The OP mentioned that their first child chose:
I’m not sure what route the second is considering. Hopefully they’ll clarify. I think that’s how the thread got there though.
1 Like
Very well articulated!
Business and accounting have AACSB accreditation, although the minimum standard there may not be seen to be as rigorous as the ABET standard for engineering.
At the U of Wisconsin in the mid-late 90s, the lectures were led by PhD (or terminal degree for the field) holders. I’ve no idea if they were adjunct or tenured, though I suspect the older ones probably were tenured – like my Finite Math professor, who wore moon boots with his shirt and tie. He was an odd fellow but a heck of a teacher.
However, I suspect that most, or all, of my discussions and labs were led by grad students (Masters or PhD). The discussions were great because it’s easier to foment meaningful discussion (that everyone present can hear and follow…) with 20 students vs. 200, in a small classroom vs. a large lecture hall/theater. Questions were answered, quizzes were administered to help keep us on track, assignments were discussed, etc.
Can confirm your two paragraphs, on large lectures being taught by PhDs and multiple small discussions/labs by graduate students, are still accurate today at UW–Madison. The instructors are quite often non-tenure-track, recent PhDs from top schools (e.g., Van Vleck visiting assistant professors teaching calculus). Some will be in the market for tenure-track positions in a few years, some appear to be lifer adjuncts. I find this large-lecture-small-discussion model efficient and helpful in combating the “impersonal” classroom experience of students at large schools.
1 Like
I was a Ph.D. student in history at UW-Madison around that time. Yes, most discussion sections in large lecture courses were led by grad students, who were responsible for grading students in their sections (though the professor sometimes took the honors section). There were a few visiting professors, but no adjuncts at that time (in my department, anyway – I wonder if that’s changed). And there were some Ph.D. students who taught lecture courses, especially if a course was on the books and in demand but the professor who would normally teach that course was on leave or had other teaching priorities. I suppose they would have counted as adjuncts, but we categorized them differently. And there were a couple of fellowships for advanced graduate student that included the opportunity to teach a course (usually a large lecture course, I think) for one semester.
2 Likes
Were you, by chance, a TA for “The Age of Jefferson & Jackson” or “Medieval European History”? lol
I was (am) an early Americanist but I never TAed for Jeanne Boydston – I did sit in on her class, though, while I was preparing for prelims, and I had some good friends who were her TAs. Never TAed for Medieval (not my field), but I took Courtenay’s class on Medieval monasticism for my minor field in religious studies. I mostly TAed for HIS 102 (the second half of the US survey) and American Revolution (and also History of American Education, which was crosslisted in the school of ed).
2 Likes
I hadn’t encountered those prof names in over 25 years, but both ring a bell. Especially Boydston. If memory serves, that one was a power lecture – an hour and 15 mins.
Thanks for the nostalgia dose.
1 Like
Yep. And she was a master at making a big lecture class seem small and intimate. She was one of my mentors and a reader for my dissertation. She passed away in fall 2008 (if memory serves), and is missed by so many.
2 Likes
Sorry to hear of her passing, but encouraged by her impact on your path. Hers was among my favorite courses – as was Medieval. Had I not majored in Journalism, History probably would have been my landing spot.
I was a fan of blue book exams, and if memory serves, hers were either entirely or mainly essay-based.
2 Likes
Regarding adjuncts, when I was going to grad school for IE at USC in the '80s, I thought the adjunct professors, who tended to be either currently working or retired executives from local LA aerospace companies, were better teachers than the full-time professors. The adjuncts had a better understanding of how our classes applied to the real world than the full-timers.
1 Like
Yes, those are the desirable kind of adjuncts, who bring valuable non-academic experience into the classroom for various specialty courses.
But that seems different from hiring poorly paid adjuncts to teach ordinary courses on a short term contract basis. Such use of adjuncts is enabled by the surplus of PhD graduates relative to tenure track jobs in many fields where there is not much non-academic demand for them.
My son’s favorite teacher in undergrad, who he subsequently asked to be on his thesis committee, didn’t hold a professorial designation of any kind at the time of their first class together. He was simply designated, as many others were…“instructor.” My comment though was “instructors with terminal degrees.” He has a PhD, and is now an Assistant Professor.
1 Like
I saw this article last night that shows the problem of TAs, Grad students and even Professors not knowing how to effectively teach has been around for a long time.
1 Like
One of the main points the piece makes is the problem with making sure professors are focused on the “real work.” By that, they mean research. There are institutions where teaching is in and of itself the “real work.” Those programs are rarely recognized for that trait unless they are LACs.
OP here to clarify. So… the oldest is, in fact, going to an engineering school on an athletic scholarship. For privacy, I won’t state the exact school but it is that next tier down from Cal Tech, MIT, CMU, JHU, Cornell, etc… He was 3.9+uw, 4.2w, 1480sat.
I’m trying to figure out 2025’s best path. He wants to study something along the lines of math, data, quant, economics. He will also be a recruited athlete. He’s a little smarter but let’s say similar HS stats. The coaches think he is a bottom third D1 (athletically) to very sought after D3. So that would include Ivys, Patriot league. He wouldn’t just go to any D1 just to play the sport. It would have to be a school considered academically “good”. So I’m softly pushing him to some of the high academic D3s. But I’m cognizant that “credentials” from some schools like Ivys may open doors for him early in the career or graduate school admissions. But what if he wanted to go to a say… Utah or Denison or Trinity Texas. I’m just trying to get a sense for how much value is there to some school names/experiences.
2023 was pretty easy. The engineering program was good and the price was right.
2025 is a bit different. Oh, I know someone will ask… we will be full pay and we have the ability to do it.
1 Like
While it varies by sport, he’s much likelier to get play time at a D3 school.
2 Likes
I don’t know about econ, which is probably more about graduate school, but I would think that the institution would matter for those other areas of study. There aren’t as many job openings as there are in engineering, so it is less egalitarian. Others are far more versed than I, but it’s my understanding that your list would start with MIT. @DadTwoGirls would likely know.
2 Likes
I knew an assistant professor at a top 10 engineering school who was told by the administration on the day of joining to “spend just enough effort on teaching to keep students from revolting.” Exact quote.
In general, there is a lot to like about adjuncts from an engineering student’s point of view. Not only do many of them bring practical/hands-on/industrial experience to the classroom, they are almost certainly not a bad teacher. There is no reason for departments to keep them if they don’t teach well, when they also don’t bring in money.
3 Likes