Coming to the U of R for a good education? THINK AGAIN!!!!

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Rochester
21

<p>"adkdad: whatisit - I for one thank you for posting your views here. I think folks should consider all info when making such an important and expensive decision. They can pick and choose how each piece of info factors into their personal decision.</p>

<p>My questions for you are1) Knowing what you now know, where do you go from here? And (2) how is this different from what you were initially planning?"</p>

<p>Thank you for that. Sometimes people get really defensive and angry because some new information pops their bubble of reality in their head. </p>

<p>Well, I am planning on going to professional school in the near future. If I don’t get in, I am planning on going back home and taking classes at a state school nearby where a 4 credit class is around $800 compared to U of R’s $2,600. What you will find from a lot of students here is that the ones who did not have AP chem, AP Bio etc in high school, do very poorly on standardized test such as MCAT, DAT, PSAT because the beginer bio and chem classes do not teach that. They teach something totally different, which isn’t a bad thing, but if your goal is to gain that basic scientific knowledge then it is a bad thing. Trust me, ask any freshmen bio student if they have been “oleked” (Olek is the name of the bio I professor. )</p>

<p>If I could redo everything over knowing what I know now, meaning if I was back as a Senior in High School, I would have taken up on 2 full rides I gotten. Yes those schools are smaller and/or not as highly ranked but you all need to get yourself off of that ranking system. Because U of R in only 38th. You are now in the middle of nowhere hole meaning it isn’t IVY where at least you are paying for the name. An analogy is like why pay $100,000 for a souped up Toyota? Either pay $20,000 for a normal car that get you there or use that $100,000 to get a Ferrari if you can get one (aka get into IVY).</p>

22

<p>Ironclaw- I am not by any means saying ALL the professors at the U of R are bad, what I am saying is that why are their some that are just so so bad, but nothing is done about it? Frankly, because the University do not hire enough and because the good professors are let go because their research is not up to par to the level the U of R wants. </p>

<p>One thing I have to say, is that your opinions are very biased also, simply for the fact that you are a R-scholar. You have almost no financial obligation since you have a full ride. Heck, if I had a full ride, would I care as much that the professors are bad? Probably not as much as I am now, stare at the $60,000 loan repayment I will be left with. Plus the amount that I have already paid the U of R, which I could have bought a house with. </p>

<p>Once again, I am not saying all students hate this school, but the general consensus is that there are a lot of problems at this school. This ranges from dining, dorms, teaching and price. And for all the students and parents that visited, do you really expect the tour guide to let you in on that? Their job is to sell the school. What I would advise any students who are visiting, leave the tour and walk around by yourself, go up to a group of students and pretend you are attending the U of R. Ask a group of students what year they are in and what major. </p>

<p>Then make a comment like “Man that freaking (fill in the blank )class is killing me, can you understand what he was talking about?” " </p>

<p>Example: Hey what year are you guys in? what are you guys studying? </p>

<p>student: bio</p>

<p>You: Man, that freaking bio class is killing me, can you understand what he was talking about? I have no idea what we are supposed to study. </p>

<p>Then see if they agree with u or not.</p>

<p>DO NOT LET ON THAT YOU ARE VISITING, OR YOU ARE IN HIGH SCHOOL. Hide that stupid bag they give you from the bookstore with all the pamphlets. Take off that name tag, don’t be nervous.</p>

23

<p>whatisit I do appreciate the opinion of a current student. If my son went to any campus though and went “undercover” as a current student I bet he would find plenty of students who had less than flattering things to say about the school-that is just human nature.</p>

<p>I do think the financial part of what you have to say is accurate.</p>

<p>It would be great to hear from other current UR students about this-decision time for us is rapidly approaching.</p>

24

<p>Every school has its malcontents. About 2% of all students nationwide transfer and that means people in and people out. The unhappy ones tend to think their issues are objective, not subjective. They also tend to hang around and post a lot, even after they’ve left. People have a need to share - or impose - their issues and miseries on others. Some people, the more mature ones, recognize that they made a choice and it may not have been the right one. Maybe they took advice and didn’t listen to their hearts. Maybe they just picked wrong. So they move on. Others don’t know what they want and they don’t realize that until they’ve made a choice or two that doesn’t work out. I know a girl who transferred through 2 schools until she found a place that fit her. I know kids who were miserable in Boston for reason of all sorts - from it not being home to a bad roommate to not adjusting well to work to whatever. It sometimes takes nothing more than a change of scenery because that’s much of what a new start is. </p>

<p>Heck, a young Harvard grad friend of mine just moved back and is now on her 3rd career in maybe 4 years. It can take awhile to find yourself and what you need. </p>

<p>It is unfortunate that unhappy people can’t understand that it is they who are unhappy and that they need to make themselves happier not make others unhappier. It is when you realize it is about you that you can make whatever changes you need to be happy. As a friend of mine says, “I am the hero of my own story, aren’t I?” In the bluntest possible terms, it’s you. It’s always you. Places are what they are. No place is perfect. No job is perfect and many actually suck. It’s your choice to be there and that makes it your fault when it comes to your happiness because you are responsible for your self and your decisions for your own happiness. </p>

<p>As Elizabeth Bennett says, “I am only resolved to act in that manner, which will, in my own opinion, constitute my happiness, without reference to you, or to any person so wholly unconnected with me.” That is a good lesson.</p>

25

<p>

</p>

<p>whatisit–this is not phenomena unique to UR. This is a universal truth, common to all colleges. No school ‘teaches’ the content for medical professional school entrance exams. Why? Because those exams are not content dependent. IOW, they don’t test course material, but rather reasoning skills. In fact, you cannot prepare for those exams by memorizing material at all. (And I do know this for to be true. D1 teaches MCAT prep for Kaplan and so does her BF.) The tests are designed to prevent ‘pass by memorization.’ Additionally, there is a very strong correlation between an individual’s score on college admission exams (SAT, ACT) and their later scores on PCAT, OAT, DAT, MCAT. Again, this is not unique to UR. This true everywhere.</p>

<p>I can appreciate you’re unhappy. I can appreciate you feel like you’re not getting a good return for your money. But your experience is your experience. It’s not going to be anyone else’s.</p>

<p>As Tolstoy said: “… every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.”</p>

26

<p>I went to a research heavy university, and, yes, the disadvantages are there that you state. For some kids, those who want to be in on research and the leading edge of their fields, it was great. Also there are some very good teachers who are top researchers too. The two are not mutually exclusive by a long shot.</p>

<p>However, as someone else here mentioned, there is a big difference between a school like this and a LAC or local college where the emphasis and main mission is to teach undergraduates. I won’t disput that for an instant. If you have a student who needs the nurturing and attention, ITs, big State Us and research Us, and U s with large graduate depts are not what you want. I’m one who loves the LACs for undergrads. But for some kids for whom the sky is the limit in terms of learning stuff in the field, school like Rochester are perfect.</p>

27

<p>"whatisit–this is not phenomena unique to UR. This is a universal truth, common to all colleges. No school ‘teaches’ the content for medical professional school entrance exams. Why? Because those exams are not content dependent. IOW, they don’t test course material, but rather reasoning skills. In fact, you cannot prepare for those exams by memorizing material at all. (And I do know this for to be true. D1 teaches MCAT prep for Kaplan and so does her BF.) The tests are designed to prevent ‘pass by memorization.’ Additionally, there is a very strong correlation between an individual’s score on college admission exams (SAT, ACT) and their later scores on PCAT, OAT, DAT, MCAT. Again, this is not unique to UR. This true everywhere.</p>

<p>I can appreciate you’re unhappy. I can appreciate you feel like you’re not getting a good return for your money. But your experience is your experience. It’s not going to be anyone else’s.</p>

<p>As Tolstoy said: “… every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.” </p>

<p>I have to disagree with your statement. Yes, MCAT, DAT, etc is not about memorization, but I am not talking about memorizing the material. What I am saying is that the professors here merely teaches what they want and not the basic foundation and understanding so students are pretty much memorizing some insane bits of information that has nothing to do with any entry level science and then forgetting it because they will never use it. </p>

<p>So if you do not believe me, I will give you the names of the basic science courses needed for medical school requirements and you can look them up on ratemyprofessor.com</p>

<p>bio I- Olek
bioII- Minckley
CHem 1- Krause,
Orgo: Goodman</p>

<p>Genetics: Sia </p>

<p>Here are some comments for bio:</p>

<p>"CAUTION: It is nearly impossible to keep up with his lectures. He goes VERY quickly, and so I recommend typing up notes instead of trying to write them down, and he does not slow down much if you ask him to. He is also known to give unfair tests at times (check out exam 2 of 2011), but if you try, it’s not hard to do well, and he’s really funny.</p>

<p>“Took him for an upper level lab. He’s another UR prof much more interested in his research than teaching. His way or the highway, be prepared to manipulate the way you do everything in the lab to mimic his way or don’t just get low grades-get zeroes for work that takes hours.”</p>

<p>“Incredibly apathetic. Poorly written exams with ridiculous stipulations (eg: getting 6 points off a 8 point short answer for not putting the word “quickly” in the answer). Had a sub one day, 10x better literally.”</p>

<p>“Material covered in this class is all fairly straightforward. However, its the exams that make this class ridiculous. 80% of them is vocabulary that’s mentioned once in either the lecture or textbook. The lecture and textbook overlap randomly. Very little wiggle room for what seems like easy test questions. Only posts fragmented slides online.Hesuc”</p>

<p>“So disorganized. He claims that we need data to back everything up, but much of the data he provides in lecture is mathematically impossible. Half of the class is a slippery slope argument.”</p>

<p>“Whatever you do . . do not take this class. I still do not believe that bio 110 is not a biology class, but to understand the mind of the professor.”</p>

<p>Here are some for Chem: </p>

<p>“As someone who took AP chem in high-school and did well in the class, I found this class surprisingly hard to get an A in. Material in lecture and workshop is straightforward but tests are difficult. Krauss is a cool guy I just hated how hard the tests were.”</p>

<p>“Least helpful person I have ever met. He clearly is only interested in his research and only teches in order to be allowed to do this research. Way harder than a professor needs to be in order to teach and orgo class.”</p>

<p>“He’s friendly and has a good sense of humor, but not the best at actually teaching. It was tough to follow what was going on and he frequently disagreed with material from the book.”</p>

<p>“he had no interest in teaching the class, he was nasty to students who went to him for help, lectures were useless except for when he put specific problems from lecture which were in no way covered in the book on the exams. Exams were impossibly hard. Aweful teacher.”</p>

<p>Of course there are good reviews too but not as many as the bad ones. And yes they should be taken with a grain of salt but personally having had taken these professors I can attest to these.</p>

28

<p>“It is unfortunate that unhappy people can’t understand that it is they who are unhappy and that they need to make themselves happier not make others unhappier. It is when you realize it is about you that you can make whatever changes you need to be happy. As a friend of mine says, “I am the hero of my own story, aren’t I?” In the bluntest possible terms, it’s you. It’s always you.”</p>

<p>Why are you using some overarching philosophical saying that is found in a fortune cookie as an argument? </p>

<p>No, that is not true. It is not always up to you. Can you force a professor to teach better? Can you force the school to retain the best professor even though he/she is just a visiting professor? Can you force the professor to teach what is supposed to be taught in Bio I and not some advanced material that he is currently research?</p>

<p>The reason I am making these posting is SO people can make a choice before it is too late. Transferring from a school is a long and hard process and you will lose financial aid since you get the short end of the stick in financial aid from the school you want to transfer to. Not to mention, you may have to retake classes. It is best if people get a real information about if U of R is good fit for them or not when they still have A CHOICE! </p>

<p>And to all of you who think I am bashing this school for no reason, what do I have to gain from this? Nothing. In fact, I have more to lose than anything. If I am merely trying to bring the reputation of the school down, I am hurting myself in the process, since my diploma will say that I am a graduate of University of Rochester. </p>

<p>Trust me, this is a last resort because I am so sick of the administration not doing anything to improve teaching quality and all the lies I was told about smaller class size, etc. when I matriculated.</p>

29

<p>Honestly, I have been following this thread for some time now and it just sounds like your own negative experiences, which are not shared by the rest of the UoR community. If you really dislike what you see, work to make it better instead of spending all your time and efforts into
“bashing” the school.</p>

<p>Yes, you have stated that you are not trying to “bash” UoR in any way, but rather give another perspective to students and parents considering this institution. Let me say this: you don’t come across this way at all. You are upset, unhappy, and unsatisfied. Life is not full of rainbows and butterflies. Don’t drag the world down with you.</p>

30

<p>Whatisit–you need to TRANSFER if you as unhappy as you sound. There are thousands of other schools, I sure there is one you would be happy at.</p>

31

<p>

</p>

<p>Actually, the reviews on ratemyprofessors.com are relatively favorable towards Rochester - the [average</a> professor rating at Rochester](<a href=“http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/SelectTeacher.jsp?sid=1331]average”>http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/SelectTeacher.jsp?sid=1331) is 3.25, which is higher than the average at each Ivy League school, and higher than 70% (25 out of 36) of the averages at colleges that are ranked higher than Rochester in the [US</a> News University Rankings](<a href=“http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities]US”>http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities).</p>

<p>Internally, the University of Rochester keeps pretty comprehensive course evaluations, which students are asked to fill out the end of every semester. Students are also able to see those aggregated evaluations by logging in [here[/url</a>]. Unfortunately, I don’t think this data is available to the public - I think this would help potential students evaluate individual departments within the university.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>It seems that you are referring to Olek here. Olek doesn’t do research - he is a [url=<a href=“http://www.rochester.edu/College/BIO/directory.php]senior”>http://www.rochester.edu/College/BIO/directory.php]senior</a> lecturer](<a href=“http://www.rochester.edu/registrar/course-evaluations.html]here[/url”>http://www.rochester.edu/registrar/course-evaluations.html), not a professor (so his correct academic title is “Dr.” because of his PhD, but it would also be correct to refer to him as a lecturer or an instructor because of his teaching responsibilities). In fact, his [publication</a> history](<a href="Google Scholar) indicates that he has probably stopped doing research for at least 10 years. I don’t dispute the claim that he is a bad lecturer (but I don’t confirm it either - I simply don’t know), but I do dispute the claim that it is because of his research - how can he be preoccupied with research when he doesn’t do research?</p>

<p>I think that the relationship between research and teaching is more nuanced. Certainly, if a professor spends all his time doing research, then he won’t have time to prepare for class. On the other hand, it seems very plausible to me that research quality correlates strongly with teaching ability - the set of attributes that makes someone good at research overlaps a lot with the set of attributes that makes someone good at teaching. For instance, someone who spends his life doing research in a subject must be passionate - or at the very least, interested - in that subject. It seems to me that someone who teaches a subject well must also be passionate or interested in that subject. Another simple example is aptitude and ability in the subject itself.</p>

<p>As a final point, let me try to concisely state whatisit’s main point, and my main point, to see whether we have a fundamental disagreement or not:
Whatisit says, “The introductory biology and chemistry professors teach very badly.”
I say, “The introductory physics and math professors teach very well.”</p>

<p>To put it another way: I have no idea how bad whatisit’s professors are, and whatisit has no idea how good my professors are. Because of this, it would be best for us not to rely on unverifiable anecdotal information, and not to mistakenly generalize our assessment of professors at Rochester based on just a few pieces of anecdotal data.</p>

32

<p>Olek is not liked by the kids. The others are. </p>

<p>UR’s approach to this problem is, like much of what UR does, somewhat different than other schools: they have eliminated the standard requirements. If you speak to professors, they tell you their classes are full of kids who actually want to take that class, not kids taking it for a distribution requirement. That, according to the professors, makes a big difference to them and to the learning experience. The goal, as it has been explained to me, was to address the problem of research as a requirement in academia - all of academia* - versus teaching. UR’s approach, which is uncommon, was to decrease mandatory requirements in a way that encourages kids to take what they want in depth. Professors were complaining - as they do at all schools - about disinterested kids in their classes. </p>

<p>The solution is the UR curriculum, which is something they should talk more about. Kids take clusters, meaning related flows of 3 classes in disciplines they like. Choice then works both ways: professors generally teach more of what they want and students take more of what they want. (Of course, professor choice is constrained by their departments, by the need to teach intro, etc. classes, but this is a big step in that direction.) It is for this reason that UR has the Take 5 program; a student can develop an interest in a subject and find that 4 years is simply not enough time to get through a major and that area as well. You can then apply for a free 5th year - not to complete a major but to pursue your intellectual interest. </p>

<p>It is somewhat ironic that an immature kid is attacking UR on the topic of research versus teaching when UR is significantly different in a better way from almost all other universities.</p>

<p>*Good schools struggle with balancing research versus teaching because people become “professors” because they have an intellectual interest in a field and because they want to teach. You can have a school full of “teachers,” meaning untenured people that come and go hoping for a permanent job, or you can try to attract and nurture the best people in a field. These people are interesting. They have deep passions for their subjects - at UR from religious studies to polisci to optics, etc. Some are great teachers and some aren’t. I pointed in another post that UR ranks in the top tier in “quotability”: of schools that produce 2000 articles a year, there is a metric scaled with 1 as average by which the schools can be ranked according to how often their work is cited by others. This is a measure of importance.</p>

33

<p>This is a particularly interesting conversation… So interesting, in fact, that our Dean of Admissions discussed it this morning during his welcome address at our first Spring Open Campus event. His comments suggested that this type of open and honest exchange is fundamentally important to the University of Rochester, and I can assure you that we do not attempt to run away from, hide, or lie about anything to current and/or prospective students. We’d be setting ourselves up for failure if we encouraged students to enroll by deceiving them. I thought it was pretty cool of him to mention it.</p>

<p>Ironclaw… Your previous post is very insightful. “Ratemyprofessor” is interesting, and I am encouraged to see that the average rating at Rochester is above the average rating elsewhere. I’ll admit to having used the site when registering for classes in the past, but I sometimes feel that the individuals that are most likely to submit a rating are those that are most angry/upset with their experience. That is not to imply that the information on “ratemyprofessor” is not helpful, but I think the happiest of students are less likely to offer a rating than those that are unhappy, which of course skews the numbers a bit. Also, in my humble opinion, the credibility of the site is diminished by the fact that students are able to rate the attractiveness of the professor, an important indicator in the quality of the education you receive :).</p>

34

<p>ratemyprofessor is of very limited use at UR and other schools of its size and smaller. Two reasons: </p>

<ol>
<li><p>if you go to a school with 14k students, odds are there will be multiple sections of certain classes. Size means there is more unfamiliarity. A freshman at UR knows which teachers are good, so the site is mostly useful for incoming freshman but the real story is …</p></li>
<li><p>social media. Blunt truth is every kid who goes to UR will be exposed to real opinions from students in their areas of interest. Thus, there is discussion among pre-med and science kids about whether it’s better to take the higher level intro bio class because most kids think Olek is not a good teacher but the higher level teacher is very good. It’s a question of difficulty and preparation, like whether you had AP Bio and how you did plus personal worry factors, etc. You know that stuff before you show up. It isn’t a surprise. The old-fashioned grapevine works more efficiently now. In a large school, you can look through ratings to find classes you might like - or better ways to deal with requirements - while at a school UR’s size or smaller you can’t help but know and you don’t have distribution requirements. </p></li>
</ol>

<p>I think ratemyprofessor is also subject to different forms of bias. I’ve noticed for example that ratings at certain very high prestige schools tend to be higher than the kids actually say the quality is when you speak to them. I think that’s a self-reinforcing mechanism of prestige; you go along because you have to buy into the image. Other schools seem to have a culture of self-critical comments and I think that also self-reinforces because social group-think is contagious. If you look through ratings, you should sift for factual observations.</p>

35

<p>

As whatisit acknowledges, these classes are prerequisites to medical school. What he fails to realize, and this is true of almost every school (including LACs) is that these are “weed out” courses for those who will ultimately drop out of premed, and classes of limited interest to any professor. Why? Because a professor with a PhD in biology, chemistry, physics, etc., doesn’t really want to teach future doctors. He or she wants to teach future biologists, chemists, physicists, etc. As the UR curriculum provides, he or she wants to teach those students who want to be in the class. Most premeds don’t actually want to be in the class.</p>

<p>My d is not premed. In fact, she’s never taken a science class (she did math as her natural science cluster). And yet, she’s managed to get what appears to be an excellent education at Rochester, had a number of excellent teachers there (although she did have a couple of lousy ones - about par for the course), and has enjoyed herself immensely.</p>

36

<p>I’m sorry, Chedva, but I don’t think “weed out” class is as true as you seem to believe. All departments have intro classes. Some people come to an area prepared better than others and they start in a higher level but some majors (and minors) in an area start with those intro courses. More to the point, the schools I know - and you may know others - don’t see these classes as weeding people out. That implies making a class harder or grading harder and that is not true at UR. In fact, the school works to make sure the material is intelligible. In intro bio, for example, there are not only sections but recitations so kids can get the material. They also provide other academic support, which I mention because it seems somewhat more actually available than at some other universities that say they have it. If these classes “weed out” people, it’s because they find they don’t want to be pre-med or they hate biology or they hate physics. And UR gives kids a way around that; they can choose to have the grade hidden by electing that late in the term. (I believe they can choose to reveal the grade later, if it turns out they did ok.) </p>

<p>Here’s an example from my life. Intro Chemistry first semester taught by a great teacher. Second semester taught by possibly the worst teacher I’ve ever had. He’d write stuff on the board and instead of moving on - with 3 boards that rose up like they have today - he’d erase it after standing in front of it so no one could see. You’d hear groaning every class. He gave one test that was so hard the next one was a set of questions you could answer in groups before hand and then just write down the answer letters. Why did he teach this class? He wanted to. He wanted to teach undergraduates because he was a relatively big cheese and he wanted contact with them. We wanted to kill him and there was discussion about sabotaging the brakes on his motorcycle. Weeder class? No. Just a lousy experience in the Ivy League.</p>

<p>If I have a criticism of intro bio’s teacher arrangement, it’s that the biology department is missing an opportunity: they could put a terrific teacher in every intro class and attract more kids to their department. Some departments at schools know this - don’t know about UR but I’ll assume it’s true - and they put a great lecturer in the intro course because that is advertising.</p>

37

<p>Perhaps “weed out” was the wrong term. Many students beginning college are convinced they want to be doctors. Or that they want to major in biology. These intro classes often convince them that they were wrong.</p>

38

<p>At UR, the self-weeding process for pre meds is particularly severe simply because UR has more potential pre meds than many schools. Since UR has a reputation for being a “good” pre med school, it tend to attract students who think they want to be doctors. </p>

<p>In D2’s class nearly 45% (!!!) of all incoming freshmen self-identified as “pre med.” That’s well over 500 freshmen out of 1200! Assuming this is typical, if you check the actual numbers of students who applied to med schools (data available in the career center) either as rising seniors or alums, you’ll see approx 90-115 apply to med school each year–or about 20% of the initial freshman pre med cohort.</p>

<p>This level of attrition among pre med students is pretty common. The national rate of attrition among pre meds between freshman and senior year is well over 70%.</p>

<p>Medicine is demanding profession. Much is expected from future doctors–and not just academically. Med school applicants are expected to have good grades, good MCAT scores, research experience, substantial medical volunteering and physician shadowing, substantial community service and to hold positions of leadership in addition to being a well-rounded and interesting person. Many pre meds once they see these expectations are unwilling or unable to fulfill them.</p>

<p>Or ancedotally, D2 said that freshman year during the first week of classes that “everyone” on her freshman floor was a pre med–by the time the end of first semester rolled around 1/2 had already dropped out of the bio and chem classes.</p>

<p>BTW, has had several of the professors whatisit mentions. Not Olek since she was in the other Bio section (Platt), but she did have the chem profs mentioned. She did her share of grumbling about the class (She grumbles about every one of her classes…), but never once did she say the instruction quality was poor or the tests were “unfair”. Difficult, yes, but not unfair. We have a number of friends who are or who have been professors of chemistry at major universities, including UT-Austin, UNC-CH, UIUC, the Air Force Academy. When D2 was home, she’d talked with our friends about her chem courses–not one of these chem profs found anything amiss with either the content of the courses or the types test questions asked.</p>

39

<p>Most kids like the intro chem professors. They just may not like chemistry. </p>

<p>The percentage of incoming freshman who want to be pre-med is very high at a lot of schools, even some really big ones. </p>

<p>It’s weird to me that so many people want to get a medical degree - though some nowadays want to become researchers with that degree. The doctors profession will be undergoing change in the reasonably near future. Uncertainty is usually a turn off.</p>

40

<p>Well, it’s probably because high school students are aware of a relatively limited number of future careers–doctor, lawyer, teacher, minister, engineer, “business” and whatever their parents do. And their views of these professions are often idealized and gleaned from TV/media or limited personal exposure. </p>

<p>Besides, it’s easier to say “doctor” than to admit “I have no idea.”</p>