<p>Well that I find pretty scary. I hope that none of these schools are schools that we are looking at.</p>
<p>As far as caliber of students (which is related to how challenging the classes will be), you can find that out very easily by looking at the college's profiles.</p>
<p>From the description, I live within 5 miles of mythmom and agree with all her statements. The community colleges on Long Island are excellent. My oldest D goofed off all through high school. She went to community college for 2 yrs and it was the best thing that could have happened. She then went to Stony Brook and graduated phi beta kappa. We also have several expensive privates on LI. They are just not very good and seem to attract kids with minimal academic interests from families with money. I suppose there are challenging courses by some definitions, but it is pretty hard to have much challenge when the students don't want it. My W also taught in the CC and loved it, except for the pay, and taught at one of the privates and was frustrated by the attitude of the students.</p>
<p>
[quote]
As far as caliber of students (which is related to how challenging the classes will be), you can find that out very easily by looking at the college's profiles.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Still unclear to me. From my vantage point, a lot of these low tier schools all look about the same - average ACT 20 or so. Is strength of instruction at those really worse than at schools with somewhat higher average scores which, to quote mythmom, are "country club(s) with wealthy students who are capable of so much more"?</p>
<p>It's unfair to tar all CC with the same brush. Yes some community colleges have many a student that is pretty much just hanging out, and the college provides the courses that cater to that. But others are known for the GE/transfer programs to get the kids to the flagship state university system. In our area there are both kinds of CCs, and you can pick which one to go to.</p>
<p>mythmom would be better qualified to answer that question. But I propose that if the "average student" at a college has a 470 writing score and can't break a 3 on the essay, and it's a private school to boot, the teacher can't exactly raise the bar too much. He can't fail the majority of his students.</p>
<p>I'm not tarring any CC; I suspect that there are more likely kids in some of those who have higher skills and abilities than the kids you'd find in the private 3rd or 4th tier.</p>
<p>It is shocking how poor the skill levels of some of these kids are...really, one wonders how they ever graduated from high school. The ability to pay offers just about anyone a college education, but the truth is, some of these kids would be much better off learning a trade instead.</p>
<p>I don't think the stats tell the whole story. There are plenty of kids at the Long Island cc's who have poor preparation and/or abilities. I am sure the SAT scores would average well under 500. Some of these kids will not make it to an associates degree. Quite a few do and many work very hard to overcome previous deficiencies and lack of home support. Many of them work to pay tuition and they take courses when their finances allow it. Many are very determined and work hard to gain an education. Up the street, the privileged kids have SATs of 600 or so. They don't seem to work very hard except to complain if the parking is not good enough for their bmw's.</p>
<p>edad, you're so right. The CC kids I know are there because they want to learn and they want to improve themselves. It's not the most idyllic place in the world, most of them have to pay for it themselves, most are working their way through. They are strongly motivated to get through their classes with success. OTOH, I've seen many students (at both private and party publics) that go because they want to have a good time, and someone else is paying for it.</p>
<p>I am truly blessed because our CC has a national reputation and some of the kids are truly brilliant. Many are URM's (well not underrepresented there!) and immigrants who have excellent skills in their native languages. But even the average kids are often quite capable but have gotten a raw deal in life through divorce, parental incarcertation, parental mental illness, what have you. Many of our courses are quite challenging. I am teaching a course on Thomas Kuhn and the paradigm shifts that created the modern sensibility that I wouldn't be unhappy if my kids took.</p>
<p>Some of the writing is abyssmal. But not all. And we are trained to teach those kids, not just pass them along. We also take our obligation to get kids to the place they can transfer to a good school quite seriously. Right now I have students (one a return from NYU) who want to be doctors, lawyers, psychologists. We don't get research scientists, that's true, or too many who want to be anthropogists, but we get English majors who want to teach. One of my most talented students wants to be a professional photographer.</p>
<p>The main difference, I think, is that we really love these kids. Sounds super corny I know; at least I do. And now that my own are away, they've become my own children.</p>
<p>The expensive private colleges that are not good, both in this county and the next, are not striving for a higher standard of instruction because they need to maintain that they are already there. The CC atmosphere very much tells the kids that they are not there yet. So if I had my choice for my kid between CC and a very weak private, I'd choose the CC. </p>
<p>However, in NY we have so many SUNY schools that many students' needs could be met there. I would definitely choose one of those, probably any of those, over the particular privates I am talking about. SUNY tuition is very reasonable for OOS, too. </p>
<p>I am not being a snob about the preparation of the students or the "tier" of the school. It's just that some of these institutions really are degree mills and holding areas for wealthy students going into family businesses.</p>
<p>That is not to say that a student couldn't get an education, especially in a field like accounting in which the material is fairly standard. It's disturbing to me that one or two of these schools turn out teachers who never know that there is a different intellectual standard they could aspire to. I think that is my mission in teaching.</p>
<p>Even kids with low scores can be thoughtful and insightful. I don't prejudge them and have been amazed at what they can see and think.</p>
<p>As for the people I teach with, I am incredibly impressed by them. 90% of us have PhD's, many from pestigious institutions like Columbia, Brown, Yale, UVa, Berkeley etc. My own dissertation won the award for the best thesis of 1987. We are people who didn't have the ambition to go the publish/or perish route, each for our own reasons. Our classes are capped at 25 at one school I teach at (full-time) and one I teach at (part-time) is capped at 30.</p>
<p>I'm sorry, I am an apologist for my school. That's not my intention. I guess I am supporting the argument for publics over questionable privates. Look at the school's mission and why the kids are there. If it's for an education, it's all good. If they have other reasons, you may not be satisfied with what the school provides. Look at course catalogues and sit in on classes.</p>
<p>There are many wonderful, intelligent kids who can't "prove it" via their GPA (they were not motivated) or test scores (they are not good standardized test takers.) There are institutions where they will blossom, but there are others that set the bar very low.</p>
<p>Mythmom, that was a truly moving testimonial to the community colleges. I hear similar dedication here from friends who teach at Erie County Community College. They are all about the students, and recognize the variety of influences in their lives, including being parents or living at home caring for parents, all the while pursuing a degree, while working. The affection for their students is palpable.</p>
<p>Who knows but that the CC, so accessible and affordable, will cause a national shift in knowledge and class mobility, comparable to the impact of places like CUNY following World War II for the returning veterans. </p>
<p>We need all kinds of educational facilities. My parents taught at a low tier private college that had students whose futures were assured with a return home to run the family business. Just as you expressed it, in fact! My folks didn't express the personal affection for their students as you do, but they loved the task of teaching in a smaller place. Their joy was more institutional than personal. They enjoyed being the alternative (for those who could afford it) for students who'd otherwise only go to huge state schools with 25,000 people. Instead they came to a school of 1,000 even though their SAT's hovered around 500. That school also pursued a special interest in Learning Disabled students, long before it was on the horizon as much as it is today. Mostly my folks said that these same students (LD and not-LD) wouldn't ever make it in a large state university, not because of the coursework but because they needed so much "loco parenting" to stay on track outside of classes. I think it takes a certain kind of confident person to manage a big state university at age l8, and not everyone is there at that moment. It's sometimes a matter of social/emotional readiness more than academic, would you agree? So having that closeness with a professor is crucial for some students. Others could care less, just sign my form and g'bye... </p>
<p>My mom always felt badly that she never taught in a prestige college, but my Dad didn't care quite as much. They both enjoyed the lifestyle of college professor very much, except for faculty politics of course.</p>
<p>paying3: Yeah, that's another thing that is truly wonderful. We don't have faculty politics. Salaries are totally unionized; we truly have nothing to fight about.</p>
<p>Kudos for your parents for providing what they did for their students. You are right -- every population needs to be well served.</p>
<p>I think what is disheartening on LI is that many of these "rich" kids drive much better cars than their professors and see us as the "help" and therefore resist our efforts to educate them. It's not their ignorance that is difficult for me to deal with, it's their arrogance. </p>
<p>Those are the institutions I would avoid in choosing a college for my kids. Any place where the student body is sincere, open and willing to learn will yield some very rewarding experiences I'm sure.</p>
<p>My D's GC has a 6 year old son. While we were discussing college costs she lamented what she was facing if college cost continue to escalate as they have. Her salary, like most of ours, does not increase a two or three times the rate of inflation every year. Right now merit aid makes some of the choices affordable, but soon not even that will help. In 12 years one year of college at a top 100 private will probabaly be between 65 and 80k a year. Something has got to give....</p>
<p>I'm always amazed at the contrast between widespread outrage over health care costs and quiet suffering in relative silence over college costs.</p>
<p>We don't have acknowledged "elite" medical care (well, of course, we do, but it isn't as easily discernable as "Harvard"). Besides which, although some people think otherwise, a college education is really not a live or die kind of situation. </p>
<p>Really, if ones kid doesn't go to an Ivy League school, or even any college, it isn't the end of the world, but obtaining or not obtaining medical treatment could be (or at least the end of a life). So, poor people can forego college, but still can't forego health care.</p>
<p>Next question?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Not one of the top students at our high school has ended up at our state U... Even the kids who end up in the honor's college there, are solid above average kids, but not the top students (and this is not a group of 1 or 2, but I am thinking of the top 20-30). </p>
<p>So this might be state dependent too.
[/quote]
Yes, there are tiers of 'state' schools just as there are tiers of privates and it can vary both state to state and within the state. The 'average' GPA of an incoming freshman to UCLA this year was 4.3. UCB and UCSD are similar. Some state schools have gotten extremely selective to the point where they're much more selective than most of the privates. Many of the top students including Vals/Sals will choose a top state over a private. There could be some regional influence as well - i.e. West versus East.</p>
<p>Allmusic - here's your counter argument - health care is essential and esentially valuable - it can often literally keep us alive. Why do we resent paying for it but not resent paying for a non-essential like college for our kids?</p>
<p>I think Honors programs at state schools are not familiar to many families until they discover them during their college search.</p>
<p>Wouldn't we always want to pay for a luxury than a necessity? I hate bills but love paying for D's clothes, especially when she models them for me.</p>
<p>The 40 million people with no health insurance aren't complaining about Cadillac higher education costs. </p>
<p>The people who resent paying for higher education usually have health insurance, typically provided through their places of employment. The poor often have no health insurance, nor worries or resentments about college costs. College costs are a luxury, which health insurance shouldn't be.</p>