<p>I agree (if this is what you are suggesting) that these "seminars" are a fad that will, hopefully pass. </p>
<p>The best, most memorable courses I took were the largest classes, in the biggest rooms, where the professor needed a microphone and the students needed binoculars to see him. The thing was, these were brilliant lecturers who had something to say, and were a pleasure to listen to.</p>
<p>I don't think seminars are a negative fad...I just think they're hugely overrated.</p>
<p>[Edit: Much like famous researchers are hugely overrated. I once heard some friends talking about a course they took with an extremely famous Harvard biologist. "He's senile, of course, and a horrible lecturer...but I can tell my friends and they say, oh my God, you took a course with <famous professor="">!"]</famous></p>
<p>was a response to post #47, which has since been removed from this thread (together with all the other posts from that poster). I didn't want to leave the impression that I was accusing daddo09, or anyone else whose posts remain on this thread, of being a "serial Harvard-basher."</p>
<p>As for seminars v. lecture courses, I had some very memorable lecture courses as well as some very memorable seminars. I would steer away from generalizations about which is "better" and evaluate each course on its on merits.</p>
<p>Byerly, Northstarmom, and other H alum: two of the multiple mini-decisions our family has to make before May 1 are "Harvard - yes or no?" and "Harvard vs. Oxford." I would be very interested in your reaction to some of the various opinions and student feedback I've either read on CC or heard from people who either attended or whose kids attended - let me toss out a few statements and perhaps you would be willing to comment (these do not necessarily reflect my opinions, as I do not know enough about the school to take a position on most of these topics):</p>
<p>Harvard has a pre-professional emphasis.</p>
<p>Harvard is best suited to Type A personalities.</p>
<p>To get the most out of Harvard, it is preferable to have a plan going in (e.g., rather than be undecided)</p>
<p>Self-direction is important, as there is not much support for undergraduates.</p>
<p>Many Harvard students do not have an intellectual orientation, but are primarily career-oriented.</p>
<p>Harvard is more suited to graduate school education than undergraduate education.</p>
<p>Harvard students who graduate in the bottom 75% of the class do not get into top graduate programs.</p>
<p>Fewer than 30% of Harvard's undergrads go directly to graduate or professional school.</p>
<p>It is not easy to get access to the top professors, who are primarily focused on their own work and graduate students.</p>
<p>I would really appreciate your input. Thank you.</p>
<p>"Harvard has a pre-professional emphasis." I don't think so. For instance, it lacks majors called things like "pre law," "premed."</p>
<p>While many students who go to Harvard plan to be doctors, lawyers or to get MBAs, they don't spend their time at Harvard prepping for those fields. Of course, if they are pre-med, they do have to take courses that would get them into med school, but they aren't nose-to-the-grindstone focused on their careers.</p>
<p>For instance, few Harvard students plan to go into journalism. Yet, it has a thriving daily newspaper which many students compete to get on staff and to get leadership positions even though those jobs don't pay. Some of their editors are headed for medical school. Their idea of fun -- a hobby -- is to spend 30 hours a week running a newspaper!</p>
<p>"Harvard is best suited to Type A personalities." I think that's true. I think that truly laid back people would hate being at Harvard. </p>
<p>"o get the most out of Harvard, it is preferable to have a plan going in (e.g., rather than be undecided)" I don't think so. Harvard is designed so that one can sample a variety of things. For instance, the first week or two of each semester is a time in which students can go to courses, check them out, and then figure out what to take. Many colleges don't offer this kind of period.</p>
<p>What I would say is that Harvard is a place for people who have the confidence to try out their ideas and to try out new things. </p>
<p>Self direction is important.</p>
<p>Most Harvard students do have an intellectual orientation. Harvard really tries not to select students who do things for resume dressing or who take classes in h.s. simply in an effort to look good to Harvard. What I think separates Harvard students from schools known more for pure intellectualism is that Harvard students tend to be as passionate about their ECs as they are about intellectual things.</p>
<p>"Harvard is more suited to graduate school education than undergraduate education."</p>
<p>It depends on what one wants out of one's undergrad education. If one wants a cozy atmosphere where the students join hands with the prof in class and sing Kumbaya, Harvard isn't the place for you. If one wants an undergrad atmosphere where one is surrounded by an amazingly passionate, intense, diverse, smart, active group of peers who are doing extraordinary things in class and with their ECs, then go to Harvard.</p>
<p>"Harvard students who graduate in the bottom 75% of the class do not get into top graduate programs.""</p>
<p>I suppose it depends on what you consider top graduate programs. I have found it very rare that any Harvard student failed to get into a grad or professional program in their chosen field. That doesn't mean that everyone got into HPY. Also, when it comes to grad/professional schools, some students don't even bother applying to the top programs in their field because things like location are important to them.</p>
<p>"Fewer than 30% of Harvard's undergrads go directly to graduate or professional school."</p>
<p>You can probably get that info from Harvard's career office. I don't know the answer. If what you stated is true, I would have no problem with it. I think that most people gain enormously in maturity and self knowledge by taking some time off between college and grad school.</p>
<p>"It is not easy to get access to the top professors, who are primarily focused on their own work and graduate students."</p>
<p>They have to have office hours. If you want to see them, you can.</p>
<p>I think that at some other schools, it's easier to establish strong, ongoing deep relationships with faculty who do things like invite you over to dinner and personally mentor you. If this is the central experience you'd like in college, probably another type of college
would be more suitable for you.</p>
<p>Self direction is very important at Harvard. Harvard students pride themselves on their confidence and independence. Things that some other colleges' students would regard as much welcome nurturing are things that many Harvard students would experience as being treated as a baby.</p>
<p>Yulsie:</p>
<p>The thing to consider is the very real difference between Oxford and an American university, whether that university is Harvard or not. Harvard is not perfect. I just read the two Crimson articles on the COFE study and it appears that Harvard takes those findings very seriously (though fixing the problems is another issue). But the more important thing is that the structure of education at Harvard and at Oxford is so different. So your student will need to decide which appeals more.
Since specialization happens at Oxord much earlier than at an American university, it's also worth thinking about what your student wants to major in. S/he may be better off at Oxford than Harvard or vice-versa.</p>
<p>My major concern about choosing betwen Oxford and Harvard would be the following:</p>
<p>Do you want to be able to go off on a tangent, try out something new - or do you want to go straight into a set degree, which may offer you flexibility in what you study but won't let you try something completely different. If it's the former, I'd consider Harvard - the latter, Oxford. </p>
<p>Just my opinion...</p>
<p>Most of these questions are a matter of opinion, so I'll qualify all of this by stressing that.</p>
<br>
<p>False, unless you're comparing it to, say, Oberlin. There's a very wide range represented; those who are gunning for B, Law, or Med school are present, but not the majority. Most people do actually care about their academic life and about the present, not just the future.</p>
<br> [QUOTE=""]
<p>Harvard is best suited to Type A personalities.</p>
<br>
<p>As a huge generalization, I think that's basically true. It's a place that rewards tenacity and chutzpah. This isn't to say that type B personalities can't be happy there; just that there aren't a whole lot of them, and that the people who get the most out of Harvard lean more towards A.</p>
<br>
<p>To get the most out of Harvard, it is preferable to have a plan going in (e.g., rather than be undecided)</p>
<br>
<p>False. Harvard's greatest strength is the fact that it has good programs with enthusiastic students in every field. For that reason, I think it's ideal for someone who might want physics, or maybe folklore & mythology, or maybe economics, or maybe Russian lit. Don't be frightened off by the end-of-first-year major declaration; LOTS of people change their minds.</p>
<br>
<p>Self-direction is important, as there is not much support for undergraduates.</p>
<br>
<p>First part true, second part false. There's support available for undergraduates, but after freshman year (when the proctor will hold required counseling sessions), you have to seek it out. Make an appointment with your TF, call up some seniors in your department, find your senior tutor in the dining hall and LET THEM KNOW you need help. A passive person can get lost at Harvard, but that is not because there isn't support available. On the whole, if you have trouble being pro-active and you operate better with guidance right there at your shoulder 24/7, I think Harvard is not a good fit.</p>
<br>
<p>Many Harvard students do not have an intellectual orientation, but are primarily career-oriented.</p>
<br>
<p>Same answer as above -- both types of orientation are well represented, often in the same people. I think this is a false dichotomy. It's possible to care deeply about the life of the mind and your own intellectual growth AND about getting into law school.</p>
<br>
<p>This is just a big fat lie. I did both at Harvard, and there is NO CONTEST that the university directs more resources and energy at its undergraduates and takes much, much better care of them than it does of the grad students. For the most part the grad schools are just separate, with their own campuses and faculties, but in those rare areas where they go head-to-head for real estate, funding, administrative attention, you name it, the college wins. Nothing against any Harvard grad school -- I loved HLS too -- but the undergrads are front and center there.</p>
<br> [QUOTE=""]
<p>Harvard students who graduate in the bottom 75% of the class do not get into top graduate programs.</p>
<br>
<p>This is such a broad generalization that I can't even answer. The response would be totally different for PhD programs vs. law school vs. B school, etc. I also have no idea what you mean by top programs -- top 3? Top 10? On the whole, Harvard undergrads do extremely well at getting into grad programs of every stripe, and I'd rather be applying to grad school from the bottom of the Harvard class than the bottom of any other class I can think of.</p>
<br>
<p>I don't know the stat on this. A LOT of people choose to take a break before doing more school. I'd say a majority of those at my 5-year reunion had gone to grad school after 1-3 years off. I'm not sure what conclusions you can make from this stat, tho -- is that a good or bad thing to you? (Personally I see it as neutral; people go when they feel ready.) </p>
<br> [QUOTE=""]
<p>It is not easy to get access to the top professors, who are primarily focused on their own work and graduate students.</p>
<br>
<p>Another myth. All arts & sciences faculty teach undergrads and hold office hours; that's an iron-clad rule. Every House is led by a senior faulty member who lives in the house and eats in the dining hall. You DO have to take the initiative to get to know your professors on a personal level, be they "top" or not top. But what that means is talking in class, going to office hours, emailing them, answering ads seeking research assistants, etc. It's not like you have to move heaven and earth or know some secret password to do it.</p>
<p>Now, are there individual Harvard faculty members who are either insanely busy or pompous jerks or both? Of course. But that was true at my 1200-student LAC as well. The good thing about being at a larger school is that if this is a priority for you, there will be enough professors in every department that you can find ones you "click" with.</p>
<p>As the person who initiated this thread, I thought I'd revisit it now that my son has made his decision. For him, the schools that ultimately remained in the mix included Harvard (which we visited for the first time earlier this week), Amherst (ditto), and Swarthmore (which we visited last spring). After spending two days and nights on Harvard's campus (I didn't even see him for about 48 hours) - going to classes, taking in a couple of Friday night parties, and talking to a lot of students (including a few that he knew from high school) - he decided on Harvard.</p>
<p>Why? The main reasons have nothing to do with any perceived drawbacks to Amherst or Swarthmore; rather, they relate to what my son experienced as Harvard's distinctive strengths, which include:</p>
<p>--The extraordindary range of extracurricular opportunities, including the possibility of writing for the Crimson (the daily newspaper) and for the Let's Go travel guides.</p>
<p>--The wide array of stimulating and exciting events - talks, debates, exhibits, concerts, etc., etc., etc. - to be found, seemingly on a daily basis, both on campus and off.</p>
<p>--The students that he met, who, virtually without exception, seemed not only really intelligent, but also interesting, friendly, and happy to be at Harvard. </p>
<p>As a parent, there are few greater pleasures than seeing your child bubble over with the sort of excitement that my son experienced this week in Cambridge.</p>
<p>Congratulations to your son ... and to you, for letting him make his own decision! You've come a long way, haven't you.</p>
<p>Congratulations from the parent of another Harvard prospie!</p>
<p>And from yet another!</p>
<p>There is nothing like an extended visit at each place to really get a feel for the strengths of a school. And nothing like a decision that is based not on any drawbacks (real or perceived) of alternative choices, but based on sheer enthusiasm for the first choice. </p>
<p>Btw, even though my son made his decision last December, he is still bubbling over with excitement too. :)</p>
<p>Congrats epistrophy (& your son too)! I had such a hard time choosing between Harvard and Amherst. In the end, I decided on Harvard as well (and for much of the same reasons)...but I still regret not being able to take Professor Sarat's classes at Amherst (my decision was almost Sarat vs Harvard). Saying no to Amherst was one of the hardest decision I've made and I made sure I wrote a nice explanation/note to the Amherst admission officers (many of whom I met personally when I visited).</p>
<p>cncm:</p>
<p>Austin Sarat's classes at Amherst - and the whole law-related department there (not, I hasten to add for those unfamiliar with it, a pre-law program, but rather one that focuses on law and law-related issues within the context of the liberal arts) - were a major draw for my son as well, as was the much admired English Department. While at Amherst earlier this week, my son attended - and loved - Sarat's current class offering on murder. But you know what? Trite as it may seem, there's a lesson here: no matter what you decide, you can't have everything.</p>
<p>But in the maybe-you-can department, you may just have a chance to take a class with Sarat as a Harvard student after all, as he has been a Visiting Professor at both Harvard and MIT (where, I understand, Harvard students can take classes) in recent years.</p>
<p>Byerly:</p>
<p>Yes, I have come a long way. When this process started a couple years ago (this is my oldest child, so this has been my first time through all this), my biases were definitely in favor of a small liberal arts college in the Midwest. (Uh, wanna take three guesses on what my own background is?) I had all sorts of negative stereotypes about the Ivy League in general and Harvard in particular: snooty, status-obsessed, more concerned with perceived prestige than with actual intellectual content and achievement, etc., etc., etc. I would tell my son (we live in Illinois), half-jokingly: "You can go anywhere you want, just so long as it's within a day's drive." Well, he ain't going in the Midwest, he ain't going to a place within a day's drive, and he ain't going to a small liberal arts college. So, in one sense, I guess I struck out. But in another I opened up.</p>
<p>Congratulations, Epistrophy. By the way, is your screen name in honor of Thelonius Monk's jazz composition? I have been listening to a lot of Monk recently, and have "Brilliant Corners" constantly playing in my head.</p>
<p>tokenadult: </p>
<p>Re Monk: Yes.</p>
<p>Hmmm. . . in April, after my son decided on Harvard - where he couldn't be more excited to be starting in the fall - I wrote the following (post #74 above) in regard to some of the biases that I had to overcome in order to share in his excitement:</p>
<p>"I had all sorts of negative stereotypes about the Ivy League in general and Harvard in particular: snooty, status-obsessed, more concerned with perceived prestige than with actual intellectual content and achievement, etc., etc., etc."</p>
<p>While I remain very excited about the world of opportunities that awaits my son in Cambridge, I must admit that sometimes, in seeing the posts that seem to generate the most buzz on this board and those of the other Ivies - which Ivy is best, what other schools did you reject in order to go here, do more cross-admits choose X, Y, or Z, yadda yadda yadda - it's hard to avoid becoming just a tad disheartened by the notion that, geez, maybe these stereotypes aren't so off the mark after all.</p>
<p>Have you read any of the newspaper stories I've linked about real flesh-and-blood freshmen who will be attending next fall? Most strike me as serious about their academics and high achievers - many of whom have overcome serious challenges in life.</p>
<p>Yes, Byerly, I have read these stories. And I thank you - as I previously did in the thread re the truly inspiring Globe series on Emily - for posting them. It's just that sometimes stories like these seem to get drowned out by all the chatter re who's up, who's down, who's in, who's out . . . . </p>
<p>I know, I know: a solution to this "problem" would be to read more selectively. Maybe I'll try that.</p>
<br>
<p>in seeing the posts that seem to generate the most buzz on this board and those of the other Ivies - which Ivy is best, what other schools did you reject in order to go here, do more cross-admits choose X, Y, or Z, yadda yadda yadda - it's hard to avoid becoming just a tad disheartened by the notion that, geez, maybe these stereotypes aren't so off the mark after all.</p>
<br>
<ol>
<li><p>Users of this board and others like it don't represent anything close to a random sample of applicants or admits to Harvard.</p></li>
<li><p>High school students are larvae. They are about to grow personally, academically, socially, and intellectually during their first three months at college at a rate they haven't approached since infancy. Until then, listening to them talk about the application process tells you about as much about the attitude they'll have in college as a caterpillar's behavior tells you about a butterfly's. This is true of kids heading to every school, but it is doubly true of Harvard, where there's a 90% chance that the kid is going to get a huge and beneficial shock to the system when he experiences being nothing special in a huge crowd of fantastically talented people for the first time in his life.</p></li>
</ol>