<p>I agree with cosar. My S has had a great first semester. None of his classes were larger than 29 students (the smallest had 11) and every single one of them had a Course Assistant or TF (or 2 for the larger classes) so each student got plenty of attention and help. The profs were very accessible both during office hours and via email.<br>
I also agree that students need to be proactive and to seek out opportunities. But help is there in plenty.
For students majoring in math, there is a weekly math table. For physics students, there is a Society of Physics Students that is very active. I believe each House has its own pre-law and pre-med advisor. Some departments also have an tutor in each of the Houses. And so on. I understand that advising will be beefed up as of next fall, though I am not clear about the details. As it is, however, my S had no complaint about faculty availability or advising.</p>
<p>Harvard also has a great tutor system. It cost the student $4 and hour while the university picks up the remainder.</p>
<p>Here's an interesting article from USNEWs about the current state of Harvard's educational experience. </p>
<p>Here's a few quotes which echo many "Harvard Bashers" though they are harvard students in this case:</p>
<p>Despite the school's well-documented academic prowess, there seems to be at least a shadow of a doubt.....</p>
<p>
[quote]
it's almost mutual avoidance.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It tales two to tango. Students who are not pro-active should consider other schools. I understand there are some LACs where the prof calls a student if s/he overslept and missed the class.</p>
<p>IDK, I think I'd prefer a decent separation between professor and student. Most Harvard scholars probably aren't the sort to talk about their grandmothers over tea and sugarbread. How creepy is that, for a teacher to ring you up for dinner with the wife and kids?</p>
<p>I was going to comment on CB's use of selective quotation, and offer a few other quotations from the article, but it looks like we're not allowed to do that. It's a reasonably interesting article if you read the whole thing - and it makes some points that I and others have made here. If you're not proactive, it's easy not to have a lot of contact with professors. On the other hand, if you are proactive, the opportunities are there. It talks about one student who worked every week on her senior thesis with Louis Menand, a brilliant Pulitzer Prize winner. And it also quotes one of the students who complained about lack of access to professors (which CB originally quoted) as "conceding" that you can create the access "if you really try" (of course, CB did not include this second quote in his original post).</p>
<p>Another point the article makes is that Harvard works pretty hard at addressing perceived shortcomings. The freshman seminar program, in particular, has significantly changed the typical freshman experience. I was speaking with a 2003 graduate recently, who said that relatively few students took freshman seminars when she was a freshman. In contrast, over 90% of freshmen do so now. Based on my son's experience, it really makes a difference to have a small class with a professor right off the bat.</p>
<p>The article also points out that much of what makes Harvard special are the other students, quoting one student as saying that every student there has something about them that "just amazes you." It's a comment I've heard from my son as well.</p>
<p>Harvard cuz it's just better. I visited both, and Princeton looked like a summer camp to me. Harvard has a good city feel. (But, I did notice that they weren't up on all of their maintenance).</p>
<p>"The article also points out that much of what makes Harvard special are the other students, quoting one student as saying that every student there has something about them that 'just amazes you.'"
And that's not the case at other top schools?</p>
<p>ie, high SAT scorers, valedictorians, National Merit Scholars, National Achievement Scholars, USA Today winners, Intel Award winners and others who have achieved national distinction in academic areas and a range of extra-curricular fields even before matriculating are all present at Harvard in greater abundance than elsewhere.</p>
<p>HARVARD</p>
<p>For me, location matters. I need easy access to a major city and all the resources it offers.</p>
<p>I might agree with that, Byerly. Harvard has its own intensity that goes pretty much unmatched. Sure, it has its weaknesses, but the student body is most certainly not one of them. I don't think I've been to Harvard once without meeting someone utterly remarkable.</p>
<p>That said, the intensity may be partly due to expectation. The general air of haughtiness one hears about is proof that some of this Harvard aura is contrived and not altogether natural. Those visiting expect to be impressed, so they will, no matter. Those studying are considered the best students in the world so they act the part.</p>
<p>"Not the same degree"
Does that also mean that other schools don't have pretentious conceited kids who win lottery-style awards such as USA Today and Intel? </p>
<p>You must also concede that MIT probably has higher SAT scorers. And that valedictorians are hardly an indicator of anything considering how many even schools such as Cornell reject.</p>
<p>"Not to the same extent. ie, high SAT scorers, valedictorians, National Merit Scholars, National Achievement Scholars, USA Today winners, Intel Award winners and others who have achieved national distinction in academic areas and a range of extra-curricular fields even before matriculating are all present at Harvard in greater abundance than elsewhere."</p>
<p>Yes and no. Those facts you quoted are obviously true, and there are many remarkable people at Harvard. However, my observation is that a significant number of these students are simply over-achieving Type-A personalities who blew by weak high school competition by having carefully drafted plans for success.</p>
<p>Among these students, many have somewhat limited natural abilities (perhaps 60-70th percentile ... although completely impossible to assess objectively) but compensate by their tremendous drive. Despite the rhetoric about teaching independent thought, many of these students are never able to move beyond simply reciting what was taught to them because they're so focused on getting the "highest grade." And nobody benefits from this.</p>
<p>This is much more true of Harvard than any other school that I've been exposed to, and there are +'s and -'s about that type of atmosphere.</p>
<p>. .</p>
<p>No, MIT does not have higher SAT scores. And all that sneering about the alleged moral inferiority of Harvard students simply because they are at Harvard is the same kind of jealous junk directed at Harvard from adherents of other schools since time immemorial. </p>
<p>The standard, hoary charge is that people go to Harvard for the "wrong" reasons, whereas they go to other schools for the "right" reasons! The response, generally, is to consider the source.</p>
<p>What is better, MIT or Harvard. I think MIT is a lot better. I'm talking about the school overall.</p>
<p>Overall, Harvard is more prestigious but if you're a math or science guy, especially engineering, there are very few instances where MIT might not provide a superior education.</p>
<p>Either way, can you say that there's an overall "better" school? Of course not. Every school offers different things to different people. Despite what US News may say, nothing's that objective.</p>
<p>I've said it before, and maybe I had better say it again. I have been to the campuses of all the most desired colleges during business trips over the last two decades, and I have taken my son (only just now a teenager) to college information meetings of various colleges over the last couple years. I don't have any particular bias about the issue of which college is the "best," insofar as I applied ONLY to, and gained two postsecondary degrees from, my state's flagship research university, which by all accounts is NOT the best university in any subject that I studied there. </p>
<p>But I will remind an Ivy-disappointed Stanford booster in these many Harvard Forum threads that he is not making his alma mater look good by some of the silly statements he posts here. This irks me, NOT because I have any alumni connection or other connection to Harvard, but because for all I know I may have a parent connection to Stanford in a few years. I don't know where my son will apply, and I SURELY don't know where he will be accepted, but I know he has subject matter interests such that he may desire to apply beyond my alma mater (State U) and possibly apply to some of the schools that are debated about here. I know of two young men from my state who are now studying at Stanford, and I note that they don't waste their time bragging up Stanford on CC's Harvard Forum, probably because they are continuing to be the mature young men they were when they were here now that they are away at college. I guess I will have to rely on guys like that to maintain and possibly boost Stanford's reputation BY THEIR OWN ACHIEVEMENTS up to the year when my son may (or may not) apply there. It certainly doesn't help Stanford's reputation in the eyes of many neutral observers for it to become known as the school for kiddies who have sour grapes feelings about Ivy League schools. It was seeing repeated uninformed posts on this Harvard Forum that got me wondering, hey, where does that guy go to school anyhow? and looking up the CC list of previous posts that revealed that one purported Stanford student is not busy with his studies, but busy offering opinions about a school he knows little about.</p>
<p>Zephyr: If you consider the USA Today and Intel awards "lottery-style", I guess you haven't taken the time to read about the students that receive them. Once again, you have shown that you shoot from the hip with statements that are nothing short of ridiculous.</p>
<p>I also have to say that when we visited Princeton, there was a much more show-offy, elitist air to the way things were conducted. For example, they had the info session in one of their massive, stain-glass cathedral type spaces, and then later toured us to see all the others just like it. They made a special point of telling us how Princeton has so much money that they'll fund anything you want, even pleasure trips if its presented in the right way. It was a turn off.
By contrast, at Harvard, the info session was conducted in a regular, small lecture hall, in the most low-key way by an admissions person and a student. The tour person was also very down-to-earth, and took us to relevant places, but didn't try to show off every cathedral ceiling. Everyone we dealt with, and most that my son has since met, have been unpretensious and not anxious to talk about their past or present accomplishments. In sum, my son describes his impression of Harvard as "elite, without being elitist".</p>