Is Peer Assessment in USNWR Rankings based on Undergrad or Grad Reputation?

College Search & Selection
201

<p>Xiggi, I followed the order of the conversation. I am referring to your constant jabs at Michigan and Cal. This is not just one isolated incident. I often catch you hitting Michigan and Cal below the belt. You constantly hint that somehow, those two schools are unique ion their use of TAs. In the 3+ years I have seen you post on these forums, I cannot recall a single time that you actually gave those schools any credit. </p>

<p>But back to the original topic. Cal has 10,000 graduate students and Michigan has 15,000 graduate students. Please tell me, what do the 8,000 graduate students at MIT and Stanford, or 10,000 graduate students at Chicago, or 14,000 graduate students at Harvard or 17,000 graduate students at Columbia? How do they earn their tuition and stipends? I suppose all those Political Science, History, English, Mathematics and Biology PhD candidates are sitting in labs doing advanced research. I suppose only faculty teach students at those schools. Michigan and Cal are the only schools where TAs teach eh? In truth, TAs at Cal or Michigan are no more active than TAs at any major research uiniversity, including schools such as Chicago, Columbia, Harvard, MIT, Stanford and Yale. TAs at any major research university, whether it is Harvard or Michigan, are going to lead discussion groups and sometimes, they are going to teach 100 level intro classes in very popular and generic subjects such as English, Foreign Languages and Math.</p>

202

<p>"The singling out of one school only occured when BKClinton decided to post his story from 1970s about ... Michigan. I only debunked that account by quoting DIRECT information from the school graduate union or from people who happen to do the job some want to deny even exist."</p>

<p>"BKClinton decided to post his story from 1970s about ... Michigan. I only debunked that account" </p>

<p>How do you debunk a person's account of his/her experience? </p>

<p>I'm curious.</p>

<p>I already commented on the article you pasted. So is my account of my daughter's experience debunked because I said she wasn't taught by GSIs 25% of the time? Are her friends' experiences debunked? Are all the Michigan people that have come to this website to say their experience is different than the article mentions debunked? The article said 25% of hours taught were by GSIs. I guess that means the average student is taught by GSIs 25% of the time. Right?</p>

203

<p>"My point, BClintonK, is that your account which probably dates back several decades and describes the organization of a Honors College might be quite distinct from today's environment at large research universities.</p>

<p>While you're entitled to "sticking to your story" that is based on the "best of your knowledge," should you not consider that others might prefer to rely on testimonials that tell different stories, and happen to be more timely and more accurate?"</p>

<p>What about those of us that don't bother posting because our current, timely, and accurate testimonial tells the exact same story? I don't believe the honors program at Michigan has changed all that much in all of it's decades of existence. Me and my dad both got pity B+'s in the required first year honors literature class Great Books (because not everybody is in the honors program for their writing skills), and very well could have had the same professor. If that's not continuity, I don't know what is.</p>

204

<p>
[quote]
Xiggi, I followed the order of the conversation. I am referring to your constant jabs at Michigan and Cal. This is not just one isolated incident. I often catch you hitting Michigan and Cal below the belt. You constantly hint that somehow, those two schools are unique ion their use of TAs. In the 3+ years I have seen you post on these forums, I cannot recall a single time that you actually gave those schools any credit.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Really?</p>

<p>I don't think that that is correct, but even if it were, I do not see why I would offer any apologies for my opinions about GSIs and TAs. Fwiw, if YOU thought that such a system was so wonderful, there would be little need to deny its scope and use at your favorite schools. And, did I ever say that I find the use of GSI or TA at private schools ANY better? </p>

<p>In the meantime, I wish you the very best of luck in finding all those abject "hints" and "below the belt" jabs. Perception and reality are two very different animals!</p>

205

<p>
[quote]
Cal has 10,000 graduate students and Michigan has 15,000 graduate students. Please tell me, what do the 8,000 graduate students at MIT and Stanford, or 10,000 graduate students at Chicago, or 14,000 graduate students at Harvard or 17,000 graduate students at Columbia? How do they earn their tuition and stipends? I suppose all those Political Science, History, English, Mathematics and Biology PhD candidates are sitting in labs doing advanced research. I suppose only faculty teach students at those schools. Michigan and Cal are the only schools where TAs teach eh? In truth, TAs at Cal or Michigan are no more active than TAs at any major research uiniversity, including schools such as Chicago, Columbia, Harvard, MIT, Stanford and Yale. TAs at any major research university, whether it is Harvard or Michigan, are going to lead discussion groups and sometimes, they are going to teach 100 level intro classes in very popular and generic subjects such as English, Foreign Languages and Math.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So? Aren't you making my point that this army of TA or GSI does indeed exist? You are making this an issue about Michigan just because you want to make it about Michigan.</p>

206

<p>xiggy, I am not going to bother looking for any of those "abject" hints. I have read enough of your posts to know where you stand. </p>

<p>Back to the topic, I see nothing wrong with TAs. I never denied their existance. But why do you even bother mentioning them? You were trying to make it seem like Cal and Michigan are alone in their use of TAs. Have you admitted that other top universities like Columbia and Stanford use TAs just as prominently as Cal or Michigan? You seem to insinuate that they don't. TAs play a small role in undergraduate education at all universities, no more so at Cal or Michigan than at Harvard or Stanford. TAs are like interns. Thjey play a supporting role but do not contribut to the overall outcome nearly as much as the experts they support. I took over 40 classes at Michigan. Of those, 6 had TAs. All 6 of them were "Section Leaders" in large classes that were taught by professors. 5 of those 6 were excellent. 1 was not! But in none of those 6 cases did the TA alter the ultimate result of the course. It was always the professor who dictated the pace and the quality of the course. I'd say my experience at Michigan is pretty typical. Statistically speaking, 97% of classes at Michigan are taught by professors and GSIs/TAs are involved in 25% of all undergraduate classes, almost always as assistants, very seldom as teachers. </p>

<p>Information</a> About Graduate Student Instructors at the University of Michigan</p>

<p>It is important to remember that most students focus primarily on 300, 400 and 500 level courses. Those are almost exclusively taught by professors.</p>

207

<p>
[quote]
xiggy, I am not going to bother looking for any of those "abject" hints. I have read enough of your posts to know where you stand. </p>

<p>Back to the topic, I see nothing wrong with TAs. I never denied their existance. But why do you even bother mentioning them? You were trying to make it seem like Cal and Michigan are alone in their use of TAs. Have you admitted that other top universities like Columbia and Stanford use TAs just as prominently as Cal or Michigan? You seem to insinuate that they don't.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Alexandre, enough of this charade. This is getting very tiresome.</p>

<p>There is indeed no need to go back to find the "Michigan" hints and the jabs I posted because you'd have a hard time finding anything close to what you describe. I know **exactly **what I have written about Michigan (the school) and what I have written about the antics of Michigan's and Cal's "supporters" on College Confidential. </p>

<p>Back to the topic, it is obvious that we disagree about TAs. Contrary to your allegation, I do not view this is as an issue that poisons solely Michigan or Berkeley. Inasmuch as there are various degrees in preparation of TAs/GSI depending on the schools and programs taught, I do see PLENTY of wrongs with the excessive use of poorly prepared TAs. I find that there is a world of difference between a TA who is freshly minted PhD who is starting his academic career and a TA who is foreign student starting a Master's. </p>

<p>As far as admitting that Stanford (or Columbia) uses TAs, why would I have a problem with that? Berkeley, Michigan, Stanford, Columbia ... it makes no difference to me. What annoys me is the misleading attempt to diminish the role and impact of TAs, and the utterly silly games of semantics that is based on class/section, instruction/lecture, teaching/reviewing. </p>

<p>You said it yourself ... what do you think all those thousands of students do to earn their stipends and free tuition? If you like the system ... power to you! I don't care for it, and so far, it looks like we both voted with oour feet. I opted for a system that allowed me to bypass the ordeal altogether and you seemed to appreciate and enjoy it. </p>

<p>By the way, do you think you would have been a **good **teacher when completing your master's at Cornell? Just curious!</p>

<p>Oh, by the way, I was perfectly aware of the statistics discussed in Information</a> About Graduate Student Instructors at the University of Michigan. Interestingly enough, do you think anyone noticed that the numbers are identical to the GEO piece I quoted earlier. Dstark, do you still have problems with the 25% number. LOL!</p>

208

<p>I have no issues with TAs. Like I said, the ones I had were excellent and they were hardly noticeable. I also have no issue admitting that Michigan has a large TA presence. All leading research universities do. How else can graduate students earn their way through their degrees. I think you have a huge dislike for TAs that is, perhaps, unjustified. TAs aren't a "poison".</p>

<p>"By the way, do you think you would have been a good teacher when completing your master's at Cornell? Just curious!"</p>

<p>I am generally good at explaining concepts to people. But I would not have been as qualified to teach as a 3rd or 4th year PhD candidate. Most TAs tend to be 3rd or 4th year PhD students, although in some cases, you obviously have less experienced students. Another thing to remember is that I had never been exposed to ILR before Cornell. Most PhD students in most disciplines have been exposed to their field much before their got to graduate school.</p>

209

<p>xiggi, if there's any charade around here, it's your attempts to pretend that you don't disdain and scorn, openly, schools like Michigan and Cal. Hell, it's pretty well known that you don't like them (inasmuch as it's well known that I do).</p>

210

<p>HARVARD, DUKE AND MICHIGAN</p>

<p>(2007 entering class)
75th percentile SAT Harvard: 1590
75th percentile SAT Duke: 1560
75th percentile SAT Michigan: 1460</p>

<p>(2005-06)
Endowment per capita Harvard: $1,456.940
Endowment per capita Duke: $350,727
Endowment per capita Michigan: $177,229</p>

<p>(2005-06)
Student to Faculty ratio Harvard: 7/1
Student to Faculty ratio Duke: 8/1
Student to Faculty ratio Michigan: 15/1</p>

<p>(2007-08)
Acceptance rate Harvard: 7.1%
Acceptance rate Duke: 18.8%
Acceptance rate Michigan: 42%ish</p>

<p>This is only the tip of the iceberg, but these are some of the facts. Duke is closer to Harvard than it is to Michigan. You may draw your own conclusions.</p>

211

<p>"Dstark, do you still have problems with the 25% number. LOL!"</p>

<p>All Undergraduate Courses (Courses Numbered 100-499)
Taught by: No. of Courses % of Total
Faculty Only
Faculty & GSI
GSIs Only
Total 2,404
788
105
3,297 73%
24%
3%
100%</p>

<p>GSIs Only
3%.<br>
That was close to my daughter's experience. 1 class taught by a GSI.</p>

<p>Xiggi, one of the great things about graduate school is you get to meet people from many different undergraduate backgrounds. You will find that these students, many of them graduates of large schools, many who took a class or two run by a TA, are more than capable.</p>

212

<p>


</p>

<p>My experience does indeed date back several decades, but my D is a rising HS junior just starting to look seriously at colleges and in that context we've looked quite closely at the Honors program at Michigan. It is structured exactly the way it was back in my day: small honors classes at the intro level, and from there you move into your major taking mostly upper (300- and 400-) level courses as an upperclassman with probably a smattering of 500-level graduate-level courses and seminars. D is thinking about studying classics, an absolutely stellar department at Michigan with a large, world-class faculty and a small population of undergrad majors, which means all small classes taught by some of the top people in the field. This replicates to a T my experience as a philosophy major there in the 1970s. To my mind this is one of the highest quality educational experiences you can get anywhere. Yes, D could get a similar experience at HYPS and a small handful of other highly selective schools. But not at most LACs, which generally don't have the faculty depth to create the same kinds of opportunities for serious work in classics. And not at many major research universities which just don't have the faculty depth, breadth and quality in this field to match Michigan. So Michigan is very, very prominent on our radar screen, well ahead of many highly selective private schools. </p>

<p>I never claimed my experience, or the experience I project for D if she ends up at Michigan, is typical of all Michigan students. It partly depends on whether you're in Honors or the Residential College or one of the other "Michigan learning communities." And it partly depends on your major; it's harder to get small classes and as much individualized attention in some fields. My only point is that Michigan has extraordinary intellectual resources and the undergraduate experience there is far richer and more varied than the broad-brush negative stereotyping that goes on in these pages. In many areas it can match the best anywhere. </p>

<p>Finally, let me be very clear about this: I'm not an uncritical Michigan booster. I got an absolutely first-rate education there, but I think there are some drawbacks. I'm not sure I'd want D to go there if she doesn't get into the Honors program or RC, because I don't like those big intro classes, either. And even though she's passionate about classics right now, that could change and she could end up in a major with a lot more students. She also has a geographic preference for the Northeast and a general preference for smaller schools (though that's a difficult balancing act since so few small schools have the depth she'll need in classics). All those things push Michigan a little further down our current working list, but still in the top half dozen or so, all factors considered. But if D does end up at Michigan, I'll be one proud Dad, and I'll be confident that she's in for a really high quality undergraduate educational experience.</p>

213

<p>"This is only the tip of the iceberg, but these are some of the facts. Duke is closer to Harvard than it is to Michigan. You may draw your own conclusions"</p>

<p>UM >>Far More top faculty scholars than Duke. I care more about who is standing in the front of the class than who is sitting next to me.</p>

214

<p>"I care more about who is standing in the front of the class than who is sitting next to me."</p>

<p>barrons,
It translates to Michigan doesn't have an extremely high density of extremely brilliant student. At HYP, Stanford, Dartmouth, MIT, Duke, etc. you would care as much about the person sitting next to you as the person in the front.</p>

215

<p>This has become a generic state school vs. private debate, with a bunch of defensive Michigan people added.
Having graduated from both state and private universities, the level of the student is the best determinant of the quality of the eduction, IMO, regardless of whether the institution is public or private. This is usually clear at the K12 levels. The urban test-in magnet will just offer up a much richer education than a neighborhood school in a poor neighborhood. Try teaching a sixth grade math class when 80% of the students are at a third grade math ability level.
Back to the PA- I think it is grossly biased toward huge schools, partly because of large numbers of graduates who do the rating. I don't think there is any practical way to remedy the problem, and the PA should just be dumped.</p>

216

<p>There are plenty of very bright people at UM. And there's a good football team.</p>

217

<p>BK, thank you for your reply.</p>

<p>First of all, allow me that I could NOT agree more with the body of your comment. The two paragraphs below are exactly what I think about Michigan.</p>

<p>
[quote]
My only point is that Michigan has extraordinary intellectual resources and the undergraduate experience there is far richer and more varied than the broad-brush negative stereotyping that goes on in these pages. In many areas it can match the best anywhere. </p>

<p>Finally, let me be very clear about this: I'm not an uncritical Michigan booster. I got an absolutely first-rate education there, but I think there are some drawbacks. I'm not sure I'd want D to go there if she doesn't get into the Honors program or RC, because I don't like those big intro classes, either.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The unfortunate nature of public discussion is that it is hard to express nuances that come naturally in face to face discussions. Another unfortunate aspect is that small and precise comments are often taken out of context. The example of the discussion about the role of TAs is just an illustration. The fact that I view an excessive use of TAs at many schools as a negative does not mean I think that the education at ... Michigan is sub-par. Michigan IS a world renowned school, one of the best 12 universities in the world, and its undergraduate should be easily among the best 50 in the country. </p>

<p>And, one needs to understand that the "ranked" order is simply ... meaningless.</p>

218

<p>

I strongly disagree with this, especially because at Michigan, the person standing in front of the class might be a GSI who is leading the lecture since the Nobel Laureate professor is off attending a conference. LOL!</p>

219

<p>"Michigan IS a world renowned school, one of the best 12 universities in the world, and its undergraduate should be easily among the best 50 in the country."</p>

<p>subtle anti-michigan trolling. ok, i'm so glad that you and hawk agree with me that michigan is a top 50 school for undergrads and a top 15 school for engineering.</p>

220

<p>I think the strength of Michigan's graduate programs, the wealth of academic resources it has, the sheer size/power of its alumni base and the excellence in post-graduate/job placement is what keeps Michigan a legitimate top 25 or maybe even top 20 school. If we were looking just at selectivity, student body strength and undergraduate focus, then Michigan can justified as merely being a top 50 school.</p>