<p>I'm shocked that people on this site think Michigan and Cal are equal to Duke and Penn, but I'll live with that if their only criteria for measuring an undergraduate school is "the all-knowing PA". However, anyone who thinks Cal is equal to Yale is certifiably insane.</p>
<p>We all know how good Yale is in the humanities but for a student interested in going into the sciences and doing research in that area, no school besides maybe Caltech can compare to Yale. Since most students aren't interested in that area, a prospective science student would have access to incredible personalized attention by the science faculty and world-class facilities. If you consider that along with Yale's tight-knit residential system, unparalleled financial resources available per student, incredible advising, diverse/academically elite student body, plethora of grants available to student for study abroad/civic engagement and gorgeous campus, then there's almost no comparison with Berkeley.</p>
<p>Oh yeah, I hear Tony Blair is teaching at Yale next year. I'm supremely jealous of my Yale friends.</p>
<p>
[quote]
At Duke, there is not a SINGLE class that is taught by anyone besides a tenured professor.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Interesting. Since by an large graduate students can't get tenure-track teaching jobs without some prior teaching experience, this would put Duke grad students at an enormous disadvantage in the job market. So out of curiosity I went to the Duke website and looked up the psychology department---typically a huge department at most schools, with a very large enrollment in intro-level classes. Under the "people" section of the departmental website, it lists all the grad students, many with links to their CVs. And under "teaching experience," many have entries like the following:</p>
<p>"Spring 2006. Teaching Assistant, Cognitive Psychology, Prof. [name deleted]. Responsibilities included leading discussions once a week, organizing student projects, and grading student work."</p>
<p>In short, this Duke grad student claimed to be doing exactly the same work that TAs or GSIs do at Berkeley, Michigan, Harvard, Princeton, or any other school with a large graduate program. So obviously, someone's lying. Either grad students DO teach as TAs at Duke, or Duke grad students en masse are misrepresenting their teaching experience so as to be taken seriously as candidates for entry-level faculty positions.</p>
<p>What do we think. Should I notify my faculty colleagues not to hire any grad students coming out of Duke because they're falsifying their CVs and claiming teaching experience that they don't in fact have? </p>
<p>Oh, and I'm sure all those tenure-track faculty members at Duke will be relieved to learn that they're been retroactively awarded tenure, since if they've ever taught a course at Duke, they must be tenured.</p>
<p>Even I think EAD is too full of himself, I think what he meant was that all lectures were led by professors/lecturers (not necessarily tenured, EAD. All schools have "assistant" professors). Discussion sections don't count.</p>
<p>
[quote]
However, anyone who thinks Cal is equal to Yale is certifiably insane.</p>
<p>We all know how good Yale is in the humanities but for a student interested in going into the sciences and doing research in that area, no school besides maybe Caltech can compare to Yale.
[/quote]
Okaaay...USNWR says Peer Assessment is a measure of distinguished academic programs.
Seems like over 2,000 people who completed the Peer Assessment survey are "insane"...:rolleyes: </p>
<p>Peer assessment is not about undergraduate student quality, financial resources, etc. USNWR breaks down that data into separate categories, so why conduct an opinion survey to confirm these criteria?</p>
<p>Cal has just as distinguished academic programs in humanities as Yale. Cal also happens to have outstanding engineering, physical science, social science and business programs as well.</p>
<p>Academic distinction comes from faculty and scholarly reputation...not the 2400 SAT scoring 18 year old.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And thanks for questioning my credibility.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Okay, that was one commentary I wish I had not made. It was uncalled for and I must apologize for that. </p>
<p>In addition, U.S. News does indeed state directly that the PA is a measure of undergraduate academic excellence. The fact that I do not really believe the results match their objectives, I've to admit that I was wrong in criticizing your "title."</p>
<p>
[quote]
Even I think EAD is too full of himself, I think what he meant was that all lectures were led by professors/lecturers (not necessarily tenured, EAD. All schools have "assistant" professors). Discussion sections don't count.
[/quote]
Well, how would that make Duke differ from Cal and Michigan in the roles of using TAs in teaching?</p>
<p>But since you asked, I took a quick look at Duke's 2007 Fall time schedule. Sure enough, they had TA with full responsibility of lecture sections in courses like Calculus II, Laboratory Calculus and intro courses in Spanish and English.</p>
<p>Besides, Duke employs a bunch of lecturers teaching intro courses across the board. And as far as I know, lecturers are not on tenure track.</p>
<p>TAs lead discussion sections at Duke; they help students with their homework, go over difficult concepts again and assist the professor in grading the material. They DO NOT DO THE LECTURING OF THE ACTUAL CLASS. Even if there were isolated cases of this occurring, it doesn't even come close to Michigan where GSIs do 30-40% of the actual LECTURING OF THE MATERIAL.</p>
<p>Geez, you public school advocates won't concede on any issue. All I want is for you to acknowledge is that while a student can get a great education at Michigan and Berkeleley as well as the top privates(Duke, Penn and Dartmouth), they are inferior schools at the undergraduate level. It's like having a debate with a group of people who think a Toyota Corolla is as good as a Jaguar S-Type. Both are good cars but one is clearly better lol.</p>
<p>EAD, TAs do not lecture at Michigan either. Duke's TA contribution to undergraduate instruction and academics is no less pronounced than Michigan's. And no, Duke does not offer superior education to Cal and Michigan. Equal, perhaps (particularly in the case of Cal, which really is in a class of its own), but superior, not really.</p>
<p>The</a> Vital Role of Graduate Student Instructors
"Graduate Student Instructors (GSIs) have an extremely important role in TEACHING undergraduate students at the University of Michigan. You are generally in charge of TEACHING small introductory classes, facilitating discussions in small sections connected to large lecture courses, RUNNING laboratory sections, and holding office hours where one-to-one teaching occurs."</p>
<p>"Try to get students actively involved in YOUR CLASSES. You can create the climate needed for students to feel safe enough to ask questions and participate in discussions. We challenge you as a GSI to learn how to facilitate good discussions and to ask questions that require much more than learning facts. We encourage you to build a repertoire of good TEACHING TECHNIQUES that will promote active learning, not only through discussion but also through such techniques as group work, simulations, role-playing, and projects. Student participation leads to higher-level thinking and problem-solving skills."</p>
<p>It seems like the GSIs at Michigan have a lot on their hands. I wonder what the professors are busy doing?</p>
<p>
I think we can agree on that, especially considering the breadth of course offerings at Cal and Michigan. However, I have always argued that the actual education offered by the university and the scholarly reputation of the faculty is a very little part of the actual learning that takes place in college and an even smaller componenet of the actual overall college experience.</p>
<p>What about going to a school with a smarter student body? A more diverse student body? Smaller class sizes? More direct access to professors? Better academic advising? More academic resources per student? More grants for study abroad and civic engagement? Name recognition(employers and regular educated people)? Prestige? Job placement? Those matter do. Duke is better at Michigan in those areas. I don't really care about Alumni Giving but the alumni donate in droves and I can only think of two other schools that have alumni as passionate(Dartmouth and Princeton), so Duke must be doing something right.</p>
<p>If you think students choose Harvard over most other schools for the "superior education". The vast, vast majority choose it for the prestige, the opportunity to make connections with their extremely talented peers and the amazing grants/resources for doing reseach/study abroad/civic engagement that the school has. There are a number of schools in the country that offer a good education if that's all one is after.</p>
<p>Who cares what the academics think? I surely don't. The vast majority of college-aged kids could care less. Universities need to impress 18-year olds, not the academic world. The parents of those 18-year olds are the ones who fund the existence of these institutions.</p>
<p>I care what my family friends and relatives think. I care what my parents think. I care what the professional elite in the America's major cities think. I care what internship providers think. I care what the employers think. I care what kids in my age group think. I care what educated working people in America think. I care what young women my age think. These are the demographics I'm trying to impress and gain validation from. They all believe schools like Duke/Penn/Dartmouth are a cut or several cuts above Cal and Michigan.</p>
<p>You assume human beings are perfectly rational by just talking about the type of education offered by schools. Michigan has the highest number of living alumni out of any schools in the country. I consider that a bad thing. Obviously that's incredibly vain of me but there's nothing "special" about that. Going to a more selective school makes you feel "special".</p>
<p>Maybe you're completely right that Michigan and Duke are equal institutions. Even if you were, the vast majority of people wouldn't believe you. You might argue that they have all been "marketed" but that's not important. They all think Duke is better than Michigan. If enough people believe in a lie, then who cares about the truth? I sure don't. It's all about perception.</p>
<p>For what it's worth, I love the University of Michigan to death. I've been a diehard UMich football fan for the past 10 years, most of my good friends go there and I love going to Ann Arbor. It sucks that I'm having to debate the merits of a school I grew up loving versus the school that I currently attend lol. However, I want the information on this site to be objective so future applicants aren't influenced by false information.</p>
<p>
[quote]
it doesn't even come close to Michigan where GSIs do 30-40% of the actual LECTURING OF THE MATERIAL.
[/quote]
Well, I've done the leg work to uncover the real story of TAs at Duke. I challenge you to show us which are the 30-40% of courses in Michigan where GSIs do the "actual LECTURING OF THE MATERIAL". If you can't, you should stop spreading this kinda of baseless myths.</p>
<p>For starter:
- All chemical engineering courses are taught (lecture) by faculty.
- All 200-level mathematics courses (i.e., Calculus III or above) are taught by faculty.</p>
<p>EAD, the Michigan website gives credit to its GSI's. What do you expect the university to say? That GSIs are insignificant pions?! That does not mean that GSIs teach all that much. They lead discussion groups, just as they do at Duke. GSIs teach 3% of Michigan class. Most of those 3% are intro Math classes (100-125), intro English (100-125) and intro Foreign Language classes. In the remaining 97% of classes, full time professors teach. If GSIs play a role in some of those classes, it is primarily as discussion group leaders and teacher assistants.</p>
<p>As for for the rest of your post, it shows a lot of passion but very little experience or knowledge. I like the fact that you value what your parents and friends think. I value what my folks and friends think too. Their opinion helped me pick the school I chose to attend because I respect their views. To your family and friends, Duke may indeed be better than Michigan. My parents and friends tend to think Michigan is better than Duke and were quite vocal about it when I was picking between those two schools. And like your parents and friends, those closest to me are very educated and quite knowledgeable. But what our families and friends think does not equal what "the vast majority" of people think, nor are their opinions indicative of what is truly best.</p>
<p>And no EAD, Duke does not place its students better than Michigan. Employers and graduate schools think just as highly of both universities as undergraduate institutions. Two students of equal calibre from those two universities will be equally respected and just as highly recruited. If you can show me a university rating according to industry or according to academe that places Duke at a higher level than Michigan, feel free to share it with us. I have yet to see such a rating. </p>
<p>As for all the other points you make about faculty and advising being more focused on undergrads at Duke, it would be great if you could prove it without resorting to meaningless statistics.</p>
<p>Clearly, you value some things about Duke that makes it an ideal school for you. That's great. You can hardly pick a better college than Duke. That does not mean it is superior to Michigan.</p>
<p>How can you possibly say something like this:</p>
<p>
[quote]
it doesn't even come close to Michigan where GSIs do 30-40% of the actual LECTURING OF THE MATERIAL.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>When you also post a quote from Michigan's website stating that actual lecturing of material is just one of SEVERAL roles that GSI's play? Some GSIs may teach some intro classes, but by and large, Michigan's teaching model follows that at other major research institutions--Profs lecture, GSIs run the accompanying labs and discussion sections. You're trying to make it sound like GSIs primarily teach stand-alone courses in which faculty have no involvement. This is not the case. I don't know how you could maintain this belief in the face of things you, yourself, have quoted. I think you're just getting overzealous.</p>
<p>I think you should acknowledge that Duke and Michigan have some similarities here. Duke and Michigan BOTH have examples of top faculty who enhance their overall reputations BUT who are appointed in schools or departments that teach primarily grad & professional students. Duke and Michigan BOTH have some classes taught by visiting professors, assistant professors, and others who are NOT tenured. Duke and Michigan BOTH employ graduate students to assist in teaching.</p>
<p>FWIW, I think Duke is a great school and have no problem believing arguments saying that Duke is superior to Michigan in certain ways. But some of what you are saying is not only wrong, it is logically inconsistent.</p>
<p>
[quote]
TAs lead discussion sections at Duke; they help students with their homework, go over difficult concepts again and assist the professor in grading the material. They DO NOT DO THE LECTURING OF THE ACTUAL CLASS.
[/quote]
My experience at Cal is the same you've had at Duke, I never had a GSI teach a course. They only lead the discussion sections.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It's like having a debate with a group of people who think a Toyota Corolla is as good as a Jaguar S-Type. Both are good cars but one is clearly better lol.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>MPG (City) - Estimates (Fueleconomy.gov)</p>
<p>2008 Jaguar S-Type R: 15mpg
2008 Toyota Corolla: 27 mpg</p>
<p>one is clearly the superior at the gas pump. btw, crude oil prices have just surged to new highs to $142 per barrel on the New York Merc. -- enjoy that gas guzzler.</p>
<p>The Jaguar S-Type is an old model...replaced by the Jaguar XF.
Also, the S-Type was built off a Ford/Lincoln chassis and engine...you've been duped by "prestige".</p>
<p>
[quote]
You're trying to make it sound like GSIs primarily teach stand-alone courses in which faculty have no involvement. This is not the case. I don't know how you could maintain this belief in the face of things you, yourself, have quoted. I think you're just getting overzealous.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Isn't getting overzealous a syndrome that affects both sides? While it is obvious that EAD overplayed his hand when describing the possible differences between Duke and Michigan, it remains that both schools as large research universities do use TA ... extensively. As far as the 3% of classes taught by Michigan's GSI, we know from past discussions and extensive quotations of Michigan's own GSI website that the 3% represents ONLY the classes taught EXCLUSIVELY by a GSI. There is an additional statistic that cover classes taught by faculty AND GSI. As it is typical in any debate about figures, it is not hard to look at the same data and reach different conclusions, especially when trying to make a point with a tad of ... zeal. </p>
<p>The sad part is that most participants in such debates DO know the stark reality but prefer not to yield much to the "other side," Protecting an illusory "grandeur" seems more important. </p>
<p>Fwiw, should be not ask ourselves if the percentage of GSI, TAs at different schools has much relevance? Is it really relevant to debate ad nauseam what constitutes a lecture and what degree of "teaching" is done during the lectures versus the labs and sections? We could go on and on with discussions about the semantics of who wrote the syllabus, who graded the papers and exams, and who provided the very necessary support and feedback during a class. Again, most of us DO know the real answer! </p>
<p>At the end of the day, students should make choices between different models of instruction and pick the model that fit their style and preference better. Since this choice is extremely subjective, the answer does not establish that one model is superior to another; it simply establishes that one model is better for ... this student. </p>
<p>It is clear that someone who questions paying the full rate for a class where he will listen to a lecturer in a large hall, but will see his papers and exams graded by a "slightly" more educated student who might or might not have the necessary background, command of English, or aptitude to teach .. should look somewhere else for his or her best fit. </p>
<p>On the other hand, someone who does not like to be an active participant in smaller classes and seminars led by professors should equally select an institution where such classes are not the norm. </p>
<p>What is better remains entirely in the eye of the beholder. That is why we several thousands colleges in the US. And also millions of students who probably think how ridiculous it is for "zealots" to fight about which of the 3 to 4,000 schools should be in a short list of 15 universities.</p>
<p>You really should provide the source to back up that 30-40%. To say TAs lecture 30-40% of Michigan courses is an unbelievable claim. Having a civilized debate/discussion is one thing; fabricating numbers is quite another. I am sure Duke has some very good ethics classes taught by tenured professor. :rolleyes:</p>