Ivy education really a fraud??

Parent Cafe
1

<p>"Tenure-track faculty members teach only 40 percent of classes in the University of Pennsylvania's School of Arts and Sciences, according to a report by a graduate-student union at Penn that has been fighting for university recognition. Lecturers on short-term contracts teach almost the same amount, the report says. </p>

<p>As a result, the group argues, students at Penn are not getting the education they are paying for."
.." </p>

<p>The report is similar to one compiled in 2000 by the Coalition on the Academic Workforce about the broad use of non-tenure-track faculty members to teach courses in many humanities and social-science disciplines (The Chronicle, November 22, 2000). Another similar report, compiled in 1999 by graduate students at Yale University, said that tenure-track professors taught only 30 percent of courses there (The Chronicle, March 30, 1999). "</p>

<p>I know they get the best adjuncts. LOL</p>

2

<p>Sounds like a compelling argument for a small college (then university for grad school, if you're inclined).</p>

3

<p>
[quote]
students at Penn are not getting the education they are paying for.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Says who? An Ivy education is a credential. IMHO, the main reason folks seek educations at some places is for the NAME. And that they get. </p>

<p>If there is any fraud, it is less by the school than by the folks who think the NAME of the degree granting institution is more important than what is learned. </p>

<p>But wait. Is it any more a problem to want a name brand diploma than to want a name brand shirt, or status auto? I think not. </p>

<p>Instead, let us all thank the Ivies for providing a place where the seekers of status and privelidge can hang out for four years, while the kids who really want an education can head to the Reeds, the Oberlins, the Chicagos and many others to learn with fewer distractions.</p>

4

<p>"Instead, let us all thank the Ivies for providing a place where the seekers of status and privelidge can hang out for four years, while the kids who really want an education can head to the Reeds, the Oberlins, the Chicagos and many others to learn with fewer distractions."</p>

<p>I think an overly broad statement like that does a great disservice to all of the really great kids that are at Ivies, working their tails off and taking advantage of the multitude of opportunities that are available to them.</p>

5

<p>Newmassdad:</p>

<p>Here is a partial list of readings that my S and all his classmates studied in some of their required freshman and sophomore Core classes.
This is why he chose this school. Thankfully, his grubby philistine-ness won't inflict itself on the more serious students of the world. I wouldn't want him to be a distraction:</p>

<p>ILIAD (U. of Chicago, tr. Lattimore)
HOMERIC HYMNS (Hopkins, tr. Athanassakis)
ODYSSEY (Harper, tr. Lattimore)
THE HISTORIES (Penguin, tr. de Selincourt)
ORESTEIA (Aeschylus I, U. of Chicago, tr. Lattimore)
OEDIPUS THE KING (Sophocles I, U. of Chicago, tr. Grene)
MEDEA (Euripides I, U. of Chicago, tr. Warner) ISBN 0-226-30780-8
HISTORY OF THE PELOPONNESIAN WAR (Penguin, tr. Warner)
SYMPOSIUM (Hackett, trs. Nehamas, Woodruff)
LYSISTRATA (Signet, tr. Parker) ISBN 0-451-52789-5
BIBLE: Revised Standard Version (Meridian)</p>

<p>Virgil, AENEID (Bantam, tr. Mandelbaum)
Augustine, CONFESSIONS (Oxford, tr. Chadwick)
Dante, INFERNO (Bantam, tr. Mandelbaum)
Boccaccio, DECAMERON (Penguin, tr. McWilliam)
Montaigne, ESSAYS (Penguin, tr. Cohen)
Shakespeare, KING LEAR (Pelican)
Cervantes, DON QUIXOTE (Penguin, tr. Rutherford)
Austen, PRIDE AND PREJUDICE (Oxford)
Dostoevsky, CRIME AND PUNISHMENT (Vintage, trs. Pevear & Volokhonsky)
Woolf, TO THE LIGHTHOUSE (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich)</p>

<p>Plato, Republic (Hackett)
Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics (Hackett)
Aristotle, Politics (Hackett)
The Holy Bible: Revised Standard Version (Meridian)
Augustine, City of God (Penguin)
The Koran(Penguin)
Machiavelli, The Prince (Penguin)
Machiavelli, The Discourses (Penguin)
The Protestant Reformation (Harper & Row)
Descartes, Discourse on Method and Meditations on First Philosophy (Hackett)
Hobbes, Leviathan (Oxford)
Locke, Second Treatise of Government (Hackett)</p>

<p>Hume, An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals (Hackett)
Smith, Wealth of Nations (Modern Library)
Rousseau, The Basic Political Writings (Hackett)
Kant, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals (Cambridge)
Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France (Hackett)
Tocqueville, Democracy in America (Penguin)
Mill, On Liberty and Other Essays (Oxford)
Hegel, Introduction to the Philosophy of History (Hackett)
The Marx-Engels Reader (Norton)
Nietzsche, On the Genealogy of Morals / Ecce Homo (Vintage)
Du Bois, The Souls of Black Folk (Dover)
Woolf, Three Guineas (Harcourt)</p>

6

<p>Please, this is not about an Ivy education--whatever that means--, but about Penn and Yale. My S at Harvard is not being taught by TFs, although he has TFs leading sections. Penn graduate students are trying to unionize; Yale graduate students have been trying to unionize for years and have gone on strike frequently to achieve this goal. Graduate students at Harvard, Princeton, Bown, and Cornell have not sought to unionize nor have they gone on strike. And let's not forget that Dartmouth is more like a LAC, though it is also an Ivy.</p>

7

<p>"Instead, let us all thank the Ivies for providing a place where the seekers of status and privelidge can hang out for four years, while the kids who really want an education can head to the Reeds, the Oberlins, the Chicagos and many others to learn with fewer distractions."</p>

<p>I do not understand this sweeping generalization. Is every kid at an Ivy a "seeker of status or priviledge"? While some who apply or attend may very well have that motivation, surely not all fit that pattern. I have a kid at an Ivy who is very anti-prestige seeking. In fact, she got into PENN as a Ben Franklin Scholar (since Penn is being talked about here) and when it came time to decide which of her acceptances to attend, she narrowed her acceptances down to Smith, Tufts, and Brown and left Penn off, as the fit wasn't as close to what she WANTED. Smith and Tufts, most would agree are not as "high" as Penn. Did she care? NO! In the end, she had her personal college criteria and went back to these three schools and picked the one that most closely resembled what she wanted in a college. For a long while, Tufts was higher in her preference than Brown but in the end, Brown matched up at tad more but not much more to HER. </p>

<p>I also don't understand the generalization that kids who really want an education should seek out the Reeds, Oberlins and Chicagos. My D wanted an education too. She is the same person whether she opted to attend Chicago or an Ivy. She was NEVER seeking "an Ivy". She very well may have chosen Smith, not Brown. She is still the same education seeking kid. I don't know of any "distractions" she has at her Ivy either. She simply just really likes her school and fits in well. Nothing more.</p>

<p>I am surprised by this statement because while I know your child attends UChicago, I believe she also applied to some Ivies where she was interested, at one time, in attending, I'd presume. I would never think of your D as status seeking or not wanting to receive an education or wanting to learn without distraction. She opted to attend UChicago but she very well may have opted to attend Yale if admitted, no?</p>

8

<p>This is not the first post I have read here where a parent of a student who applied to Ivies but who did not get admitted but attended another excellent college, later on poo pooed an Ivy League education or those who would seek to attend such schools. The generalization that those who attend do so for name recognition is quite an unsubstantiated stereotype. I do read kid posters who seem to have an "Ivy or bust" mentality but I can assure you that many at an Ivy League school did not choose it because it was an Ivy but merely applied to very challenging schools that appealed to them for what they might offer and would be just as content at a Non Ivy school.</p>

9

<p>Also, I agree with Marite....this isn't about Ivies but about that particular school. At Brown, my D is taught by professors. She only has TA's for sections and in fact, really enjoys the TA's for one on one help when needed. She knows her professors and they are professors, not TAs, nor adjuncts.</p>

10

<p>And, let's not forget the great Publics out there, such as Cal, UMich, UNC, UVa and the like. Clearly, they too, provide opportunities for kids "who really want an education", but, perhaps don't have the financial means to attend those three private schools (Chicago, Reed, Oberlin).</p>

11

<p>Apparently this is EVERY school against the Ivies...........</p>

12

<p>LefthandofDog...I do not think it then follows that attending a small college or LAC is better. I'm all for LACs, don't get me wrong. But let's not generalize about things like contact with professors and so forth at either Ivies or bigger universities.</p>

<p>I have a kid at a huge university, NYU. She knows all her professors and they all know her. Just yesterday, she had a one on one conference with a professor (I think every kid in the class had one actually) and the professor gave her back a paper and said she was impressed with the level and would be writing a rec for her to be invited to an upper class Honors course, though she is a freshman. Another professor has also had one on one conferences with her. I even saw an email she got from that one today thanking my D for burning her a CD of an album that must have come up in their conversations. Another teacher wrote an extensive mid semester evaluation. In one area of her courses, she gets narratives from every teacher as feedback. She has contact with the professors and they are not TAs. I have on complaints. She is getting a fine education. And oh yeah, she is there to learn. She says she has learned a great deal so far and she is just a frosh. </p>

<p>I don't know why these conversations get to Ivy vs. other elite colleges or big universities vs. LACs or private vs. public. These are all such generalizations and aren't useful discussions unless drawn to specific colleges and experiences.</p>

13

<p>As near as I can remember, my S had full professors for every class at Penn, and had TAs in labs and recitations. Just like in HS, some of his teachers were great, some of his TAs were great ... and some weren't. And he was in the SAS. </p>

<p>As for the Ivy discussion, I will say that the prestige of the school did carry some weight with him when he was making his final decision. He felt his employability would be greater graduating from Penn. Who knows if it was? He graduated last year with a degree in economics, and had three job offers. But we don't have anything to compare that to. </p>

<p>It was one small part of his attempt to logically justify his desire to attend the school he fell in love with. We were all aware, all along, that his "fit" at Penn was very strong -- And that was long before I discovered CC and even knew to look for fit.</p>

14

<p>And garland, I can supply a similar list as yours, for my D who attends (omg, horror of horrors, shame of shame) an Ivy. However, I think posts #1 and #3 are not worth my reply time -- narrow-minded & prejudiced as they are.</p>

<p>To answer your rhetorical question, susan, addressed to the insulters, the answer is Yes. Newmassdad really does believe that, if you can check the history of his statements and his replies for the last 1.25 years. Yes, he believes these broad generalizations. Also, he has apparently bought the mythology that 100% of UChicago students are motivated by academic purity. Surely there are no status-seekers there. (Wrong: I know a few who have particularly applied to or chosen Chicago for status reasons, & especially to claim their distinction as supposedly superior "scholars" -- in contrast to the inferior slackers at those horrid Ivies.)</p>

<p>Just a reality FYI for any readers who may actually be reading with an open mind, you will find status-seekers everywhere, in most every reasonably selective higher institution, in most high-priced neighborhoods in this country, behind some wheels of luxury cars. There are students, & even whole groups, who seek UC Berkeley primarily for "status," in case you were not aware. (No, I didn't think so.)</p>

<p>There are also people of modest means (not including myself) who drive older model premium cars because they like their driveability.</p>

<p>But anyway, thank you for letting me know that my D is among those who do NOT "really want an education." I never knew that before. I'll pass that information along to her former high school teachers, who raved about the sincerity of her motivations, & to her current profs. I'm sure they'll be fascinated to learn what an excellent, excellent actress she is. Oh, excuse me, what a "fraud" she is.</p>

<p>(Moderator, please remove their posts.)</p>

15

<p>Tenure track faculty aren't likely to teach the majority of the classes at many universities. In a good many cases, students will be taught by research faculty or adjuncts (or TA's at a few schools). What's the harm? From my experience thus far, the younger, un-tenured professors are those who are most likely to put effort into their classes. Too often tenured professors lose touch with the purpose of a college education. Many of the professors who have tenure have been teaching for quite a while (and sadly, sometimes their teaching style hasn't changed) and are wrapped up in their research (which is what got them tenure in the first place!). Anyway, it's not like this trend is new. The general trend has been toward lecturers for quite some time now, a worry for those interested in going into academia (me). </p>

<p>garland- what an eclectic list! We covered about half of them (i.e. the ancient works) in my "Athens in the Golden Age" FOCUS last semester. It was great to work in small seminars with professors and students who cared about the material.</p>

16

<p>Epiphany, the thing that surprises me, however, is that NewMassDad's child applied EA to Yale, if I recall, and perhaps other schools of that sort. I have read posts by other regular parents on CC as well, who had kids apply to Ivies but who did not land at an Ivy but later put down the Ivies. THIS I do not get.</p>

17

<p>I don't understand the problem?
Does a tenure track prof necessarily have special skills one who isn't on that track doesn't have?
One of the best profs my D had at Reed and one of her favorites by far wasn't on a tenure track but that wasn't through any lack of his background or skills.
Schools are saving money apparently by slashing tenured positions and it isn't any surprise the Ivies are included in their number.</p>

18

<p>Epiphany, I believe that Garland's son is at Columbia. This thread is just another version of "Ivy's are bad, every other school is good" that permeates the Parent's forum. I'm sorry, but this type of thread just always strikes me as sour grapes. Dartmouth is no more like Columbia than U of C is like Bowdoin. What difference should that make to anyone? Presumably, there are kids who are better suited to attend one over the over, for a variety of reasons. Susan's posts make the most sense to me -- unless you are comparing specific departments and have a well-defined need in mind, you can't really compare schools in this way. My Dartmouth son has only had full professors teach his classes, and doesn't seem to even have TA's. I actually liked having TA's in college, since they sometimes explained things better than the professor.</p>

19

<p>SJMom...while my D's classes at an Ivy are not taught by TA's, she does have TAs for sections and she has loved the one on one attention and availability of these folks and they have ADDED to her education.
(note to clarify...I'm agreeing with ya)</p>

<p>As well, I must be really lesser of an educator myself as I have taught as an adjunct at five colleges. I pity my students. Their education was a fraud.</p>

20

<p>Oh, yeah, sorry Epiphany. I was making the same point as you, just did not identify properly.</p>