<p>Perhaps…perhaps not. Some universities’ most outspoken critics are tenured faculty who know they are “safe” in saying whatever they want. He may have been planning to write this piece either way.</p>
<p>Point is, we don’t know and he’s one guy. One guy with a readership of some sort. Other than that, how is this different than your neighbor, who used to teach at X, making universal statements?</p>
<p>we cross posted sally. I was probably editing when you were posting. </p>
<p>I dont disagree that the “elites”, for lack of a better word, may tend to focus on teaching its students to be critical thinkers and the leaders of tomorrow. But that said, the vast majority of the grads go into the professional working world, and may have in the long run, more “successful” (whatever that means) outcomes than the same percentage of grads from Cleveland State.</p>
<p>And fwiw, I want my plumber to be a good critical thinker/problem solver.</p>
<p>Is it really possible to agree with both Deresiewicz and Pascarella and Terenzini? </p>
<p>P&T’s survey showed “that the dimensions along which American colleges are typically categorized, ranked, and studied, such as type of control, size, and selectivity, are simply not linked with important differences in student learning, change, or development.”</p>
<p>And yet D’s position is that going to an elite/selective college is actually a disadvantge. He’s not saying that it’s nothing special, or equivalent to attending a non-elite college; he’s stating right there is the title that you are worse off in some respects going to an elite college.</p>
<p>But P and T show that “selectivity” is not associated with any differences in student learning, change or development outcome. </p>
<p>So is going to an elite/selective college no different, or are you at a disadvantage?</p>
<p>Annasdad’s chip on his shoulder is based purely on anecdote. The anecdote by Deserewiecz, and an anecdote by an acquaintance of his daughter’s who went to Northwestern and didn’t like it. There you have it. It’s as simple as that. </p>
<p>I submit it’s probably more difficult for Annasdad in the milieu of having his daughter attend a rigorous math/science high school where there is undoubtedly a lot of parental fawning over where-the-darlings-got-into-school and a lot of high expectations for them to get into the MIT’s of the world, than there is for me in a public school environment where not only wasn’t there a lot of focus on getting into elite schools, I was pretty removed from that focus anyway as I (deliberately) removed myself from that community. So to some extent, I feel some sympathy for him having to put on that bravado.</p>
<p>^But, don’t P&T define “learning” (isn’t it “intellectual growth?”) in a way purposeful to their study? The multiple factors they feel contribute to success are not called exclusive to any one sort of school- quality of faculty/student interaction, faculty prep for classes, campus involvement outside classes, diversity, etc. They note issues with mega-universities, but… So, “selectivity,” in itself and as used on CC, is not the key distiguisher.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How odd and one-dimensional that you define “merit” by scores on SAT tests. Surely there is merit in terms of leadership, artistic ability, community service and all other dimensions.</p>
<p>Harvard selects for whatever it wants to select for; that’s all the “merit” that needs defining. There is not some overall outside standard of merit that they need to aspire to. If their methods don’t get them the class they like, they’ll change their standards. So far, they seem to be pleased with the classes they get; the proof would be in the pudding if they all of a sudden mixed it up.</p>
<p>This often referenced article is based on 30 years of “research” which means that some of the information on which the data is based is…well… OVER thirty years old.</p>
<p>And as I stated earlier…the authors have NO WAY to determine if these students would have done better or worse at a more or less selective school. The students didn’t attend more than one school.</p>
<p>On Class Sizes:
I believe that small classes are generally better than big ones, but above a certain point size doesn’t really matter. When sitting in class you are either having a discussion with the professor or listening to a lecture. A discussion becomes impossible if the class in much larger than about 12-15 students. Beyond that you are going to get a lecture. The professor many entertain a few questions, but class still consists primarily of listening to a lecture. And once you are in lecture-land really doesn’t matter whether you are sitting next to 35 classmates or 350 classmates. It’s still much the same experience. </p>
<p>On the Quality of Harvard:
I don’t consider Harvard to be perfect. It may not be the very best in any one thing. But in does many, many things very, very well. It is also approaching its 400th anniversary - 400 years of being regarded as among the best colleges in America (however “best” is defined at the moment). Think about that. If the quality wasn’t there to support the brand name, if it truly were just a diploma mill, the public would have figured that out and abandoned it long ago. People will fall for scams or empty promises for only so long.</p>
<p>As JHS put it in another thread:
“Yes, they (the Ivies) are overrated (at least on CC) compared to 20 or 30 other institutions that offer comparable benefits (or reasonable substitutes, with other advantages). But they (and their peers) are incredible institutions that have been built brick by brick over decades (centuries, for some) and offer marvelous opportunities – opportunities, not guarantees – to the students lucky enough to attend.”</p>
<p>I wanted to go back to the link that was posted upthread about the grade distributions and final outcomes of students entering Duke. It was a fascinating read, and thanks to whoever posted it. But their conclusions differed from what one what one would expect. They showed that the initial diffferences in GPAs of the entering students differeed due to differring HS preparation, the end result in the grades, that seemed to catch up, were, in their estimation to other factors. I’ve tried to highlight the key issues without violating the “too long a quote” policy, but included the most important factors. </p>
<p><a href=“SEAPHE -”>SEAPHE -;
<p>
</p>
<p>This relates somewhat to the discussion of what students attend school for-- to get an employable degree upon graduation vs pursuing grad/professional school and/or academia. This may sway what undergrad a student chooses.</p>
<p>Another issue is the change in the mix of undergrads these days, as many more choose to attend a less expensive 2 year school before transferring to a school to complete their undergrad education. Was surprised to hear that 1/3 of undergrads transfer at least once these days. [A</a> Third of Students Transfer Before Graduating - Students - The Chronicle of Higher Education](<a href=“http://chronicle.com/article/A-Third-of-Students-Transfer/130954/]A”>http://chronicle.com/article/A-Third-of-Students-Transfer/130954/)</p>
<p>[AAC&U</a> News | April 2012 | Facts & Figures](<a href=“http://www.aacu.org/aacu_news/aacunews12/april12/facts_figures.cfm]AAC&U”>http://www.aacu.org/aacu_news/aacunews12/april12/facts_figures.cfm)</p>
<p>The report, IMO, is MUCH more contemporaneous and meaningful than that tired old Tetrazinni and Pascagula thing that reminds me of the path of 8 track and betamax. The above articles speak to the CURRENT trends in education, as does this one [Georgia</a> colleges transfer attention to transfer students | <a href=“http://www.ajc.com%5B/url%5D”>www.ajc.com](<a href=“http://www.ajc.com/news/news/state-regional/georgia-colleges-transfer-attention-to-transfer-st/nR2Jf/]Georgia”>http://www.ajc.com/news/news/state-regional/georgia-colleges-transfer-attention-to-transfer-st/nR2Jf/)</a> , indicating a greater willingness on the part of some schools to accept credits from other institutions, making is easier to transfer. The economy has its effect on the trends in education, and these articles speak to what is happening in education today, not 30 years ago. The students were beginning school in 2006, a year after the tunafish and paparazzi article reviewing the past 30 years of eduction was published.</p>
<p>From the CC perspective, transferring is a way to get to a better college- or resolve some of the complaints about the current one. From a university’s perspective, it’s to fill empty seats- from early grads, kids who changed from one major to another, study abroad, dropouts, gaps, anything you can name. It’s ackowledged that it’s far more “expensive” per student (in effort and dollars) to fill that void than build the freshman class. So, the more open seats, the more concessions.</p>
<p>Btw, there are many studies linking “whatever” to college outcomes. Eg, one shows taking AP calc is key. Then they asked themselves, what is it about AP calc? And decided it was that the very sort of kid who will take it, is already more motivated, better able to endure some sorts of challenges, than those who settle for math for dummies. </p>
<p>A lot of this does hinge on the kid.</p>
<p>Btw, you can find Pascarella’s own commentary on the study. The 2005 revision revisited the old data and collected planty of new, but he acknowledges the limitations (without diminishing the study.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Indeed, it’s certainly “better” (academically) than in the olden days when it was the repository for well-to-do prep school kids who got in on the basis of a handshake with the headmaster. </p>
<p>Anyway, it’s so tiresome to argue whether students at Harvard are the “very most meritorious” as Canuckguy tried to do. If you believe the student body there is tragically watered down by all those URM’s/legacies/athletes/donors/politician-kids, then feel free not to apply. It’s amusing on CC how so many people who would give their left arm for their kids to go there simultaneously argue that the class isn’t what it “should” be. It is what it is. Don’t like it, don’t have your kids apply. My kids didn’t apply to any Ivies; they simply weren’t interested. However, unlike Annasdad, they have no need to pretend that they aren’t all great schools with a lot to offer. </p>
<p>A concept that Annasdad might benefit from is – it’s all good. Really.</p>
<p>If anyone is truly interested in a summary of the first (1991) publication of Pascagula and Tuna tetrazinni’s 1991 article, that reviewed studies from previous 50 years (so they are looking at our and our parents generation of college-goers), they found that
</p>
<p>Read more: College and its Effect on Students - Early Work on the Impact of College, Nine Generalizations, Later Studies, Pascarella and Terenzini - StateUniversity.com [College</a> and its Effect on Students - Early Work on the Impact of College, Nine Generalizations, Later Studies, Pascarella and Terenzini - StateUniversity.com](<a href=“College and its Effect on Students - Early Work on the Impact of College, Nine Generalizations, Later Studies, Pascarella and Terenzini - StateUniversity.com”>College and its Effect on Students - Early Work on the Impact of College, Nine Generalizations, Later Studies, Pascarella and Terenzini - StateUniversity.com)</p>
<p>Does anyone find this a surprise? Really? Can someone PULEEZE stick a fork in it now? It is quite done. Oh, and its all about fit. :)</p>
<p>Well, to that end, some people think part of fit is deliberately thumbing your nose at what other people think is the “right” thing to do, don’t be sheeple, look what an Independent Thinker ™ I am, and all that. So if you can’t afford certain things, it’s certainly easier to contend that anyone who can is just trying to blend in with the crowd, and you’re so enlightened and different that you chose differently. Of course, deliberate non-conformity is just as conformist as conformity, and reverse snobbery is just as snobby as regular snobbery.</p>
<p>Sheeple. SAT word of the day.</p>
<p>And for some, “fit” is what fits in their wallet. That is fine, if thats the criteria that is paramount. Nothing to be ashamed of. Its just declasse’ to smack at those who have other choices to consider.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There’s a plausible argument that those who subscribe to this tend to not understand/deliberately ignore the fact that one actually can actually have a serious negative impact on a less powerful/disenfranchised group in many important areas of their lives whereas the reverse does not.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, I don’t think “fit” for anyone necessitates disparaging others’ choices. Having said that, I think there is ample evidence that the Ivies either attract students who are largely conformist in high school, or who become that way once they are there (again, read the Yale article I posted…do you really think 25% of entering students at Yale expect to graduate into the world of investment banking and consulting?). There are a lot of people out there, parents and college-bound kids included, who Care What People Think. That doesn’t lead them all to the Ivies–in many cases, the state flagship is the “correct” choice–but they are certainly not the kids who will end up at a Warren Wilson or St. John’s or Bennington or other unconventional school. Attending an institution whose name people recognize is important to them. All you need to do for confirmation of this fact is to read the many chance posts on this site in which the posters ask about “prestige” and their odds at “a school many people have heard of.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh, do tell, cobrat. How does “snobbery” affect those in less powerful / disenfranchised groups? Or is this going to be one of your stories about how many of your innumerable classmates went into tailspins of depression because some elderly aunts, school officials, parents-not-their-own or other busybodies didn’t “approve” of their school?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>FWIW, not that anyone asked, I personally think it’s a shame that such a large % of the students in elite schools (including our mutual alma mater) see only the worlds of i-banking and consulting, and wish that weren’t the case. That being said, that doesn’t mean they aren’t getting a good education in the interim. </p>
<p>I am sort of the poster child for not caring what other people think, so count me out of that one 
We cared what our family thought, and didn’t give a rat’s behind as to what the neighbors, etc., might think. And that’s exactly how I’d do it all over again.</p>
<p>
What makes you say that,sally? Yale, for example, has the reputation of being quite welcoming to many that would not be considered conforming". Its pretty open-minded to folks of differing ways of thinking that would not be considered conformist.</p>