<p>In post 16 A.E. says….. “some of the faculty certainly aren't concerned with the well-being of the students.” </p>
<p>A.E. please back this statement up…..give us the information you have that allows you to make this statement….how much time have you spent on campus, how many student have you talked to, how regular is you contact with the school and students. What training or experience do you have that would give you the ability to make this statement. Are you aware of any other people who have the training, experience and information necessary for them to be able to collaborate your unsupported claim? If so, who are they? </p>
<p>It seems silly to me for you to claim others opinions are BS, when they come to their opinions from a general understanding of the circumstances, while you give your opinions, which to the best of my knowledge, are based on no information, and apparently no understanding, of the circumstances. </p>
<p>“It does no good for a coondog to howl, if he can’t tree the coon.” </p>
<p>
[quote]
Swarthmore is a small, close knit community, very little goes on that does not become common knowledge quickly. A professor who did not care for or about the students would more than likely not be hired, and if s/he were some how hired, would not last long.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Or a professor could stop caring about the students after he was already tenured. Do you suppose this doesn't happen? Or a student could be unfortunate to get stuck with one of those professors who "will not last long" before he is found out and let go. It's bound to happen to every student several times during his time at Swarthmore that he runs into professors like this.</p>
<p>
[quote]
A.E. please back this statement up…..give us the information you have that allows you to make this statement….how much time have you spent on campus, how many student have you talked to, how regular is you contact with the school and students. What training or experience do you have that would give you the ability to make this statement. Are you aware of any other people who have the training, experience and information necessary for them to be able to collaborate your unsupported claim? If so, who are they?
[/quote]
Do you want me to name names and out professors who are second or third-rate when it comes to caring about and interacting with students?</p>
<p>My son has for the most part at Swarthmore has had very good professors who are genuinely concerned with the well-being of the students and who are enthusiastic about teaching. In 2 years, he has had only 1 professor that he did not particularly admire per teaching style, but he still learned a lot and enjoyed the course material.</p>
<p>I really think that he and his friends are generally very happy with going to Swarthmore. Many are taking advantage of junior year abroad, but others can't wait to get back to spend junior year at Swarthmore. </p>
<p>I think that there is always a broad spectrum per faculty teaching styles, and not every professor is going to please everyone. Sometimes professors may have opinions that conflict with a student's opinion, and that may also influence how a student reacts.</p>
<p>This is college, and it is not going to be a perfect experience, no matter where one attends (even if you attend my perfect large state university alma mater.)</p>
<p>“Do you want me to name names and out professors who are second or third-rate when it comes to caring about and interacting with students?”</p>
<p>Yes...and tell us why and how you are qualified to make the comments you are making</p>
<p>As for tenured professors are we to believe that after many years of teaching in a caring and interactive way when a professor gets tenured his/her personality and teaching style changes and they stop “caring about and interacting with students?” </p>
<p>I will say again, no place is perfect, but you continue to paint a picture that doesn’t reflect reality, and you do so with out any apparent qualifications to comment.</p>
Do you want me to name names and out professors who are second or third-rate when it comes to caring about and interacting with students?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think you'll need to in order to make your point. And you'll probably need to explain your comparison measure -- third rate in caring vs. other Swarthmore profs, R1 profs, HS teachers?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Or a professor could stop caring about the students after he was already tenured. Do you suppose this doesn't happen? Or a student could be unfortunate to get stuck with one of those professors who "will not last long" before he is found out and let go. It's bound to happen to every student several times during his time at Swarthmore that he runs into professors like this.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's possible that a NBA team might hire someone that doesn't know how to play basketball and doesn't enjoy the game, but I hope you'll agree that such is unlikely. Now a given NBA player might be second or third rate compared to other NBA players, but I'd guess they'll still shine at a local pick-up game.</p>
<p>Consider that the same reputation that makes Swarthmore competitive for student applications will also make it competitive for faculty applicants. I'd be very surprised if there were faculty hires that made it through the interview process that didn't genuinely care about the students. It's a matter of self-selection to apply and they'd have to fool a number of people to be hired. It just seems pretty unlikely to me. Maybe more likely in a temporary hire such as a 1 semester/year replacement for someone on leave. Again, it seems improbable, but I'll admit it isn't impossible. So hearing such makes me curious for the details.</p>
<p>I agree, because a professor who is disinterested in teaching and more interested in research would be much more likely to be hired and retained by a large research university than a small liberal arts college. They also would have a hard time surviving at a place like Swarthmore, given the level of feedback given by the students about the professors, and how small it is. </p>
<p>That is why it would be interesting to pinpoint who these profs are who somehow hide at Swarthmore, not relating to students or teaching them. It really is the opposite of what appears to really happen there!</p>
<p>You guys have asked for me to name some professors and I have thought about it, and I'm going to decline. Why? I don't feel the need to drag someone's name through the mud (even if what I say about him is true) in order to satisfy some bloodthirsty posters here at College Confidential.* If a professor loses interest in his students later in his tenure at Swarthmore and elects to spend virtually all of his intellectual efforts in research or some other area, that is certainly his prerogative, and, as his endeavors are beneficial to the institution he represents by way of granting it academic credibility, it's well within his rights as a tenured faculty member with a high salary to do so, even if the students lose out.</p>
<p>All that said, it is still my position that Swarthmore is not immune to having disinterested faculty (in terms of being disinterested in the students) present in its ranks, despite what you may think about LACs and the types of professors they're "supposed" to attract. Swarthmore is, in fact, attractive to researchers as well as teaching-oriented professors, because at Swarthmore you can get access to research facilities and be more or less left alone after you've established yourself there. This is by no means the rule, but if you think you're going to go to Swarthmore and never encounter professors who are largely apathetic to your academic well-being, then you're mistaken.</p>
<p>*If you must know, you can send me a private message for an example, but it's not something I want to make a public spectacle of.</p>
<p>I sent AE a private e-mail, and he responded as he said he would. I will respect his request that his response be kept private. </p>
<p>I will however report, that I found the case very weak. AE named one professor who is no longer alive; and whom AE says lost interest in and quit teaching once the professor had reached emeritus status.</p>
<p>once again I am astounded by the degree to which we LAC graduates delight in argument for arguments sake. 90% of Swarthmore faculty are interested in students to such a degree that they place their own academic research as secondary. End of story. What is that old saying about academic arguments? That they are more vehement because the stakes are so low?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I will however report, that I found the case very weak. AE named one professor who is no longer alive; and whom AE says lost interest in and quit teaching once the professor had reached emeritus status.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No, tommybill, that's not what I said, and you really should make a better effort to comprehend what I said before you go and post erroneous accounts of our private message exchange in public. I gave you the name of a person who lost interest in his students before he was ever a professor emeritus. It was only later that he retired, after about a decade of apathetic behavior toward everything at the college, except for his research, during his time as a full professor, not professor emeritus.</p>
<p>dchow08 - you know, I had that same concern before I enrolled. Furthermore, one of the people in the 'Swarthmore Unscripted' movies available on the Swat admissions page really seemed unhappy with her life at Swarthmore; that movie exacerbated my concerns. </p>
<p>Instead of reading those anonymous reviews, I suggest that you actually chat with current students through Facebook. [Unfortunately, I'll be of no help until later this year :)] Express your concerns, and I'm sure more than a handful of students will respond and debunk your concerns. </p>
<p>Additionally, you should take a look at the reviews of other schools as well. Notice that Harvard pulled in a 'B-' for academics, which is worse than Swarthmore's 'B.' It seems that most people agree that Stanford has no advising support and that only TA's teach hard-science courses. </p>
<p>Again, I had the same concerns you have, but through talking to current students and reading some posts by 'interesteddad,' I feel confident I made the right decision.</p>
<p>[rant warning]</p>
<p>Oh, one thing that I DO NOT understand about Swarthmore is the the DORMS! This year, I will be in probably the best place on campus (Parrish Hall) but also in the smallest 'triple' on campus. Though I didn't apply to Amherst, I did visit, and saw their new dorms, to which the class of 2011 has first access. [Apparently Amherst is gutting the insides of all its dorms and renovating them.] Those dorms had wood floors, fireplaces, and were quite large. Though Amherst does have ~$200M more in its endowment, I do not understand why Swarthmore can't do the same. On the other hand, I'd take Philadelphia over the 'sticks' any day. I've lived in MN all my life, where there is very little decent public transportation, and I was not about to go to the east coast and live in that same kind of isolation, and always have to rely on cars. Oh, and Pomona supposedly has a 'maid service,' which is a little ridiculous and quite a departure from the real word, but is nonetheless desirable. :)</p>
<p>I beg to differ, I think Wharton's generally known as the best dorm on campus, gosh. ; ) I agree that Swat should have better housing for its endowment size, though. Not to uh...derail the thread.</p>
<p>i totally agree. swat is one of the richest schools in terms of endowment per student (more than even amherst), but some of the dorms leave much to be desired. i'm living in dana this upcoming year. it's okay, but it surely doesn't have any maid service or fireplaces.</p>
<p>I think that kind of luxury would be out of keeping with Swathmore's philosophy and mission as well as the preference for simplicity from its Quaker roots.</p>
<p>Parrish may be the nicest dorm on campus in some ways, but it has a different kind of appeal- it's very old. If you're comparing to Amherst's new or newly renovated dorms, it's only fair to use Alice Paul. Also, no school can constantly update all its dorms. They go through cycles. I'm not saying that Amherst doesn't have nicer dorms, because I really don't know, but I bet the overall difference isn't all that big.</p>
<p>Back in the 1970s we did have maids in the dorms at Swarthmore. I think they changed the sheets and kept the halls and bathrooms clean. They were very sweet.</p>