<p>Bay: When I read that post, I assumed mini was using Fulbrights awarded to measure how many undergrads at various colleges were interested in scholarship, independent research, etc. And to show that even though Harvard might start with the best SAT scores, they weren’t fostering an environment that encouraged undergraduate scholarship. But I do not know his intention. I have learned on CC that posters value schools for very different reasons. Someone could feel, legitimately imho, that a school other than HYP was a better academic fit for their child. Some could feel very strongly that overall LACs offer a better undergraduate education without being in any way resentful of HYP. Some strongly support their state schools. This may be completely incomprehensible to a poster who sees HYP as being the best chance possible to ensure career and financial success and they might not understand the POV of others that HYP may be “too pre-professional” People on CC just really are coming at this from honestly differing POVs. At least that is how I am reading it. Valid criticisms of HYP may help families unfamiliar with those schools make the best choices for their children. This isn’t one size fits all.</p>
<p>^^I wonder how many students who are going to be interested in Fulbright/PhD/etc are going to HYP? I know a few will, who have targeted particular departments. But I think only a few potential “scholars” are accepted and they are already fairly self-selected in the application process. ymmv</p>
<p>It would be interesting, to me :)) to know if the Fulbright/PhD rejects at HYP are just making those applications because they saw they might be unemployed at graduation?</p>
<p>another thought: Would it even be possible for Fulbright to make awards to all Harvard applicants regardless how good the application? There isn’t an unlimited pot of money and they must have to spread it around? I am looking on the site and can’t find anything much about the selection process. Is it done by regions like Rhodes and Marshall?</p>
<p>sorry for repeated posts. This is a fascinating topic to me :)</p>
<p>The selection of the research Fulbrights is done by scholars in the various disciplines, and in various countries. (the H and Y numbers include the graduate students both accepted and rejected for Fulbrights - take them out of the equation, and they had even fewer accepted). The teaching Fulbrights I believe are evaluated by teams in the host countries.</p>
<p>Fulbrights are unlike Rhodes and Marshalls. In the latter two, they are generally looking for the most brilliant students/people, and preparation has much less to do with it. Research Fulbrights are all about preparation - how prepared are students to carry out the research they intend to do, and the evidence for same. </p>
<p>"I wonder how many students who are going to be interested in Fulbright/PhD/etc are going to HYP?’</p>
<p>We know that, at the final stage, by the number of applicants, I would think. And we know that over a series of years. I’ve never seen a breakout of the research v. the teaching applicants. But of those who actually receive Fulbrights, you can usually go to the college’s website and count. </p>
<p>“It would be interesting, to me ) to know if the Fulbright/PhD rejects at HYP are just making those applications because they saw they might be unemployed at graduation?”</p>
<p>Couldn’t that be true at every school in the country?</p>
<p>I don’t want to overstress - this is only one of many indicators. Nor do I want to suggest at all that HYPs, etc. do not offer really excellent educations. Just, in my judgment, not the very best. And I am extremely flattered by the thought of many of you that the very best education in the country can be obtained from my 23-year-old daughter (who isn’t even an “Ivy” graduate, nor are any of her young colleagues, nor are any of the senior faculty, with only one exception.)</p>
<p>mini.
If your D is as bright as her father, I’m sure she will do the Princeton undergrads right. Please just don’t discredit the Princeton undergrads because your D is so bright and successful and didn’t go there.</p>
<p>The Princeton undergrads are very, very, very, very bright (and some, she tells me, not so bright, but that’s true everywhere). (My d. didn’t WANT to go there.) Certainly their SAT scores, selectivity, and average GPAs would tell you they are very, very bright, even if none of them have been admitted to my d’s graduate program in five years. None of that has to do with the quality of education once they get there. And I’m sure my d. will turn out to be a wonderful prof, as will many of her young colleagues (all from non-HYP, non-Ivy schools). Really! But does she offer the BEST education that money can buy now??? Really?</p>
<p>All schools use TA’s to teach classes, which everyone knows, so why make a big deal about a girl at Princeton working as a TA? Do you see her name in the course catalog that lists all the professors?</p>
<p>Fulbright Scholars - those can be bought with connections, so I don’t know how indicative of a school’s prestige or quality they are. I’d really like to see a Rhodes Scholar, to be impressed. :)</p>
<p>"All schools use TA’s to teach classes, which everyone knows, so why make a big deal about a girl at Princeton working as a TA? Do you see her name in the course catalog that lists all the professors?’</p>
<p>My d. never had even one. I never had even one. Ever. So you obvious don’t know what you are talking about. My d. doesn’t just TA. She teaches new material, grades all papers and writes comments, grades all exams, and assigns grades.</p>
<p>As for your second comment, I won’t even dignify it with a reply, except to say that I’m sorry those 87 H students and 96 Y students couldn’t afford one.</p>
<p>Sure that might be the motivate of some, just like the motivation to pump your school if you forked out a $200k different for an unknown benefit. </p>
<p>But an even more likely motivation is that all this Ivy-is-everything elitism on this board (if you don’t believe me, look at your comments), drives many to rightfully point out that these too are imperfect institutions (like all). </p>
<p>Or possibly- just possibly- some parents actually have first hand experience to know some of these schools are not necessarily better. There are lots of examples of folks on this board who had kids who got into an Ivy school and chose not to…for specific real reasons. </p>
<p>So you apply to a specific country with your project and they can fund only a limited number. Some countries will be more popular some years. If unsuccessful, you can apply for other grants. I am not seeing the Fulbright, with so many variables, as a valid argument here. The TAs - yes.</p>
<p>"My d. never had even one. I never had even one. Ever. So you obvious don’t know what you are talking about. My d. doesn’t just TA. She teaches new material, grades all papers and writes comments, grades all exams, and assigns grades."mini</p>
<p>What is the definition of a TA - teaches, grades papers, etc.</p>
<p>I should have specified “university”. LAC aren’t as likely to have TA’s.</p>
<p>You don’t have to dignify my comment about Fulbright Scholars - except, if you know of one who got his FS through connections, it brings the rest of them into question.</p>
<p>What is this thread about again? A poster who is worried about getting into the top schools? It seems to have meandered way off path. Whats all the fighting about?</p>
<p>FWIW, I went to a LAC for undergrad and was a TA to other undergrads. It was considered a departmental honor. I helped with the labs mostly, IIRC. I had to put out brain slices that were kept in formalin (ruined my acrylic watch), took care of the lab rats and pigeons, and help with tachistoscopic surgeries. I might have done more-- I don’t recall. It was a long time ago.</p>
<p>I’m sorry to hear that Princeton is making mini’s daughter teach. That would indicate she doesn’t have a research fellowship covering her expenses? In general, graduate students consider research to be above teaching, since it is what will feed their thesis or dissertation, lead to pubs, etc.</p>
<p>Even fully funded PhD students are sometimes given the opportunity to TA. This is seen as a plus for them since it adds to their CVs and makes them more attractive hires than those without teaching experience. My personal observation is that only the best students will be put in the position of mini’s daughter, where they are presenting new material, etc. </p>
<p>edit: my post has to do with humanities fields</p>
<p>edit 2: I believe Princeton is one of a small number of schools which only have fully funded PhD students.</p>
<p>edit 3: The fact grad students are given this opportunity, and lessening the work load of professors does speak to the quality of HYP education for undergrads imho. It is generally possible to avoid graduate student teachers if that matters to you.</p>
<p>My Dh is a PhD and former professor. Currently, adjunct at two universities. I kind of get how it works. Many friends with kids doing grad school. Most seem to want to get research fellowships enabling them to avoid teaching as teaching does not do much to accelerate their way. It’s just how it is. If you haven’t got a professor to put you onto his funding or independent research funding, then you TF. Or do both.</p>
<p>sewhappy: This describes grad school in science imho. I have kids in both science and humanities PhD programs. IMHO it is an asset to humanities PhD graduates to have teaching experience. Even better if they have taught a class they have developed.</p>
<p>obviously ymmv</p>
<p>edit: you can choose not to believe me but I am pretty sure what I wrote above is true for elite schools.</p>
<p>In my field, and two others I’m fairly close to, all schools provide full funding. What you have to do for that funding varies. Most great schools have you teach a class or two in your fourth year, but not before. You don’t TA, you actually teach your own course and have the same role as a regular professor (even MBA classes, as was the case at my alma mater, a top business school). </p>
<p>SOME teaching and some great teaching evaluations is great for your cv. But beyond a course or two, it is taking away from your research record. Research is your academic currency, not teaching. You get hired for what you produced, not how many classes you’ve taught before (unless you are aiming to be an adjunct or work at a community college). </p>
<p>Many many schools exploit their young by using them as cheap labor to cover courses. That helps the school a ton and does NOTHING to help students and in fact hurts their progress, how long they take to graduate, and their ultimate success in getting a job. Even ‘teaching schools’ are looking for those with good research records nowadays.</p>
<p>At the schools i know that exploit their grad students, everyone teaches, there is no special status that goes with it (if you don’t screw up in the classroom, great you can teach more). If ithere is any differential, its that individual faculty members will try to save their best grad students (usually defined by research ability) to help them publish…if they are off in the classroom they aren’t helping particular professors at all.</p>
![http://cdn.buzznet.com/assets/imgx/1/5/1/6/6/8/9/1/orig-15166891.jpg[/url]](http://cdn.buzznet.com/assets/imgx/1/5/1/6/6/8/9/1/orig-15166891.jpg%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
