<p>
[QUOTE]
point is that some seem improvidently to discount relationship of quality between graduate and undergraduate departments, almost to the point that the argument (illogically) that there is either a null or even inverse relationship.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I hope that wasn't directed at me, since I never asserted anything of the kind.</p>
<p>My point was merely to counter those who try and leverage strength in one particular area as a proxy for others. That is not to say that there aren't institutions that possess strengths across both grad and undergrad programs, there most certainly are and I have stated as such (e.g. HYPSM).</p>
<p>The clearest example of what I am referring to are those proponents of Cal (or more specifically the use of Cal's grad programs as a proxy for Cal's undergrad quality). Certainly many of Cal's graduate programs are world class (prominent professors, cutting edge research, high quality of student body, etc.) But this doesn't necessarily translate into (the same level of) quality at the undergrad level. Sakky, for example, has provided plenty of examples as to why (noting a number of prominent professors that have turned out to be lousy teachers and / or are not motivated to teach undergrads and / or don't even teach undergrads period as evidenced by student criticism, grading rankings etc.)</p>
<p>Compare that to a place like Brown where every single professor is REQUIRED to teach undergrads. Clearly there are notable grad / undergrad differences across the landscape of American universities. That was the point.</p>
<p>"t_p" not directed at you. Comment was more global. btw, are you familiar with Bruce Hornsby's surprisingly strong rendition of "comfortably numb?"</p>
<p>redcrimble,
I guess I have been visiting different parts of CC than you because I have not run into those arguments (although I've seen the variety mentioned by the_prestige dozens of times). I don't see an inverse relationship at all and, at worse, it's a null relationship. Still, I'm not sure one can make a general statement about the relationship between grad and undergrad. Probably the balance leans to a positive relationship, but I suspect it varies from school to school and perhaps even department to department. As for your comments on class size, lousy professors are lousy professors regardless of the class size (although my experience was that even good professors can sometimes get defeated by large class sizes). In any event, like all of us probably, I'd prefer good professors and small class size. </p>
<p>I really enjoy your word choices. You're definitely on my team for the next round of Scrabble.</p>
<p>Numerous examples or anecdotes? Some of Wisconsin's most well known profs taught undergrad sections for years and were well regarded as both teachers and researchers. So much so that their lectures have been made available to future generations.</p>
<p>I though "comfortably numb" came from Pink Floyd.</p>
<p>On one of the best albums of all time. Anytime I look at new stereo equipment I bring along my special edition PF disc to test the sound. Just amazing.</p>
<p>With the exception of Harvard, Yale and maybe Princeton, most universities have produced, on average, fewer than 1 Rhodes Scholar annually. Most elite universities have produced between 25 and 50 Rhodes schollars over the last 105 years of the awards' existance. Still, it would be cool to see the total number of Marshall, Truman, Rhodes and Fulbright award winners listed by institution. Harvard would blow away the competion of course, but the rest of the listing would yield some very interesting results.</p>
<p>Geez! this will open another Pandora's Box. So, someone can even try to rank all the scholar awards, put weight factor on them, do size adjustment. etc...</p>
<p>Frankly, I have never heard of the Udall Scholarship before. And its strictures seem rather narrow. </p>
<p>* In 2007, the Foundation expects to award 80 scholarships of up to $5,000 and 50 honorable mentions on the basis of merit to sophomore and junior level college students. Scholarships are offered in any of three categories:</p>
<p>To students who have demonstrated commitment to careers related to the environment; or
To Native American and Alaska Native students who have demonstrated commitment to careers related to tribal public policy; or
To Native American and Alaska Native students who have demonstrated commitment to careers related to Native health care.</p>
<p>Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to criticize this particular scholarship. Hey, I certainly wouldn't have minded winning this award. Not one bit.</p>
<p>I just don't know if you can put this award on the same level as ones like the Rhodes or the Marshall.</p>
<p>Probably to prevent people trying to come up with rankings like this one, LOL</p>
<p>And jack, may I enquire as to your...underlying attitude when you said that "Pomona has an unusually large number of 2007 Fulbrights"? What is so unusual about that? hhrmm?</p>
<p>(In general, not to jack)
Anecdotes and warm fuzzy stories of inspiring professors don't cut it when you're trying to even make a vague claim about the general relationship between teachers/teaching grad schools and undergrad schools. I for one agree that the relationship is neutral until proven patently and absolutely false. Some LACs are better in teaching, some aren't. Some universities are better than LACs in teaching (!!!), Some universities don't give 2 h00ts about their undergrads. Most universities are great in research and they can never be replaced or "trumped" in any way by the LACs in this department simply by dint of their resources and size, and Nobel Prize winning professors and etc</p>
<p>Attempt to temper your ego and accept that your school, and my school, and his school, and her school has weaknesses RELATIVE to other institutions. Don't try to make yourself feel better by forcing out generalizations of the inverse and converse and diverse and reverse and whatnot that implicitly bumps your school up that status ladder.</p>