<p>
Let’s start with some evidence.</p>
<p>Then we can talk about whether this stat means anything at all.</p>
<p>
Davidson and Middlebury are not in the [The</a> Ivy Plus Society](<a href=“http://www.ivyplussociety.org/about.html]The”>http://www.ivyplussociety.org/about.html), so their graduates are at a clear disadvantage in social desirability.</p>
<p>From Cornell’s COE website:
“Most courses in the College of Engineering are led by full-time, tenured or tenure-track faculty members. Exceptions include professional writers who teach Engineering Communication courses and some of the First-Year Writing Seminars.”
My neighbor’s son is a sophomore at Rutgers COE. He told me that he has only had a handful of classes taught by professors. The vast majority were taught by TAs that spoke broken English. I know that my daughter has had many classes taught by TAs. Although this year she is a junior and now has professors.
Mokusatsu are you saying it doesn’t matter who is teaching the classes?</p>
<p>
Huh? Mokusatsu wrote this:
</p>
<p>
Dangerous? Probably less than 100 people read Annasdad’s posts, maybe ten post responses, and most of them disagree with him. Let’s not get carried away.</p>
<p>Of course, after reading his posts I do have a sudden urge to remove my flash drive before it is safe to do so.</p>
<p>
What does teaching have to do with social desirability?</p>
<p>guys,
mokusatsu was making a joke. the IVY PLUS SOCIETY is a dating network .</p>
<p>^^^
No need to scream. I know he was making a joke, and I’m sure NJMom was directing her comment to noimagination. I was giving her a hard time.</p>
<p>
Data, we want data! (jk) </p>
<p>Actually, the 2 threads in which he posted regularly yesterday have over 33K views combined. While your flash drive reaction is probably shared by the majority of readers, there may be lurkers or new members who might misunderstand or misread the opinions he expresses. That would be unfortunate.</p>
<p>
And do what exactly? Make their college decisions based on what one poster says on a message board? Even when virtually every other poster disagrees with him? Such people, if they actually exist, have bigger issues than annasdad.</p>
<p>To call him dangerous is pure hyperbole.</p>
<p>He has posted his “research” in many threads. Is it possible that some posters may take it to heart? I think he sure hopes so, and he seems to be quite vehement in expressing his opinion. As for your comment about NJMom23’s choice of the adjective “dangerous”. You are right. There are likely a whole host of better adjectives to choose from ;)</p>
<p>But no worries, he won’t see this. He claims not to read my posts, which I see as very much to my benefit.</p>
<p>LOL I am sorry. I meant noimagination.</p>
<p>You are right. Dangerous was the wrong adjective. My concern was that someone might actually listen to his advice without doing other research and make a decision based on his “research”. I should give people more credit than that :-)</p>
<p>Aha. If all you want is “social desirability,” then forget USNews rankings. Here’s the list of “top tier schools” to go by:</p>
<p>[Katie</a> Baker on the New York Times wedding section - Grantland](<a href=“http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/6769919/matrimonial-moneyball]Katie”>» Matrimonial Moneyball)</p>
<p>
Sorry to give you a hard time. I know what you meant. Sometimes I get ornery.</p>
<p>People can read a thousand opinions or pieces of data and still cling to one minority view because it serves their ego best. There’s nothing we can do about it. I have no CC-worthy data to prove this, but in my own experience I continue to see that the people who rant the most about top schools being overrated are the same people whose kids got rejected or weren’t good enough to apply.</p>
<p>I have a friend whose child attended TCNJ for CS. His mother likes to say he “could have gone to MIT but wasn’t interested.” He has not been able to find a job, and was forced to go on to grad school. He continues to have trouble finding even summer internships. The friend admits the TCNJ career office was not very helpful. However, contrast this with the story a CC poster recently PMed me about. Her freshman son who plans to major in CS at Stanford attended a job fair on campus. Companies showed lots of interest in him, took his resume, and he was contacted by several already and has an interview set up. As a freshman! My D has had a similar experience at her elite school.</p>
<p>I know, I know, it’s only an anecdote and not fact.</p>
<p>If job placement / career services is a priority, then the search should concentrate on that factor instead of just “elite school”. For example, Northeastern has a superb co-op program… and they are rated highly (#1?) by USN&WR for Career Services. </p>
<p>That’s just one “fit factor” example. If a student knows desired major, then obviously a big factor would be strong department/reputation in that field. My point is that “elite brand” does not ensure that it is the best choice for every student. Most of the posters already know that. I’m just giving some food for thought to the newbie families.</p>
<p>^ Agreed, but most of the top schools do have good career services. It would be hard not to, when so many companies target them for hiring. Also, the elite schools have few truly weak departments, with “weak” being a relative term. A kid choosing Princeton, for example, is going to be pretty safe no matter what major they ultimately select. While the engineering department at Harvard might not be the school’s best department, do the graduates really struggle to get jobs more than an engineer from WPI or somewhere cheaper/easier to get into?</p>
<p>And yup, Northeastern is on my list for our youngest for that very reason!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A kid choosing Princeton is not safe if Princeton isn’t the right school for him or her. Princeton, like all schools, has a distinct personality and is not right for all kids. Not to mention that level of academics is not right for all kids.</p>
<p>Dad II: I’m in your corner… my kid goes to the BEST school and I invite anyone to disagree with me ;)</p>
<p>I first became aware of the work of Pascarella and Terenzini through an article by Malcolm Gladwell, and have mentioned it on CC (before annasdad did). Their work spanned decades and I would be very reluctant to say that they are wrong. I certainly have not seen anything better out there.</p>
<p>Are the results really that surprising? I certainly dont think so. Another area of study where we have extensive data is psychometrics. Although we dont want to hear about it, the results are not even controversial anymore: we are by and large a product of our genes. Academically speaking, improvements at the periphery are possible; quantum leaps of one standard deviation or more is unlikely (unless the person was a slacker that has a satori).</p>
<p>Where elites really add value is in signaling. It tells perspective employers (and perspective spouses) that the individual is really special, and have been certified as such by us. Is this not the take-away from the Rivera study?</p>
<p>One of the very sharpest members I see here on CC is siserune. By his calculation, approximately 40% of admits to the elites are URMs, athletes, and legacies, and with the exception of Caltech, only the top 10-15% of admits are admitted strictly on the basis of academic merit. If this is true, and I have no reason to doubt the analysis, then I would argue it is more important to choose the right major than the right school if one is truly in it for the education and only the education.</p>
<p>I have proposed that exact solution before, but few took it seriously. Why not? I have seen students leaving STEM all the time for something less challenging, and there is no stigma to it. Why is it OK to move down but not move up the totem pole? Sociology students in your school not sharp enough for you? Take economics and hang around with the economics students instead. You dont think the HR students are the sharpest tools in the shed? Take finance and keep the quants company. You get my drift.</p>
<p>My feeling, of course, is that the students are not really in it for the academics. What they are looking for is prestige, and the dividend that come with it. While there is nothing wrong with it, I just dont think they are being honest with me; in a few cases, I dont think they are even being honest with themselves.</p>
<p>As I see it anyway.</p>