<p>Today an article came out in the International Herald Tribune (published by the New York Times) which describes Harvard's fundamental flaws in teaching. The article recognizes that due to Harvard's status in the public mind, many other universities may suffer similar problems but not experience the same publicity of Harvard. Would you say the statement that you, "don't go to Harvard for the teaching. You go to be around the greatest minds in the world," applies to Chicago? Here's the link to the article: <a href="http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/10/news/harvard.php">http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/10/news/harvard.php</a></p>
<p>On the other hand, in 1998 according to the University of Chicago, their commitment to teaching, "makes the University virtually unique among its peers. A recent study by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching concluded that research universities deny undergraduates the best education available by placing them almost exclusively in large lecture classes taught by graduate students. The same study cited Chicago as a noteworthy exception."</p>
<p>Is this still the case? What makes the University of Chicago's commitment to undergraduate teaching from other universities?</p>
<p>Chicago has always thought of itself as educational inventor and leader in higher education. It has only recently, however, made a major commitment to being a leader in undergraduate as well as graduate education. In the early days the graduate/research component was the emphasis. Hutchins even tried to move the College to Northwestern in his plan to merge both universities. Not being successful, it was decided that the College should reflect the same level of quality as the graduate divisions. It was decided that a focus on curriculum and teaching was essential and that undergraduates be held to rigorous academic standards. To do this, the faculty had to be intimately involved in the process. This process of self-reflection, experimentation, and leadership in teaching has simply become a part of its DNA. As a result, the College has its own identity within the University, and its students are highly respected by the University community. Graduate students (having been one myself) often stand in awe of the undergraduates. Chicago has maintained this processes primarily because of the University's commitment to open and rigorous inquiry and argument. Undergraduate education, therefore, is continually examined in this light. Great teachers are recognized, and faculty seminars on teaching occur with regularity. Further, undergrads are selected on the basis of how well they may themselves respond to this tradition and provide a stimulating classroom environment for the faculty. To read a history of the University and its importance to higher education in the past and how it is shaping the debate for the future, I recommend Donald Levine's book, "Powers of the Mind: The Reinvention of Liberal Learning in America."</p>
<p>One can begin here, however: <a href="http://iotu.uchicago.edu/levine.html%5B/url%5D">http://iotu.uchicago.edu/levine.html</a></p>
<p>A quote from the article I find captures the essence of the University:
[quote]
We think of ourselves as utterly democratic, saying Mr. & Ms. instead of Dr. and Professor, making graduate and even undergrad students co-authors of papers and, as Elaine Fuchs happily put it, we "stand not for talking at students, but rather for traveling with students down the unknown paths to which questions point." And yet, we are intolerant to the point of arrogance in our dismissal of mediocrity, with an aristocratic hauteur that is, I suspect, also bred into our bones.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think that it comes down to respect. The professors at the University of Chicago respect undergraduates as scholars. As Idad pointed out, professors do not use titles. Most professors go by their first names, with a few preferring Mr. or Mrs. Professors speak to students as equals. Our original ideas are encouraged, and they get thoughtful consideration from professors. The largest class tends to be Introduction to Microeconomics taught by the popular lecturer Alan Sanderson. He holds office hours and review session, and there is an abundance of TAs who also hold office hours and are available for extra help. I saw Sanderson on the elevator a few days ago, and even though I am no longer in his class and never went to office hours, he knew who I was immediately and started conversation. At other schools, I think I would have been ignored. Some graduate students act at Writing Tutors or TAs in core classes, and a few sections a quarter are led by superb graduate students. These grad students tend to be quite good. Famous professors (well, famous at the U of C) teach core classes with eighteen students--and enjoy teaching them. A few professors who came from other schools have expressed to students how much they love working with U of C students because of our thoughtful inquiry and commitment to education. When students are respected, teaching becomes a very different ballgame.</p>
<p>As a second year, my son has had a total of, I think, 14 instructors (overlap in a couple of courses). Every quarter, I ask him how his professors are. Thus far, no clunkers. Every one has been a good teacher. The foreign instructors have been easy to understand - no real accent problems.</p>
<p>I find this quite phenomenal on both counts. It is certainly different from my experience (at other uni's) where I felt lucky if I had two inspired instructors (that I could understand) in a semester. Makes it a little easier to send those checks out at the beginning of each quarter!</p>
<p>My own experiences with professors has been consistently excellent-- though I'm sure there are more than a few duds here, I came from a stellar high school with stellar teachers and was told-- many times over-- that I would never have that same experience again.</p>
<p>Boy, were they wrong.</p>
<p>I've found my profs inspiring, open, and dedicated. Not only do they hold office hours, but they're open to chatting with students at any one of many coffee shops here, and they're also really excellent about e-mail communication. My humanities professor this quarter asked us to e-mail her any additional questions we had about Kant; my social sciences professor was going to be out of town the weekend before a paper was due and gave us his cell phone number; my history professor e-mails us responses to our required journal entries.</p>
<p>I also find it really cool that of the 10 profs elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, I've been to lectures/taken classes with two of them:</p>
<p>I have been impressed by the teaching I have gotten here. The best example I have is the second quarter of European Civ. My instructor was Prof. Bernard Wasserstein. His dedication to teaching a class 18, maybe one or two of whom were even considering History as a major was amazing. He clearly spent a lot of time prepating for class, required us to meet with him to discuss our papers, and was extremely helpful in general. The last time I met with him, he even gave me some advice on the process of writing a BA, even though I'm not a history major. He was the extreme example of an outstanding teacher who is also a world-class scholar (the only problem he has is that the Guggenheim he just got will mean he's on a research leave next year), but that shows that many Chicago professors who at the top of their fields still take teaching very seriously. Of course, not every single class turns out that way, but it really sticks out to me when I have a really bad experience, probably because most of my instructors here have put a great deal into their teaching.</p>
<p>The above posts demonstrate why the University of Chicago is considered the best undergraduate academic experience. What a fantastic school!</p>
<p>I'll share a story. S was taking a chemistry course at an top Ivy and began wondering about some theoretical aspect of what was being presented and asked the grad assistant about it. The grad assistant said he didn't know, so S said perhaps they (the section) could derive it. The other students asked why he cared, but S tried any how, finally he said he needed some advice from either a chemistry or physics prof, and asked the grad student if the prof giving the lectures was available. He was told the prof would not want to be bothered. He went looking for one (they were in the science building) and found none. Finally S, took out his notebook computer opened it and emailed his quite famous Chicago physics professor he had the previous term with his question. Before the end of the section he received an email with a detailed answer and a verbal pat on the back for thinking of the issue in the context of his course. the other students were shocked, they had never seen anything like that before.</p>
<p>That's an interesting story, though I would think that you'd be able to find those interested, engaged profs at other schools. I don't think that at Chicago, all the profs are superlative, while at other schools, all the profs are second-rate, though at the same time the story reminds me of why I ended up coming here...</p>
<p>I went to a top high school (and "top" really does mean "top"; about half of our graduating class of 330 ends up at top 20 schools) where intelligent students were, as you can imagine, in no short supply. I remember, however, that most students had masks that they put on in class... in a classroom setting, they were studious and hard-working, but once class was over, any intellectualism that was inside the class dissipated. Students were interested in grades and scores rather than Shakespeare and polar coordinates; I have friends who are now at Yale, Princeton, and Columbia who spent literally thousands of dollars on SAT tutors.</p>
<p>I was far from the kid with the highest grades-- I was the kid who was in it to be in it and I was there because I was having a lot of fun. Every once in a while I would bring something up in class-- either demonstrate a proof, or ask a question, that shed light on my glee with the topic at hand, and any time I showed a love for the material my classmates stared me down. (Part of me thinks that they were amazed that somebody could enjoy school, part of me thinks that they were angry because I was making them look bad).</p>
<p>Anyway, they're not here, that's all I can say.</p>
<p>amykins -- </p>
<p>your posts are solidifying my strong suspicion that my daughter's decision to "zero in" on U of C is a great choice for her. I just showed her your above description of how you felt in high school (Northeast, right-- same as my D) -- and she rolled her eyes and said this was exactly her experience. I remember her frustration with these attitudes. </p>
<p>Of late she has been taking fire for wanting to go to a school where fun "dies" -- she finds it amusing that their definition of "fun" is so limited.</p>
<p>And I can add that my colleagues that teach at Chicago <em>constantly</em> rave about the quality of their undergraduates.</p>
<p>JT</p>
<p>I hope one would not think I was suggesting that profs at other schools are not engaged with their students, I have many friends who teach and include undergrads in research that would take issue with that. I was simply pointing out a single experience of an interaction a Chicago prof had with a student who was no longer in his class. To amykins point, what bothered S was the lack of interest by his classmates in the question. He said at Chicago there would have been a race to the board to join him in figuring it out. Conceivably, it is the atmosphere of joint engagement that is perhaps defining of the Chicago experience (though I am sure one will find instances of that as well at other schools).</p>
<p>that's great on both accounts-- I guess I'm just trying to avoid absolutes, but the scene you described is quintessentially Chicago.</p>
<p>I was wondering, if students are respected in class and treated as equals, does that mean the student-professor exchange is strictly professional? If you see a professor outside of class or after you've already taken a class with him or her, would you still feel comfortable going to talk with them? Of course this probably depends on individuals, but how well do you feel students and professors know one another?</p>
<p>That's an excellent question-- my art history professor from last quarter loves to do work in the classics cafe, and when she does work she splays herself out in a chair, barefoot. Even though I wasn't particularly close to her, she always says hi to me and I say hi to her.</p>
<p>Students get to know professors as much as students want to get to know them. I've kept up a good e-mail correspondence with my humanities professors from first and second quarter, both of whom I had asked to write recommendations for me. Because you're in small discussion classes from the start, the prof will have a chance to get to know you, your personality, and your work.</p>
<p>The relationship is usually not strictly professional. In small classes, professors hear us talking before and after class and gets to know us all really well. Some professors know which activities the different students are involved in. Some professors hold little parties at the end of the term. My humanities class got together about a month after the class for lunch once. We invited our professor, and he came. We just had normal, relaxed conversation with him, including explaining to him what a jello shot is (he's foreign). Some professors, of course, like to remain more professional--some students do, as well. When you're in a small, discussion-based class, though, it's really hard to avoid getting to know each other and getting to be more relaxed with each other. Many core classes have the same professor for two or three quarters. Sometimes you see professors around Hyde Park. I feel really comfortable with almost all of the professors I've had.</p>
<p>corranged-- did you have Robert Buch for HBC in winter?</p>
<p>...</p>
<p>Yes, but there wasn't an Amy in my class. :)</p>
<p>I wasn't in that class, but I know four or five people who were in it and they always talked about how much fun it was to have conversations with each other that ranged from the weekend's frat parties to imagery in Dante's Inferno. I don't know anybody in that class who lives in Max, though, so I'm pretty sure I don't know who you are.</p>
<p>It was a good random guess, though, right? :-P</p>
<p>Wow. Faculty commitment to students seems definitely evident. Would you say as well though that its easy to find long-term mentors on the faculty?</p>