<p>i am really curious too...considering I will be applying to schools this year.
you only have 3 posts....so no one knows who you are, or anything about u. u dont even have a record on CC. so it will be fabulous for everyone else if you could mention the names</p>
<p>Is it better to have a large lecture, taught largely un-interrupted by a professor, and then to have small discussion sections led by graduate students? Or is it better to have small seminars, led by a professor, and involving lots of discussion by fellow students?</p>
<p>There seems to be an assumption that the second way is necessarily better. It isn't. Different people have different learning styles and different preferences.</p>
<p>Professors do often have a lot of experience and knowledge in their field. There's a lot to be said for letting them teach, rather than turning them into facilitators of discussion.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh, my god. Why do you insist on calling me out every time I make a critical observation against particular LACs and LACs in general? I am trying to be as insightfully unbiased as I can. Having visited four of the best LACs, sat in on multiple classes across many disciplines, spent entire weekends overnight, and interacting with numerous upperclassmen, I am qualified to make judgments: both positive and negative. And, as a Lord Jeff myself, I have first hand experience as to what the intellectual and social atmosphere is like at an elite LAC.</p>
<p>Where do you go to college?</p>
<p>OP: I recommend visiting a select number of LACs, and conferring in advance with current students about which classes would be ideal to sit in on. I'd argue that most introductory mathematics and science courses won't be the most exciting in the world, whereas a charismatic and passionate professor and a few really engaged students in a more peculiar class will do the trick for you. Keep an open mind.</p>
<p>Harvard allows classes to be audited at the discretion of the instructor.
As for class discussions not be stimulating, every class can have its "off" days. Some topics generate huge amount of interest, others don't and it's not always easy to know which. Sometimes, the class has to cover some materials which are important but dry and make for less exciting discussions than at other times.<br>
I think one can make too much of a visit to one class in a course that lasts a whole semester.</p>
<p>There is no such thing as a 300 person seminar, or even a 30 person seminar. Large lecture classes have sections (precepts or recitations) led by graduate Teaching Assistants whose job is to lead discussion.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The OP's concern is one reason why so many top students fight to get into the top 20 or so National Universities & the top 13 LACs.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It may explain why students fight so hard for the top X LACs, but I also think that the OP's experience illustrates why such efforts may be misguided (at least to some extent, and insofar as this is a factor).</p>
<p>I went to school in a consortium of 5 LACs whose rankings spanned the top 50. I took multiple classes (and took them from multiple professors) on every single campus. The quality of discussion absolutely did not correspond with the schools' rankings. </p>
<p>That said, I imagine that the class make-up, the time of the semester, the time of the morning, etc. all played their own parts during your visit. It's a good thing that you sat in on multiple classes, but do the same at a few other schools before generalizing from your experience.</p>
<p>I found college class discussions very different from HS class discussions (I also came from an intense HS with lots of seminar-style classes, and I was looking for a similar academic environment). The HS discussions may have looked more intense, but they also tended to be much more narrowly focused, and much more closely guided/moderated. College class discussions were much broader and student-directed, which meant that a lot depended on circumstances like those you mentioned. Sometimes that was for better, sometimes it was probably for worse.</p>
<p>Don't for two seconds make the mistake of thinking that just because this was a top-ranked school, even one with an intellectual rep, that it's representative of LACs in general. There's definitely still hope :)</p>
<p>It may be that, having not done the reading, you may not have understood the discussions as well as you thought you did. Hence they seemed simple because you missed some of the points. </p>
<p>As for whether this is an LAC thing, try sitting in on classes at other colleges. </p>
<p>Given their history of turning out highly educated people, it is hard to accept your experience as an accurate characterization of even this one LAC, let alone LACs in general.</p>
<p>I apologize, but I still don’t feel comfortable mentioning the name of the school. In addition, I was interested in this question about LACs generally, not any specific school: My hypothesis was that LACs were right for me. And intellectually rigorous discussions was one of the attractive features. My first classroom visits produced some surprising, and disappointing, results. So now I’m wondering if I just got some fluky results, or my hypothesis is in the process of being disproved. Of course, there is the ever-popular ‘none of the above’ which is that LACs are as good as it gets, and other schools are even worse on this dimension. Or that the discussions in class do not match the discussions you have with your friends outside of class. I’ll certainly visit more LACs, but maybe I need to recalibrate my expectations.</p>
<p>Cold Wind: . I know I’d mentioned Grinnell in an earlier unrelated post, but no, the college I’m referring to in this post is not Grinnell.</p>
<p>"Depends a lot on the professor and the course." Yes, and the prestige of the school may not be that important, either. S attended a middle size public university, beautiful campus though school is not known for for it's high intellectual crowd, and took numerous courses that engaged debate between the students and professors. I agree class size could make a difference as the one's of his he mentioned varied between 20 and 60 students.</p>
<p>I think that many people do have unrealistics expectations about college. I sure did. If you had some good educational experiences at high school, even a top college will not equal or outrank that all the time. A lot of your college classes will be workaday anywhere. You have to look at the overall experience. If you pick a better school, or a better match for you, your overall experience will be more gratifying, even if each and every class is not amazing.</p>
<p>You want awesome discussion based classes? Plus the resources of one of the largest research universities in the world? Check Plan II Honors out at the University of Texas. It is amazing! Just give it a look at it:Plan</a> II Honors Program</p>
<p>Early classes are a poor representation of college academics. I took organic chem at 7:15am. It was like they were trying to keep the stuff a secret.</p>
<p>LOL @ belevit.</p>
<p>Quite frankly, Skywriter, it's going to be really hard for you to find a school that has AMAZING in-class discussions ALL THE TIME, in EVERY class. Every professor has a different style. Additionally, some classes are just not that interesting. Yes, even within your major, regardless of what that is. Besides, it's not as if all students at some LACs are outgoing and eager to participate in discussions, and all of the students at the others are reluctant to do so. There's a mix of personalities - both in professors and in students - at every school.</p>
<p>Honestly, I really think you're looking into the "lively class discussion" category a little bit too heavily. At any LAC, if you get in with the right group of friends (and you will; birds of a feather and all that) you'll have extremely stimulating discussions OUT of the classroom, and if you join a club or two that focuses on things you want to discuss, you'll find very good discussions there as well. The quality of discussions should not be your determining factor in choosing a school. Say a LAC has the most stimulating discussions ever, but offers little to no help with finding and attaining internships relevant to your major. Do you really think it would be a wise choice to attend that school? My point is this - there should be a LOT of factors influencing your decision.</p>
<p>Why not shoot for an Honors Program? In those classes you'll find majoritively like-minded students who are usually fond of intense class discussions.</p>
<p>I have to agree with kenf1234 in post #22. The value of class discussion really varies greatly not only with the subject matter and the learning styles, but also with the quality of the discussion. As we all know from experience, more talk is not always better. It may sometimes be better to learn from an expert rather than spend a lot of time listening to fellow students who just like to hear themselves talk. ;)</p>
<p>
[quote]
fellow students who just like to hear themselves talk.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That is the other problem with seminar-style courses. The students who do the most talking are usually the most aggressive, not necessarily the most insightful. Few professors are skilled enough facilitators to balance and guide the discussion among the participants.</p>
<p>Don't count out the honors programs at state universities. I'm currently at ASU and am a student in Barrett Honors College. Barrett offers honors only sections of many classes, in addition to classes designed by individual professors and tailored to their interests and passion. These classes have between 10-20 students and are discussion and paper intensive. I've found the students to be insightful and engaged, the class material to be fascinating, and the professors to be genuinely interested in the opinions of the students and in challenging the way we think. So don't think that LAC's are the only place where this sort of seminar environment is offered. </p>
<p>Also, remember that you'll get out of your college education whatever you put into it. If you slack off and don't do the reading, you won't get much out of it. If you participate in discussion and question others about their comments, you'll incite others to be more engaged and the class will be better as a whole.</p>
<p>kwu, I don't recall calling you out repeatedly, although I will trust your memory on it. I assure you I'm not targeting you, since all I know about you is that your username sounds vaguely familiar as a CC reg. But to the particular post I disagreed with, you did not sound "insightfully unbiased." You sounded the epitome of biased; thus, I felt the need to counter with my own opinion on the matter. You are absolutely just as entitled to your judgments, but I feel that although the Ivies and the elite LACs attract different types of people, the -quality- of the student body is equal. Is there a significant difference in 30 points on the SAT or 8 percentage points in admissions rate when both sides of the comparison are heavily skewed toward the top of the scale and the experiences offered are substantially different? I believe that the answer is no. Disagree as you like, but please don't attack me for disagreeing as well.</p>
<p>In the first month at a LAC, my kid enrolled in one class with 5 students (meets around a dining room table.) In another class, the prof has invited students to both breakfast and lunch (...this prof is the head of the department.) In another class, the prof extended an invitation to students to accompany her to an evening lecture by a famous researcher and author. I don't know how one can quantify the value of that kind of experience -- and, all in the first 4 weeks of college. Just imagine the next four years! It has exceeded all expectations. I'm sure there will be the occasional "dud" course, disengaged prof or tedious class discussion, but my daughter's overwhelming sense is that she is at a student-focused school -- and, access to professors and engaging discussions is the norm, rather than the exception. </p>
<p>PS: She didn't necessarily observe this depth of interaction on college visits -- and, she too, focused on LACs. I would encourage you to continue to talk with as many students as you can when you visit campuses. Don't just rely on the tours or sitting in on classes. Students, hanging out in the campus center or in the dining halls, may give you the bigger picture and true sense of the place.</p>
<p>
[quote]
my daughter's overwhelming sense is that she is at a student-focused school -- and, access to professors and engaging discussions is the norm, rather than the exception.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>There's another side to this, of course. At a small college there are very few professors, very few perspectives, limitations on the courses you can take. You have more access to the professors who are there, but fewer professors to choose from. That issue becomes more apparent as the student matures into upper-division coursework.</p>
<p>My point isn't that there is anything wrong with small LACs, for many students they provide the best experience. But for many others, a big university with all it has to offer is a better choics. They each have their upsides and downsides.</p>
<p>I love the "probably some Midwestern LAC" or "some LAC in the middle of the cornfields." </p>
<p>Haha discussions... especially first semester. First semester, first year I was in a discussion based history class.. wow. The quality depends on the professor and students of course. The funny thing was that twice we had another prof substitute and blew us away with how good the class could be. </p>
<p>The best discussions I've been a part of happened outside the classroom. In the dining hall or someone's dorm. It was amazing.</p>
<p>If you're looking for the intellectual discussions, they're there. In LAC's even in the middle of cornfields... You just have to be at the right place at the right time. It happens more often than you think. :)</p>
<p>maybe they analyze on their exams and papers?</p>