<p>Speaking about ignorance, Barrons, I am more than happy to discuss the finer points of admission with you at any time, and happy to bet with you at any time about the admission rates and yield at Wisconsin. You and I know how that turned out last time. </p>
<p>In the meantime, if you enjoy insulting people or call them liars, be my guest. You know what they say about toads and white doves! </p>
<p>Fwiw, if you ever decide to look at what people write with an ounce of objectivity, you might uncover that I am hardly the opponent of public education you always try to pin on me. I firmly believe that public education fills a critical role in education, especially at the state level. Again, if you were to read what I actually write about schools I know something about, you will be surprised. Check what I write about Texas.</p>
<p>On the other hand, I see no reason for me to abandon my criticism of the teaching methods used at ALL research universities, my criticism of the focus on research and graduate education, and the nonchalant acceptance of extremely small production from tenured faculty. </p>
<p>Where we differ is that you would like people to think that such criticisms are simply the figment of the imagination of someone who does not like state universities!</p>
<p>Where we also differ is that I do NOT jump on every thread to recommend or defend a particular school or immediately attack the āother choice.ā Feel free to compare our posts! </p>
<p>And speaking about recent experience, you seem quite apt in dismissing the experience of people who went through their entire university or college experience in the past decade. Yes, we know that middle-aged boosters and cheerleaders do KNOW what it means to BE a football player a lot better than the players on the field.</p>
<p>Publics are publics and have a mission to educate state people that pay taxes. They spend little money and time trying to drum up more applicants to reject with mass mailing like some privates. Just as most students in the state donāt spend time and money on testing prep classes and taking the test 5 times to get a higher score. Thatās an east and west coast thing. And since that last time the average ACT is up another point to 29. A very respectable number at the 93rd percentile. 25% are now in the 97th percentile. Thatās nearly equal to the total number of freshmen at Stanford. </p>
<p>So you have a soft spot for UT. It hardly offsets your constant barrage against the Big Ten and UC schools.</p>
<p>Barrons, what is the nature of my constant ābarrageā against Big Ten? A few years ago, Alexandre also asked me to stop āattackingā Michigan but could not come up with a single post where I did! I could issue a similar challenge to you ā¦ can you find a post of mine where I attacked the University of Wisconsinās education directly? No, not my opinion about the provost who filled the PA. Not my opinion about the focus on research in general. Not about the adulation of Nobel prize-winners. Not about the PA. </p>
<p>When reduced to its bare essence, what are my attacks? Messing with the pompom-weavers? Not placing much trust in the Peer Assessment and, directly questioning the lack of integrity of latest versions of the USNews? To that, I plead guilty! Not recognizing the validity or relevance of a number of rankings? To that, I plead guilty. And, fwiw, I am also quite critical of rankings where my āfavoriteā schools are glorified! </p>
<p>Fwiw, ALL of us have a number of preferences. You obviously like schools that are similar to Wisconsin, and ā¦ it would burn your fingertips to type anything positive about a LAC. As a matter of principle! In addition to the obvious disdain for LACs, a number of schools that happen to be just ranked above the best public universities are generating special scorn: Notre Dame, Vandy, Emory, and Rice. Threads after threads ā¦ it is the same story! This one is NO exception as it seems insulting to some that anyone would think Vanderbilt might be a better school for a high school senior to consider. </p>
<p>As far as the schools I do like and like less, I believe that you have yet to figure that out!</p>
<p>The high school counselors at the top public and private schools in the country donāt think Wisconsin belongs in the same sentence as Vandy. You all may dispute the knowledge that HS counselors have of all the colleges in the US but at least you can be sure that they themselves fill it out since they donāt have secretaries like university provosts and presidents do. Also, since USNWR polls a wide variety of counselors all across the country, this survey is a good litmus test for the geographical reach of a university as well.</p>
<p>Like annasdad, Pizzagirl and MOWC have said, Wisconsin is a good state flagship and nothing more. Vandy is one of the gems of higher education in the country and is often considered āThe Harvard of the Southā.</p>
<p>Really? You really think so? I do not wave pom-poms and wear colored glassed!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Is this a comment solely directed at the Big 10 schools? Or a GENERAL criticism about unqualified and untrained students in Masterās programs who are tasked to educate peers and undergraduates? And, most importantly, is it ā¦ incorrect?</p>
<p>Pure and unadulterated BS on both statements. </p>
<p>Teaching assistants, GSIs, or whatever you call them are most definitely not ALL PhDs candidates. They range from PhDs waiting to present a dissertation all the way down to ā¦ undergraduates. Although the quality of TAs vary with the selectivity of the schools, I make no difference in my criticism of the (ab)use of untrained and unqualified providers of an education service. </p>
<p>Please tell me what you put in that pipe of yours!</p>
Thanks for the bone, xiggi. Iām glad you recognized that.</p>
<p>I can only speak of my experience. All the GSIs I had were PhD candidates. The only undergrads I know of that teach a course are for the DeCal electives: [url=<a href=āMy Dating Tests ā What I learned to avoidā>http://www.decal.org/]DeCal[/url</a>]</p>
<p>Nothing to do with throwing a bone. It would be impossible to disagree that the quality of the TAs vary considerably. And, fwiw, isnāt that exactly my point of contention? I am still quite uncertain why only you and our friends from Michigan feel singled out by my comments on TAs. Do you think I am more charitable towards accounts of undergraduates TAing at Brown or Princeton? Or at Vanderbilt?</p>
Hmmmā¦perhaps itās because it was brought up in a discussion with Berkeley/Michigan supporters? </p>
<p>
I donāt know. You could argue that theyāre more likely to have a high SAT score and therefore a great command of the English languageā¦and then thereās the classic argument that you learn more from your peers than your profs. So perhaps in that light you may be more charitable.</p>
<p>I am pretty sure President Gordon Gee (former Chancellor of Vandy) would probably agree that Vanderbilt = TOSU in terms of overall academics. Both are currently ranked #17, the only difference being that ranking is based on āTop Private vs Top Public.ā ;)</p>
<p>Again, I am not following you. You want me to read a post and discuss āassertationsā and get back to āyou.ā Is that it? If you want to know my opinion about the Counselor Poll, I have made it clear in the past that I think even less of that part than I do about the āexpertā PA poll. What say you now? </p>
<p>As I said before, you really do not know much about my positions, even after I have repeated them quite often.</p>
<p>bustazakādid you know that only 10% of the brilliant (and arenāt they always the best studentsāfrom Kutztown State) GCs even filled out the surveys. My guess is they will drop that next year due to lack of responses.
And what was the end result of the Provost who filled out the survey a few years backāhe was relieved of that duty and the Chancellor took it over personally. So UW took swift and complete action once it came to their attention. So give it a rest. I am sure even Stanford has made some mistakes in the pastālike being founded by a robber baron to start. But we forgive them that.</p>
<p>āThe gold strike in California had brought a large influx of newcomers into the territory. The Chinese immigrants, in particular, were subject to persecution in the gold fields and in small towns and cities as well. [15] Anti-Chinese sentiment became an official political issue over time. Stanford, as governor, ostensibly supported the prevailing mood in the state, which lobbied for the restriction of Chinese immigration. In a message to the legislature in January 1862, Stanford proclaimed that āThe presence of numbers of that degraded and distinct people would exercise a deleterious effect upon the superior race.ā His pronouncement was initially received with widespread enthusiasm and Stanford lauded as a defender of the white race. Public opinion shifted when Stanfordās blatant hypocrisy was disclosed. As the head of the Central Pacific, Stanford oversaw a corporation which imported thousands of Chinese laborers in the construction of the railroad.[16]ā Wiki</p>
<p>āIt would be impossible to disagree that the quality of the TAs vary considerably.ā</p>
<p>Unfortunately, the same is true of professors. Iāve seen fabulous, terrible, and indifferent teachers among undergrads, PhD candidates, and tenured faculty in front of a classroom. I agree that undergrad TAs are bad for a schoolās PR, but I donāt see much correlation between rank and substance.</p>