<p>
</p>
<p>?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Maybe. I’m a math major.</p>
<p>Well, for one thing, you’re assuming kids can get into the state flagship. In our state, that’s Berkeley or UCLA. Both my Ds are strong students and smart girls but would not get into those flagships. What I call “normal smart”-- 3.5 to 4.0W, 1800-2000 SAT-- is not good enough for those schools.</p>
<p>That said, even if they could get into UCLA, I wouldn’t want them there. My sister went there and felt lost for five years (yes, it was hard to graduate in four years even back then). The community (students, faculty, etc) is larger than many small cities. We wanted our kids to have a smaller community where they could develop personal relationships with professors, not be taught by TAs, and have a strong community on campus.</p>
<p>“What I call “normal smart”-- 3.5 to 4.0W, 1800-2000 SAT-- is not good enough for those schools.”</p>
<p>Really? Those numbers fall on the mid-upper part of their median statistics.</p>
<p>^Half the kids with those stats or better don’t get in.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.admissions.ucla.edu/prospect/adm_fr/Frosh_Prof10.htm[/url]”>http://www.admissions.ucla.edu/prospect/adm_fr/Frosh_Prof10.htm</a></p>
<p>I really wished of D had picked Cal over a private, but just wasn’t a good fit for her. We are glad we could afford to let her try living in a completely different demographic than she grew up in. Sigh.</p>
<p>I’m looking at the stats from one SoCal public high school that bovertine posted recently:
<a href=“http://www.pvpusd.k12.ca.us/penhi/collegeacceptance/collegeacceptance2010.pdf[/url]”>http://www.pvpusd.k12.ca.us/penhi/collegeacceptance/collegeacceptance2010.pdf</a></p>
<p>UCLA rejections go on and on: 4.57/2150, 4.22/1910, 4.54/2350, 4.51/2100… there are dozens like that. It is simply not a reliable/viable option for the majority of college-prep California kids. My D has a 3.75/4.05, 30 on the ACT, 4 APs, 5 honors, leadership, ECs, and she wouldn’t stand a chance at UCLA or Berkeley. It’s just the way it is.</p>
<p>Living in WA, we have a great public in UW. But, I don’t really want to go there because it’s too big, I don’t really want to stay here, I wouldn’t be able to play sports for them, and I just am not a huge fan of the overall feel. I mean if financial aid sucks at all my other colleges I’ll be fine going there but it’s def not my 1at choice.</p>
<p>I would like to go to a smaller school, with smaller class sizes, more seminars and fewer lectures, less red tape, etc.</p>
<p>Berkeley has a really good rep in large part because of the research its professors do and because of its graduate schools. I’m not convinced the undergraduate education would be so great for me. Not to mention California’s financial crisis, especially in regards to funding public education.</p>
<p>I think it should be said that not all state flagships are the same. There are some that offer the same “feel” and “quality” of their private counterparts. Our D actually chose to go to another state’s flagship (UVa) over other comparable private schools such as Northwestern. UVa felt, to her, essentially the same as NU (only warmer 
) With 13,500 undergrads, it’s not the huge, impersonal school typical of some state universities. Even though we’re paying full price OOS tuition, it’s still less than the selective privates on her list.</p>
<p>Red tape / bureaucracy, often associated with large public universities, is not just about minor inconveniences such as standing in longer lines at registration. Bureaucracy, or the lack of it at “elite” schools, is about socializing you for the life you can expect to live after graduation.</p>
<p>[The</a> Disadvantages of an Elite Education: an article by William Deresiewicz about how universities should exist to make minds, not careers | The American Scholar](<a href=“http://www.theamericanscholar.org/the-disadvantages-of-an-elite-education/]The”>The American Scholar: The Disadvantages of an Elite Education - <a href='https://theamericanscholar.org/author/william-deresiewicz/'>William Deresiewicz</a>)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I understand that the OP is not asking about Yale v. Cleveland State. So the question becomes, in terms of socializing you for the life you want to lead, how different is Berkeley or Michigan from the above description of Cleveland State? How different is Bryn Mawr or Northwestern from Yale?</p>
<p>That is the dumbest thing I ever read. Many folks from say Yale go on to become lawyers, doctors and work on Wall Street. Deadlines in ALL those fields are very serious. You want to tell a partner you missed a filing deadline and need an extension??? You will be fired that day. Same for Wall Street firms. They want it NOW.
Utter craptacular BS.</p>
<p>PS–At most large schools there is no registration line at all. It’s all done online by computer. Get with the 2000’s.</p>
<p>Are all those online journals open access or do you have to subscribe? I’d bet all the good ones require a subscription which is another asset of large college libraries. They subscribe to over 50,000 journals–both printed and online. And you often can print for free if you are a student there. Printing at home costs money. Plus they have specialist librarians in every area. Have a question on biochemistry research–see the biochem librarian who will know every major journal in the field. And there are 674 of them listed that cover biochem.</p>
<p>[Emily</a> Wixson - UW-Madison Libraries](<a href=“http://www.library.wisc.edu/directory/staff/Emily-Wixson]Emily”>http://www.library.wisc.edu/directory/staff/Emily-Wixson)</p>
<p>“What I call “normal smart”-- 3.5 to 4.0W, 1800-2000 SAT-- is not good enough for those schools.”</p>
<p>– Maybe not UCLA or Cal. But those stats are generally good enough for UC Davis, UC Santa Cruz, UC Santa Barbara and UC Irvine. At least they were for 2 of my nieces, who got into all of these campuses with just these kinds of stats. And all of these schools are, in their own ways, world-class. So I wouldn’t say that “normal smart” kids in California can’t get into their flagships. Maybe not the two biggies, but they still have world-class options.</p>
<p>“Bureaucracy, or the lack of it at “elite” schools, is about socializing you for the life you can expect to live after graduation.”</p>
<p>– an insulting and absurd comment. That Deresiewicz article has been derided by elite and non-elite school grads to such an extent he must really rue the day when he sent that puppy out for publication. Honestly, he’s a boob. He can’t talk to a plummer? My, how precious. Most Ivy grads I know have no such issues.</p>
<p>When we toured U of Md last year we loved the campus and the school spirit. But we were totally turned off by what the dean of the college of behavioral and social sciences said. She told the group of 1000+ people at her info session that no one should expect to graduate from that college in 8 semesters. </p>
<p>She explained that (in this recession) they can’t replace retiring profs. State budgets are down and enrollment is up. Sections fill in seconds and underclassmen are lucky to gather the crumbs of what’s left. She went on to say that most degrees from that college require grad school. Grad school acceptance (typically) requires UG research experience. But, no UG at Md should expect a research opportunity. Why? Because they give the vast majority to grad students. </p>
<p>So we left that open house complete bummed by the news, but grateful for her candor. My son did apply, as a back-up plan, and was admitted. </p>
<p>He currently attends Wake Forest and is thriving. He is on an Army ROTC scholarship which pays full tuition, fees and books. Had he attended UMD, the same would be paid. However, Wake R&B costs us less because the private school kicks in a grant for ROTC cadets. UMD couldn’t afford that. </p>
<p>So, in his case, the private U is costing less, has more major courses available, and has UG research opps. Compared to the flagship, it was pretty much a no-brainer.</p>
<p>UMD is my state school too. I wouldn’t call them an amazing school by any means, but they’re certainly good, especially for in-state. They commonly give plenty of money to people in the magnet program that I’m in, and I would be surprised if me and several of my friends didn’t get full rides.</p>
<p>But I’ll never, ever, ever go there, because I’d be able to walk from my dorm to my house.</p>
<p>(That’s not to say there aren’t other reasons I don’t like the school- that’s just the one that always comes to mind first when I think about maybe having to go there.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is a common fallacy that classes at Flagship Universities are “taught by TA’s”. This is absolutely not true. Rather, the TA grad students only help grade homework and exams, or assist in study groups and labs. </p>
<p>I graduated from Pomona College myself, and had heard this fallacy for years, so I was somewhat anxious when my son started at UCLA; after his first day of classes I even called him to see if it was true. It’s not. He is now a TA himself. He graduated with his BS in 4 years, earned his MS in only 9 months, and is now doing research toward his PhD in Engineering. I have absolutely no complaints about UCLA as a state school, my son’s professors have been wonderful, and they have helped him get great internships, on and off campus jobs, as well as a full fellowship and living stipend.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Most might need a subscription. However, my point is that there is not a large difference between universities at some point in terms of library size. Most good schools will make an attempt to maintain a decent library or join a consortium of libraries. Having a librarian for each subject seems a bit excessive to me, since I expect professors and students to have gathered significant experience to tell which journals are the best for their fields.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Field-dependent. In engineering, TAs do not teach. They might lead lab sections, but would not teach. However in the humanities, TAs might lead discussion sections and do the grading. In a way they significantly partake in the teaching component of the class. I dont know the difference between public school vs. private school</p>
<p>Do Harvard, Yale, Stanford etc use TA’s to perform such functions for undergrad classes? I believe they do.</p>
<p>[Students</a> Teach as Course Assistants | The Harvard Crimson](<a href=“http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2007/5/14/students-teach-as-course-assistants-english/]Students”>Students Teach as Course Assistants | News | The Harvard Crimson)</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.yaledailynews.com/news/2009/feb/13/ycc-to-evaluate-teaching-assistants/[/url]”>http://www.yaledailynews.com/news/2009/feb/13/ycc-to-evaluate-teaching-assistants/</a></p>
<p><a href=“midnightatyale.com”>midnightatyale.com;
<p><a href=“http://adminguide.stanford.edu/24_2.pdf[/url]”>http://adminguide.stanford.edu/24_2.pdf</a></p>
<p>
This lady dean is dumb … and also badly misinformed. What she said might be true if she was referring to PAID research positions. Most labs I know would welcome qualified undergraduates to do research for credits as they are free resources for programming, data collection/analysis, etc. Undergrads should have no problem looking for for-credits research opportunities. At Michigan, there are more than 1000 research projects set aside for freshman and sophomore students. Undergraduate research is quite common at most universities I know.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Read through all this and they reconfirmed what is pretty well known. TA facilitate discussions, and grade homework sections in nearly every school. I dont think they actually give out like real lectures, that professors do. The professor gives the main lectures, the TAs handle lab sessions or discussion sessions. This is usually teh case regardless of whether it is public or private.</p>