<p>One thing I've noticed from reading the ratemyprofs things on my son's profs is that MOST of the students are appreciative of a prof being really tough. There are always a few whiners, but this suggests to me that there are plenty of students there who want to be challenged because they want to grow.</p>
<p>Re: fit. I still remember when my DS moved from one public elementary school to a different public elementary school for 5th grade, and he came home and sighed happily, "Mom," he said happily, "It's okay to be smart there!" Yes, he got a decent education at the first school, but, oh, he was so much happier and fulfilled and relaxed and challenged when he went to the second. (applies to colleges, too!)</p>
<p>Amen! OOps My reply was too short. Amen, anxiousmom!</p>
<p>Some schools self select students by who they admit and then teach to them. Others admit a more varied group and the coursework/speed of material taught in the course ends up self selecting who continues on. If students can't keep up they either get a tutor or drop the class or change majors. The prof does not slow down or dumb down the class.</p>
<p>^^^This is definitely the case in big public U's. They don't consider the major when admitting. If you want to be premed- fine. Take those prereq's. Can't hack it? They'll find some (easier) major for you to succeed. Meanwhile, some courses of study (architecture, engineering, premed, others), weed out within the first semester/year and are into the same levels as would be achieved at the top private selectives by the time you are a sophomore.</p>
<p>As my chemistry teacher(an engineering major from Rutgers) used to say to me,
"By the end of freshman year there is a flood of engineering majors into the business school. No need for a dam the other way though..."</p>
<p>I still remember my first experience as a TA. The weedout rate for freshman chemistry at a large State U was 60-70%. This was not intentional. The course was taught at a very basic level and the goal was to retain and teach as many students as possible. Most of the kids who were weeded out had no basic algebra skills. They could not solve a simple equation with one variable. We spent a lot of time on this skill but many of the students either did not have the ability or would not expend the effort to master this basic skill. After the weedout we were not left with a stellar group of students and subsequent courses were also taught at a basic, undemanding level. The group left after the weedout was much less capable than the incoming freshmen at a selective State U and not even close to the level at very selective private schools.</p>
<p>edad:</p>
<p>I am unfamiliar with weedout classes. Are such classes mandatory for prospective majors? Or there different levels of mandatory classes?
For example, for prospective physics majors at Harvard, there is Physics 16 for those who scored a 5 on the BC Calc exam, but there is also Physics 15a for those who did not. Both lead to Physics 15b.
Once students get through the weedout class, would you say that they are on the same level as students at more selective schools either public or private?</p>
<p>I would say that courses are not designed to weedout students. There are some courses where it is necessary to have some basic skills and students without those skills will not pass. My example was general chemistry where one basic skill needed is the ability to solve an equation for one unknown. Physics can be much more demanding. There are non-science courses that are little more than show and tell and descriptive. Any serious physics course requires advanced calculus. </p>
<p>No, kids at non-selective schools who make it through the weedout courses are often not equal to those at much more selective schools. Sure there are some very good students at every school but at least selective schools the capabilities of the students are often much lower and classes must be taught to less rigorous standards.</p>
<p>edad:</p>
<p>Please clarify further. In a way, the less selective schools let the weedout classes do some of the work that adcoms at more selective institutions do, i.e. compose a cohort of students with a similar range of abilities. This also accounts in part for the higher drop-out rate in less selective institutions.</p>
<p>For math, the weedout class is multivariable calculus. But there are different versions and flavors of multivariable calculus. At Harvard, students sort themselves out into the more or the less rigorous classes. At the end, though, those students who took the less rigorous version--Math 21-- can still graduate as math majors. Chances are, though, they will not share classes with those who went through the more rigorous version--Math 55. The latter will, however, probably share some classes with students who took the one lower down--Math 25. And both will take graduate level classes beginning in their second or third year. But again, most topics have an undergraduate and a graduate version. </p>
<p>My point, then is: if a highly capable student were to matriculate at a somewhat less selective school, couldn't this student take the more demanding version of the courses and thus be among intellectual peers rather than being surrounded by students who are less prepared and less invested in the subject? At a university, couldn't that student take graduate level classes? Even at a LAC, couldn't that student take independent studies? Or is the peer group so overwhelmingly important?</p>
<p>I have twin sons, one at a selective private and one at a large state U. Their classes in Calc and Enginering have been very close in rigor and content. Yes the state U twin reports a significant drop out already while the son at the private is not seeing the drop out. </p>
<p>The Private school screened the class before they got there and now the Cal and physics classes for engineers are screening the students at the state U to about the same level of student when all is said and done. The State U also requires a 2.7 - 3.0 GPA, depending on major, after the sophomore year to advance to junior status as an engineering major so yet another screening tool is in place.</p>
<p>Based on my sons experience the rigor is close and I do not see the situation that EDAD is talking about. Perhaps engineering courses are different since these programs are accredited by an outside agency and all have to meet certain standards nationwide.</p>
<p>I think it would be difficult to judge the quality of students ahead of time. A case in point . . . my son goes to the University of Delaware and a very good friend of his goes to Duke. They are both freshmen, majoring in mechanical engineering. Both of these young men graduated very high in their class of over 700. My son was #8 and his friend was #1. They are equally committed to hard work and learning. Both of them had intro engineering classes in the fall and were assigned to a small group to work on projects. Believe it or not, they each were dismayed that more of the members of their groups were not as concerned with achieving excellence as they were. I would not have expected that, especially at Duke.</p>
<p>Marite,
We found in the course of DS's search that not all schools offer differentiated levels of the same course (i.e., Math 55, 23, etc.) This became an important criteria for DS's selection process.</p>
<p>When I was in college, MV was the big weeder, for math and CS majors alike. At our local flagship, it's orgo for pre-meds.</p>
<p>deleted, sorry I appear to be experiencing technical problems with this forum.</p>
<p>marite, Our local State U, ranked about 100, offers honors courses. Unfortunately these are specialized humanities courses. The honors students take the same courses as everyone else. My older D goofed off in high school and ended up at community college. She then went to the State U and graduated phi beta kappa. She is of about average ability and did not work very hard. My younger D took 4 courses at the State U and was bored. The demands were minimal compared with her full time selective college. Those two examples match numerous experiences I have had.</p>
<p>Thanks, edad. It must be discouraging for students whose families cannot afford the higher costs of more selective schools.</p>
<p>marite,</p>
<p>IMO the answer to your questions is "yes" . State schools usually are much more generous with granting credit for things like APs or letting students test out of "weedout" courses. It's not unusual for a bright and dedicated student to come in with a sophomore or junior standing and go straight into the "meaty" classes.There are also Honors options of all intro science and math classes at the State Uni where my H teaches and at our State Flagship S attends. S has a friend who is a triple major in math, stats and econ planning to graduate in 4 years. S is comfortably on track with a double.</p>
<p>To add: we felt discouraged when it became clear that State Flagship is the only viable option financially. Not anymore. :) S is very happy, works hard, has plenty of intellectual peers, so the parents are happy too. :)</p>
<p>marite, the costs depend on financial aid, which can be very good at "expensive" schools. Many of us who face the financial pressures live in high cost areas. In my area the cost of living is 1.67x the national average. Taxes are not adjusted for living costs and neither is FAFSA. This makes it very difficult to afford expensive private schools and many families settle for the State U's, which here are not very good.</p>
<p>Perhaps the weedout phenomona is responsible for the lower graduation rates in public universities. They check in but they can't check out? If you think about it, being a public institution funded by the taxpayers, it's only right to accept as many students as possible. Let them test their mettle, and those that don't measure up eventually leave or find a major where they can succeed.</p>
<p>Private schools in general accept students they feel will succeed from the get-go; they basically do in the first round what public U's do in the freshman/sophomore year. They have no moral imperative to educate as many people as they possibly can. Public schools let the chips fall. I have not seen the public U situation edad talks about in pre-med or engineering at my kids' school, although my children claim that high grades would be much easier to obtain if they were at any number of alternative publics. ;) I'm not buying it.</p>
<p>
I don't know the circumstances, but I'm going to guess that your d was in high school and took lower division, introductory courses at the State U.</p>
<p>When I was at a UC I figured out by my 2nd quarter that I was free to enroll in any upper division courses I wanted, so long as I had the prerequisites, and even if not I could get into the course with permission of the instructor. I took hardly any intro-level courses, using my AP credit to pretty much leverage my way out of them.</p>
<p>My son transferred last year to a CSU and, because of different GE requirements, he had to take a bunch of lower division courses for his major. Coming from a more demanding private LAC, he complained to me about the lower level of instruction and minimal reading. Now that he is a senior and is enrolled in all upper-division courses, he is complaining about the expense entailed in having to buy all the books for classes with very heavy reading expectations -- a huge difference. He has also remarked several times that he really likes his CSU teachers, and referred to at least one of them as "brilliant". </p>
<p>I don't think from your post that you have really encountered the situation of what happens when a smart, hard-working student ends up at the public U -- you had one d. who was more of the take-it-easy type and another who really never had the opportunity to plunge in the deep end of the pool. I think that most large public universities have plenty of opportunities for challenge .... but students do have to seek them out.</p>