3 ms·

My issue with the rankings is how they emphasise research. Why would it matter to an undergraduate how highly decorated his prof is? We used to joke that the mo

My issue with the rankings is how they emphasise research. Why would it matter to an undergraduate how highly decorated his prof is? We used to joke that the more titles a guy had, the worse he was at teaching. I think this is true because the guys with the titles have moved on to managing research and finding funding, rather than having daily tasks to do with the research. I went to a very well known university that's known for giving tutorials with just a couple of students, and this always seemed to be the case. Top prof = doesn't have time or motivation to teach. If you look at it, everything you do in undergrad is fairly well known anyway. There's no reason why a course at one uni would be much different from another, the fields have decided long ago what is and isn't important. What might affect your kid is what peers they end up with. If you go to a top uni, people are used to doing well and tend to come from backgrounds that allow them to succeed.

ummonk 6y ago
This depends whether you go to college to be taught or you go to college to network and get involved in research.
noodlesUK 6y ago
One of the problems that universities need to contend with is that they’re simultaneously meant to be research institutions and educational institutions. I think universities tend to do better if they focus on research first and let that lead their (comparatively smaller) teaching responsibilities.
throwawaygh 6y ago
Well, a few things: 1. Research is part of the pedagogy. Getting involved in a research lab as an undergraduate is a great way to land in the top 5-10 percentile. 2. I think what you're saying is roughly correct, but would warn that you can very easily go way too far in the other direction. For example, check out some of the smaller colleges and state branch campuses launching data science departments staffed entirely by non-stats/non-CS faculty who have 0 days of work experience. Mostly because their math courses are under-subscribed and they've gotta do something with those bodies. The quality of these programs is about what you'd expect. So, you don't need top-tier faculty. However, you do need faculty who have at least a relevant terminal degree and/or significant work experience. Otherwise, it's the blind leading the blind. 3. Curriculum does vary radically between universities! C.f., Stanford and a random branch campus of a state school. 4. As you noted, cohorts can also vary even more radically.
- tnecniv 6y ago
  > Research is part of the pedagogy. Getting involved in a research lab as an undergraduate is a great way to land in the top 5-10 percentile. I just want to point out for any newer undergrads that might be reading that research is really one of the best things you can do during your time at school. Even if you don't plan on going into academia, it looks great on a resume and professors are often have industry connections that can get you an internship easily.
  - jeffe 6y ago
    A few caveats to be aware of: more scrutinizing employers will recognize that undergraduate research at the same university you attend is usually a gimme. And at my large state school was often used for cheap labor that grad students didn't want to do.
    - throwawaygh 6y ago
      It’s the project output, the faculty connection, and conference attendance. The line on the resume doesn’t matter.
      - derangedHorse 6y ago
        For the large amount of students who don't go on to get PhDs, why would that matter?
        throwawaygh 6y ago
        A good rec from a strong researcher carries weight. Likely lots of execs, managers, and senior engineers in the ranks of their academic siblings, old grad school friends, collaborators, former students, etc. It’ll add a band or at least max out comp in the existing one if the right person gives the right rec. And that’s assuming the undergrad research project was totally irrelevant to the position. New grads who can contribute to cutting edge stuff are super hard to find and super cheap relatively speaking. Usually your options are super expensive engineers or the few phds who decide to go into engineering instead of research. I’ve seen undergrads sign in the 3s and 4s when their research aligns perfectly with the advertised position, cause the alternative is often buying the kid out of his startup a year later.
7thaccount 6y ago
I went to a public university with a good engineering program. After freshman year I took most of the Edx circuits course from MIT to see what the ivy league education advantage would be. It was pretty much the exact same topics and lectures. I thought the MIT lecturer did a slightly better job and I'm sure all the students were smarter than me, but I feel like I learned the same things for a fraction of the cost.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

ummonk 6y ago

This depends whether you go to college to be taught or you go to college to network and get involved in research.

noodlesUK 6y ago

One of the problems that universities need to contend with is that they’re simultaneously meant to be research institutions and educational institutions. I think universities tend to do better if they focus on research first and let that lead their (comparatively smaller) teaching responsibilities.

throwawaygh 6y ago

Well, a few things: 1. Research is part of the pedagogy. Getting involved in a research lab as an undergraduate is a great way to land in the top 5-10 percentile. 2. I think what you're saying is roughly correct, but would warn that you can very easily go way too far in the other direction. For example, check out some of the smaller colleges and state branch campuses launching data science departments staffed entirely by non-stats/non-CS faculty who have 0 days of work experience. Mostly because their math courses are under-subscribed and they've gotta do something with those bodies. The quality of these programs is about what you'd expect. So, you don't need top-tier faculty. However, you do need faculty who have at least a relevant terminal degree and/or significant work experience. Otherwise, it's the blind leading the blind. 3. Curriculum does vary radically between universities! C.f., Stanford and a random branch campus of a state school. 4. As you noted, cohorts can also vary even more radically.

tnecniv 6y ago
> Research is part of the pedagogy. Getting involved in a research lab as an undergraduate is a great way to land in the top 5-10 percentile. I just want to point out for any newer undergrads that might be reading that research is really one of the best things you can do during your time at school. Even if you don't plan on going into academia, it looks great on a resume and professors are often have industry connections that can get you an internship easily.
- jeffe 6y ago
  A few caveats to be aware of: more scrutinizing employers will recognize that undergraduate research at the same university you attend is usually a gimme. And at my large state school was often used for cheap labor that grad students didn't want to do.
  - throwawaygh 6y ago
    It’s the project output, the faculty connection, and conference attendance. The line on the resume doesn’t matter.
    - derangedHorse 6y ago
      For the large amount of students who don't go on to get PhDs, why would that matter?
      - throwawaygh 6y ago
        A good rec from a strong researcher carries weight. Likely lots of execs, managers, and senior engineers in the ranks of their academic siblings, old grad school friends, collaborators, former students, etc. It’ll add a band or at least max out comp in the existing one if the right person gives the right rec. And that’s assuming the undergrad research project was totally irrelevant to the position. New grads who can contribute to cutting edge stuff are super hard to find and super cheap relatively speaking. Usually your options are super expensive engineers or the few phds who decide to go into engineering instead of research. I’ve seen undergrads sign in the 3s and 4s when their research aligns perfectly with the advertised position, cause the alternative is often buying the kid out of his startup a year later.

7thaccount 6y ago

I went to a public university with a good engineering program. After freshman year I took most of the Edx circuits course from MIT to see what the ivy league education advantage would be. It was pretty much the exact same topics and lectures. I thought the MIT lecturer did a slightly better job and I'm sure all the students were smarter than me, but I feel like I learned the same things for a fraction of the cost.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]