DocT

"What I have heard about the whole TF thing at harvard is that they are relied on quite heavily and that the only reason why harvard can make that claim is because a professor always is officially teaching the class regardless of the amount of work s/he puts in. I only know this from kids in freshman/sophomore years and not from any upperclassmen."

Yes in lots of courses - math and science for example, there are large lectures that the professor teaches and then they are broken into groups being taught by TF's. What is extremely irksome about this, is that the TF's grade the exams and papers, without the professor having a clue as to what's going on. There have been several classes, that my D had questions about the final exam, the professor didn't have a clue and the TF who graded it, had gone back to China permanently. Also undergraduate TA's are heavily involved in tutoring sessions that are held during the week and probably involved in some grading. My D is a TA for organic chemistry.

DocT

"I have to disagree with GADad ... I have found the advising to be very disappointing."

Twinmom: your daughter needs to complain about this and get other advisors. My D had similar issues sophomore year.

Synth

ecneics, hope this provides a flavor of the freshman situation.

Rule of thumb #1: Avoid courses as a freshman that have freshman students as a
minority % of the class compared to especially sophomores

Supplement rule #1 : Identify the few courses that get excluded under rule #1 that
grade/provide feedback based on your contributions rather than relative grading
(examples are lab-only courses like SCRB 65); track down their TFs and chat with
them to see if you want to enroll in Spring freshman year and to get an idea as
to what you will actually learn

Rule of thumb #2: Find the level of course you are comfortable at and then drop
down one level in your freshman year (Fall semester-definitely) (the people who tell
you to challenge yourself in freshman year have typically not attended Harvard)

Rule of thumb #3: Identify your top likely concentration and your most peripheral
one (though you might still fall in love with it), add something else in the middle; now
for these 3 concentrations study the ugrad handbook and come up with 4 year plans;
identify which common courses during freshman year provide you the most flexibility to
change concentrations in sophomore year; use the above rules of thumb and come
up with a common bucket of courses you can check out in freshman year

The single most important mistake that those who stumble (or fall)
encounter specificially in Science has to do with trusting the Q guide
or advisors who have not attended Harvard as an undergraduate.

Harvard is synonymous with understatement and it takes a while to
appreciate this. If you are a Science inclined student just admitted to
Harvard, chances are that you have a perfect GPA, a significant number
of national (or international) recognitions and a well rounded resume
(athletics and/or performing arts). You are used to taking
the toughest courses and acing them. Its just hard work and gritting it
out right?

uh uh ...

What you could easily forget is that your peer group within a Science
course is no longer made up of freshman students. Additionally the few
freshmen who took the 'wrong' courses with you will include the
two jokers who spent their last two years preparing for this course in terms of their
research areas and comfortably fall above the median student population. The first
midterm will make the big difference so contrary to what your advisers will tell
you dropping the course and running for cover after this to an Anthropology course is the
best recourse if you want to have a decent GPA when you graduate.

... and ESL1, if one is 'asking' about Math55 chances are very high he/she should
not be taking it. Math advising is so well done at Harvard that you will quickly
come to that conclusion once you are here. Unfortunatley the
suitability of MCB 52/54, Chem 17/20 or LS1A/B are not discussed
as thoroughly at the freshman stage (they are in the upperclassman houses).

DocT, what is even more irksome is that the same paper graded by a different TF
would have garnered a different grade. This is particularly true in LS1A that has a
huge number of sections (550-600 students?). In fall of our freshman year we are
not yet Harvard savvy enough to protest.

natalia6228

"The single most important mistake that those who stumble (or fall)
encounter specificially in Science has to do with trusting the Q guide"

Synth, what's wrong with the Q Guide? What shouldn't you trust?

ESL1

I don't believe that I will take math 55 even if I get in and go, but I was mostly asking do people who are not allstars get enough attention to go on to the top PhD programs (which I would define subjectively as Harvard, MIT, Princeton, Berkeley, Stanford, and Chicago). If that is my goal, would it be better to go to a place where students are coming in knowing less to get more attention from top professors?

DocT

"DocT, what is even more irksome is that the same paper graded by a different TF
would have garnered a different grade. This is particularly true in LS1A that has a
huge number of sections (550-600 students?). In fall of our freshman year we are
not yet Harvard savvy enough to protest. "

Yeah my kid is premed and took that course. Also there were several times, she complained to professors about TF's whose English was pathetic and transferred to other TFs.

ecneics

Wow, it sounds grim for science concentrators!

Synth, why do you say to avoid course especially with sophomores?

And is it common I wonder for students to switch TAs?

Shalashaska64

Synth is overhyping the quality of the science concentrators at Harvard. The national/international award winners from high school are NOT the group of students who necessarily destroy the competition (in fact that is the exception rather than the norm). Said "jokers" usually are smart enough to do everyone a favor and take the appropriate grad class for their level, where issues such as "curves" don't exist. But even still...most intro classes give a B- or better to the top 80% of the class. 80%! And even in the "brutal" science classes (try cross-registering at an MIT science class and see how long that lasts), the median is curved to a B+.

twinmom

Regarding TFs ... Yes, the professors teach the courses. Here's one example ... Greg Mankiw teaches Ec 10 and lectures at about 5 of the classes. The rest is taught in section by TFs.

White_Rabbit

Mankiw is a joke of a professor and everyone knows it. I doubt many kids go into that class thinking it will be a meaningful experience or that they'll learn anything from Mankiw. People take it because it is the pre-req for all other upper-level econ courses. There are a fair number of courses with huge numbers of kids and one Professor, but ec 10 isn't a helpful example. It's just a bad course all around. Justice would be an interesting example of a HUGE course with only one Professor (Sandel), but that also receives general praise from students. I think the key is finding small courses to take if that is your thing. Or if you're in science, get involved in research.

smoda61

White_Rabbit - Is there a site that reviews the classes/professors? At Tufts, my memory is that there had been two (admittedly not well maintained). One that was sanctioned the administration and one that was not (and no I do not remember their links at this time).

DocT

"Mankiw is a joke of a professor and everyone knows it. I doubt many kids go into that class thinking it will be a meaningful experience or that they'll learn anything from Mankiw."

Interesting point. My D at one point thought of perhaps looking into economics as a concentration. She took his EC 10 course and hated it with a passion. She claims he basically read out of his book while the Econ concentrators sat in the front row fawning over him. Also as was pointed out he only "taught" 5 classes. That course cemented neurobiology as her concentration.

twinmom

Same here. Turned my kid off to economics too.

Synth

ecneics, it is relatively grim only during the first year. Upperclassmen get quality
support (more importantly they know when and where they can get the
best help). Also once you get to the level of courses where your personal
contribution is valued more than the relative positioning you will be able to focus
and get to a level of depth that is probably available only at very small schools
like Caltech or Princeton.These courses are usually lab-only/hands-on courses
(scrb 165, ls 100r, cs 171, stat 115, BP 101 etc. or the grad level courses that
are usually focused on reading current papers and then doing a final report
versus a final exam).

Sophomores in particular have a point to make when they are taking introductory
courses (since they are about to state their concentration or just have done so).
A few freshman also fall in this category. Remember when your grades are evaluated
for grad school there is going to be very little sympathy about your taking a course
in freshman year when you should have waited.

The good news about taking foundational courses at Harvard (i.e dropping down a level
from where you are comfortable) is that you can build superbly on this.

Smoda, the Q guide is supposed to provide a feel for the professor. Take a look at
Sa 10 (Principles of Ec) >
Reads like an astrological prediction wouldn't you say? Depending on your leaning one
could arrive at quite different conclusions.

White-rabbit makes a great point with the MR22 Justice course though one could get
better access as a science concentrator by taking the gov 1093 course with Sandel and
Melton.

just_forget_me

Mankiw is a strange character. He actually does love interacting with students, yet he makes himself one of the least accessible professors on campus.

His Ec10 lectures are definitely jokes. If you're interested in interacting with him, read his blog, and send him some comments/criticism/ideas via email. He's good at responding, and would probably meet up for a dinner/lunch once he "knows" you.