<p>They said it ranked 60…when I hear 60, I think UGA, and many Oxford students from Georgia choose Oxford over going to UGA (and honestly, I wouldn’t turn down UGA unless I really care for having a different or more intense academic environment. Perhaps students who go to Oxford certainly want the Emory name, but also believe that they’ll get higher quality out of Oxford). I know that UVa, Michigan, Berkeley, Austin, and schools like that are particularly excellent (I would say that half of them are certaily better than main campus at Emory and perhaps upwards to 5 other top 20s at the UG level). However, I would stick to my position that the LAC will typically have more concentrated high quality instruction than even the best research universities (what’s interesting is that you allude to the possibility of being in a tightnit department in a very large school. I advocate for that as a substitute. However, I feel as if most won’t land in that sort of situation. That’s all I’m saying. That goes for Emory or other research U’s). I wasn’t limiting the conversation to public research universities, I’m including “top” private schools as well. In many cases, the research universities struggle with having uniform instructional quality. Again, I feel there are many great instructors, but it’s not as concentrated (and often has a different kind of rigor) as many LAC type of environments (because, again, it’s not really prioritized. Often getting truly excellent instruction is either “luck” or reflects departmental values and much lesser so institutional values. Some departments have to go out on their own and buck the trends seen in research universities. I suppose Emory’s environmental science program would be a solid example. There is also effort that our biology department is actually trying to make high quality and standards less “random” and more of a focus. However, I wouldn’t say that most departments are as self-aware or even care to be. I don’t think Emory is exceptional as a research university in this sense). And much literature has been written about how LAC’s typically educate better in the sciences for example than research universities, and I don’t find it surprising. However, one thing I’ll admit is that it seems to me that the very best public institutions that are known for science education are more innovative on the whole than many “top” private institutions.</p>
<p>Also, what you said kind of confirmed what I feared about the definition of “like”. I worry that too many students put too much stock in the personality of instructors as opposed to the quality of their teaching. For example, students may prefer a “chill” or “nice” instructor or an instructor that entertains as opposed to a tougher, more strict instructor (perhaps with tough character) that does indeed convey material extremely well and challenges the students. Also, if that person doesn’t come off as “likeable” upon meeting them, it’s actually possible students can warm up to the person if that person teaches well. I don’t know how you can gauge their teaching ability based upon a meeting. I’d almost rather rely on ratemyprofessor for some rather crude. Often some comments are very reflexive of student values and sometimes it’s not pretty. </p>
<p>I love the timeless classics such as: “You actually have to go to class because much of the exams come from what is said in lecture”. You know, because attendance is not expected or “Class does not make study guides for us which makes it hard” because students can’t use their own judgement and because it’s all about what will go on the exam. “Instructor makes material more difficult than necessary” because the student has a P.hD and thus knows what difficulty level is optimal for learning the material and it just so happens to be a low level of difficulty or demands. “You actually have to do all the practice problems and read the book” because that’s not an expectation either…OMG! Our high expectations for instruction and learning are all over professor rating sites haha. Even such comments suggest that we like easygoing, more endearing, and often less demanding instructors. Like often tough graders and those who use Socratic method may be considered “mean”. We often project certain personality characteristics onto the way a course is run. It’s often less about quality. I suppose the best way to gauge instructional quality is to simply sit in the courses when a student visits as opposed to meeting them outside of that context. </p>