BF2S Forums Men and women share Dorm Rooms

lowing wrote:

[-DER-]Omega wrote:

lowing wrote:

If curriculums are vastly different, then it is not academics, rather opinion, that is being taught.

Undoubtedly the level of study and expectancies involved in a university such as Harvard are quite simply much higher than in community colleges. I attend one and they require only the bare minimums to "succeed" in. There are many advanced courses that comm. colleges simply do not offer, therefore, your potential for learning is quite limited.

you are adding advanced courses to this.

Masques wrote:

lowing wrote:

[-DER-]Omega wrote:

Undoubtedly the level of study and expectancies involved in a university such as Harvard are quite simply much higher than in community colleges. I attend one and they require only the bare minimums to "succeed" in. There are many advanced courses that comm. colleges simply do not offer, therefore, your potential for learning is quite limited.

you are adding advanced courses to this.

I am comparing apple to apples, math 101 in Harvard, should teach the same thing as math 101 in a CC. Is this not correct?

A degree is more than the "101s". It's probably true that the first two years of any 4 yr degree can be completed at a community college, but beyond that is where the true value of a degree at an Ivy or flagship public/private university is gained. The advanced study in a field is where graduates are made and working under the right faculty or around the latest instruments or with access to more funding, produces a better graduate.

Now I'm not saying that there is much difference between Harvard or a highly regarded public school (U of KS, UMD, U Mich., UVA, etc.), but the dividing line is really at the community college level.

lowing wrote:

Masques wrote:

lowing wrote:

you are adding advanced courses to this.

I am comparing apple to apples, math 101 in Harvard, should teach the same thing as math 101 in a CC. Is this not correct?

A degree is more than the "101s". It's probably true that the first two years of any 4 yr degree can be completed at a community college, but beyond that is where the true value of a degree at an Ivy or flagship public/private university is gained. The advanced study in a field is where graduates are made and working under the right faculty or around the latest instruments or with access to more funding, produces a better graduate.

Now I'm not saying that there is much difference between Harvard or a highly regarded public school (U of KS, UMD, U Mich., UVA, etc.), but the dividing line is really at the community college level.

This I agree with, but to get back to the orginal point, if you want a Harvard degree, then you pay for it. If you are going to insist the tax payer pays your way, then you should get used to a CC.

Masques wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

I don't know much about the US system, but it seems to be very much geared towards Ivy League schools, much as the British system is towards Oxbridge. I've done a degree at a fairly decent university (Sussex) and I've also done some similar courses at a top university (Imperial). The courses and the content of them was dramatically different - which is fairly obvious when you don't have any sort of centralised curiculum. That's why with universities it matters so much, because they set the courses and the content of them themselves as well as the exams and pass marks. Different universities, different standards.

It really depends on your field of study. One of the top schools for social sciences, Michigan, is a public (operated in part or in full by a state government). Michigan also has an excellent law school.

For most jobs outside of the academy a degree from Harvard or Yale will have more of a "wow" factor than a Michigan or Pennsylvania State, but often inside academia the large public universities are more highly regarded than the Ivies. This is mostly due to things like grade inflation or questionable actions regarding the admissions of the progeny of wealthy donors. Public universities are largely free of that kind of taint and thus are thought to provide a more rigorous education.

This isn't always the case. Harvard has possibly the best medical school in the country and plenty of well regarded advanced programs, but at the baccalaureate level in terms of pure academics Ohio State, Albany, or Berkeley probably beat out Harvard.

FatherTed wrote:

sorry uzikins, you should have just gone to one of the old polys, 'parently oxbridge is the same teaching.

DrunkFace wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

DrunkFace wrote:

Community colleges give out degrees now, wtf?

Associate Degrees.

A Diploma?

DrunkFace wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

DrunkFace wrote:

A Diploma?

Yup:  http://www.allnursingschools.com/featur … a-nursing/

Thats what I thought... now back to Lowing.

lowing wrote:

but to get back to the orginal point, if you want a Harvard degree, then you pay for it. If you are going to insist the tax payer pays your way, then you should get used to a CC.

Fixed.
So we're back to, you have to be rich to be able to get the education required to get a 'good' job, because CC don't give the same training or education as a university.

Ilocano wrote:

DrunkFace wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

Yup:  http://www.allnursingschools.com/featur … a-nursing/

Thats what I thought... now back to Lowing.

lowing wrote:

but to get back to the orginal point, if you want a Harvard degree, then you pay for it. If you are going to insist the tax payer pays your way, then you should get used to a CC.

Fixed.
So we're back to, you have to be rich to be able to get the education required to get a 'good' job, because CC don't give the same training or education as a university.

Actually, no.  If you are Harvard material and low income (Household income under $60K), Harvard will cover your entire tuition.

ghettoperson wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

you are adding advanced courses to this.

I am comparing apple to apples, math 101 in Harvard, should teach the same thing as math 101 in a CC. Is this not correct?

No, it isn't.

I don't know much about the US system, but it seems to be very much geared towards Ivy League schools, much as the British system is towards Oxbridge. I've done a degree at a fairly decent university (Sussex) and I've also done some similar courses at a top university (Imperial). The courses and the content of them was dramatically different - which is fairly obvious when you don't have any sort of centralised curiculum. That's why with universities it matters so much, because they set the courses and the content of them themselves as well as the exams and pass marks. Different universities, different standards.

Moreover you're missing the big point here, which is the employment prospects you get from degrees from different universities, which vary massively.

You're really demonstrating your naivety when it comes to these things. I'm gathering from all this that you don't have a degree and have never had any sort of job where what university you went to would be a major issue. Is that the case?

I'd make a comment here about his general naivety, but of late he keeps getting offended and challenges me to a battle of wits.

ghettoperson wrote:

*runs for the woodwork*

I've just decided that debating you is a waste of time, so I'll make snide comments instead.

But in any case, I'm curious about Bertster's assertion that you don't have a degree.

ghettoperson wrote:

You can think that if you want, but I'm more than happy to debate other more constructive posters. I just don't consider you to be one of them.

Anyway, I'm trying to become the liberal version of USMarine.

Last edited by lowing (2009-07-08 16:33:57)

nukchebi0 wrote:

Masques wrote:

but often inside academia the large public universities are more highly regarded than the Ivies.

The large, good public universities (UCB, UCLA, UM, and potentially UNC, and UVA), and only certain Ivies. Harvard, Yale, and Princeton, minimally, are seen as superior to the publics in everything I've seen. If you want to provide something to contrary, I'd welcome it.

questionable actions regarding the admissions of the progeny of wealthy donors.

Its not 1970 anymore. This isn't really a major issue in current admissions cycles. I've heard multiple stories of double legacy applicants being rejected from the top private schools they had legacy at.

Edit: To clarify on the top school FA policies, Harvard covers the entire cost of attending if your income is under 60k (provided you aren't supported by a multimillion dollar trust or bank account). They ensure, still assuming relatively normal assets, that families from 60k - 120k pay less than 10% of their income in direct contribution. From 120k to 180k, the figure is about 10%, and from thereon, it grows. Yale's functions similarly, although it is a bit less generous for those in the 120k - 180k range.