Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Age or Ability Specific Forums College Engineering colleges

I tend to agree with Dude (nice to see you again, BTW).

Another thing about rankings is that the rank depends on the priorities of the rankers. Everyone will have a different idea there.

For example, one person may decide that a small undergraduate college is "better" than a big R01 university. At the former, classes are small and students get attention from professors. At the latter, classes are big and your interactions with your professor might be minimal. But...the professor may be a Nobel laureate. Some may be attracted by that idea and the potential for getting a research experience in a Nobel's lab. Others may think, "Well, I'm only seeing the laureate from row 16 in the lecture hall and...."

Ultimately, what matters the most is the student's motivation. Much knowledge (especially at the undergrad STEM level) is self-taught, anyway. Sure, a tutor or the prof can explain the chain rule for two-variable functions, but IMO, lectures/tutorials are mostly road maps to what must be learned. The student must go back to the dorm, sit down, and go through the material him- or herself.

A highly motivated student will go out of his way to learn in depth, and IMO --- assuming the college meets minimum standards --- the student's location at a high-prestige college becomes less relevant to learning as motivation increases. In some ways, a low-pressure environment may be better for a highly motivated student with a keen instinct for what's important to know and what's not.



*The situation is a bit different in the humanities, where discussions are critical to learning (e.g. different interpretations about a chapter in Middlemarch or different ideas about Stalin's motivations for pursuing the non-aggression pact with the Nazis). But even then, you still have to have done the reading and done a lot of thinking on your own first.