s/o Money Saved for College: Are CC classes Inferior?

[luvnlattes]

I saw a comment on the "Money Saved for College" thread where the poster mentioned that community college classes are not the same caliber as university classes. Do others have experience with this?

 

Our current plan is that our kids would go to the local CC which is the same one that I went to back in the day, but that was over 20 years ago. I only went for a year and then went to work full time. I did more CC classes part time to get my AA degree, took a couple of years off, then went back to school for my BA. The BA I received was from a 4 year university that's about a 3 hours drive from here. I took the remote classes they offered through the CC. (I'm hoping this makes sense.) When I began taking the upper level courses, I did feel prepared by my CC classes.

 

The bottom line is I have no experience with what classes are like at a 4 year college on campus. My education jumped around a lot. A few classes here, break, a few more there, etc. so I don't have the typical college experience. But I had never considered that the education I received at the CC wasn't on par with a 4 year university.

 

I mentioned on the other thread that we intend to have each of our boys complete 2 years at the CC and then transfer to one of the 4 year state universities. Anyone have any thoughts or experiences with this?

[delaney]

From what I understand the Profs at CC are more invested in their classes because they aren't full-time employees sitting on their laurels. They are REAL people in the real world who actually do what they teach. Our plan is to do the same thing. I don't get spending that much money for the first 2 years of basic junk skills. I like that Princeton impresses on applicants that they have until the end of the second year to declare a major! REALLY? Well for what they charge I guess they want them to take their sweet time and go on the 5 year plan. The state school here are so hard to get into as a freshman but so much easier to transfer into. In all honesty there isn't a dang thing I learned undergrad or grad from a very good NY state school that did anything to make me a better teacher. The same goes for business. My DH needs people who have experience and training specific to what he does. You could come from the school of advanced gumdrops but if you can do what he needs well he will pay you upwards of $90k to start!

[creekland]

I strongly suggest reading this fairly recent thread for many of the pros and cons:

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=219694

 

In our situation, cc courses are not good for college, but are fine for honors high school courses. That said, my oldest did transfer 3 credits of English since that's not his major. I would never allow him to transfer credits in his major. Middle son will likely transfer his public speaking credits (IF his 4 year takes them), but definitely not any science classes since he wants med school afterward.

[Photo Ninja]

There is no blanket answer to your question. In our experience, in general, the answer would be no, cc is not inferior to a 4 year university.

 

I have dc who completed 2 years at the cc then transferred (or will transfer this fall) to a university. Their courses have varied in quality depending on the course and instructor. I think there may be more students at the cc who don't care about their education. They are paying far less than a 4 year university costs and it seems like many are there because they don't know what else to do. This does affect the tone of the classroom and class discussions. However, classes are far smaller than equivalent class sizes at universities. The instructors like having interested students and are very available to them. We are comparing a cc class of 40 to a university class of 400. That is a huge difference.

 

My dc who are at 4 year universities say that their courses there, in general, are no more difficult and don't contain more depth than the cc classes did. (Comparing lower division classes only.) This is for state university and private university. I don't know that all community colleges are like this, though, because my dc have friends who have had different experiences with different community colleges.

 

My dc who took courses at a cc then transferred to a university say they were well prepared for upper level course content. The courses at the cc prepared them.

 

So in general, I think completing 2 years at a cc then transferring to a university, either state or private, is a good option. The academic quality is equivalent (our experience, anyway), class size is much smaller, teachers are more available to students, and the cost savings is significant.

 

However, it is not always the best choice. It depends on the major and how the university schedules courses. For some majors, the student will be better off spending all 4 (or 5 or 6, whatever) years at the university. I have one ds who is in this position. He transferred about 15 credits to a private university from courses he took at the cc while in high school, which does help cut costs, but he will be there for 3.5 or 4 years. He would be at a disadvantage in his major if he completed 2 years at the cc because there are many courses in his major that are pre-requisites for other courses, and there are other requirements that can not be met at a cc. It would be very difficult to take all those courses in 2 years. If he needs to be there for at least 3 years after spending 2 years at a cc, then it is not worth going to the cc. Not all majors are like this and not all universities are like this, but it should be a consideration.

 

Courses in some majors are best spread out over the entire 4 years of school instead of trying to complete them all in 2 years. That is one thing one dc is dealing with. Courses in her major are difficult, and that is all she has left to take because she completed all her general ed at a cc. It probably would have been easier for her to have started taking some of the major courses during her freshman and sophomore years and taken some general ed courses mixed with the upper division courses in order to have one or two easier courses mixed amongst the more difficult ones. I hope that makes sense. But you have to weigh that against the money saved by finishing two years at the cc. She is willing to have 2 difficult years because of all the money she saved. But again, that is not going to be the right choice for everyone, and it should be a consideration.

 

So yes, your plan can work very well. Or it might not be the best option. It depends on the majors your dc choose and the best school for them to attend to achieve their goals. Some people will probably also bring up freshman scholarships vs saving money at a cc. In my experience, the cc often saves more money that the freshman scholarship will provide, but that won't always be the case. Some universities give excellent transfer scholarships based on GPA at a cc. My dd is in the running for a 2 year, full tuition transfer scholarship. So going to a cc doesn't mean there is no merit scholarship money available.

 

You probably won't know which option is best until it is time to make the choice.

[regentrude]

I have no personal experience with CC classes, but I often hear my physics students tell me how much harder the math and physics classes are at our 4 year state University than their friends' who attend CCs, or their own previous CC classes. Students who transfer from CCs often struggle to adjust to the higher expectations; several have admitted that their GPA has taken a serious hit after transferring and that CC was easy compared to our school.

There are however, exceptions; some of the CC students have received a very good preparation.

I assume the answer will vary by CC and by subject.

[Mejane]

Agree with others who said much depends on the college, the instructor, and the student body (dumbing down goes on in both cc and uni.) My personal experience, having attended both, was that I had excellent, challenging classes and terrible, mind-numbing classes at both. I found the instructor to be the determining factor in most cases. Some of my best profs were at cc.

[Barb_]

ratemyprofessors.com is the best insurance at both.

[Nestof3]

It depends on the teacher and student from my experience.

 

Honestly, with so many classes out of major and only required to check boxes off in the first two years, I don't really care as long as the student is prepared for university. Aaron made dean's list at CC and is still making A's and B's at university. He seems perfectly prepared.

[Crimson Wife]

Some CC's have guaranteed-transfer agreements such that if the student passes particular classes at the CC, the 4 yr university will guarantee those credits will transfer. At our local CC, the courses are marked UC/CSU.

 

A friend of mine from high school did that with one of the CC nursing programs in order to save money.

[Jane in NC]

Agreeing with others who commented that so much depends on your CC and the individual goals of your student.

 

One comment that I would like to make concerns CC transfers into engineering programs. At engineering schools, there is a Calculus sequence that is geared toward that major. When I was an instructor in one such program, we covered some material from later math courses in Calc II. This was done at the request of the physics department since many of the students in Calc II were also enrolled in Physics I. Students who transferred from CCs had a gap in their knowledge base.

 

It can be challenging for an engineering student to complete his degree in four years, particularly if he opts for a co-op experience. I don't think that I have met a CC transfer who completed his engineering degree in a total of four years. Leaving two years to complete a list of courses with prerequisites (and sometimes limited offerings) is next to impossible.

 

The CC savings are diminished for these students. I suspect that this might be true for other majors where coursework is sequential.

 

But let's back up to the original question: Is the CC version of Calc II not of the same caliber as the engineering one? Maybe, maybe not. Depends on the instructor and the student's goals.

 

After thought: many CCs have courses that are more applied than theoretical. This can be good--again depending on the student's goals. Computer Science majors may find the computer courses at their CC (which are geared toward a technical degree) to be completely unhelpful. Students need to pick and choose carefully.

[2cents]

It all depends on the school. In my own experience, at a 4 year I found some of the professors were just going through the motions and were downright unprepared etc. and some were quite inspiring and it appeared they enjoyed their job. My son has has the same with his CC. The instructors are just people. Some are good at their job and some and better.

 

I strongly believe that with the cost of tuition and books that people should expect competent instruction whether it is a 4 year of CC and if a professor is not living up to that expectation the school needs to be informed so they can correct the issue. IMO there should be no excuse for subpar instruction at any college. :001_smile:

[Nestof3]

Some CC's have guaranteed-transfer agreements such that if the student passes particular classes at the CC, the 4 yr university will guarantee those credits will transfer. At our local CC, the courses are marked UC/CSU.

 

A friend of mine from high school did that with one of the CC nursing programs in order to save money.

 

Virginia has this system.

[luvnlattes]

Thanks for all of your replies and the link to the other thread. This has given me a lot to think about and discuss with dh. We were so relieved when we thought we had a great plan....have each boy start at CC and then save enough for 2 years at university. Apparently it's not as straight-forward as that.

 

I have no idea what my kids will want to major in. Oldest has mentioned architecture a few times and I know the colleges here that offer those programs. I'll need to go back and check the sequence of required courses at those schools. I'm glad to be learning some of this now instead of when he's 17!

[FaithManor]

All Cc's are not created equal. Some are wonderful, some are okay, and some are less than mediocre. You have to do your research.

 

The two CC's close to us are so poor that not one single four year college in this state will accept more than nine credits from them and then, no matter what the class, only as electives and not as gen-ed requirements. So, if you take college writing at them, you will take it again at uni. If you take college algebra, you'll get credit for a "math elective" and then have to take the class again. Part of this is because they have a reputation for being A.A. mills...the administration puts huge pressure on the professors to not fail anyone, etc. You can skip 50% of the classes and only turn in 50% of the homework and be given a "c". So, it's really bad.

 

However, if you live near a really good one whose credits are accepted at a wide range of four year colleges, then great. Parents just really need to do a lot of research first.

 

Faith

[TravelingChris]

First of all, there are colleges and universities and then there are great colleges and universities. If you live in one of the states with a well regarded great college and that college accepts your CC's credits, great (with the proviso that if it is a certain major, there may still be problems). My undergraduate was from a top ten school as was my husbands. Just about all my history, English, poly sci, econ, etc. classes were small and discussion based or at least plenty of question and answer time. My community college class I attended was also discussion based but the discussion was lower in intellectual content. My dd took an honors psych class in CC and it was discussion based but again I am not thinking it was as enriching as a class in one of the better institutions.

It is sort of the same as homeschooling- you can use textbooks only and ise onlytests or you can use living books, discussions, and assign papers. The level of learning is not the same although textbooks may be completely appropriate in many subjects but for my exampl use history or literature.

[bettyandbob]

even if your state doesn't have guaranteed transfer and you can look at the particular cc and find out if they have a connection with any university. Before Virginia had guaranteed transfer, Va Tech had a relationship with Northern Virginia Community College. NVCC had a specific math track set up 30 years ago for engineering students that was accepted by VT. These two schools are a 4.5 hour drive apart, I have no idea how they originally forged the relationship that helped some students move from one to the other. Now, it's standard among cc's across the state.

[Reya]

Depends on the university, the CC, and the instructors. I had math profs (300 level, small classes, at Purdue) who could have been replaced my statues and a recording of the textbook, for all the real teaching they did.

 

The peer group will be, on average, less able at the CC. Maturity levels will vary.

Edited March 8, 2011 by Reya

[Reya]

I will say, though, that without exception, the online and distance courses I've been privy to are easier than the same courses at the actual university OR CC.

 

The freshman courses at the cc/university will be the most similar. By the sophomore level, greater differences will emerge in what is covered int he syllabus, at least in technical majors. There are no true honors-level equivalents at CCs.

Edited March 8, 2011 by Reya

[asta]

Depends on the university, the CC, and the instructors. I had math profs (300 level, small classes, at Purdue) who could have been replaced my statues and a recording of the textbook, for all the real teaching they did.

 

The peer group will be, on average, less able at the CC. Maturity levels will vary.

 

Having just spent time at my alma mater (where one niece is attending), and also having been deeply involved with another niece's experiences at the largest state U in my home state (with a highly renown business school - which she attends)...

 

I simply can't agree with the above statement.

 

The "peer group" of niece one was quite honestly frightening. Kid did the whole "go to classes for a day" thing with her and was mortified by the level of interest in the coursework (honors program!) and the ability level. This is not a "bad" school. This is an all-purpose "good liberal arts" school. The kids apparently couldn't care less, were texting, talking, and surfing the internet in class. They were completely uninterested in what was going on. These were classes for their major. This does not strike me as "more able".

 

For the other niece, the "big name" business school has been an unmitigated disaster. Classes of 500 kids. Classes that are "taught" 1/2 or more online (eg: not taught - data is simply shoved). No option (for some courses) to take a "brick and mortar" class in one's major, as some required courses are only offered online - yet online doesn't involve a teacher, it only involves a computer.

 

First niece is in la-la land. She is thrilled to be away from her parents, is caught up in the wonderment of sleeping in, going where she wants to, when she wants to, and generally running with the bulls. It fits her perfectly. Education? What?

 

Second niece is dumping big name business school at the end of the term and going to the local community college. They are highly organized, have a great reputation, small classes, good teachers, and transfer agreements.

 

I realize that every situation is different, but all of those horrific New York Times articles? They're on to something.

 

 

asta

Edited March 8, 2011 by asta

[creekland]

Asta, your post is a good reminder that people should check out all colleges, not just those with a 2 year label. I've heard similar stories about state schools, esp those with large classes. It makes me worry that our safeties for middle son are state schools.

 

We're definitely going to be certain middle son sits in on classes when he visits. Oldest has classes of about 30 and said he's never even remotely experienced these sorts of things. I think higher rated schools with smaller classes are likely to be better, but even then, it might depend on the school.

[Reesegirl]

All 3 of my dds took college credit classes while in high school. Our highschool offered the basic english comp, US history, college Algebra and ecology for college credit, the program is called College now. My girls took all of these classes except for ecology since they were planning on going into science majors and wouldn't apply to their interests (bio chem, nursing and my youngest pre physical therapy). All of these classes tranfered and were accepted as credit at their lac's. And if they had gone to the in state schools they would have transfered too. However, I talked to my dentist one time and he told me that his boys credits from those college classes were not accepted at the CA university that his boys went to....so who knows. Sometimes they transfer and sometimes not. By second semester of my dds freshmen year they were all sophomores. They didn't graduate early but it certainly freed up other classes for them to take and actually helped my oldest dd to pick up a second major.

[msk]

From what I understand the Profs at CC are more invested in their classes because they aren't full-time employees sitting on their laurels. They are REAL people in the real world who actually do what they teach. Our plan is to do the same thing. I don't get spending that much money for the first 2 years of basic junk skills.

 

Ouch, way to slam an entire profession... I take it you had a bad college experience, and I'm sorry. But if you knew any professors in real life, you'd realize that many of them are incredibly hard-working and dedicated. Anyone who spends two years(!) learning nothing but "junk" is either in the *wrong* college, or getting out what they put in.

 

A lot of universities *and* CCs have a small staff of full time professors, plus a rotating gang of adjuncts or lecturers who teach classes but aren't full time employees. At CCs, the full-time profs focus almost exclusively on teaching; comparatively little research or writing is supported by the institution in terms of work hours, pay, or facilities. At a university, profs are supposed to do both teaching and research. Being taught by someone who specializes in teaching can be very beneficial for people whose study skills are poor, or who have other challenges to overcome. And, as others have mentioned, CC classes are often smaller than university intro-level courses, which benefits many students. On the other hand, learning from a teacher who is also very active in research means you're learning from someone who's *creating* the knowledge in the books, and someone who's deeply passionate about their subject and on the cutting edge of new developments. Getting involved in long-term research projects is a very exciting way to get hands-on experience in a field, and those opportunities are easier to come by in an institution that supports research. So, there are advantages to both, depending on the student. A student's major is important here too, and whether they're interested in a field that involves creating new knowledge or more interested in acquiring a specific technical skill set.

 

While I'm attempting to dispel misconceptions: PLEASE don't think the only hours these people are working are the hours they spend standing in front of a classroom. A good course takes lots of time to prepare and LOTS of time to grade. And doing research (and applying for research money, much of which often goes to support the students who work on that research with you!) takes enormous time and dedication too. As for sitting on laurels, the university where I work does an extensive faculty evaluation process EVERY year, and the consequences of failing to perform well are real in terms of both promotion and pay; the better local community colleges have a similar system. Every place has a few bad apples, but at any *good* college or university these people will be a tiny minority.

 

Stepping off my soapbox now...

[AngieW in Texas]

It depends on the cc and it depends on the individual teachers.

 

Where I live, students can take up to two classes for free each semester once they've finished 10th grade. That's a price that can't be beat. So my kids take one class each summer (because two is pushing it a bit for the summer) and take two classes each spring and fall.

 

My cc district also allows to students to request an overload (permission to take more than just 2 classes/semester) once they've finished 12 credit hours and have a gpa of at least 3.5 and meet test score minimums.

 

My oldest took 4 classes last semester and is taking 4 classes again this semester. I had to pay for the 2 extra classes each semester. She will graduate high school with 50 credit hours that will all transfer to the state school she is attending in the fall.

 

When I taught at a cc (20 years ago), the department head wrote all the tests, so all the teachers for that subject had to cover the same material. I know I had some students during the summer who were unhappy that my physics class wasn't dumbed down like they thought it would be.

[creekland]

 

A lot of universities *and* CCs have a small staff of full time professors, plus a rotating gang of adjuncts or lecturers who teach classes but aren't full time employees. At CCs, the full-time profs focus almost exclusively on teaching; comparatively little research or writing is supported by the institution in terms of work hours, pay, or facilities. At a university, profs are supposed to do both teaching and research. Being taught by someone who specializes in teaching can be very beneficial for people whose study skills are poor, or who have other challenges to overcome. And, as others have mentioned, CC classes are often smaller than university intro-level courses, which benefits many students. On the other hand, learning from a teacher who is also very active in research means you're learning from someone who's *creating* the knowledge in the books, and someone who's deeply passionate about their subject and on the cutting edge of new developments. Getting involved in long-term research projects is a very exciting way to get hands-on experience in a field, and those opportunities are easier to come by in an institution that supports research. So, there are advantages to both, depending on the student. A student's major is important here too, and whether they're interested in a field that involves creating new knowledge or more interested in acquiring a specific technical skill set.

 

 

 

:iagree: This is a very good summary of the differences. Thanks for writing it! Many people want "do" the work and essentially just need to learn the info that it already out there. Others want to be on the cutting edge figuring the new "stuff" out and need to be in a more appropriate setting. There's plenty of room for both on this planet and both are needed!

[luvnlattes]

A student's major is important here too, and whether they're interested in a field that involves creating new knowledge or more interested in acquiring a specific technical skill set.

 

 

So my guess is that if my oldest continues with his current interest and decides to major in architecture, that would be more of a technical skill set?

 

I'm trying to figure out if research is undertaken in architecture. I'm thinking there would be new design techniques, "green" influences, etc. but is that considered research?

[vonfirmath]

So my guess is that if my oldest continues with his current interest and decides to major in architecture, that would be more of a technical skill set?

 

I'm trying to figure out if research is undertaken in architecture. I'm thinking there would be new design techniques, "green" influences, etc. but is that considered research?

 

My guess, just from being in a company with an Architecture arm is YES. It is very important to design to new LEED standards, and a lot of innovative stuff being done! Both for "prettiness" sake and to meet these standards.

[creekland]

So my guess is that if my oldest continues with his current interest and decides to major in architecture, that would be more of a technical skill set?

 

I'm trying to figure out if research is undertaken in architecture. I'm thinking there would be new design techniques, "green" influences, etc. but is that considered research?

 

The best schools I know of for architecture tend to be the larger schools, and yes, they are into research as well as doing. Some of these are 5 year programs. These programs can be very difficult to get admitted to, so a rigorous high school prep would be recommended with some autocad experience a plus if you can get it. Don't look at minimums a college wants if you are trying for a competitive major. Minimum requirements won't cut it. If you know a school you'd be interested in, write a prof or the dean of the school (architecture part) and ask what the typical ACCEPTED student has on their high school transcript. Then plan high school accordingly.

 

For college, I seriously doubt you can do the first two years at a cc then transfer into architecture. Their courses are sequential and some start freshman year from what I've heard. (Hearsay though.) Check with a college for more definite info.

[msk]

So my guess is that if my oldest continues with his current interest and decides to major in architecture, that would be more of a technical skill set?

 

I'm trying to figure out if research is undertaken in architecture. I'm thinking there would be new design techniques, "green" influences, etc. but is that considered research?

 

I don't know any architects, but I suspect there are "regular" architects and ones who specialize in more unusual things. Ideally, ask someone who knows the reputations of the colleges in your state, and maybe email/talk to the undergrad advisor for the appropriate departments/sections in those colleges. If the first 2 years of a university's architecture program are exclusively large lecture courses that are also taught as small sections at a well-regarded CC (and are easy to transfer), that might be the best option. Good CC professors do keep up with the latest knowledge in their field, but the CCs tend to limit their class offerings to the more basic courses (because those are the ones that transfer).

 

If your son wants to head in a specialized direction right away, or if he will likely be one of those "standout" students who does unusually well, makes sure the professors know him in his first year even in a big class, and seeks out opportunities to work with them on projects, he might have more of those opportunities at a university. Some students are standouts as university freshmen, others become standouts during/after attending community college.

[Granny_Weatherwax]

From what I understand the Profs at CC are more invested in their classes because they aren't full-time employees sitting on their laurels. They are REAL people in the real world who actually do what they teach!

 

I can't help but chuckle at this. Okay, I admit to laughing out loud because that is the funniest thing I have read all day.

 

I am an adjunct at the local cc. Most of the full timers are hardworking instructors who do their best. I know many adjuncts, however, who do the minimum required to get by. We are paid by the credit hour and our salary is fixed. The more students you have the more work is required and the less you make per hour. For example - if you teach a 3 credit course for $200 per credit you make $600 for the course. If you work 5 hours a week for that course and the course is 16 weeks that equals 80 hours and you make $7.50 per hour (before taxes). If you have a full class and have to put in 10 hours a week (class time, office hours, grading, prepping) that takes the pay down to $3.75 an hour. I know adjuncts who will never assign papers or homework because grading takes too much time. Tests are all scantron because it takes less time to run them through the machine than it does to hand grade an essay exam. Lectures and tests are the same from term to term so the prep work is less time consuming.

 

I have been in on conversations where adjuncts will say things like "I'm only in it for the down payment on my [next] car."

 

One adjunct I know is a high school science teacher. He uses the same materials - worksheets, quizzes, etc - he uses for his high school students. Any student who had him in high school is going to fly through his CC biology course because it is the same work.

 

I have lots of other stories to share but I won't.

 

I do want to add that I am invested in my classes because I want my students to come back after they have transferred to a four year school and tell me "Thank you for preparing me for college level work." I want to hear their success stories. I do not want to hear about the shock they received because they were ill prepared.

 

I also want to add that there is little incentive for adjunct CC instructors to continue their education. Very few of my colleagues attend conferences and work on continuing ed credits.

Edited March 10, 2011 by The Dragon Academy

[regentrude]

A lot of universities *and* CCs have a small staff of full time professors, plus a rotating gang of adjuncts or lecturers who teach classes but aren't full time employees. At CCs, the full-time profs focus almost exclusively on teaching; comparatively little research or writing is supported by the institution in terms of work hours, pay, or facilities. At a university, profs are supposed to do both teaching and research. Being taught by someone who specializes in teaching can be very beneficial for people whose study skills are poor, or who have other challenges to overcome. And, as others have mentioned, CC classes are often smaller than university intro-level courses, which benefits many students. On the other hand, learning from a teacher who is also very active in research means you're learning from someone who's *creating* the knowledge in the books, and someone who's deeply passionate about their subject and on the cutting edge of new developments. Getting involved in long-term research projects is a very exciting way to get hands-on experience in a field, and those opportunities are easier to come by in an institution that supports research. So, there are advantages to both, depending on the student. A student's major is important here too, and whether they're interested in a field that involves creating new knowledge or more interested in acquiring a specific technical skill set.

 

While I'm attempting to dispel misconceptions: PLEASE don't think the only hours these people are working are the hours they spend standing in front of a classroom. A good course takes lots of time to prepare and LOTS of time to grade. And doing research (and applying for research money, much of which often goes to support the students who work on that research with you!) takes enormous time and dedication too. As for sitting on laurels, the university where I work does an extensive faculty evaluation process EVERY year, and the consequences of failing to perform well are real in terms of both promotion and pay; the better local community colleges have a similar system. Every place has a few bad apples, but at any *good* college or university these people will be a tiny minority.

 

Stepping off my soapbox now...

 

Thanks for writing this.

[regentrude]

From what I understand the Profs at CC are more invested in their classes because they aren't full-time employees sitting on their laurels. They are REAL people in the real world who actually do what they teach.

 

???

If you want to be taught science by somebody who actually does science, you need to be taught by a professor at a four year research university with a graduate program - that's where scientific research is done. If you want to be taught by somebody who actually does math, the same - because just teaching math is not the same as actually doing math.

[TravelingChris]

My guess was that Delaney was talking about adjuct professors who teach things like criminal justice, nursing, education. These are usually professionals in their fields who are just teaching one class as an extra. I would wager that most adjunct math professor are not actual mathematicians. On the other hand, I did know adjunct physics professors at CC who were working scientists in the field. They were teaching physics to test out a new potential career.

[Ohdanigirl]

A others have said, it really depends on the school. I went to a cc in San Diego. It was considered to be a good cc, and many professors and students told me that the classes were actually harder than the ones offered at state. This was about 10 years ago. I transfered to another school and found that I did have to work much harder, but they were upper level classes. The big difference noticed was in the tests. Scantrons were no where to be seen. All tests were essay.

 

Just look into these things. CC can actually be a great option.

 

HTH

 

Danielle

[Nestof3]

And like I said, if you're a history major who is only taking the math and science b/c someone decided they were necessary for a history major, who cares? So much of college is a joke and a waste of time and money, in my opinion.

 

My guess was that Delaney was talking about adjuct professors who teach things like criminal justice, nursing, education. These are usually professionals in their fields who are just teaching one class as an extra. I would wager that most adjunct math professor are not actual mathematicians. On the other hand, I did know adjunct physics professors at CC who were working scientists in the field. They were teaching physics to test out a new potential career.

[Gwen in VA]

If you want to be taught science by somebody who actually does science, you need to be taught by a professor at a four year research university with a graduate program - that's where scientific research is done.

 

I think that depends on the college.

 

My kids are at a LAC where the profs do do research, publish papers, etc. And undergrads help them -- my kids have been involved in research both over summers and during the year, and my son will hopefully have his name on two published papers by next fall.

 

The profs at the LAC do not do the research at the same intensity as they would at a university because the focus is more on teaching and they have no grad students to assist them. But the profs do do research -- and the undergrads have opportunities to help them!

[distancia]

Good topic. What I have learned from all this is: there are no one "right" answer.

 

While in her last year of high school my dd is taking classes at our local CC (brick building); through an online CC; and an independent study course (online and print textbook) at a high quality, 4-year university.

 

Some of her classes at the local CC were a joke. Others, like a European History class she is now enrolled in, with a young, vibrant instructor who just completed his PhD at Columbia, are fantastic. Those students work! Every week, a 2 page paper; a quiz (short answer) every 2 weeks, and 3 difficult (essay) exams over 4 months. However, other instructors she had at this same college were mediocre.

 

DD's is not impressed with her younger CC classmates, but the older ones are more serious in their educational pursuits.

 

My dd's online courses at an out-of-state CC were fairly rigorous and required the same amount of work I remember having when I was at a 4-year Uni ages ago. Likewise, the coursework my dd is doing through the independent study course is the same as in the classroom setting, but harder, because dd has to teach herself, whereas in a classroom, the teacher instructs.

 

Overall I would say dd is qualified to go to 4-year Uni. She will have completed one full year of transferable credits. Initially she wanted to do 3 years at Uni and then go on to grad school. However, now she is thinking of doing 4 years at Uni which will allow her a double major, because she has a full tuition scholarship for 4 years and a partial housing scholarship one for 4 years, as well as funding for a semester abroad--so why not take advantage of it?

 

DD has friends away at Uni now who are taking the same courses as dd and the caliber of instruction and quantity of work is LOWER and LESS than what my dd is accomplishing. Classes of 300+students, online courses because classes are overflowing....never mind the non-stop partying......this extra year or two at home going to the CC is helping my child mature far more than her peers, who went to Uni directly after graduating from high school.

 

I really believe that the opportunity to do CC work, with a good instructor, is a practical way for a student to prepare for Uni. DD's friends (mentioned above) were AP and IB studetns in public high school, but they are faring quite poorly at Uni now. I attribute that to the fact that they never made a transitional step into the adult (CC) world.

Edited March 15, 2011 by distancia