Feedback on Finding a Good English Department

Many thanks to the wise and worldly readers who answered yesterday’s question (in a variety of venues) about how an interested high school student could spot a good undergraduate English department. Some highlights:

• A few folks mentioned looking at whether the “stars” of the department teach 100-level classes. If they don’t -- if the lower-level classes are staffed mostly by adjuncts, with the names clustered at the top of the curriculum -- there’s probably a relative lack of coherence in the program. I find this point persuasive in the context of liberal arts colleges, but it may not work as well at research universities. There, the Big Name may be the instructor of record for the intro class, but all of a student’s interaction would be with graduate teaching assistants. To be fair, though, that may be less true in English than in most other fields.
• Someone mentioned that faculty writing for a broader audience is usually a good sign. I like this point a lot. Having survived postmodernist prose in grad school, I’m a fan of clarity on both pragmatic and principled grounds. The Girl’s writerly voice is wonderfully readable; I’d hate to see that trained out of her.
• Several people pointed out that “English,” as a category, contains multitudes, so some depends on what she wants. Some departments may be stronger on historical or theoretical analysis of literature, while others might have a more applied bent. I concede the point, but part of what attracts her to English is its range. If she becomes an even better reader and writer than she is now, I’d call it a win; that could happen in any number of ways.
• A few wrote to suggest that a women’s college, such as Mount Holyoke, might suit her. I could see it, though she hasn’t expressed much interest in that option at this point.
• Several suggested that she email individual faculty at prospective schools to express interest, and see who gets back to her and what they say. I'll admit a vague curiosity about how that would be received; I’ll suggest it to her and see what she thinks.
• One wrote that “she will go to a place that will treat her as an intellectual.” Yes, please. I would like to think that would be common.
• John Warner made the excellent suggestion to see if the department devotes attention to new forms of communication, such as podcasts. Separate from the merits of doing that, the willingness to do it suggests a certain spirit.
• My favorite point, though, was that answering the question was much harder than it seemed like it should be. I wasn’t really looking for recommendations of specific schools, though they’re always fun. The issue was epistemological: How do you know a good department when you see one? What counts as evidence? Once you know that, the rest should (theoretically) be a matter of information gathering. You’d think that colleges would bend over backward to show how good their academic programs are, but they mostly don’t, at least at the undergraduate level.

Which raises the question, why don’t they? I like Chad Orzel’s theory that many students assume that teaching is generally strong at well-known schools, so they effectively hold that variable constant and focus instead on other things. There’s some truth to that. It’s also true that what one student thinks makes a department or program great might not mean the same to another student. But even allowing for both of those, colleges’ almost aggressive indifference to distinguishing themselves academically at the undergraduate level, in ways that would be legible to a reasonably bright high school student, is deeply counterintuitive. You’d think they would try, at least.

Instead, even motivated and bright high school students with parents who went to college have to resort to a combination of guesswork, hearsay and blind luck to decide where to go. Given that colleges’ core job is communication, you’d think we’d do better than that.

The contrast with other large purchases is striking. If I go car shopping, I can easily find an incredible range of information on different models online. (That’s useful in our family, given that we’re a tall bunch. Low headroom is a deal breaker.) The same is true of houses. Even graduate programs try to distinguish themselves to some extent. But at the undergrad level, the silence around teaching -- the core of the enterprise -- is strange.

Still, I owe a debt of gratitude to the wise and worldly readers who took up the challenge. Thank you! I’ll keep you posted as the search unfolds.