Science at Liberal Arts Colleges: A Better Education?

[Anonymous]

Absolutely not. They may do well in undergrad, when they have tons of encouragement and individual attention from professors, but they consistently struggle in graduate school when they will have to deal with high expectations for independence and a lack of constant encouragement and hand-holding. Any R1 program (state or private) will better prepare them for a career in science, where how they do in grad school is going to make or break it for them.

[Anonymous]

Furthermore, performance as an undergrad (including lab internships, conference presentations, first-author papers) is actually not at all a great indicator of potential success in grad school. I never took students straight out of undergrad because I wanted them to have had to deal with the real world first, and to have made an active choice to come back to school. Sure, if they don't intend to go to grad school, fine. But even the most entry-level, bottom-tier science jobs require a Ph.D. these days. It is competitive and cutthroat as hell.

[Anonymous]

And every first-author paper by an undergrad is basically ghostwritten by a more senior co-author who would have had an easier time just writing it themselves. I hate the whole undergraduate research trend. They're better off taking more math or stats instead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely not. They may do well in undergrad, when they have tons of encouragement and individual attention from professors, but they consistently struggle in graduate school when they will have to deal with high expectations for independence and a lack of constant encouragement and hand-holding. Any R1 program (state or private) will better prepare them for a career in science, where how they do in grad school is going to make or break it for them.

Source? Ah, your butt. Got it.

[Anonymous]

Source - 20 years tenured prof running large research lab.

[Anonymous]

"Source - 20 years tenured prof running large research lab."

+1 30 years in and running R1 science

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Source - 20 years tenured prof running large research lab.

Ah, so you're a data person, I hope. Let's see your data.
Because all the NSF data shows that SLAC graduates far, far outnumber their their large university peers when it comes to actually earning PhDs in STEM fields. If there's anyone struggling to complete the PhD, it's not SLAC alum.

[Anonymous]

I think it depends a lot on the person's background, personality and needs. For both of my kids, coming out of a magnet math/science program, almost no SLAC (maybe three in the country) offered them the math/physics opportunities they were seeking.

[Anonymous]

A PhD itself is worth the paper it's printed on, and not that hard to get once you're in a program (unfortunately it's very hard to get rid of grad students - easier to just finish them up if they insist on staying). What did they do AFTER earning that Ph.D.? Run a lab? Or scrape by adjuncting at community colleges?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In general, I would say the answer is no. Large universities have incredible resources and opportunities for science. But if your kid is not confident and gives up easily, then I do think the nurturing environment of a Slac might work better for them. For med school SLACs might have an edge as big schools can be more competitive and sink or swim. But if your kid is scrappy, outgoing and doesn’t get defeated easily, you can’t compare the science education at schools like Berkeley, Michigan, Cornell, etc. with small colleges

You packed an impressive number of passive-aggressive hate on SLACs into that. Truly a DCUM special right there.

It’s funny that is all you took away from my post. I went to a SLAC and enjoyed my time there. And then went to a science PhD program at a top school and was blown away by the background, experience and confidence of kids coming from larger universities. Some of these kids had taken grad level courses and worked in the labs of Nobel prize winners. I did fine in the end but it was a rough beginning. My best friend went to Wellesley and then to MIT for a physics PhD. She almost flunked out of the PhD program because the physics was so much harder at MIT than Wellesley. It is what it is but SLACs do work better for some kids. Other kids find them too small and claustrophobic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And every first-author paper by an undergrad is basically ghostwritten by a more senior co-author who would have had an easier time just writing it themselves. I hate the whole undergraduate research trend. They're better off taking more math or stats instead.

Wow, you really have some sad axe to grind in this regard, so could not take the olive branch being offered.

I also have a PhD, from Johns Hopkins. And I am a tenured full professor.

Yet, like MANY academics, I was thrilled when my child chose to receive his fundamental science training from a SLAC.

One of us really does not have to be right and the other wrong. But your personality does not seem able to compute that simple reality.

Perhaps that is why you are trying to say everyone needs to fight their way to recognition in a dog-eat-dog, back stabbing environment or face a dismal future.

--from a successful scientist who does not share your world view

[Anonymous]

My son had science research opportunities, supervised by the lead lab professor, as an undergrad at Virginia Tech. I wasn’t expecting that; assumed all research opportunities outside of engineering would go to grad students. The research being conducted by some of his big intro class professors is interesting, and it was great he got that tangential exposure in an introductory class. However, I also think taking the basic intro sciences in small classes at a liberal arts college probably would have been a better learning environment. Conclusion: there’s never one route or one answer. Look at the specifics available at each college for your DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In general, I would say the answer is no. Large universities have incredible resources and opportunities for science. But if your kid is not confident and gives up easily, then I do think the nurturing environment of a Slac might work better for them. For med school SLACs might have an edge as big schools can be more competitive and sink or swim. But if your kid is scrappy, outgoing and doesn’t get defeated easily, you can’t compare the science education at schools like Berkeley, Michigan, Cornell, etc. with small colleges

You packed an impressive number of passive-aggressive hate on SLACs into that. Truly a DCUM special right there.

It’s funny that is all you took away from my post. I went to a SLAC and enjoyed my time there. And then went to a science PhD program at a top school and was blown away by the background, experience and confidence of kids coming from larger universities. Some of these kids had taken grad level courses and worked in the labs of Nobel prize winners. I did fine in the end but it was a rough beginning. My best friend went to Wellesley and then to MIT for a physics PhD. She almost flunked out of the PhD program because the physics was so much harder at MIT than Wellesley. It is what it is but SLACs do work better for some kids. Other kids find them too small and claustrophobic

Where is your data? Because right now, your dataset is n=2 (you and your friend).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A PhD itself is worth the paper it's printed on, and not that hard to get once you're in a program (unfortunately it's very hard to get rid of grad students - easier to just finish them up if they insist on staying). What did they do AFTER earning that Ph.D.? Run a lab? Or scrape by adjuncting at community colleges?

Funny, I am a tenured professor at an R1 and I have found that it is not easy to earn the PhD. If students don't meet the requirements, they don't stay (unless independent wealthy) and retain ABD status. We never just "finish them up" at our university, but maybe they do at yours?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Source - 20 years tenured prof running large research lab.

Ah, so you're a data person, I hope. Let's see your data.
Because all the NSF data shows that SLAC graduates far, far outnumber their their large university peers when it comes to actually earning PhDs in STEM fields. If there's anyone struggling to complete the PhD, it's not SLAC alum.

Okay, for fun (and out of curiosity), I did a quick analysis of the people who have won the highest mid-career medal in my field over the past ten years:
Private R1 undergrads: 41%
State R1 undergrads: 50%
SLAC undergrads: 9%

There you go.