St Johns College Annapolis/Sante Fe

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We toured Annapolis. The buildings need repair, repaint and removal of moss growth. It looks shabby in many places.

Sad. One of the oldest colleges in America and rundown. The liberal arts colleges really are dying.

Toured myself. Absolutely beautiful campus and location. Also seems well run.

were you wearing your glasses or your rose tinted spectacles?

[Anonymous]

NP I don't know anything about the college, but I'm in Annapolis frequently bcs of the Naval Academy and the location is great. Also, I've strolled around the campus itself a half dozen times, walked into buildings, used bathrooms, etc and it's very beautiful. I don't wear glasses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:they need some AI division of Google or something to come in and say they want these grads.

the two issues with St Johns is super high transfer rate (and the credits don't transfer) and very low starting salary rate. Lower than humanities majors at bigger universities.

I blame those two things on the school. You have to communicate what the program is (so you dont lose kids) and then communicate who the grads are to HR departments. That's two hires St Johns should make - one person to take charge of each of these issues

The starting salary problem is I think bigger than a marketing issue. It's a skill problem. Johnnies learn one skill and one skill very well - close reading of texts translated into English. What math and science they take is hamstrung by the Great Books approach - they actually learn classical geometry from reading Euclid, analytic geometry from reading Descartes, and relativity from reading Einstein. That's a problem because most of the important discoveries in math and science are fairly recent (19th century or later) and being updated all the time.

Even setting that aside (many successful liberal arts majors have a weaker math and science background) there are other problems with teaching harder skills. I have already written above that I don't think much of Johnnies' foreign language preparation. But even more importantly for employability with a LA degree, they do all close reading and very little research with secondary sources. That's a problem for research heavy fields that hire LA majors, like consulting and marketing.

Johnnies do make great journalists, ad writers, etc., however. I know one who's a self taught Linux administrator.

That's one part of their curriculum I never understood: Math and Science. Unlike Literature and the Classics, natural sciences don't run off the "greats" to understand them; in fact, many are impossible to begin without passing the knowledge of many non-greats. You cannot start Gabriele Veneziano "String Theory" without a lot of physics instruction. Same with math and chemistry and biology. Even understanding Einstein's theory of relativity is strung across multiple physics courses from undergrad to grad. They could easily update the math curriculum as all it involves is chalk and a professor (or just leave the kids copies of Topology and Real Analysis if needed), but the sciences require a ton of investment if they actually want to teach a great science curriculum.

FWIW, the school is on the list of top feeder schools for math and physics Ph.D.s. So grad schools apparently think the education accomplishes something valuable.

I don’t know much about the program — but I can imagine that tracing the history of human thought on math, astronomy, motion, relativity, etc, could be a pretty exciting foundation for more contemporary challenges.

[Anonymous]

I really like that they reset tuition.

You know, there was a push for all colleges to reset to what was more the 'real price' of attendance (what colleges expected from each student, which is cost of teaching kids - draw down from endowment). All T100 colleges looked into this and said, our brand would suffer. We need "prestige pricing" and will discount from there.

St Johns did the opposite. For full pay families with kids interested in the humanities, looking at academia or law school or non profit work etc and want to keep powder dry for grad school or down payment on a house, it's a good idea. It's just very small.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:they need some AI division of Google or something to come in and say they want these grads.

the two issues with St Johns is super high transfer rate (and the credits don't transfer) and very low starting salary rate. Lower than humanities majors at bigger universities.

I blame those two things on the school. You have to communicate what the program is (so you dont lose kids) and then communicate who the grads are to HR departments. That's two hires St Johns should make - one person to take charge of each of these issues

The starting salary problem is I think bigger than a marketing issue. It's a skill problem. Johnnies learn one skill and one skill very well - close reading of texts translated into English. What math and science they take is hamstrung by the Great Books approach - they actually learn classical geometry from reading Euclid, analytic geometry from reading Descartes, and relativity from reading Einstein. That's a problem because most of the important discoveries in math and science are fairly recent (19th century or later) and being updated all the time.

Even setting that aside (many successful liberal arts majors have a weaker math and science background) there are other problems with teaching harder skills. I have already written above that I don't think much of Johnnies' foreign language preparation. But even more importantly for employability with a LA degree, they do all close reading and very little research with secondary sources. That's a problem for research heavy fields that hire LA majors, like consulting and marketing.

Johnnies do make great journalists, ad writers, etc., however. I know one who's a self taught Linux administrator.

That's one part of their curriculum I never understood: Math and Science. Unlike Literature and the Classics, natural sciences don't run off the "greats" to understand them; in fact, many are impossible to begin without passing the knowledge of many non-greats. You cannot start Gabriele Veneziano "String Theory" without a lot of physics instruction. Same with math and chemistry and biology. Even understanding Einstein's theory of relativity is strung across multiple physics courses from undergrad to grad. They could easily update the math curriculum as all it involves is chalk and a professor (or just leave the kids copies of Topology and Real Analysis if needed), but the sciences require a ton of investment if they actually want to teach a great science curriculum.

FWIW, the school is on the list of top feeder schools for math and physics Ph.D.s. So grad schools apparently think the education accomplishes something valuable.

I don’t know much about the program — but I can imagine that tracing the history of human thought on math, astronomy, motion, relativity, etc, could be a pretty exciting foundation for more contemporary challenges.

I wonder how this works. It is ranked #15 (adjusted) among math and statistics PhD program feeders: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-phd-programs#math (that's below Reed and St. Olaf, but still impressive). And yet they go in with no modern algebra, topology, etc.? Seems odd.

FWIW 10 percent of the graduating class goes into STEM, which seems to be construed rather broadly - it would seem to include the self taught Linux admin I knew: https://www.sjc.edu/application/files/2316/0268/1564/Alumni_Success_Career_Paths_Data_Graph_2020.jpg

The largest group goes into education and library science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:they need some AI division of Google or something to come in and say they want these grads.

the two issues with St Johns is super high transfer rate (and the credits don't transfer) and very low starting salary rate. Lower than humanities majors at bigger universities.

I blame those two things on the school. You have to communicate what the program is (so you dont lose kids) and then communicate who the grads are to HR departments. That's two hires St Johns should make - one person to take charge of each of these issues

The starting salary problem is I think bigger than a marketing issue. It's a skill problem. Johnnies learn one skill and one skill very well - close reading of texts translated into English. What math and science they take is hamstrung by the Great Books approach - they actually learn classical geometry from reading Euclid, analytic geometry from reading Descartes, and relativity from reading Einstein. That's a problem because most of the important discoveries in math and science are fairly recent (19th century or later) and being updated all the time.

Even setting that aside (many successful liberal arts majors have a weaker math and science background) there are other problems with teaching harder skills. I have already written above that I don't think much of Johnnies' foreign language preparation. But even more importantly for employability with a LA degree, they do all close reading and very little research with secondary sources. That's a problem for research heavy fields that hire LA majors, like consulting and marketing.

Johnnies do make great journalists, ad writers, etc., however. I know one who's a self taught Linux administrator.

That's one part of their curriculum I never understood: Math and Science. Unlike Literature and the Classics, natural sciences don't run off the "greats" to understand them; in fact, many are impossible to begin without passing the knowledge of many non-greats. You cannot start Gabriele Veneziano "String Theory" without a lot of physics instruction. Same with math and chemistry and biology. Even understanding Einstein's theory of relativity is strung across multiple physics courses from undergrad to grad. They could easily update the math curriculum as all it involves is chalk and a professor (or just leave the kids copies of Topology and Real Analysis if needed), but the sciences require a ton of investment if they actually want to teach a great science curriculum.

FWIW, the school is on the list of top feeder schools for math and physics Ph.D.s. So grad schools apparently think the education accomplishes something valuable.

I don’t know much about the program — but I can imagine that tracing the history of human thought on math, astronomy, motion, relativity, etc, could be a pretty exciting foundation for more contemporary challenges.

I wonder how this works. It is ranked #15 (adjusted) among math and statistics PhD program feeders: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-phd-programs#math (that's below Reed and St. Olaf, but still impressive). And yet they go in with no modern algebra, topology, etc.? Seems odd.

FWIW 10 percent of the graduating class goes into STEM, which seems to be construed rather broadly - it would seem to include the self taught Linux admin I knew: https://www.sjc.edu/application/files/2316/0268/1564/Alumni_Success_Career_Paths_Data_Graph_2020.jpg

The largest group goes into education and library science.

Their math goes to calculus — everyone takes it — but it is taught differently so it is more about understanding the concepts behind it than knowing how to mechanically solve problems (as in BC Calculus). The kids take French, not just Greek, The pre-med kids might take 1-2 summer courses elsewhere, but that’s all they need. Their education is both broad and deep enough to get into any humanities (not languages) or social science programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:they need some AI division of Google or something to come in and say they want these grads.

the two issues with St Johns is super high transfer rate (and the credits don't transfer) and very low starting salary rate. Lower than humanities majors at bigger universities.

I blame those two things on the school. You have to communicate what the program is (so you dont lose kids) and then communicate who the grads are to HR departments. That's two hires St Johns should make - one person to take charge of each of these issues

The starting salary problem is I think bigger than a marketing issue. It's a skill problem. Johnnies learn one skill and one skill very well - close reading of texts translated into English. What math and science they take is hamstrung by the Great Books approach - they actually learn classical geometry from reading Euclid, analytic geometry from reading Descartes, and relativity from reading Einstein. That's a problem because most of the important discoveries in math and science are fairly recent (19th century or later) and being updated all the time.

Even setting that aside (many successful liberal arts majors have a weaker math and science background) there are other problems with teaching harder skills. I have already written above that I don't think much of Johnnies' foreign language preparation. But even more importantly for employability with a LA degree, they do all close reading and very little research with secondary sources. That's a problem for research heavy fields that hire LA majors, like consulting and marketing.

Johnnies do make great journalists, ad writers, etc., however. I know one who's a self taught Linux administrator.

That's one part of their curriculum I never understood: Math and Science. Unlike Literature and the Classics, natural sciences don't run off the "greats" to understand them; in fact, many are impossible to begin without passing the knowledge of many non-greats. You cannot start Gabriele Veneziano "String Theory" without a lot of physics instruction. Same with math and chemistry and biology. Even understanding Einstein's theory of relativity is strung across multiple physics courses from undergrad to grad. They could easily update the math curriculum as all it involves is chalk and a professor (or just leave the kids copies of Topology and Real Analysis if needed), but the sciences require a ton of investment if they actually want to teach a great science curriculum.

FWIW, the school is on the list of top feeder schools for math and physics Ph.D.s. So grad schools apparently think the education accomplishes something valuable.

I don’t know much about the program — but I can imagine that tracing the history of human thought on math, astronomy, motion, relativity, etc, could be a pretty exciting foundation for more contemporary challenges.

I wonder how this works. It is ranked #15 (adjusted) among math and statistics PhD program feeders: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-phd-programs#math (that's below Reed and St. Olaf, but still impressive). And yet they go in with no modern algebra, topology, etc.? Seems odd.

FWIW 10 percent of the graduating class goes into STEM, which seems to be construed rather broadly - it would seem to include the self taught Linux admin I knew: https://www.sjc.edu/application/files/2316/0268/1564/Alumni_Success_Career_Paths_Data_Graph_2020.jpg

The largest group goes into education and library science.

Contrary to dcum popular belief, what this shows is that critical thinking, close reading, and writing skills are more important than content knowledge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:they need some AI division of Google or something to come in and say they want these grads.

the two issues with St Johns is super high transfer rate (and the credits don't transfer) and very low starting salary rate. Lower than humanities majors at bigger universities.

I blame those two things on the school. You have to communicate what the program is (so you dont lose kids) and then communicate who the grads are to HR departments. That's two hires St Johns should make - one person to take charge of each of these issues

The starting salary problem is I think bigger than a marketing issue. It's a skill problem. Johnnies learn one skill and one skill very well - close reading of texts translated into English. What math and science they take is hamstrung by the Great Books approach - they actually learn classical geometry from reading Euclid, analytic geometry from reading Descartes, and relativity from reading Einstein. That's a problem because most of the important discoveries in math and science are fairly recent (19th century or later) and being updated all the time.

Even setting that aside (many successful liberal arts majors have a weaker math and science background) there are other problems with teaching harder skills. I have already written above that I don't think much of Johnnies' foreign language preparation. But even more importantly for employability with a LA degree, they do all close reading and very little research with secondary sources. That's a problem for research heavy fields that hire LA majors, like consulting and marketing.

Johnnies do make great journalists, ad writers, etc., however. I know one who's a self taught Linux administrator.

That's one part of their curriculum I never understood: Math and Science. Unlike Literature and the Classics, natural sciences don't run off the "greats" to understand them; in fact, many are impossible to begin without passing the knowledge of many non-greats. You cannot start Gabriele Veneziano "String Theory" without a lot of physics instruction. Same with math and chemistry and biology. Even understanding Einstein's theory of relativity is strung across multiple physics courses from undergrad to grad. They could easily update the math curriculum as all it involves is chalk and a professor (or just leave the kids copies of Topology and Real Analysis if needed), but the sciences require a ton of investment if they actually want to teach a great science curriculum.

FWIW, the school is on the list of top feeder schools for math and physics Ph.D.s. So grad schools apparently think the education accomplishes something valuable.

I don’t know much about the program — but I can imagine that tracing the history of human thought on math, astronomy, motion, relativity, etc, could be a pretty exciting foundation for more contemporary challenges.

I wonder how this works. It is ranked #15 (adjusted) among math and statistics PhD program feeders: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-phd-programs#math (that's below Reed and St. Olaf, but still impressive). And yet they go in with no modern algebra, topology, etc.? Seems odd.

FWIW 10 percent of the graduating class goes into STEM, which seems to be construed rather broadly - it would seem to include the self taught Linux admin I knew: https://www.sjc.edu/application/files/2316/0268/1564/Alumni_Success_Career_Paths_Data_Graph_2020.jpg

The largest group goes into education and library science.

A lot of ST John’s kids take courses elsewhere during the summer to supplement the education. This is so they can become doctors and viable phd candidates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:they need some AI division of Google or something to come in and say they want these grads.

the two issues with St Johns is super high transfer rate (and the credits don't transfer) and very low starting salary rate. Lower than humanities majors at bigger universities.

I blame those two things on the school. You have to communicate what the program is (so you dont lose kids) and then communicate who the grads are to HR departments. That's two hires St Johns should make - one person to take charge of each of these issues

The starting salary problem is I think bigger than a marketing issue. It's a skill problem. Johnnies learn one skill and one skill very well - close reading of texts translated into English. What math and science they take is hamstrung by the Great Books approach - they actually learn classical geometry from reading Euclid, analytic geometry from reading Descartes, and relativity from reading Einstein. That's a problem because most of the important discoveries in math and science are fairly recent (19th century or later) and being updated all the time.

Even setting that aside (many successful liberal arts majors have a weaker math and science background) there are other problems with teaching harder skills. I have already written above that I don't think much of Johnnies' foreign language preparation. But even more importantly for employability with a LA degree, they do all close reading and very little research with secondary sources. That's a problem for research heavy fields that hire LA majors, like consulting and marketing.

Johnnies do make great journalists, ad writers, etc., however. I know one who's a self taught Linux administrator.

That's one part of their curriculum I never understood: Math and Science. Unlike Literature and the Classics, natural sciences don't run off the "greats" to understand them; in fact, many are impossible to begin without passing the knowledge of many non-greats. You cannot start Gabriele Veneziano "String Theory" without a lot of physics instruction. Same with math and chemistry and biology. Even understanding Einstein's theory of relativity is strung across multiple physics courses from undergrad to grad. They could easily update the math curriculum as all it involves is chalk and a professor (or just leave the kids copies of Topology and Real Analysis if needed), but the sciences require a ton of investment if they actually want to teach a great science curriculum.

FWIW, the school is on the list of top feeder schools for math and physics Ph.D.s. So grad schools apparently think the education accomplishes something valuable.

I don’t know much about the program — but I can imagine that tracing the history of human thought on math, astronomy, motion, relativity, etc, could be a pretty exciting foundation for more contemporary challenges.

I wonder how this works. It is ranked #15 (adjusted) among math and statistics PhD program feeders: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-phd-programs#math (that's below Reed and St. Olaf, but still impressive). And yet they go in with no modern algebra, topology, etc.? Seems odd.

FWIW 10 percent of the graduating class goes into STEM, which seems to be construed rather broadly - it would seem to include the self taught Linux admin I knew: https://www.sjc.edu/application/files/2316/0268/1564/Alumni_Success_Career_Paths_Data_Graph_2020.jpg

The largest group goes into education and library science.

Their math goes to calculus — everyone takes it — but it is taught differently so it is more about understanding the concepts behind it than knowing how to mechanically solve problems (as in BC Calculus). The kids take French, not just Greek, The pre-med kids might take 1-2 summer courses elsewhere, but that’s all they need. Their education is both broad and deep enough to get into any humanities (not languages) or social science programs.

and a stats PhD doesn’t require much prior coursework, even for top programs. The qualifications are typically an intro stats course, probability, and real analysis, rarely do even decent applicants have graduate work like Bayesian or Time series completed.

Math is very different and nearly impossible to get into a good program without multiple graduate courses

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:they need some AI division of Google or something to come in and say they want these grads.

the two issues with St Johns is super high transfer rate (and the credits don't transfer) and very low starting salary rate. Lower than humanities majors at bigger universities.

I blame those two things on the school. You have to communicate what the program is (so you dont lose kids) and then communicate who the grads are to HR departments. That's two hires St Johns should make - one person to take charge of each of these issues

The starting salary problem is I think bigger than a marketing issue. It's a skill problem. Johnnies learn one skill and one skill very well - close reading of texts translated into English. What math and science they take is hamstrung by the Great Books approach - they actually learn classical geometry from reading Euclid, analytic geometry from reading Descartes, and relativity from reading Einstein. That's a problem because most of the important discoveries in math and science are fairly recent (19th century or later) and being updated all the time.

Even setting that aside (many successful liberal arts majors have a weaker math and science background) there are other problems with teaching harder skills. I have already written above that I don't think much of Johnnies' foreign language preparation. But even more importantly for employability with a LA degree, they do all close reading and very little research with secondary sources. That's a problem for research heavy fields that hire LA majors, like consulting and marketing.

Johnnies do make great journalists, ad writers, etc., however. I know one who's a self taught Linux administrator.

That's one part of their curriculum I never understood: Math and Science. Unlike Literature and the Classics, natural sciences don't run off the "greats" to understand them; in fact, many are impossible to begin without passing the knowledge of many non-greats. You cannot start Gabriele Veneziano "String Theory" without a lot of physics instruction. Same with math and chemistry and biology. Even understanding Einstein's theory of relativity is strung across multiple physics courses from undergrad to grad. They could easily update the math curriculum as all it involves is chalk and a professor (or just leave the kids copies of Topology and Real Analysis if needed), but the sciences require a ton of investment if they actually want to teach a great science curriculum.

FWIW, the school is on the list of top feeder schools for math and physics Ph.D.s. So grad schools apparently think the education accomplishes something valuable.

I don’t know much about the program — but I can imagine that tracing the history of human thought on math, astronomy, motion, relativity, etc, could be a pretty exciting foundation for more contemporary challenges.

I wonder how this works. It is ranked #15 (adjusted) among math and statistics PhD program feeders: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-phd-programs#math (that's below Reed and St. Olaf, but still impressive). And yet they go in with no modern algebra, topology, etc.? Seems odd.

FWIW 10 percent of the graduating class goes into STEM, which seems to be construed rather broadly - it would seem to include the self taught Linux admin I knew: https://www.sjc.edu/application/files/2316/0268/1564/Alumni_Success_Career_Paths_Data_Graph_2020.jpg

The largest group goes into education and library science.

Their math goes to calculus — everyone takes it — but it is taught differently so it is more about understanding the concepts behind it than knowing how to mechanically solve problems (as in BC Calculus). The kids take French, not just Greek, The pre-med kids might take 1-2 summer courses elsewhere, but that’s all they need. Their education is both broad and deep enough to get into any humanities (not languages) or social science programs.

and a stats PhD doesn’t require much prior coursework, even for top programs. The qualifications are typically an intro stats course, probability, and real analysis, rarely do even decent applicants have graduate work like Bayesian or Time series completed.

Math is very different and nearly impossible to get into a good program without multiple graduate courses

I wonder what math programs they're getting into. There are a ton of math PhD programs out there, not just the "good" ones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:they need some AI division of Google or something to come in and say they want these grads.

the two issues with St Johns is super high transfer rate (and the credits don't transfer) and very low starting salary rate. Lower than humanities majors at bigger universities.

I blame those two things on the school. You have to communicate what the program is (so you dont lose kids) and then communicate who the grads are to HR departments. That's two hires St Johns should make - one person to take charge of each of these issues

The starting salary problem is I think bigger than a marketing issue. It's a skill problem. Johnnies learn one skill and one skill very well - close reading of texts translated into English. What math and science they take is hamstrung by the Great Books approach - they actually learn classical geometry from reading Euclid, analytic geometry from reading Descartes, and relativity from reading Einstein. That's a problem because most of the important discoveries in math and science are fairly recent (19th century or later) and being updated all the time.

Even setting that aside (many successful liberal arts majors have a weaker math and science background) there are other problems with teaching harder skills. I have already written above that I don't think much of Johnnies' foreign language preparation. But even more importantly for employability with a LA degree, they do all close reading and very little research with secondary sources. That's a problem for research heavy fields that hire LA majors, like consulting and marketing.

Johnnies do make great journalists, ad writers, etc., however. I know one who's a self taught Linux administrator.

That's one part of their curriculum I never understood: Math and Science. Unlike Literature and the Classics, natural sciences don't run off the "greats" to understand them; in fact, many are impossible to begin without passing the knowledge of many non-greats. You cannot start Gabriele Veneziano "String Theory" without a lot of physics instruction. Same with math and chemistry and biology. Even understanding Einstein's theory of relativity is strung across multiple physics courses from undergrad to grad. They could easily update the math curriculum as all it involves is chalk and a professor (or just leave the kids copies of Topology and Real Analysis if needed), but the sciences require a ton of investment if they actually want to teach a great science curriculum.

FWIW, the school is on the list of top feeder schools for math and physics Ph.D.s. So grad schools apparently think the education accomplishes something valuable.

I don’t know much about the program — but I can imagine that tracing the history of human thought on math, astronomy, motion, relativity, etc, could be a pretty exciting foundation for more contemporary challenges.

I wonder how this works. It is ranked #15 (adjusted) among math and statistics PhD program feeders: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-phd-programs#math (that's below Reed and St. Olaf, but still impressive). And yet they go in with no modern algebra, topology, etc.? Seems odd.

FWIW 10 percent of the graduating class goes into STEM, which seems to be construed rather broadly - it would seem to include the self taught Linux admin I knew: https://www.sjc.edu/application/files/2316/0268/1564/Alumni_Success_Career_Paths_Data_Graph_2020.jpg

The largest group goes into education and library science.

Their math goes to calculus — everyone takes it — but it is taught differently so it is more about understanding the concepts behind it than knowing how to mechanically solve problems (as in BC Calculus). The kids take French, not just Greek, The pre-med kids might take 1-2 summer courses elsewhere, but that’s all they need. Their education is both broad and deep enough to get into any humanities (not languages) or social science programs.

and a stats PhD doesn’t require much prior coursework, even for top programs. The qualifications are typically an intro stats course, probability, and real analysis, rarely do even decent applicants have graduate work like Bayesian or Time series completed.

Math is very different and nearly impossible to get into a good program without multiple graduate courses

I wonder what math programs they're getting into. There are a ton of math PhD programs out there, not just the "good" ones.

Checking through linkedin, CUNY PhD, Miami University (Ohio) MS, Emory PhD, Electrical Engineering SMU Phd, Northwestern PhD, UChicago MS, and Harvard PhD. Seems like the SJC education isn't limiting their goals-it is only four years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:they need some AI division of Google or something to come in and say they want these grads.

the two issues with St Johns is super high transfer rate (and the credits don't transfer) and very low starting salary rate. Lower than humanities majors at bigger universities.

I blame those two things on the school. You have to communicate what the program is (so you dont lose kids) and then communicate who the grads are to HR departments. That's two hires St Johns should make - one person to take charge of each of these issues

The starting salary problem is I think bigger than a marketing issue. It's a skill problem. Johnnies learn one skill and one skill very well - close reading of texts translated into English. What math and science they take is hamstrung by the Great Books approach - they actually learn classical geometry from reading Euclid, analytic geometry from reading Descartes, and relativity from reading Einstein. That's a problem because most of the important discoveries in math and science are fairly recent (19th century or later) and being updated all the time.

Even setting that aside (many successful liberal arts majors have a weaker math and science background) there are other problems with teaching harder skills. I have already written above that I don't think much of Johnnies' foreign language preparation. But even more importantly for employability with a LA degree, they do all close reading and very little research with secondary sources. That's a problem for research heavy fields that hire LA majors, like consulting and marketing.

Johnnies do make great journalists, ad writers, etc., however. I know one who's a self taught Linux administrator.

That's one part of their curriculum I never understood: Math and Science. Unlike Literature and the Classics, natural sciences don't run off the "greats" to understand them; in fact, many are impossible to begin without passing the knowledge of many non-greats. You cannot start Gabriele Veneziano "String Theory" without a lot of physics instruction. Same with math and chemistry and biology. Even understanding Einstein's theory of relativity is strung across multiple physics courses from undergrad to grad. They could easily update the math curriculum as all it involves is chalk and a professor (or just leave the kids copies of Topology and Real Analysis if needed), but the sciences require a ton of investment if they actually want to teach a great science curriculum.

FWIW, the school is on the list of top feeder schools for math and physics Ph.D.s. So grad schools apparently think the education accomplishes something valuable.

I don’t know much about the program — but I can imagine that tracing the history of human thought on math, astronomy, motion, relativity, etc, could be a pretty exciting foundation for more contemporary challenges.

I wonder how this works. It is ranked #15 (adjusted) among math and statistics PhD program feeders: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-phd-programs#math (that's below Reed and St. Olaf, but still impressive). And yet they go in with no modern algebra, topology, etc.? Seems odd.

FWIW 10 percent of the graduating class goes into STEM, which seems to be construed rather broadly - it would seem to include the self taught Linux admin I knew: https://www.sjc.edu/application/files/2316/0268/1564/Alumni_Success_Career_Paths_Data_Graph_2020.jpg

The largest group goes into education and library science.

Their math goes to calculus — everyone takes it — but it is taught differently so it is more about understanding the concepts behind it than knowing how to mechanically solve problems (as in BC Calculus). The kids take French, not just Greek, The pre-med kids might take 1-2 summer courses elsewhere, but that’s all they need. Their education is both broad and deep enough to get into any humanities (not languages) or social science programs.

and a stats PhD doesn’t require much prior coursework, even for top programs. The qualifications are typically an intro stats course, probability, and real analysis, rarely do even decent applicants have graduate work like Bayesian or Time series completed.

Math is very different and nearly impossible to get into a good program without multiple graduate courses

I wonder what math programs they're getting into. There are a ton of math PhD programs out there, not just the "good" ones.

Checking through linkedin, CUNY PhD, Miami University (Ohio) MS, Emory PhD, Electrical Engineering SMU Phd, Northwestern PhD, UChicago MS, and Harvard PhD. Seems like the SJC education isn't limiting their goals-it is only four years.

So mediocre programs anyone can get into with a sliver of a brain. Fitting.

[Anonymous]

Says a lot about you if you don’t recognize those programs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Says a lot about you if you don’t recognize those programs

New poster.

SJC is SJC. High transfer rate. Doesn't have the top grades and scores for incoming students. It is a narrow focus. The brightest will always go elsewhere where you can study everything SJC offers plus much more. SJC's undergraduate is sub 500 students at Annapolis so boasting about feeding into PhD programs is meaningless as it's selective statistics based on percentages exaggerated by a graduating class of only 125ish, many more students out of College Park will be going into top graduate programs.

I don't dislike or think poorly of SJC but I'm honest about what it is. I also don't find it an efficient approach to education and I'm someone who thinks highly of the concept of the Great Books because you do need more than just the Great Books. As a quirkly school, it's not surprising the top 10% of students (in this case approx 10-12 from the graduating class at Annapolis) can end up in impressive programs and professional schools, but that's only 10-12 out of 125 graduates, most who do not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:they need some AI division of Google or something to come in and say they want these grads.

the two issues with St Johns is super high transfer rate (and the credits don't transfer) and very low starting salary rate. Lower than humanities majors at bigger universities.

I blame those two things on the school. You have to communicate what the program is (so you dont lose kids) and then communicate who the grads are to HR departments. That's two hires St Johns should make - one person to take charge of each of these issues

The starting salary problem is I think bigger than a marketing issue. It's a skill problem. Johnnies learn one skill and one skill very well - close reading of texts translated into English. What math and science they take is hamstrung by the Great Books approach - they actually learn classical geometry from reading Euclid, analytic geometry from reading Descartes, and relativity from reading Einstein. That's a problem because most of the important discoveries in math and science are fairly recent (19th century or later) and being updated all the time.

Even setting that aside (many successful liberal arts majors have a weaker math and science background) there are other problems with teaching harder skills. I have already written above that I don't think much of Johnnies' foreign language preparation. But even more importantly for employability with a LA degree, they do all close reading and very little research with secondary sources. That's a problem for research heavy fields that hire LA majors, like consulting and marketing.

Johnnies do make great journalists, ad writers, etc., however. I know one who's a self taught Linux administrator.

That's one part of their curriculum I never understood: Math and Science. Unlike Literature and the Classics, natural sciences don't run off the "greats" to understand them; in fact, many are impossible to begin without passing the knowledge of many non-greats. You cannot start Gabriele Veneziano "String Theory" without a lot of physics instruction. Same with math and chemistry and biology. Even understanding Einstein's theory of relativity is strung across multiple physics courses from undergrad to grad. They could easily update the math curriculum as all it involves is chalk and a professor (or just leave the kids copies of Topology and Real Analysis if needed), but the sciences require a ton of investment if they actually want to teach a great science curriculum.

FWIW, the school is on the list of top feeder schools for math and physics Ph.D.s. So grad schools apparently think the education accomplishes something valuable.

I don’t know much about the program — but I can imagine that tracing the history of human thought on math, astronomy, motion, relativity, etc, could be a pretty exciting foundation for more contemporary challenges.

With a school this small, this seems to just be saying that going there does not somehow prevent one from going on to a PhD. Population adjusted St Johns is the #40 producer of physics PhDs and the #15 producer of math PhDs. However this is to say they've produced 2 physics PhDs and 3 math PhDs. Compare this to Reed which is ranked 7 in math PhD per capita and produced 18 degrees, and #4 in physics PhDs per capita and produced 27.

I'm not the PP, but would agree. There is so much math and physics I would love to study before returning to reading the texts St. Johns picked. The great books approach makes more sense in other disciplines.