I go to a top LAC for history and stem. It is overrated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A family member works in a top 5 worldwide school for STEM in a position where the topic of undergrad study of prof children comes up often. The topic 3 destinations amongst that group’s children are LACs.

That's cool and all, but what do the children do?

They go to college, like everyone else’s kids on this site.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to do research, go to where the research actually happens. LACs are great for certain subjects where they aren't expected grad coursework or sophisticated research. Mathematics grad school will expect graduate-level courses completed before you finish undergrad

And this is relevant to OP's complaints about physics and...history? English? OP can't really remember...at a supposed real-world LAC that is definitely not a figment of his imagination.

When you start a new thread about math students who dream of doing a Ph.D. at Princeton, then perhaps we can advise on where they should go for undergrad.

Physics is very similar-not in terms of graduate study, but you need very strong research and access to a few grad level math courses if you want to get into a top program, especially for theoretical. This is easier to achieve a top research university.

Hmm -- I don't know anything about physics, but on a tour of Amherst College last year we walked past the physics department. They had a display of recent grads (there didn't seem to be many majors per year, maybe 15?) and their locations. Almost all were in PhD programs at very prestigious research universities. Of course, I can't name the T10 PhD grad programs, but these were marque names. So (with that limited evidence) I call troll.

Amherst is one of the top SLACs, though, so maybe OP is at a lower-level institution?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A family member works in a top 5 worldwide school for STEM in a position where the topic of undergrad study of prof children comes up often. The topic 3 destinations amongst that group’s children are LACs.

Np, my spouse is a Hopkins professor. He definitely strongly feels R1 schools are better than lacs for stem majors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A family member works in a top 5 worldwide school for STEM in a position where the topic of undergrad study of prof children comes up often. The topic 3 destinations amongst that group’s children are LACs.

Np, my spouse is a Hopkins professor. He definitely strongly feels R1 schools are better than lacs for stem majors.

And he definitely is adjusting by a factor of 30 the view universities are more likely to prepare? Cause all the actual studies say otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Ignoring whether OP is a troll, the question raised can be easily settled. My kid is now choosing among a few LACs and a few research universities for physics, with an aim at PhD placement. As far as we can tell, LACs can be just as good as the best research schools. See here: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-phd-programs?utm_source=pocket_shared#physics
Mudd (one of his options) comes in second, per capita, right after CalTech and above MIT, with many other LACs also near the top. It's possible these aren't good PhD placements, for Mudd and the others -- is that the worry? I don't have any but anecdata on that, but it seems implausible.

As for humanities fields, I work in one (not English), and many of our best PhD applicants have LAC degrees. So here too, the general worry is unfounded.

That said, I can think of some LACs beloved by DCUM that are quite weak in my field, with little hope of placing their students in a good PhD program, so maybe OP has a legitimate local gripe. But I don't think it generalizes to LACs as a whole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A family member works in a top 5 worldwide school for STEM in a position where the topic of undergrad study of prof children comes up often. The topic 3 destinations amongst that group’s children are LACs.

Np, my spouse is a Hopkins professor. He definitely strongly feels R1 schools are better than lacs for stem majors.

And he definitely is adjusting by a factor of 30 the view universities are more likely to prepare? Cause all the actual studies say otherwise.

I said that in response to the claim that STEM professors send their kids to slacs. Not true at our house.

[Anonymous]

How do you find the time to double major and post on here all the time? (just saying)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to do research, go to where the research actually happens. LACs are great for certain subjects where they aren't expected grad coursework or sophisticated research. Mathematics grad school will expect graduate-level courses completed before you finish undergrad

And this is relevant to OP's complaints about physics and...history? English? OP can't really remember...at a supposed real-world LAC that is definitely not a figment of his imagination.

When you start a new thread about math students who dream of doing a Ph.D. at Princeton, then perhaps we can advise on where they should go for undergrad.

Physics is very similar-not in terms of graduate study, but you need very strong research and access to a few grad level math courses if you want to get into a top program, especially for theoretical. This is easier to achieve a top research university.

Hmm -- I don't know anything about physics, but on a tour of Amherst College last year we walked past the physics department. They had a display of recent grads (there didn't seem to be many majors per year, maybe 15?) and their locations. Almost all were in PhD programs at very prestigious research universities. Of course, I can't name the T10 PhD grad programs, but these were marque names. So (with that limited evidence) I call troll.

Amherst is one of the top SLACs, though, so maybe OP is at a lower-level institution?

Amherst College class of 2022 physics majors:
3 working in industry (SWE/data analyst jobs)
1 CU Boulder
1 Berkeley
1 Princeton
1 Stanford
2 unclear (one won a Fulbright research grant, though)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to do research, go to where the research actually happens. LACs are great for certain subjects where they aren't expected grad coursework or sophisticated research. Mathematics grad school will expect graduate-level courses completed before you finish undergrad

And this is relevant to OP's complaints about physics and...history? English? OP can't really remember...at a supposed real-world LAC that is definitely not a figment of his imagination.

When you start a new thread about math students who dream of doing a Ph.D. at Princeton, then perhaps we can advise on where they should go for undergrad.

Physics is very similar-not in terms of graduate study, but you need very strong research and access to a few grad level math courses if you want to get into a top program, especially for theoretical. This is easier to achieve a top research university.

Hmm -- I don't know anything about physics, but on a tour of Amherst College last year we walked past the physics department. They had a display of recent grads (there didn't seem to be many majors per year, maybe 15?) and their locations. Almost all were in PhD programs at very prestigious research universities. Of course, I can't name the T10 PhD grad programs, but these were marque names. So (with that limited evidence) I call troll.

Amherst is one of the top SLACs, though, so maybe OP is at a lower-level institution?

Amherst College class of 2022 physics majors:
3 working in industry (SWE/data analyst jobs)
1 CU Boulder
1 Berkeley
1 Princeton
1 Stanford
2 unclear (one won a Fulbright research grant, though)

My daughter is an Amherst senior and her boyfriend (also at Amherst) is starting his phd in Math at Princeton in the fall.

[Anonymous]

That said, I can think of some LACs beloved by DCUM that are quite weak in my field, with little hope of placing their students in a good PhD program, so maybe OP has a legitimate local gripe. But I don't think it generalizes to LACs as a whole.
Which ones?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That said, I can think of some LACs beloved by DCUM that are quite weak in my field, with little hope of placing their students in a good PhD program, so maybe OP has a legitimate local gripe. But I don't think it generalizes to LACs as a whole.

Which ones?
Quote didn’t work. Which LACs are overrated by DCUM?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to do research, go to where the research actually happens. LACs are great for certain subjects where they aren't expected grad coursework or sophisticated research. Mathematics grad school will expect graduate-level courses completed before you finish undergrad

And this is relevant to OP's complaints about physics and...history? English? OP can't really remember...at a supposed real-world LAC that is definitely not a figment of his imagination.

When you start a new thread about math students who dream of doing a Ph.D. at Princeton, then perhaps we can advise on where they should go for undergrad.

Physics is very similar-not in terms of graduate study, but you need very strong research and access to a few grad level math courses if you want to get into a top program, especially for theoretical. This is easier to achieve a top research university.

You will not run out of advanced math or physics courses at any top LAC. The notion you have to take grad classes to get into a top grad school is laughably misguided.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They’re either a troll or misinformed. LACs send many students to top STEM programs, and many profs at those PhD programs prefer LACs for their own kids. Having a meaningful or lead role in a research project is often better than tidying up for the grad students.

You're much more likely to get into a top stem research program from a research university than a lac. A lot of the top LACs have grads going to decent grad schools, but not the best. It is rare to see a lac grad going to Princeton for a math phd, for example.

Nonsense

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am currently attending a well-ranked liberal arts college for a double major in English and Physics. The small course sizes sounded nice at first, but my English courses have not really evolved past discussions of the same handful of themes (patriarchy/sex or gender, racism/exclusion, identity/perception). The professors are fine, but they are typically not doing active research that invites students, so I have to get creative (aka go to research universities). The department holds a few modernists, a single professor in literary criticism, and a complete lack of translation coursework. I cannot really say the experience has been much beyond discussion with mostly sleepy students, who do not at all care about the text, often not reading it either. I am taking a tutorial next semester, but I won't be holding my breath on increased rigor and interest.
The physics resources and faculty are amazing, but the reality is that getting into a top physics program requires top research experience and heavily biases those with graduate coursework and years of research.
Look, I love small classes and learning in a small community within an idyll, bucolic campus, but I don't think it is worth it over going to a good research university, where you get support for research and have more opportunities with nicher subspecialties.

This makes no sense. You'd probably do better in English if you wrote better.

You might just need to read closely? Those sentences are fine.

If you believe that then you are part of the problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They’re either a troll or misinformed. LACs send many students to top STEM programs, and many profs at those PhD programs prefer LACs for their own kids. Having a meaningful or lead role in a research project is often better than tidying up for the grad students.

You're much more likely to get into a top stem research program from a research university than a lac. A lot of the top LACs have grads going to decent grad schools, but not the best. It is rare to see a lac grad going to Princeton for a math phd, for example.

Actually, the opposite is true.

Really? Go take a look at the Princeton math grad student page. It’s going to be very difficult for you to find an LAC grad. This is common knowledge in physics/math. You aren’t going to a top program from a lac unless you’re truly exceptional amongst the truly exceptional.

Math is fairly unique in that practically all students who get into top PhD programs have been taking graduate courses since their freshman year. Most other fields are not like this. LAC students still go to top math PhD programs, but not the tippy top.

Again factually incorrect.