St Johns College Annapolis/Sante Fe

[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.

This is true, too, and even in mid-ranked programs there are students coming into PhD programs with good grades and so-so preperation in the mix.

[Anonymous]

I'm morbidly curious on how its possible for a student from SJC to get into a physics PhD with no training in Particle Physics, Experimental physics, and, most importantly, MODERN PHYSICS?! They also have never taken a math methods course and don't have the linear algebra, complex analysis, and differential equation skills most programs are going to expect when you begin. What in the world is going on?

[Anonymous]

intellectually curious kids who don't see their college curriculum as the outer perimeter of their education?

I only know one Johnnie and she's been a chem engineering prof at MIT for over 20 years now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:intellectually curious kids who don't see their college curriculum as the outer perimeter of their education?

I only know one Johnnie and she's been a chem engineering prof at MIT for over 20 years now.

I'd say this applies to most students applying to a Physics PhD program...how does that at all answer for the massive gap in education, training, research, and recommendations?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:intellectually curious kids who don't see their college curriculum as the outer perimeter of their education?

I only know one Johnnie and she's been a chem engineering prof at MIT for over 20 years now.

You don't "intellectually curious" your way into PhD programs in the hard sciences...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:intellectually curious kids who don't see their college curriculum as the outer perimeter of their education?

I only know one Johnnie and she's been a chem engineering prof at MIT for over 20 years now.

You don't "intellectually curious" your way into PhD programs in the hard sciences...

I smell a terminal masters in this story...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:intellectually curious kids who don't see their college curriculum as the outer perimeter of their education?

I only know one Johnnie and she's been a chem engineering prof at MIT for over 20 years now.

You don't "intellectually curious" your way into PhD programs in the hard sciences...

Anyone who doesn't agree with this has never gone through the PhD admissions process. It is filled with intellectually curious and bright students for very few slots. Not having the course work is a major disadvantage and many programs will disqualify you from consideration unless you get that coursework

[Anonymous]

And yet.. they get admitted.

You guys should really call over there if you’re so curious

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And yet.. they get admitted.

You guys should really call over there if you’re so curious

3 in math, 2 in physics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yet.. they get admitted.

You guys should really call over there if you’re so curious

3 in math, 2 in physics.

3 in math, 2 in physics, in the last five years. That's one a year.

[Anonymous]

Many Johnnies count their major as "Philosophy and Mathematics" which can lead to a good amount of jobs. They also have a guaranteed internship program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm morbidly curious on how its possible for a student from SJC to get into a physics PhD with no training in Particle Physics, Experimental physics, and, most importantly, MODERN PHYSICS?! They also have never taken a math methods course and don't have the linear algebra, complex analysis, and differential equation skills most programs are going to expect when you begin. What in the world is going on?

Here you go, also looks like phd will be completed this year: https://www.sjc.edu/news/student-connects-alumni-for-career-physics

[Anonymous]

It’s a tiny school. 1% getting a phd in math or physics year after year is pretty remarkable for a great books program

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm morbidly curious on how its possible for a student from SJC to get into a physics PhD with no training in Particle Physics, Experimental physics, and, most importantly, MODERN PHYSICS?! They also have never taken a math methods course and don't have the linear algebra, complex analysis, and differential equation skills most programs are going to expect when you begin. What in the world is going on?

Here you go, also looks like phd will be completed this year: https://www.sjc.edu/news/student-connects-alumni-for-career-physics

In other words, if you do a ton of work outside class, get private tutoring by a faculty member, and do a ton of alumni outreach, you can accomplish what students at normal schools can accomplish just by going to their regular classes.

[Anonymous]

Do you know a lot of math or physics ohs students who didn’t connect w professors, do outside research, or have internships?

I have no skin in the game but every college says they offer robust career counseling and faculty connections. I hope that’s true. I certainly wouldn’t bash a kid who found this to be true at their school