Science at Liberal Arts Colleges: A Better Education?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you come out with a STEM degree at a school like UC Berkeley, that is incredibly impressive. Much more so than Middlebury or Colby or Swarthmore. UC Berkeley STEM is cutthroat and hard as hell.

Sounds like you are describing a tour in a combat zone.

Not everyone's dream for their kid's undergrad experience.

But hey, it is what impresses you.

I went to a SLAC. I don’t think I could make it in STEM at UC Berkeley personally. Maybe I could but I doubt I would stand out like I did at my SLAC. But heck ya, those Berkeley kids are impressive. Ask any STEM university professor and they would say the same thing.

I went to a SLAC too. I got into the Chemistry PhD program at Berkeley. I didn't go, both went to a top social science PhD program instead. I'm sure I would have fine at Berkeley as well. I did get to TA in Chemistry at the other school and the kids in my section did much better than those in other sections. I think this was because I learned to teach better at the SLAC and English was actually my first language.

Sure, you would have excelled at Berkeley. More likely, Berkeley would have chewed you up and spit you out. Sure you were the best TA in your grad program! Did you go to undergrad at Swarthmore by any chance?

Berkeley took in a lot of Ph.D students each year, but in general it's hard to graduate. I know this because I was there.

I have worked with several SW undergraduates, and to be honest, they did not stand out more than others. Small samples, but still....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you come out with a STEM degree at a school like UC Berkeley, that is incredibly impressive. Much more so than Middlebury or Colby or Swarthmore. UC Berkeley STEM is cutthroat and hard as hell.

You think Swarthmore STEM isn’t hard? Okay buddy.

Not saying it isn’t hard but Swarthmore way overplays their intellectual and tough brand. Really not that different from other SLACS. Top 10 SLACs are pretty much indistinguishable but Swarthmore is more braggy. They act like they are UChicago or Columbia. Big chip on their shoulder for some reason.

Maybe it's because so many Swatties go onto earn PhDs? Historically, it is THE feeder for top doctoral programs across multiple disciplines, including STEM fields.
https://www.swarthmore.edu/institutional-research/doctorates-awarded

This list is suspect since Williams is not on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you come out with a STEM degree at a school like UC Berkeley, that is incredibly impressive. Much more so than Middlebury or Colby or Swarthmore. UC Berkeley STEM is cutthroat and hard as hell.

You think Swarthmore STEM isn’t hard? Okay buddy.

Not saying it isn’t hard but Swarthmore way overplays their intellectual and tough brand. Really not that different from other SLACS. Top 10 SLACs are pretty much indistinguishable but Swarthmore is more braggy. They act like they are UChicago or Columbia. Big chip on their shoulder for some reason.

Maybe it's because so many Swatties go onto earn PhDs? Historically, it is THE feeder for top doctoral programs across multiple disciplines, including STEM fields.
https://www.swarthmore.edu/institutional-research/doctorates-awarded

Is earning a doctorate a proxy for being smart? That makes me feel good because I have a PhD.
And I didn’t even go to Swarthmore. Went to a relatively unknown LAC because they gave me generous financial aid. I don’t think there were any Swarthmore students in my PhD cohort. Princeton, Cornell, Stanford, Penn, Columbia, Berkeley, Oberlin...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you come out with a STEM degree at a school like UC Berkeley, that is incredibly impressive. Much more so than Middlebury or Colby or Swarthmore. UC Berkeley STEM is cutthroat and hard as hell.

You think Swarthmore STEM isn’t hard? Okay buddy.

Not saying it isn’t hard but Swarthmore way overplays their intellectual and tough brand. Really not that different from other SLACS. Top 10 SLACs are pretty much indistinguishable but Swarthmore is more braggy. They act like they are UChicago or Columbia. Big chip on their shoulder for some reason.

Maybe it's because so many Swatties go onto earn PhDs? Historically, it is THE feeder for top doctoral programs across multiple disciplines, including STEM fields.
https://www.swarthmore.edu/institutional-research/doctorates-awarded

Is earning a doctorate a proxy for being smart? That makes me feel good because I have a PhD.
And I didn’t even go to Swarthmore. Went to a relatively unknown LAC because they gave me generous financial aid. I don’t think there were any Swarthmore students in my PhD cohort. Princeton, Cornell, Stanford, Penn, Columbia, Berkeley, Oberlin...

What LAC did you attend?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you come out with a STEM degree at a school like UC Berkeley, that is incredibly impressive. Much more so than Middlebury or Colby or Swarthmore. UC Berkeley STEM is cutthroat and hard as hell.

Sounds like you are describing a tour in a combat zone.

Not everyone's dream for their kid's undergrad experience.

But hey, it is what impresses you.

I went to a SLAC. I don’t think I could make it in STEM at UC Berkeley personally. Maybe I could but I doubt I would stand out like I did at my SLAC. But heck ya, those Berkeley kids are impressive. Ask any STEM university professor and they would say the same thing.

I went to a SLAC too. I got into the Chemistry PhD program at Berkeley. I didn't go, both went to a top social science PhD program instead. I'm sure I would have fine at Berkeley as well. I did get to TA in Chemistry at the other school and the kids in my section did much better than those in other sections. I think this was because I learned to teach better at the SLAC and English was actually my first language.

Who applies to both Chemistry and Social Science PhD programs? That is very strange.

Why? Are the skill sets really that different? Both require a logical, mathematical thought processes, although social sciences require more sophisticated data analysis. Both essentially examine simplifying models of how things work. I just find the social science more interesting.
No, I did not go to Swarthmore.
After taking and teaching classes at both large and small elite schools, I don't see why anyone would be more intimidated by undergraduate students at large schools over small. The sophistication of the facilities will not affect the development of the thought processes behind experiments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you come out with a STEM degree at a school like UC Berkeley, that is incredibly impressive. Much more so than Middlebury or Colby or Swarthmore. UC Berkeley STEM is cutthroat and hard as hell.

You think Swarthmore STEM isn’t hard? Okay buddy.

Not saying it isn’t hard but Swarthmore way overplays their intellectual and tough brand. Really not that different from other SLACS. Top 10 SLACs are pretty much indistinguishable but Swarthmore is more braggy. They act like they are UChicago or Columbia. Big chip on their shoulder for some reason.

Maybe it's because so many Swatties go onto earn PhDs? Historically, it is THE feeder for top doctoral programs across multiple disciplines, including STEM fields.
https://www.swarthmore.edu/institutional-research/doctorates-awarded

This list is suspect since Williams is not on it.

Why is it surprising? Some SLACs are known to be PhD feeders and others not. Neither is good not bad; just different. Fit is important.

[Anonymous]

Some truth, but if the college is small, or the major not popular,it won’t offer enough advanced classes in the semester the kid needs them. Caveat emptor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some truth, but if the college is small, or the major not popular,it won’t offer enough advanced classes in the semester the kid needs them. Caveat emptor.

But when you are talking about colleges like Swarthmore with a $2B endowment for 1500 students, tutorials are not a problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you come out with a STEM degree at a school like UC Berkeley, that is incredibly impressive. Much more so than Middlebury or Colby or Swarthmore. UC Berkeley STEM is cutthroat and hard as hell.

You think Swarthmore STEM isn’t hard? Okay buddy.

Not saying it isn’t hard but Swarthmore way overplays their intellectual and tough brand. Really not that different from other SLACS. Top 10 SLACs are pretty much indistinguishable but Swarthmore is more braggy. They act like they are UChicago or Columbia. Big chip on their shoulder for some reason.

Maybe it's because so many Swatties go onto earn PhDs? Historically, it is THE feeder for top doctoral programs across multiple disciplines, including STEM fields.
https://www.swarthmore.edu/institutional-research/doctorates-awarded

This list is suspect since Williams is not on it.

Why is it surprising? Some SLACs are known to be PhD feeders and others not. Neither is good not bad; just different. Fit is important.

This. Isn't Williams more of a feeder to Wall St and big consulting jobs? That list isn't some random opinion, it's the National Science Foundation's Survey of Earned Doctorates that they've been doing for over 60 years.

[Anonymous]

I have heard you have to be a bit offbeat and quirky to fit into the culture at Swarthmore

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:LACs were certainly the right choice for my kids both in top medical schools now. One went to Pomona and the other Occidental. The research opportunities at both schools were phenomenal as well as a chance to take a lot of art and music classes.

+1. Same for my DD. Bowdoin to Harvard Dental.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some truth, but if the college is small, or the major not popular,it won’t offer enough advanced classes in the semester the kid needs them. Caveat emptor.

You’re kidding, right? Try getting the classes you need at UCLA or Berkeley. It’s chaos.

[Anonymous]

I went to Awesome Big State U. And, indeed, it was awesome for the best of the aspiring scientists--more specifically, for the resilient ones who rose to the top. For most of the rest, a liberal arts college probably would have been better or, at the very least, just as good.

There were a lot of people there who wanted to become scientists and could have become scientists but aren't scientists today thanks to the cut-throat and impersonal culture prevalent at Awesome Big State U. The big research universities set things up so many will fail. Liberal arts colleges set thing up so most will succeed.

Personally, I'm a big research university kind of person, but my kids aren't. For them, SLACs all the way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I went to Awesome Big State U. And, indeed, it was awesome for the best of the aspiring scientists--more specifically, for the resilient ones who rose to the top. For most of the rest, a liberal arts college probably would have been better or, at the very least, just as good.

There were a lot of people there who wanted to become scientists and could have become scientists but aren't scientists today thanks to the cut-throat and impersonal culture prevalent at Awesome Big State U. The big research universities set things up so many will fail. Liberal arts colleges set thing up so most will succeed.

Personally, I'm a big research university kind of person, but my kids aren't. For them, SLACs all the way.

Curious - what do you do now? And where did you do your PhD?