Reply to LACs strong in STEM vs Humanities

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "LACs strong in STEM vs Humanities"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]For other stem majors, I think almost all lacs provide a reasonably good education.  I like WASP, Bowdoin, Wellesley, Carleton.[/quote]

These would also be strong for humanities. [/quote]
Carleton MUCH LESS so compared to good lacs like Amherst.[/quote]
Give it a rest. Amherst is not all that — the location sucks and the athlete/non-athlete divide is way too pronounced.[/quote]

Amherst has an amazing science center and strong outcomes. Carleton has wonderful outcomes, with lots going on to PhDs. Oberlin, too. Wellesley students can take courses at MIT. They also participate in the Twelve College Exchange Program. Kids can get great STEM and/or humanities educations at just about any high-ranked LAC.[/quote]
Science center is overcrowded with too many departments. Many other schools give chem and bio individual buildings.[/quote]

The Amherst interdisciplinary science center is larger than the science centers of the other LACs mentioned here. There is a reason to put all the sciences together in one roof: for easy collaboration. Science and research do not work in silos[/quote]
Every peer of Amherst has whole buildings for biology and chemistry. Some have more than one. This is wrong. Also collaboration isn’t difficult across a liberal arts college campus.[/quote]

You are quite obviously not in science research and know little to nothing about it. There is nothing wrong with what was said.[/quote]
What? I just told you why you’re wrong. Count the amount of buildings that make up those 4 main departments at a peer of Amherst like Pomona and you”ll see yourself that there is a lot more space at Pomona than Amherst, for example. Same is true for Bowdoin and Williams [/quote]

Crunching the numbers here. Amherst's science center includes Biology, Biochemistry & Biophysics, Chemistry, Computer Science, Environmental Studies, Neuroscience, Physics & Astronomy, and Psychology, which translates to the following Buildings at Pomona: Seaver North, Seaver South, Seaver Biology, Seeley Mudd hall for Environmental Analysis, Estella hall of Math and Physics, Andrews Science building, and Lincoln and Edmunds Hall. According to Pomona:

[quote]The Sciences District is north of Marston
Quadrangle, across Sixth Street. Seaver
Laboratories, Millikan Laboratory and
Seeley Mudd flank College Avenue on its
way through the campus. Lincoln and
Edmund Halls and Skyspace in Draper
Courtyard anchor the eastern end of the
Sciences District. The Sciences District
accounts for forty-six percent of the aca-
demic square footage on the campus.[/quote]
The total academic campus square footage is 1.2 mil and so in total that is 552,000 square footage of academic space. Amherst's science center is only 250,000 sqft, so less than half that of Pomona. One could do this for other colleges, but the point is clear that this isn't a lot of academic space for all for these subjects.[/quote]

And yet Pomona's outcomes are not superior to Amherst's.[/quote]
In stem? They very much are. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics