This thread is nine years old.

Someone is working reaaaaaally hard to dig up old threads. Ask yourself why. Ask who might benefit.

I imagine it’s none of us.

Anonymous wrote:http://www.thecollegesolution.com/the-colleges-where-phds-get-their-start/

"Students can increase their odds of being accepted to graduate school if they earn their bachelor’s degree at a liberal arts college. On a per capita basis, for instance, liberal arts colleges produce twice as many students who earn a PhD in science than other institutions."

Not taking college advice from someone who doesn't understand basic statistics.

I’d much rather my kid go to a good research university over the LACs. You’d get a lot more out of Uchicago or Johns Hopkins than Williams

No they shouldn’t. Liberal arts colleges need to be changed.

From the NSF study cited above: "Public universities with very high research activity are prominent in the baccalaureate training of U.S. S&E doctorate recipients, as reflected in the ranked list of U.S. baccalaureate-origin institutions (table 2). Of the top 20 U.S. baccalaureate-origin institutions for 2002–11 S&E doctorate recipients, 19 are research universities with very high research activity, including 15 public institutions. Of the top 50 U.S. baccalaureate-origin institutions for 2002–11 S&E doctorate recipients, approximately two-thirds are public institutions, and only 1, Brigham Young University, is not a research university with very high research activity."

Once you get away from magical thinking (the odds of my kid turning into a PhD double if I send her to a LAC!), you realize that, IRL, percentages are kind of meaningless to your kid. While they indicate that you certainly can get here (PhD) from there (LAC), they ignore crucial aspects of the undergraduate experience -- size of cohort with the same interests/ambitions, range of course offerings, number of faculty, variety of types of research being conducted. In absolute terms, a major research university in the top 50 on the NSF list will be sending a couple hundred undergrads a year on to science and engineering PhDs whereas a top PhD producing LAC will send a few dozen. And, of course, the kids at major research universities work in labs with grad as well as undergrad students and with researchers who aren't teaching faculty. So it's a much larger and more diverse ecosystem.

Whether your DC ends up pursuing a PhD will depend on personality, interests, and opportunities. Don't start with a categorical choice (LACs vs major research universities) -- look at specific schools with good programs in DC's areas of interest and have DC consider the pros and cons of each school. It's also worth noting that a number of LACs have 3-2 programs with major research universities and that there are summer programs (some government-funded, some school-sponsored) that host undergrads from different colleges.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.thecollegesolution.com/the-colleges-where-phds-get-their-start/

"Students can increase their odds of being accepted to graduate school if they earn their bachelor’s degree at a liberal arts college. On a per capita basis, for instance, liberal arts colleges produce twice as many students who earn a PhD in science than other institutions."

Correlation is not causation. That is something I learned in the first few weeks of my undergraduate business school at *gasp!* a state school. Actually, I think I learned it in middle school science class, but I digress.

True, but either way, the fact of the matter is that LAC students obtain doctorates far more frequently than state universities.

Anonymous wrote:http://www.thecollegesolution.com/the-colleges-where-phds-get-their-start/

"Students can increase their odds of being accepted to graduate school if they earn their bachelor’s degree at a liberal arts college. On a per capita basis, for instance, liberal arts colleges produce twice as many students who earn a PhD in science than other institutions."

Correlation is not causation. That is something I learned in the first few weeks of my undergraduate business school at *gasp!* a state school. Actually, I think I learned it in middle school science class, but I digress.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not really a problem since grad students are TAing intro courses and, by the time you're ready to apply for grad school, you've been working with profs directly for at least a year (probably at least two years, if you're planning on grad school) in your major. Also, even schools with grad student TAs in large survey courses typically have other seminar-style courses available to freshman and sophomores.

As a TA at a public Ivy, I had at least a half-dozen students ask me to write letters of recommendation for them for grad school, med school, law school, etc. It was kinda sad.

There is no such thing as a public ivy.

You are new to these boards or otherwise unfamiliar with the term? "Public Ivies": Berkeley, U Michigan-Ann Arbor, UVA. Also maybe UW-Madison, UT-Austin, UNC-Chapel Hill.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not really a problem since grad students are TAing intro courses and, by the time you're ready to apply for grad school, you've been working with profs directly for at least a year (probably at least two years, if you're planning on grad school) in your major. Also, even schools with grad student TAs in large survey courses typically have other seminar-style courses available to freshman and sophomores.

As a TA at a public Ivy, I had at least a half-dozen students ask me to write letters of recommendation for them for grad school, med school, law school, etc. It was kinda sad.

There is no such thing as a public ivy.

http://www.thecollegesolution.com/the-colleges-where-phds-get-their-start/

"Students can increase their odds of being accepted to graduate school if they earn their bachelor’s degree at a liberal arts college. On a per capita basis, for instance, liberal arts colleges produce twice as many students who earn a PhD in science than other institutions."

Compare tables 2 (based on absolute numbers) and 4 (based on percentages) get a very different impression of where PhDs studied as undergrads.
https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf13323/


Of course neither chart answers the question of over-representation. And these charts are limited to science and engineering PhDs -- I haven't found an equivalent pair with data for all PhDs, but would be interested in seeing it if anyone else has.

Do we actually know that SLACs are over-represented in PhD programs or do we know that a handful of exceptional SLACs top lists based on percentages of students going on to PhDs?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not really a problem since grad students are TAing intro courses and, by the time you're ready to apply for grad school, you've been working with profs directly for at least a year (probably at least two years, if you're planning on grad school) in your major. Also, even schools with grad student TAs in large survey courses typically have other seminar-style courses available to freshman and sophomores.

As a TA at a public Ivy, I had at least a half-dozen students ask me to write letters of recommendation for them for grad school, med school, law school, etc. It was kinda sad.

Are you sure that was a problem wrt instruction rather than career-advising? Kid from a family that is not familiar with grad/prof school apps might well follow the HS pattern and choose the recommender who knows him/her best. And, presumably, yours wasn't the kids' only rec. Do law/med schools even care? Honestly, I don't see how anyone who is a serious candidate for a PhD program could get through college without having rec-worthy relationships with at least two profs in their field.

Perhaps this is a reason why SLACs are so over-represented in PhD programs? There is no doubt in my mind that the close relationships that students develop with faculty at SLACs helps to foster interest in pursuing doctorates.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not really a problem since grad students are TAing intro courses and, by the time you're ready to apply for grad school, you've been working with profs directly for at least a year (probably at least two years, if you're planning on grad school) in your major. Also, even schools with grad student TAs in large survey courses typically have other seminar-style courses available to freshman and sophomores.

As a TA at a public Ivy, I had at least a half-dozen students ask me to write letters of recommendation for them for grad school, med school, law school, etc. It was kinda sad.

Are you sure that was a problem wrt instruction rather than career-advising? Kid from a family that is not familiar with grad/prof school apps might well follow the HS pattern and choose the recommender who knows him/her best. And, presumably, yours wasn't the kids' only rec. Do law/med schools even care? Honestly, I don't see how anyone who is a serious candidate for a PhD program could get through college without having rec-worthy relationships with at least two profs in their field.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, you're right, but the point still remains that it is graduates of LACs that are heavily represented for PhD production (http://www.swarthmore.edu/institutional-research/doctorates-awarded)

Keep in mind that that's the writing load of the average intro course, not upper-levels. I didn't go to Swarthmore, but a peer school, and I had comparable levels of writing at my intro courses and 25+ page papers in my later ones. My thesis was actually a little shorter than one of my papers for a seminar course (70 pages or so, and yes I got extensive feedback on it).

The point I wanted to highlight was more about Swarthmore vs. Drexel, not Swarthmore vs. Columbia. I think top LACs and top universities are equally rigorous. And I think they are more rigorous than other universities.

Well, but then the point is that highly selective schools with a reputation for academic rigor have more difficult courseloads than comparatively easy-to-get-into schools that serve a group of undergrads with a much broader range of interests. Quel surprise!

If you want to make an argument about LACs, you have to hold something like student qualifications relatively constant. Maybe it'd turn out that the killer app for LACs is for B students or B+ students rather than the most intellectual students.

The only argument I want to make about elite LACs is that they're comparable to their university peers. Not better overall, not worse overall. My personal belief is that many of the top universities have adapted LAC-like models in one or more undergraduate colleges, either from the start or from teaching revamps after studying LACs, so the liberal arts education does appear to be the gold standard, though one does not need to attend an LAC to get one. I was responding to the remarks made by a previous poster who didn't clarify until after the post that they were referring to elite universities, so I wanted to point out that the elite LACs are more rigorous than non-elite universities with an actual study. And while obviously a flawed metric for intellectualism, I used the grad school stat to mention that LACs do have many of the types commonly associated as being "intellectual". It feels like a better indicator than something completely subjective like Unigo's "Nietzschean Supermen (and Superwomen)" ranking.