<p>Math is NOT an exception. In the study of undergraduate origins of math Ph.Ds. (per graduate), FOUR LACs are in the top 10 in the country. (and only two Ivies).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Around here too. An MBA, however, is not seen that way.</p>
<p>And I would add to Starbright’s excellent post the fact that undergraduate research- as many posters here keep flagging-- is an almost trivial component for a strong application for an MBA program. What employers like to see on a “business degree” resume is:
case competitions, investment team/mock stock allocation projects, internships, simulations, relevant employment and volunteer work (a kid who volunteered to re-state three years of financial data for a local social services organization to prepare for an audit is a kid someone wants to hire).</p>
<p>Folks on CC like to throw around undergrad research like it is both an effective way to choose and to toss prospective colleges. The VAST majority of college students will never do original research- not because it’s not available on their campus, but because it’s not relevant for their degree program, or because they have no interest.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t be impressed with an engineering department that did not have undergrad research opportunities- that’s an experience that is critical for a young engineer. I’d be less concerned with a potential accounting major.</p>
<p>I completely agree with the many posters who encouraged this kid to explore any number of different fields- a career in business can be launched from just about any academic discipline. (I’ve worked for CEO’s whose degrees were in Renaissance Studies, Classics, Urban Planning and Anthropology, not to mention the scores of managers I’ve had who studied comparative lit, history, political science, etc.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>OK, I’ve seen this 2-3 times in this thread. When I read “LAC” in my head I say “lack”. Thus would use an “a” not an “an”. All of a sudden i feel like everyone else reads it “El-Aye-See”.</p>
<p>Sorry for the sidebar but I am genuinely curious :)</p>
<p>“Folks on CC like to throw around undergrad research like it is both an effective way to choose and to toss prospective colleges.”</p>
<p>It is absolutely irrelevant EXCEPT for students hoping to get into top Ph.D. programs or med school, which is a tiny, tiny fraction of the undergraduate population. For those, it is extremely important, and an excellent reason to toss prospective colleges.</p>
<p>You would use “a” as in a Liberal Arts College, vs an Liberal Arts College…slippery fingers and typing too fast excluded however.:D.</p>
<p>Never regretted attending a LAC (mid-tier 50-100 range on the Newsweek rankings).</p>
<p>I was able to easily dual major. One major was Econ with a Business Admin emphasis. This basically means I traded some heavy stat classes for Markteting/management/Accounting. I had no problem getting my first job vs. friends who majored in BusAdmin at state schools. I attributed this to the college’s career office and strong alumni network. I was more confident in my first job as compared to co-workers from U of Del and state schools. </p>
<p>I think it depends on what OPs son wants to do with business. Successful folks in business could range from self employed to sales to Executives. The LAC experience often has more genl ed requirements and discussion based classes. This makes a student very “rounded” and could benefit in getting that first job or two.</p>
<p>Many of my college classmates in the Econ department went on to get MBAs. Only 2 became true Economists that I am aware.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I can’t find it now but the College of Wooster (also a CTCL) has some stat about the desirability of their grads for grad school, something to do with the senior project in particular. Maybe I heard it on the tour.</p>
<p>I started at a LAC and finished at a public U (geography change, not a problem with the LAC). The LAC was Vassar and I find most everyone has heard of it and I generally get an “impressed” reaction to it, though some ask if it’s still all-women.</p>
<p>On the other hand, until CC I wasn’t aware of Williams except as the school one of my classmates went to. He was very smart, but my HS was more focused on Brown, Vassar and some of the more liberal-liberal arts colleges.</p>
<p>My neighbor’s son (neighbor is a retired HS GC) went there and he is in admissions there, I recently learned. Williams is USNWR #1 national LAC at the moment, isn’t it?</p>
<p>mini, we’re now getting close to fields I know reasonably well and what you are saying doesn’t ring true. Do you have data not on who got PhDs in a field but on who got PhDs at top 10 graduate programs?</p>
<p>Harvard and Princeton definitely have undergrads involved in research, mini. MIT as well. I think Stanford. You have to push a bit and the professors have to think it will be worth their while. That may be less true at an LAC (the cost/benefit calculus may weigh more heavily toward inclusiveness). I have no experience with Chicago. </p>
<p>bclintonk, I just did a quick scan of the Harvard Economics department and there were 5 LAC grads (2 Swarthmore, one each of Harverford, Reed, and Oberlin). The department listed about 45 total. I didn’t count, but of the remainder, the vast majority were American and the vast majority of those was HYPMCS. Say 15-20 HYPMCS and then others (Texas, Michigan, …) and lots of foreign universities. I don’t know the ratio of undergraduate LACs to HYPMSC student bodies, but would 5 out of 20 to 25 be overrepresented? </p>
<p>I was thinking that maybe there had been a shift and that HYP types were not sticking around academia, which could make my impression (and this Harvard Econ dept sample) consistent with your assertions. If so, the LAC alums would be younger and the HYPMCS types were older, but that didn’t appear to be the case (very small sample size).</p>
<p>ohiobassmom, Williams and its near clone Amherst are very well-known in the Northeast. The top consulting firms and finance firms hire there. Williams is the center of an art world Mafia of curators. But, if you go to a main street in Ohio, they might think Williams is a paint company and if they’ve heard of Amherst, they think it is UMass Amherst. Yet, they have been 1 and 2 in the USNWR rankings for a number of years (I think they have swapped top spots periodically).</p>
<p>I agree with Starbright that research is irrelevant except to those who want to go on in academia. I further agree that if my child were interested in business, I would suggest that he/she do as she suggested: LAC followed by work then by MBA or other appropriate specialized degree. My son may do that and a distinguished B-School professor who saw him in action has already volunteered to write his recommendation. There are studies that I believe suggest that LAC alums are overrepresented among the ranks of PhDs. I don’t know if they are overrepresented or underrepresented in the top grad schools or the top department faculties. In the fields I know (I got my PhD in one field, was offered a post-doc in a second, and did my research in a third, more interdisciplinary field), my instinct is that they are underrepresented. If I thought my child were going to do academic research (at least in the fields I know), I’d still draw on my own experience to recommend not an LAC but a school with an absolutely top research department that does involve proactive undergrads in research. But, we’re talking about an extremely small percentage of students who would want to or would be good at academic research.</p>
<p>“mini, we’re now getting close to fields I know reasonably well and what you are saying doesn’t ring true. Do you have data not on who got PhDs in a field but on who got PhDs at top 10 graduate programs?”</p>
<p>No. Only have "undergraduate origins of Ph.D.s. I do have data on the faculty of my d’s top-3 Ivy program. Precisely one has an undergraduate degree from an Ivy. (They don’t have degrees from Amherst, Williams, Swarthmore, or Pomona either.) Of students admitted in the past five years, not a single one has an Ivy undergraduate degree. Dozens and dozens applied.</p>
<p>No, there is NO (paid or unpaid) undergraduate research in the first two years in the humanities at Princeton. Zero. Nada. Doesn’t exist. (Oh, I’m sure someone will find an exception ;)!) And virtually none outside the thesis in the latter two years. Same when I was at Chicago back in the dark ages. Can’t speak for other disciplines, though I have doubts than ANY of them have the degree of paid in-term research assistants - in any discipline - that Smith College STRIDE students have in their first two years. </p>
<p>And, agreed that research is not the be-all and end-all. Most students aren’t going into academia, and aren’t going into medicine. </p>
<p>As for how well the colleges are known? I’ve related my Williams experience. Paint company would be a step up.</p>
<p>You can also see the impact of undergraduate research in the awarding of Fulbright scholarships:</p>
<p>[Top</a> Producers of U.S. Fulbright Students by Type of Institution, 2011-12 - International - The Chronicle of Higher Education](<a href=“Top Producers of U.S. Fulbright Students by Type of Institution, 2011-12”>Top Producers of U.S. Fulbright Students by Type of Institution, 2011-12)</p>
<p>Smith, with students with ostensibly much lower SAT scores, consistently gathers far more Fulbrights per capita, and with by far a much higher success rate, than any of the research universities or any of the Ivies. Moreover (what you can’t see here) is that a far higher percentage are *research<a href=“as%20opposed%20to%20teaching”>/I</a> Fulbrights. Pitzer and Pomona also gather outsize numbers pretty consistently (and likely for similar reasons). Since it couldn’t be asserted (easily) that the students are “smarter”, it has to have something to do with their preparation.</p>
<p>It seems that most can agree that a top student can/will be successful at a large research university or at a decent LAC. More importantly (to me!) is whether a middle of the road student can/will be successful at either of these options. My personal feeling is that a good (but not amazing) student may get more personal attention/opportunities at a LAC than at a large university. Am I deluding myself?</p>
<p>mini, I have never had any idea of what comprises research in the humanities or what one would use a student for. So, I can’t speak to that. [I tried to stay as far away as possible]. But, I completely believe you. I wonder if there is research money for students in humanities anywhere or if there was 25 years ago.</p>
<p>I am not clear if, your earlier post, you were also asserting that undergraduates don’t do paid research in the sciences and social sciences at Princeton. While I don’t know of a formal program of undergraduate research at Princeton, Harvard or MIT, students interested in a subject go talk to professors in the area and ask if they can be hired as a research assistant or if they can do an independent study. There are definitely undergraduates doing research in labs or getting RA money to work on professors research at these schools. I was employed for all 4 years and 4 summers. But, you had to ask and have something to offer. I never heard about anyone doing research in humanities then but it may have happened. But in the sciences and social sciences. I know kids now who are doing research with professors at these schools. I know other kids who are not. I know kids who talked their ways into working on research grants at Harvard who are now professors at places like MIT. [I had breakfast with one recently]. In the fields I know, being allied with the stars is helpful. </p>
<p>At the moment, one of my kids is definitely not going into academia and the other likely not. If he does, he’ll be going with the lower probability part of my forecast here, because he is at an LAC. He’ll figure out a way to make it work. </p>
<p>And, I guess a paint company is better than a gas pipeline company (no?).</p>
<p>familyof3boys, with a middle of the road student, LACs likely shine in terms of faculty attention and quality of education. Whether they shine relative to flagship state school in terms of employment prospects, I don’t know.</p>
<p>First of all, there ARE formal programs for paid research at LACs. (I know, 'cause my d. was in one.) As you noted, there are none at Harvard, Princeton, or MIT. </p>
<p>What is research in the humanities? My d., in her first two years at Smith, was paid to work with the founder of the Folger Consort to work from original sources to produce the first usable production score of the first opera ever written by a woman (in 1623). It culminated in three actual performances, with 2,000 people attending. The work, together with the historical and technical notes, wrote my d’s ticket to graduate school. At that graduate school, my d. now teaches undergrads. There aren’t any such research opportunities. None. If the faculty have research needs, they go to her and other graduate students (that’s what they pay them for.) And, yes, there are students who do theses and independent studies. But there is no program. There is no ongoing discussion among the faculty of mentoring undergraduates, there are no tutorials (Williams-style). </p>
<p>And, yes, great students (who are also great talkers) can often talk their way into fine opportunities. (Usually in their 3rd or 4th year). I actually have seen that happen more often at second-tier universities, where the star student is nurtured, mentored, and provided for.</p>
<p>But the proof is in the pudding. You can look at the undergraduate origins of Phds. You can look at the Fulbright research grants. The overrepresentation of good (not top, but good) LACs is extraordinary, and in virtually all disciplines (including math).</p>
<p>Again, research isn’t a be-all and end-all. When I was an undergraduate at Williams, I would have been totally incapable of doing really valuable research (or much research of any kind), and I was a top student. For me, it came later. (And frankly, maybe the lack of research experience worked in my favor, as I kept getting wider and wider, as everyone else was getting narrower and narrower.)</p>
<p>But the idea that going to a good (not top, but good) LAC will, as a whole, hamper a student from going to a good graduate or medical school program is just plain poppycock.</p>
<p>shawbridge: Oberlin is a little bigger than the others (in part because it also has a music conservatory program), and Haverford smaller, but Swarthmore, Haverford, Reed, and Oberlin combined are about the same size as Stanford or Harvard. So 25% or 20% in that crowd may well be overrepresentation. The other thing is that Reed and Oberlin, and probably Haverford for that matter, don’t make it into the LAC equivalent of HYPMCS (whatever that “C” is). (I use SWAMP for the LAC equivalent, although I am ambivalent about “M”.) So there’s enormous overrepresentation of non-top-5 LAC grads compared to graduates of non-top-5 universities.</p>
<p>If you look at the top 15 USNWR universities vs. top 15 LACs, I think the average aggregate class size is something like 28,000 vs. 6,000. If you think Berkeley and Michigan belong in that crowd, of course, the disparity gets much bigger. So 25% or 20% probably is some kind of overrepresentation on an apples-to-apples basis.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know that I’d classify Harvard or the field of economics, let alone Harvard’s econ department, as representative of academia generally.</p>
<p>Here’s the scorecard for Michigan’s philosophy faculty, generally regarded as one of the top handful nationally and for that matter in the world: LAC 9, Ivy 6, Non-Ivy Private U 4, Public Flagship 2, Foreign U 4, Undetermined (incomplete biographical data) 2.</p>
<p>There do, however, seem to be fewer LAC grads in economics, and possibly in some other math-heavy fields.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sorry I didn’t clarify that I grew up in Manhattan and the private HS I spoke of is in Brooklyn.</p>
<p>There are many ways to skin a cat.
I have one child who went to Pomona, majored in econ, worked for a number of years and got an MBA from a top 5 business school. She loved her Pomona years, made very close friends and when she was applying to B school, received excellent recommendations from teachers who hasn’t seen her in 4 years. She also received merit aids from many B schools. Having graduated from a LAC did not hurt her one bit.</p>
<p>I also have a son who went the other route. He attended an undergraduate business school (Wharton) because he did not want a small school environment and wanted to watch and participate in Div 1 sports. (His team played Army, Navy besides the Ivy league). The only advantage I could see in his having an undergrad business degree (OK, Wharton grants BS in Econ to everyone) is that it obviated a necessity for an advanced degree in his field. No MBA degree for him. This saved him 2 years tuition and opportunity (unemployment) cost.</p>
<p>The difference I could see in a large university vs. LAC is the on campus career office. My son had many more employers coming to campus to interview him(and found first employment through the on campus career office)while my daughter had to reach out to many more employers to find her first job.But she had several offers in hand before graduation.</p>
<p>Both are happily employed in fields they like and both love their undergraduate education and wouldn’t change a thing.</p>
<p>I don’t believe there’ ONE best way, if one has the motivation and ambition, there’s always a way to make it work.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As long as the student finds the right fit (academic and non-academic), a LAC may be perfectly fine and desirable.</p>
<p>However, the middle of the road student may not have a lot of choices of LACs and LAC-like schools to find the right fit, compared to a top student.</p>
<p>Note that many schools, whether big state universities or small LAC(-like) schools, catering to middle of the road students tend to emphasize pre-professional subjects rather than traditional liberal arts subjects (humanities, social studies, math, science), due to student demand. Liberal arts tend to get popular mainly at the more selective schools (state flagship-level selectivity and higher).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I just want to say that I agree strongly with each of Shawbridges points above. He and I don’t always agree, but here I could have written the exact same thing. </p>
<p>It might be more than a coincidence that we are both PhDs/professors in a business/econ environment. Take it for what you will.</p>