<p>Haven’t read this thread, just this page, but I’ll add my 2c for whatever it’s worth. Any kid who wants to go on to a PhD program, whether they’re coming from a national university or LAC, is going to do fine w/ acceptances if they have a decent GPA, particularly in their discipline, great GRE scores, some research (yes, even in the humanities), and other related ECs. I went to a small woman’s LAC in MA, majored in art history, researched w/ my profs (did research for their journal articles/chapters of books they were writing and was graciously acknowledged in print), did internships at RISD’s Museum of Art and the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum. Got a Mellon Fellowship for grad school and went to a leading state university…nothing like my undergrad experience. Could I have done the same thing coming from a university? Absolutely. My S is a freshman at a national university. Over winter break he emailed 10 profs who head up STEM labs, 7 responded, interviewed him and all offered a job. He applied to that many b/c he thought that as a freshman, he have little chance of getting a spot in labs that are filled w/ doctoral candidates and post-docs. In the end, what matters is that the kid find a school that fits him/her academically and socially because really, most schools offer research opps and most offer great classes. Kids know them when they see them, just as they’ll later recognize the right spouse, house or bridal gown – for all our discourse and mental energy, it comes down to gut reactions.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Excuse me, but people in the humanities do research. It usually doesn’t require fancy labs or big-ticket expenditures. But then neither does most mathematical research, or for that matter theoretical physics. </p>
<p>Some classicists translate and interpret previously untranslated texts, or re-translate and reinterpret texts, or do literary criticism on ancient texts, or do historical research either in aid of interpretation or simply to advance our historical understanding of ancient periods. Classical archaeologists might spend months or years in field research. See, e.g.</p>
<p>[Yale</a> University, Department of Classics : Research](<a href=“http://www.yale.edu/classics/research.html]Yale”>http://www.yale.edu/classics/research.html)</p>
<p>Historians obviously do original research, often spending months or years working with archives or other troves of data which they can mine for clues to the past.</p>
<p>Academic philosophers doing original philosophy (as distinct from merely teaching about what other philosophers have done) rightly regard their work as a type of research, advancing the state of human thinking on big and difficult theoretical questions.</p>
<p>No less than the sciences, these disciplines are not just about handing down existing knowledge; they’re about making new discoveries, creating new knowledge, and pushing the boundaries of human understanding. And just as in the sciences, that doesn’t just happen; it’s the product of hard, careful, painstaking work by people who are not only bright and clever and creative and singularly focused, but also well-trained and highly skilled in the technical aspects of the craft. And just as in the sciences, passing the baton to the next generation certainly requires “mentoring,” but it also requires supervised apprenticeship training in actually doing the type of research that is done in the discipline.</p>
<p>I can’t speak for LACs generally, but that type of academic apprenticeship seems to be mission #1 at my D1’s LAC, Haverford. Having spent most of my life around research universities, including some of the very best publics and privates, my impression is that Haverford is more singularly focused on this at the undergrad level than most top research universities are. But it’s not for everyone. Most college students will never become academics, and in many fields the employment outlook for academics is pretty dire, making a Ph.D. program in the discipline a questionable career move. But as for preparation for graduate work, I actually think Haverford does a better, more thorough, and more systematic job of that with its undergrads than any major research university I know.</p>
<p>If we’re going to throw around LAC’s like Sweet Briar as examples of the LAC, then let’s look at places like, oh, University of Wyoming as a Research University.</p>
<p>I’m snotty enough that I think there are about 30-50 LAC’s and about 50-100 universities that make my list of reasonable schools for consideration by most competitive students. </p>
<p>Let’s not compare apples to pipe wrenches in the process.</p>
<p>(apologies to any grad from U/Wyoming…maybe I should have picked North Dakota instead)</p>
<p>Well, at least you’re honest about your biases, TheDad. So we can really get the sparks flying, why don’t you provide the list of the 30-50 LACs and 50-100 universities that are “reasonable” for “competitive students,” in your opinion. Then maybe you could define “competitive students.” And while you’re at it, perhaps you could say what they would be competitive for. Nobel prize consideration? Solving one of the remaining Millennium Prize Problems? Figuring out “what the mama saw” in “Me and Julio Down by the Schoolyard”?</p>
<p>Ok-did a tour (first one) of a “research university” yesterday and a few things stood out in comparison of the LAC tours we have done:</p>
<p>From the tour guide-who was fantastic, one of the best we have had</p>
<p>“If you go in during office hours, introduce yourself, sit in the front row and ask at least one question every class your professor will start to recognize you and if you ask for help they will usually help, otherwise the TA’s are usually around”
vs.
LAC tour "the professors get to know your name really quickly, they are always available for help. If they are not around, any of the prof’s are more than happy to answer questions and help. Just poke your head in their office. TA’s, we don’t have TA’s that teach, there are some that are lab assistants though.</p>
<p>From the admissions counselor after being asked how many kids that start school there right out of high school finish in 4 years and how hard is it to get into classes:</p>
<p>“Well, we know that everyone likes to tout their graduation rates but you know, a lot of kids here do a study abroad, internships, etc. and that sets them back, but if you look at our 6 year graduation rate, it’s great. As far as classes go, well, the gen ed’s are pretty easy to get into because there are usually about 300 kids or more in those and they are just lecture halls, once you get into your major, if you aren’t in one of the popular majors, it’s pretty easy. If you are in a popular major, it’s best if you bring in as many credits to start so you have a higher standing to sign up for classes…then meanders off into med-school placement rates, which is actually lower than any other school we’ve looked at but still not horrible”</p>
<pre><code> vs
</code></pre>
<p>LAC–the core classes are structured so there are enough seats for everyone. You might not get the exact prof or time you want but you will get in. Every once in a while you run into a scheduling issue, not so much that there aren’t openings but sometimes the class times conflict with other classes in your schedule. We try to work with you the best we can, some kids end up taking an independent study during the semester if we can’t.</p>
<p>Sorry Mini, I am a graduate of a research university, as is my H, we’ve both been grad students at research universities, and my kids are all graduates of research universities. (there’s my bias.) You are the poster who likes to claim that anecdote is not the plural of data- I can assure you that even when dinosaurs roamed the earth when H and I were in school, we met and learned under plenty of famous professors. My kids even more so. One kid got a summer job when Famous Professor picked up the phone to call a former grad student and said, “hi it’s me, Joe, you have to meet this kid”. (believe me- my kid is not that extraordinary) One kid got bumped ahead in line for two different fellowships based on two professors (one in the department, one outside) calling in some favors. One worked as an editor for two years on a professors book (yes, humanities professors do research) and several years later, this professor is still the “go to guy” for advice on careers and what-not, even though he’s old and famous and renowned and not even in the same field.</p>
<p>Some U’s allow grad students to act as de facto faculty members. Others do not. Some Nobel prize winners don’t know the names of their undergrads. Others attend their former students weddings and kids baptisms and are god-parents to scores of little ones whose parents still consider them the singular most important impact on their intellectual development.</p>
<p>And the gods of CC are truly nuts if they think that most kids going to LAC’s are attending the likes of William and Amherst. </p>
<p>you guys need to get out more.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And the gods are equally crazy if they think that most kids going to “research universities” are attending the likes of Stanford and Princeton.</p>
<p>Look, there are something like 3,000 four-year colleges and universities in this country. A lot of them are pretty crappy, and not just small ones. Quite a few do a pretty good job with limited resources. And a small handful are outstanding. But excellence doesn’t correlate with size.</p>
<p>With reference to many of the exchanges, isn’t it both understandable and a very good thing that people feel strongly in favor of different entities? This way you have the opportunity for more people to get their needs satisfied with less competition.</p>
<p>abs, I’m merely pointing out that “like” needs to be compared to “like” in the LAC vs. Research University debate. You can set the lines wherever you like as long as they’re correspondingly equitable. Judging by grades & scores, once you pass the Top 50 LAC’s and the Top 100 research uni’s, admissions isn’t all that competitive. Not opinion, fact.</p>
<p>CC has a bias towards high-achieving students and their choices. Shrug.</p>
<p>Fair enough, TheDad.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>FWIW, 2 relatives in my family have gone to regional schools. One attended a SUNY that is not one of higher regarded SUNYs, and other attended a mid sized regional private university that was not ranked well at all when he graduated (it has gotten a somewhat better reputation in recent years, but that has nothing to do with his career, and is still not a top school). Both of these people paid some dues for about 2 years, but both were recognized for their hard work and now have FABULOUS jobs. One of my relatives was noticed by another firm’s CEO early in his career and the CEO asked him to work for his company, so he bypassed the traditional process in applying for a job. The other relative kept networking and jumping from company to company as in independant contractor (going to highest bidders for his work), until he landed the job that he wanted. My point is that their colleges had NOTHING to do with their successful careers, and both are VERY successful.</p>
<p>My S2 attends a very small school (not a LAC, but it could be mistaken for one). He is being offered opportunities that I know he would not have had at a larger school. Frankly, I really do not think that my son would have been happy at a large school either, but I could never be sure.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not sure on what basis you’re drawing the line at 100 research universities and 50 LACs. I’d say it’s either more like 50 of either kind, or 100 of either kind, but I just don’t see the LACs dropping off faster than the research universities. Once you get to research U’s ranked about #55 and higher, admit rates in the 60%, 70%, and 80% range become the norm rather than the exception. The same is true for LACs. And if you look at the middle 50% SAT/ACT scores, the #50 through #100 LACs seem to attract equally if not better-credentialed students—though overall it’s pretty close.</p>
<p>Here are the middle 50% scores of some representative LACs: #57 Wheaton (IL) 26-32; #57 Willamette 1140-1340; #68 Kalamazoo College 26-31; #71 Lewis & Clark 1180-1375; #81 Gustavus Adolphus 25-29; #81 Muhlenberg 1120-1340; #90 St. Mary’s (MD) 1118-1330; #94 Hope College 24-29.</p>
<p>And here are the middle 50% scores of some representative research Us in the same #50-#100 range: #55 Ohio State 26-30; #58 UConn 1130-1310; #68 Clemson 1140-1330; #71 Iowa 23-28; #82 Auburn 24-30; #82 Vermont 1085-1280; #94 Colorado 23-28; #97 Texas Christian 1050-1280.</p>
<p>I agree with the general thrust of your comment, though: CC is dominated by people obsessed with getting into the top 10 of either category; or barring that, the top 25; or barring that, the top 50. A subgroup is looking at schools in the #50 to #100 range. Very little discussion of any school outside the top 10% of all colleges and universities in the United States.</p>
<p>founder of Noodles and Co was from Augustana (IL) and frequently extolls the virtues of the small LAC.</p>