<p>Cellar,</p>
<p>I’m very willing to admit that students with an interest in obtaining a science PhD might be better off at a research university for undergraduate school, but I’m very surprised at the strength of the LAC’s listed in the study you cite. I really don’t think anyone considers Williams, Amherst or Swarthmore to be directly comparable to Harvard, MIT, Princeton or Yale. There may be some crossover, but AWS’s competitors are more likely schools like Brown, Dartmouth, or Penn among the Ivies. I don’t see little Jonnny pondering the big choice: Swarthmore, Haverford, or CalTech?</p>
<p>And science-oriented kids who want to do research will look to the larger schools to begin with, so the fact that a student who chooses a small LAC like AWS with limited research (and resume-building opportunities) for whatever reason, has a competitive chance of attending a top program is great. Such students must be impressive.</p>
<p>You note, of course, that one of the major conclusions of the 2003 article was that the sources of these PhD students have become more dispersed - there is a much greater competition from foreign schools, for example, so the fact that a Williams has held steady for 20 years at the 39% number is even more impressive.</p>
<p>Also, where does the first list you provided come from and what does it mean? I didn’t quite get it.</p>