<p>My son will need to choose between Penn State and a small LAC that will provide a large merit aid scholarship (i.e., not a “Swarthmore”). The small LAC may be a better fit for his personality, so that he won’t get lost in the crowd. And, he might get more substantive research opportunities earlier, and more direct professor contact. And yet, it’s hard to rate the quality of small LAC physics departments and professors (what if it’s a weak program with a few unexciting professors?) On the other hand, Penn State has a very respected Physics department, but I worry that he’ll be taught by grad students and be behind all of those grad students and more assertive undergrads for research opportunities. Any advice?</p>
<p>Small schools do often provide great research and networking connections. A friend’s daughter went to a small NE LAC (also not a Swarthmore) and had fabulous experience, some great physics related summer opportunities (university settings and then a national lab) and was accepted to more than one grad program with full funding for a PhD. So if your kid would thrive in a smaller community, don’t hold back. Also: sometimes kids expand in new directions within the sciences and it is way easier to migrate to a broader or different major in a smaller school. The prestige/ranking of programs at the undergrad level can be very misleading so think more about what is the best fit for the whole undergrad experience.</p>
<p>My son just finished his first year as a physics major at a mid sized research U. </p>
<p>Few things to consider:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Make sure there are professors interested in the areas of physics your son is (if he knows). For example, my son is interested in Astro- and Particle- physics, and we found that those areas were not really represented at all at our State U. He would have had a hard time finding a mentor in his areas of interest, and no research jobs as no one does research in either. </p></li>
<li><p>When applying to grad schools, if that is what your son wants, connections are critical. I personally believe that having a variety of professors doing different things is important in terms of providing options for making those connections.</p></li>
<li><p>Course options. At DS’s school, there are 4 different levels of first year physics classes. At a small LAC, there likely will be one for everyone. Not good or bad, just depends on what he wants. I know DS really enjoyed his rigorous highest level ‘Physics for Physics Majors’ even though he was the only kid who had not previously had AP physics.</p></li>
<li><p>Activity in the dept. I know they have well known physicists come and give guest lectures, and there is hustle and bustle in the dept. He did enjoy that stuff.</p></li>
<li><p>I was surprised to find that a young, dynamic, internationally respected professor in his dept rarely had kids ask for a research position in his group. Just by asking, DS got a job just after his freshman year. If it’s a large dept, there are likely to be a lot of jobs available.</p></li>
<li><p>I wouldn’t worry about grad students teaching classes. Those would generally be the intro type classes and once he gets to be upperclassman, I wouldn’t think that would happen. Besides, grad students are sometimes better teachers :). Also, undergrads and grad students don’t directly compete as they do very different things. DS’s supervisor, for example, is a grad student and that’s just fine.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>For my kid, who is not known to be assertive, a small LAC dept would not have worked on many levels. I’d say go with your gut, let your kid surprise you. When he is doing stuff he really likes, he may not find it difficult to go after things he wants.</p>
<p>I was a graduate-school-bound math major at a small LAC. Even though our program was unusually strong for a school our size (10% of our students major in math!), the opportunities felt very limited. I ended up attending seminars and auditing courses at a research university in the area. The university also provided me with a peer group of graduate-school-bound math majors that just didn’t exist at my LAC. I felt rather isolated at my LAC because no one else in my year seemed to share my enthusiasm for my major.</p>
<p>If your son might be interested in graduate school in physics (I assume that’s on the table since you are thinking about research opportunities), I would urge you to investigate the rigor of the academic program before he enrolls. There are huge variations in math and I assume that the same holds true for physics. In math, some LACs teach graduate-level courses as undergraduate electives. Some other LACs don’t even offer the core undergraduate courses. The latter are not set up to prepare students for graduate school, and the few graduate-school-bound math majors coming out of them need a “remedial Master’s program” first to get up to speed for regular graduate programs.</p>
<p>I went to a small LAC for chemistry and now teach at a major university. My physics-major daughter will start in the fall at a small LAC.</p>
<p>The most important criteria are personality and fit. No matter which school your son chooses, what he gets out of it will depend on what he puts into it. A strong program doesn’t mean he’ll learn anything, and a hard-working kid will get more out of a “weak” program than you might expect. At the Big State U where I work, I’ve seen the full spectrum of motivated to unmotivated students, all in the same department at the same school, with vastly different outcomes – everything from a freshman doing research in quantum chemistry to a recently-graduated chemistry major who couldn’t find sodium on the periodic table. It’s what the student brings to the college that makes the difference.</p>
<p>b@r!um:</p>
<p>Just reminds me that DS is actually taking more math classes during his first two years of college than physics classes. Needs the background before he can take the upper level physics classes.</p>
<p>I was looking at both Penn State and Ursinus because of their Biochemistry and Molecular Biology major. Although Penn State was much larger, the top students don’t get lost in the crowd. They have much better research opportunitites. At Ursuinus, I was offered a near-full ride. I would have been one of the top students and would have had many opportunities for research, but they would have been nowhere near as good as those at Penn State.</p>
<p>My personal choice is PSU. They have a well-respected Physics department, and a large school means that they have more funds for better research programs. Their honors college is one of the best in the country and has a small-school kind of feel, so he gets the small LAC feel in a more intelligent environment with the Honors College while the big school means he gets a better education.</p>
<p>I think as a student, I would prefer the LAC because it sounds like he has a pretty sure opportunity for research, which is a pretty big deal in the sciences from what I hear. I mean I am sure one could find research at a state university too, but it might be more competitive or more of a “test tube watcher” job. Also, if a smaller school would make him happier, I think that that is probably half the battle of getting a good education, if you aren’t comfortable at the school you attend, you might not be able to give it the 120% you otherwise would.</p>
<p>In LACs the problem is that the research is not going to be cutting edge, and the professors are less likely to have large grants to allow them to hire undergrads. There is a reason Penn State is an R-1 institution which means they give high priority to research.</p>
<p>If your son wants small classes, then the LAC makes sense. But the research opportunities will by definition be better at Penn State.</p>
<p>Find out how many of the students go on to grad school in physics- not just percentages as they can be misleading- and where they went. Post #3 saved me a lot of writing- well said! Also check on the other hard science offerings as he may switch (son started with math/physics as choices, ended up with math and comp sci double major). A big research U may allow the student to take grad level classes. Find out the grad school rankings for the research school- it could vary from the overall school ranking significantly (a top school can have weak depts).</p>
<p>After all of this- have your son go with his overall feelings for the school. The whole experience matters.</p>
<p>I personally favor the research U for science but keep hearing how some LACs have more students become science professors. A problem area could be mid sized schools- you really have to examine their offerings. For example- Wash U only has one starter general chemistry class (and lots of premeds) whereas UW-Madison has at least 3, and a much better reputation in that field. Likewise with other sciences.</p>
<p>Professors enjoy students who care about their subject. TAs at top U’s will be the best minds and closer to students experiences. Smaller classes will be found in Honors courses.</p>
<p>Remember, like a big city, a large school is composed of neighborhoods, your son will find his niche among those with the same interests and classes. Will he find the same peer group at the LAC? Or will he be the outsider? Often schools try to upgrade themselves by offering money to top students.</p>
<p>Excellent points above, but I would add - </p>
<p>As a PA parent, I have yet to hear complaints from students (even students not in Schreyer) that they were not able to find research opportunities on campus, as early as freshman year. OTOH, when we looked at LAC’s a few years ago, we could not get a direct answer wrt whether or not our student would find on-campus research opportunities, and when these might open up, even for a student receiving a top merit scholarship.</p>
<p>S1 goes to a small lower tier LAC - here is a link to what his fellow classmates are up to. I think it really depends on the individual department within a given LAC and also the luck of the draw when it comes to professors.</p>
<p>[Microgravity-2010</a> — Features — Carthage College](<a href=“http://www.carthage.edu/features/microgravity-2010]Microgravity-2010”>http://www.carthage.edu/features/microgravity-2010)</p>
<p>I agree with post #3 also. At a large university, he will need to be self-driven moreso than at the LAC. All the opportunities will be there at the large university, but he will have to work for them. </p>
<p>D1 just graduated from UMD-College Park with double degrees in Physics and Astronomy. When she was deciding between schools, she was choosing between Williams and UMD. She ultimately chose UMD for all the reasons ihs76 stated, as well as its proximity to Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, MD (where she had internships beginning in fall of her sophomore year), although Williams offered nearly one-on-one faculty interaction and probably (paid for) international research. She came across several profs at UMD in the physics dept that she knew to avoid for future classes…if there had been that type of personality/style conflict at Williams she would have had no choices. Additionally, she was able to drop really tough higher level classes in semesters when she realized she’d bitten off more than she could chew, and took them the next semester or next year. At a LAC, it would be likely that those higher level courses would be offered only at select times, and she would not have had as much freedom to choose. </p>
<p>She’s off to Harvard to begin her Astronomy Ph.D. program in the fall. She certainly took advantage of every opportunity given to her at the larger university for her undergrad. As spdf pointed out, though, it’s really up to the student…I’m sure she would have done great wherever she had ended up, though she has often said, however, that she couldn’t imagine having nearly as good of an experience anywhere else. She was happy and hit the ground running as a freshman. That’s the most you can hope for!</p>
<p>The above poster (astromom or whatever) made a good post, but I should add one thing to it. UMD is a tippy-top physics school; they’ve got the Joint-Quantum Institute and NIST right there, as well as other stuff mentioned. If the big research school is a top school in physics, and you do well in it, that will always help.</p>
<p>However, I just finished my first year as a physics major at a tiny department (with no grad program in physics) at a state school, though it might as well be an LAC because of the size of the physics dept. I got sort of lucky in that we had a guy who was in big with NIST, and another guy who went to Yale and has some connections in astrophysics (I’ve done/am doing research with both of these guys). At first the department didn’t look good, but a few people here make it really good. There’s the NIST guy who went to JHU, Yale guy, a Naval Research guy, and some others who do some pretty awesome work (collaborations with GaTech for computational work in solid state/graphene physics). It’s hard to tell when the physics department isn’t getting any money, doesn’t get advertised, and only has around 40-60 majors total in any given year. That being said, I’m publishing my first paper sometime this year, won a research grant, worked with two genius professors in two different fields (I’m actually in a transition phase right now), and I’m basically a junior with credit hours. That last thing probably won’t apply to any normal LAC since our classes are really easy (hence me loading up on them without much hassle). Still, I’m likely to publish at the very least another paper before I hit graduate school. Consider that 95% of undergraduates in the U.S. don’t even publish once. The reasons for this are pretty clear: there are no postdocs, graduate students, or really that many other undergrads to get in the way, so I get most of my professors’ time (the time he gives for student research anyway). I also work very hard, and since I’m the only student I get special stuff, like using grant money to go on trips to work with collaborators, or get a pretty awesome weekly wage for the area. Also, I’m not forced to do anything. I feel like I can be an exceptional physics student once I get to graduate school, and I think that it wouldn’t have happened had I been at a school like GaTech where I’d be another statistic, feel like another statistic, never have done anything above and beyond my peers, and been ignored by professors who have better things to do, etc. That’s just my personality, I guess, because I love to do all of this reading and learning on my own. Recommendations is another thing; relative to the others, I’ll be a really good student, so having a professor say that about you is really, really good for graduate admissions. You also have to realize that even senior undergraduates are typically dumb and useless in research, unless they start really early. At R-1 universities, professors have to publish at least a paper or two a year, and get about 400% of their salary in grants, or something. They don’t have time to teach an undergrad everything. At a smaller department, I get all of this, from genius world-class researchers.</p>
<p>I’m not giving any advice, I’m just telling my story. I’ve just finished my first year, and I’ve done a lot of great things (I think) and I feel like I owe it to the facts that I described above, the most important probably being that my research advisers actually care about me being a successful physicist.</p>
<p>Let me know if you have further questions, and I hope my post helped a little.</p>
<p>hadsed- the real test will be when you want the more advanced courses and are applying to grad school. You may have done just as well at the more competitive college. Your testimony is anecdotal and doesn’t mean every/most student will have the same experience/opportunities. Good luck.</p>
<p>There are some things that are factually wrong about what hadsed said. In R1 institutions, professors don’t get some if their salaries from grants, the grants are additional to their salary and are only for research use, which is why they have more resources to hire research assistants (undergrad or grad). These grants are competitive, professors at a LAC can apply, but on average, the better researchers are likely to get larger grants. Also, you said professors at R1 have to publish several papers a year. Tenured professors at an R1 do not have publication requirements. They publish more because they do more research, not because they have to.</p>
<p>^I can’t speak for whether this is true of all R1 universities, but dh is a professor at a med school. Most of his salary comes out of grants and although he’s tenured if he wants more grants he has to keep publishing.</p>
<p>
I did mention at the end of my post that I’m just telling a story and not really trying to give advice. Everyone is different, which is why reading other peoples’ stories is good for others because they can make their own decisions about what they think might work for them.</p>
<p>Anyway, because of my relationship with the professors in this department, I can take any textbook at any level and do a directed reading with any willing professor. Of course this only works for more independent students, and also because it’s a small department I might have some problems getting help if I’m doing Zwiebach’s intro to string theory course. Still, getting one-to-one attention on graduate material from an expert is something that is really, really great. And if you’re the type of student that really is passionate about physics and willing to learn it, you won’t get bored because the class is moving to slowly or you’re skipping material, or maybe you need to take more time at certain places than others (we all have those topics that we don’t quite understand at first). You’re free to work at your own pace, and it forces you to work harder because the professor knows you personally and will be noticing your performance and abilities directly.</p>
<p>Also, advanced classes are good to have and everything, but there are a few things you can that are better than this for your application (getting grants, going to conferences and presenting at them, publishing papers, all of which stems from having a good relationship with your research adviser).</p>
<p>
To your first point, yes, but they are still required to obtain that much in grant money (also I didn’t say that this is where their salary comes from directly, or at least didn’t mean to imply it, but that’s just a detail anyway).</p>
<p>On the publishing requirement; I don’t know where you’re getting your information from but I’ve talked to my professors (ones who have worked at R1 universities before, and have collaborators that do currently), and in fact the provost here is attempting to make our school an R1 school so I get the specifics on how this works and why. The rules may depend on the institution, but typically the reason you get hired at Princeton in the astro department is not because they think you’re a great teacher (they have great students, meaning they don’t need great teachers). These are the two important things at an R1 school that will get you tenure (grant money and publications). Once you get tenure it’s obviously harder to fire you, but I doubt that if you’ve gotten tenure that you’re going to become lazy all of the sudden. Perhaps at some places it’s a rather unwritten rule for tenured professors, but the implication is that if you had to do it to get tenure, you’re sort of expected to keep doing your job.</p>
<p>Anyway, again they’re just details. The main thing to focus on is that at R1 schools professors are at least expected to get grant money and publish. It doesn’t make much sense for a professor to hire an undergrad when he can fund a graduate student or a postdoc instead. Time is also of the essence because of the need to publish (as well as other administrative duties of the faculty members).</p>
<p>I keep seeing what I think is a myth about large research universities: that you’ll be in line behind grad students and never know the lead investigator. Science is done in teams, labs have multiple people on the team, and there is plenty of room for undergraduates. My gosh, my highschooler is working in such a lab along with undergrads (who she now trains), a few grad students, a post-doc or two, and a professor. But it’s a community, a great place to work as the more senior folks are all offering her training, and she knows the lead professor very well. There is no way this is less advantageous than if one was in a smaller environment. Not that I think LACs are fabulous in their own ways but I think it’s misleading to suggest they have this special advantage for research over larger recognized research environments. </p>
<p>Although my kid had the advantage of knowing what to do (because we are professors), she sought out her own opportunities in highschool, and had 3 different labs she could join just by asking! None of these professors knew her parents or even knew her parents were profs, so its not like she had some special connection or anything. But my main point being that if a kid in 10th grade can join labs so readily in a 40,000 person university, undergrads have nothing to worry about. </p>
<p>I’d also add that though larger environments have more students, they also have way more labs one can join and the vast majority of undergrads going there simply don’t seek out professors or research opportunities (compared to students at LACs I think). So long as a student in a large environment is willing to seek out opportunity, it will most definitely be there. And in some ways the competition will be LESS not MORE. </p>
<p>Finally, as others have said, it has a lot to do with WHO you work with. Invariably the bigger names are at well known research universities, not LACs.</p>
<p>I know that LACs tend to report more students going to get their PhD (proportionately speaking), but I think it’s reflective more of a self-selection mechanism than anything else. I think LACs tend to attract exactly the kind of intellectual kid that is drawn to a life of the mind and getting a PhD. Which is one of the many great things about many LACs (if you are that kind of kid, you may feel its a perfect fit going there for undergrad). But I also think for research opportunities and grad school, you can’t beat the large research institutions. IMHO.</p>