<p>coureur, an id or box number would do. Again, you quoted me out of context, as did pizzagirl.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Sorry, that would not come even vaguely close to being a proper citation for a scientific or other scholarly journal. If my integrity as a scientist is going to be called into question based on quoting you on this board, you are going to have to provide us the information we need to do it right.</p>
<p>You scientists are worse than lawyers!!!</p>
<p>Chillllll out. (smiley face)</p>
<p>Parent1986, people often try to keep their posts a reasonable length and reader friendly. Part of how that is done is by quoting only as much from another person’s message as is necessary to make the connection to their own points clear. What part of the context did you feel was critical and missing when people quoted you?</p>
<p>Parent1986, your statement was nonsensical. You said that you believed that top colleges have feeder schools that they often draw from (true, albeit limited compared to the past), and that because these feeder schools had GC’s who could give the schools the real scoop on the kids, that therefore it was rare that deserving kids would be left out.</p>
<p>Only a small minority of kids go to feeder schools - so how does the presence of feeder schools assure in any way that “deserving kids won’t get shut out”?</p>
<p>And yes, I know your assertion is that deserving kids are rarely shut out. </p>
<p>Which begs the question - so then, what’s the problem with Ivy league admissions, if deserving kids are rarely shut out?</p>
<p>Forgive me for not using proper scientific quoting style. I was math-y but not science-y.</p>
<p>So, with a little digging, I found an MIT Physics Department site that says there are 220 physics majors at MIT. So, say 55 per year, if they are evenly split across all 4 years, and more per year if students can’t declare a major in the first year. Then I went to the APS site, to look for job openings for Assistant Professors tenure-track in physics at
[APS</a> Job Center - My Account](<a href=“http://careers.aps.org/search.cfm]APS”>http://careers.aps.org/search.cfm)</p>
<p>I found 65 openings, total. The first to come up were Penn State Mont Alto, Duke, Penn State Hazleton, Denison, Michigan Tech, University of St. Thomas. Several of these are not as strong as the places Schmaltz was making fun of–or maybe Schmaltz was making fun of CC posters for making fun of. </p>
<p>Not all of the faculty openings will be filled this year. It is possible that more positions will be added later on, but this would be the logical recruiting season, for faculty to start in 2012-2013. At least in the past, a few places (<em>cough</em> Caltech <em>cough</em>) have put up ads when they don’t have any plans to hire–but just wanted to cover all of the bases, in case someone that they did want to hire was identified (by invitation, not by application).</p>
<p>Just on a numerical basis, I think it makes some sense for a 17-year-old who has been thinking about a faculty career in physics research at a research institution, but isn’t admitted to MIT, to consider other options. It makes more sense if you factor in the thought by the 17-year-old that MIT admissions sees the whole picture, he/she has no real idea of the national/international competition, and MIT felt that there were more promising people in the same age cohort. </p>
<p>Of course there are alternate routes to a faculty position in physics research! Of course “I’ll show them!” is a possible reaction, and maybe a fruitful one. But I don’t fault someone who looks at a wide array of alternatives, and picks one.</p>
<p>I don’t think a 17 yo who loves physics and has been thinking about a faculty career in physics has sufficient life experience to know what a faculty career in physics is like, so it really is throwing the baby out with the bathwater to then trash an entire interest in physics because a school with a sub 10% acceptance rate didn’t admit you. That would be about as illogical as throwing away your plans to become a doctor because you didn’t get into Johns Hopkins for undergrad.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Is MIT some kind of king-maker when it comes to physics? Is it the place all physics majors just dream about, or what? I swear, it’s like a bad crush. “Because MIT didn’t want me, there’s no sense in going on.”</p>
<p>Also, just for clarity, I understand that for a substantial fraction of the MIT students “faculty member at a research institution” is not the dream job. I am not meaning to suggest that MIT students have an inside track to faculty positions over students at other places (top or not), among those who do want to become faculty members. In fact, that’s why 65 positions are really not many. One has to include all of those other students in the group that is pursuing the 65 openings. </p>
<p>I’m just trying to show that it’s not pathological (Pizzagirl’s term, earlier post–sorry, if I look up the number at this point, I’ll lose everything I’ve typed) for a student to reconsider physics, if not admitted to MIT. And the student need not have the idea that only “top” schools are appropriate for them, to be reconsidering.</p>
<p>I would imagine some of the “promising people” in an age cohort that QuantMech talks about have no interest in MIT or Caltech. There are certainly other schools out there. The whole idea that all the great students want to or have to go to an Ivy or a place like MIT sometimes cracks me up.</p>
<p>Maybe someone will look at the APS list of tenure-track Assistant Professorships on offer at the APS site, and estimate how many are at research-intensive institutions.</p>
<p>Numerically, it seems to me that it’s sort of analogous to the student deciding that the odds of becoming an NFL player are low, and perhaps he needs Plan B. Or a student deciding that the odds of being hired by the NYCB are low, and maybe she/he needs Plan B.</p>
<p>A student who doesn’t get into Johns Hopkins (undergrad?) still has quite good odds of becoming a physician. The number of new physicians per year is very much higher than the number of new tenure-track Assistant Professors in physics.</p>
<p>Agreed, sevmom (#949). I think writing your post overlapped with my putting up #948. But that just adds to the number of people–down the road–pursuing the very limited number of tenure-track faculty positions at universities that can support research in physics.</p>
<p>I don’t mean to discourage anyone from considering a research career in physics. I am a strong advocate of “where there’s a will, there’s a way.” That sometimes works out, and sometimes not. I don’t think anyone loses by pursuing an undergrad degree in physics, somewhere, and seeing how things work out.</p>
<p>I just object to Pizzagirl’s terming a viewpoint “pathological,” when it looks fairly realistic, not to mention flexible, to me–given what the 17-year-old can know.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree. What a narrow, provincial world. </p>
<p>* “If I can’t make it / there, I can’t make it / anywhere, It’s up to you, MIT, MIT!” *</p>
<p>Since mini has been using a particular site on a thread with a similar bent, here here is the list of colleges where Physics PhD’s received their undergrad degrees in order:</p>
<p>Cal Tech
Harvey Mudd
MIT
New Mexico Institute of Mining & Tech
Reed
University of Chicago
Princeton
Carleton
Marlboro
Rice</p>
<p>To be more accurate, it reflects the percentage of undergrads at each school who went on to Ph.Ds in physics.</p>
<p>It is also worth noting that the place where female Ph.D.s come from is sometimes different:</p>
<p><a href=“The Best College Rankings and Lists | Inside College | CollegeXpress”>The Best College Rankings and Lists | Inside College | CollegeXpress;
<p>Re post #953: In my post #948, I have tried to explain what I am arguing. Yes, there are great physics majors elsewhere! Of course! Those who are interested in faculty research positions just add to the group of people pursuing the extremely small number of tenure-track openings at research universities. That makes the decision (of the students we are talking about) to drop physics seem more realistic, rather than less. </p>
<p>I’d run all of the numbers, if I had time, but–must tend rutabagas.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Considering that QuantMech got into MIT herself (but turned it down), I don’t think she thinks that great students think they *have to * go. Also, I don’t think her own son, who is very talented in math or science, applied to MIT or the other super-elite schools, so she doesn’t think that all great students want to or have to go to MIT or an ivy. She certainly hasn’t made this point on this thread–these are straw men. I’ll leave it to you to figure out what she did say.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And don’t forget to make time to try out a new haute goat cheese! :-)</p>
<p>I just love that – haute goat! I wonder if the same goats that produce milk for haute goat have the best fiber for spinning…</p>
<p>QuantMech, That’s funny-“must tend rutabagas.” Have fun!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Okay, I’m going to make an admission and frankly I feel a bit sexist here. I assumed QuantMech was a man for some reason. Not that it matters to this discussion, but I don’t know why I assumed that. :O</p>