<p>What’s different for better or worse? </p>
<p>Will I get the same undergrad focus, the same opportunities and a similar experience? Will I miss out on anything from one side?</p>
<p>I’m curious. Let the replies flow.</p>
<p>Brown views itself as the university-college and I think we deliver. I address this point briefly in my thread about the curriculum and U-C concept.</p>
<p>What you'll gain here is access to professors who are world class researches as well as fantastic teachers. Your professors will be actively creating new knowledge in their field as well as teaching, and it is strongly encouraged that you take part in that research/creation of knowledge. This creates for a drastically different experience, IMO, as actually creating is a totally different kind of learning that cannot be done in the classroom that has been essential to my education. Our size is such that any and all students interested in that aspect of learning has access to research which is pretty awesome.</p>
<p>You will have some classes that are larger than at a typical LAC-- intro chem/organic chem, intro to economics, intro to neuro-- the so-called "Great Teachers at Brown" curriculum, etc. But we do also offer a tremendous amount of small courses and you don't ever have to take a large course (depending on your concentration) if you don't want.</p>
<p>We still value, and offer, a fantastic liberal education here at Brown, that is our goal.</p>
<p>Brilliant post. Although I STILL don't get why tenniskid123, a sophomore, is caught up with such threads so early in the game!</p>
<p>Sophomore? tenniskid-- you need to go have more fun and not worry about this for a while...</p>
<p>Top LAC also have professors who are creating new knowledge in their fields. They win national prizes, win grants, are elected to prestigious offices in their disciplines, publish their research, and everything else. In fact, the requirements to win tenure at top LAC are extremely tough and require that the candidate has an excellent reputation among her or his academic peers. So, imho, the difference between Brown professors and LAC is not as modestmelody describes.</p>
<p>It is literally impossible without the support of graduate students/grad student labor, the money, and the facilities that a graduate school provides to have world class scientific research at an LAC.</p>
<p>Certainly in the humanities and social science where facilities, equipment, and labor is not as essential, it is possible.</p>
<p>I would also say that institutionally, both for it's students and it's professors, the university is able to support research and foster it in ways that a college cannot. This is not to say there are not advantages of LACs, I think they're great, but one cannot ignore that a weakness is certainly research. In fact, one of the main powers of LACs was to refocus undergraduate education on education rather than being stuck in a system that put tremendous research pressure on professors and de-emphasized teaching, the commitment and skill required to do that well. It would be a difficult stretch to claim that LACs have the resources, commitment, support, and encouragement for research as just about any university. While it certainly does not stop professors from publishing and I'm sure can encourage it, the culture is aligned and designed in such a way that it is not a priority. </p>
<p>At Brown, research is a priority, not just something that happens when very intelligent people are using their minds.</p>
<p>Modestmelody: Thanks for your acknowledgment of the fabulous research in the social sciences and humanities that goes on in a wide variety of institutions, certainly outside of the research universities. </p>
<p>From what I've heard from scientist friends, places with graduate programs give the real research tasks to their graduate students. After all, faculty are judged by how their graduate students do. In fact, graduate programs are rated by the placement of their graduate students into top jobs and their publication production over time. Thus, undergraduates do not get the attention or research opportunities at large research universities as they would in other sorts of institutions. LACs and other schools without grad programs also typically place their students in universities' and research centers' research labs in the summer and sometimes during the academic year.</p>
<p>What you've heard from scientist friend is only true of very large research universities and has become very untrue recently. At Brown, with about 4500 undergrads and 1500 grads, not only is it easy to do research as an undergraduate, to get a degree in any science (an ScB) it is REQUIRED that you do at least one semester of research for credit, and in almost all of hte sciences it's actually 2 semester of research. We mandate research as an integral part of undergraduate education. UTRAs are stipends available for students over the summer to get paid to do research, and many students are paid directly through grant money at Brown.</p>
<p>Most universities which used to only give research to graduates have received a lot of flak lately because a huge trend in education in the last 15 or so years has been bringing real research to younger and younger students. I was doing real scientific research at a university a week after my 16 birthday. Most of those universities found they had to offer research to undergraduates to compete for students.</p>
<p>Good! But there's also a lot more science research going on at LACs than you acknowledge. Brown is a great university, there's no doubt about it. But there are gems all over the place and there's no need to tarnish them to promote Brown.</p>
<p>I don't think he was "tarnishing" them in any way or form.<br>
In short, he was just saying that Brown gets the best of both worlds.</p>
<p>It's ridiculous to assert I'm tarnishing anywhere, especially since no specific LAC is mentioned.</p>
<p>There is a major difference that cannot be denied between an LAC and a research university-- and it comes straight out of their names. LACs are configured to optimize and focus solely on their role as undergraduate colleges teaching the liberal arts. Research universities are focused on being power houses of research, and depending on the university, have varying degrees of undergraduate focus.</p>
<p>Schools like Brown which defines itself as a university-college is seeking to find balance between those two in a unique way. It is completely disingenuous to assert in anyway that an LAC is able to provide the same research experience as a university-- by their definition they lack the very faculties (in the general sense of the word) to provide a robust research experience to any student, undergraduate or otherwise. That's fine-- for some people that's not an essential component of their education, can be left to graduate school, etc etc. For some, especially physical science concentrators, there are benefits to small research universities with unmatched (within universities) support and emphasis on undergraduate education-- like say Brown, Tufts, or Princeton.</p>
<p>There are many advantages to LACs, but one major disadvantage across the board is the lack of research opportunity, support, and strength available at equal caliber universities.</p>
<p>Modestmelody is true. No significant cited hard science research occurs at LAC's. Even Dartmouth's grad programs are not that good. Brown's may be about average but there are fields where Brown is the UNDISPUTED leader. For example Brown grad program in cognitive or neuroscience is amazing and is really only rivaled by johns hopkins and maybe yale.</p>
<p>Brown along with Princeton are perfect examples of what a school should be like. Both have an undergraduate focus but are leaders in numerous graduate programs.</p>
<p>When you say that the research university is better than x, you are ranking it higher than something else. Perhaps "tarnish" is not the right word, but I was trying to convey the judgment being made.</p>
<p>I know plenty about LACs and research universities, having attended and worked at both. Sure, the most significant hard science research happens at research universities. However, the OP asked about undergrad research opportunities - not about where the cutting edge hard science research takes place. Research is not equivalent to science research and having excellent science research at an institution does not mean that undergrads do a lot of serious work in it.</p>
<p>By the way, can you point readers to some hard data comparing the numbers of undergrads involved in research at liberal arts colleges vs. research universities?</p>
<p>In many fields the cutting edge research component isn't as critical... </p>
<p>My daughter attends a top LAC and the main thing I see as a disadvantage (against Brown) is that it can be hard to get certain classes, and also fewer total classes are offered. There obviously can't be as much curricular breadth with 1/3 or 1/5 the number of students. I do not recall EVER having a problem getting into a class at Brown.</p>
<p>However momfromme, at Brown those two things are the same-- Brown is doing top science research and undergraduates are an integral part of that research. So when comparing Brown you're not comparing research university X. Here, they are the same thing. I'm speaking from direct experience at Brown and have given some examples how Brown DOES involve its students in research.</p>
<p>Also, can you point out where I said Brown was better than an LAC or any specific school? I pointed out the strengths Brown has being a university that are not found at top LACs and you've even conceded, after pushing for largely unnecessary clarification, that what I said was essentially true.</p>
<p>So if you're going to concede, "Sure, the most significant hard science research happens at research universities," and I'm saying that Brown involves its students in the research here in ways other universities do not (for instance, MANDATING research as a part of receiving a degree in science here), then what is the point you're making?</p>
<p>I said that Brown can offer research experiences that are not available and don't exists at LACs. You're not refuting that, just puffing smoke in support of LACs as though I've somehow painted them in any negative light. I didn't present any reason not to go to an LAC, just a reason to come to Brown due to a resource we have that LACs do not.</p>
<p>I don't play the numbers game, most of them are poorly reported and presented in disingenuous fashion. However, it's clear from the simple mission of a university v. an LAC that this is true. I'm sure if someone wants numbers they can Google, "Money spent per undergraduate on research" and find a nice list which will show them where the top 20-50 schools lie. </p>
<p>SBMom, I appreciate your insight. I should have thought of course offerings which is often brought up as an obvious different between the two, but it just didn't cross my mind.</p>
<p>Well I couldn't get into one class this semester. Though I didn't push it.</p>
<p>What course? Why didn't you push it? Did you show up three times?</p>
<p>modestmelody: I admire your commitment to Brown. But without data (surely something any educated person would want), there is no way to have a rigorous comparison of Brown versus other universities. Sure, every data set has problems. But well-trained individuals should have the skills to evaluate them.</p>
<p>Furthermore, while again I accept that Brown is a great university, it is not the best place for every college student. I know students who loved Brown and ones who found it not to their taste. It's great when students find a strong match. I hope we can all appreciate that one person's great match is not the right fit for all.</p>
<p>On class choice: There are a number of LACs that are associated with or in proximity with other colleges and universities. In those cases, the choices available is extremely wide.</p>