For PhD, you have to go to Grad. School. UG is just a step that has to be completed. UG will not prepare one for the carrer of scientists. I would think that just as with Med. School, it is not important where you attend for your UG, but what you as a student and person will do there, what opportunities you will not neglect, and opprotunites are absolutely everywhere. actually at schools that are supposed to be “top”, you will find many lectures are not taught by profs. So, what is a point in the fact that class is taught by world-renowned schientist? On the other hand, there are UGs with less recognized names where you find tha oficial policy is that all lectures are actually given by profs, not TA’s that focus on the undergrads and their research opportunities and that would be an indication of the better school for the UG. But still, the responsibilites are on the student schoulders and not on the insitution. So, from what I can tell based on personal experience, choose the school that you personally prefer to attend and do it after very careful research of the place and not on rankings.
@13thfloor IMO, undergrad research programs are looking for these attributes: 1) a strong, expressed interest in research, not just padding a resume for med school; 2) good grades in science courses… usually upperclassmen have an advantage here; 3) external validation (via recommendations) of an interest in science. Previous research can be a plus, especially if you can get a good recommendation from the mentor. On the other hand, some programs like to give slots to those without experience to “spread the wealth”.
It should be understood that having undergrads in one’s lab for just a summer can be an altruistic endeavor on the lab’s part. It takes time for people to become productive and effort to teach the undergrad. It’s all about data generation for the next grant/publication. If you can find a research lab close to your school such that more than a summer or semester can be devoted to the lab, you will have an upperhand in securing a position.
As another poster stated, application deadlines for summer research programs occur around this time of year. If you happen to miss the deadlines, there may be opportunities outside of formal programs. Contact the department heads or lab heads directly via phone/email to see if they might take a student on for the summer… this works best if you have a personal or mutual connection however.
As a Long time poster who only posts about what I know, I would contradict MiamiDAP for the 10th time to say, for a future scientist heading for PhD, UG selection makes a big difference. At Caltech and MIT, it is easy to arrange research programs. This is true for summer and year long programs. Even after graduation, my son wanted to explore research in a different department. They created a position for him, funded by a world re known professor. My son was not even working in his lab.
I am sure there are other colleges that make it easy to do funded research, but I can only mention the two places that I have first hand experience with. Both of these schools have classes taught by profs, with TAs doing sections. They help with assignments, review material, etc. these TAs take their roles seriously.
There are real differences in expectations between universities, even without factoring in non curricular undergraduate research. At some schools the intro geology class is just a series of short essays or even multiple choice questions. At others, the intro geology class demands that students be able to write 10 page field reports, do basic analysis (qualitative and quantitative), and research in depth on a particular topic.
Name two top schools which rely on non professors, or other non obviously qualified individuals, to lecture. There’s a huge difference between Gen. Petraeus lecturing about Iraq War policy and a harried grad student doing the same. In fact, by almost all metrics, it’s the less elite schools which make the heaviest use of adjunct labor in teaching undergraduates.
Can you be more specific about what to look for in UG programs? I went to a large state school with many research programs in which you could participate in all sorts of ways from Work Study to getting credit through 400 level Independent Research. I am aware of the programs which cough up funding for student-directed research, but how is that any more valuable than participating in someone else’s grant?
" usually upperclassmen have an advantage here;"
-All it took D. to get an internship at Med. Research lab at her in-state public was an email person in charge and a short inerview where the main topic of discussion was her Music Minor. The point is that this type of opportunity almost impossilbe to obtain outside of your UG, but any UG where you attend will have them. Just do not walk by, grab the opportunity, it is up to you. D’s research was great, lasted for 3 years (she was not an upperclssmen, she just started a sophomore year), she got 2 grants, based on her own proposal (another great opportunity to write your own proposal with cost calcs.) and had a poster presentation at the end. Great LOR from person in charge, overall great experience. Nobody does research to just pad some application. The adcoms can tell the difference. And D’s college did not even have a Med. School.
Opportunities for research are absolutely everywhere. They are meanningful, rewarding and end result may be more than one expected. All around my D. were nominated for PBK by the head of the lab (as one fringe benefit).
Of course, working on someone else’s grant, is what I was referring to. At Caltech, there is the summer SURF program. A student stays in his room, gets funding, and works in a lab. At the end, the student presents his research, or that of his lab, at a poster conference. MIT has January UROP. It is the attitude of the profs that make the difference; they welcome interested students.
I have no first hand experience that is recent, of other colleges. If I was researching Caltech, for example, I could find the high percentage of students applying for a SURF and receiving one. I would want my child to be able to talk to one or two profs, and be accepted into their lab. I would not wish them to be the best to get such an opportunity.
Unfortunately, I only know about these two colleges, and our state schools. In my area, I have pushed for kids to get positions at Scripps Lab. These are paid positions, but extremely helpful for a young person to see if research is the right path for them.
At my oldests LAC, every graduate is required to write publish and defend a thesis.
It certainly helps when they apply to graduate school.
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf08311/
My D attends Penn State UP and participated in a REU this summer that was held at Penn State. Other students were from UDel and UMass - Amherst and other large schools. She is continuing her research with the professor she was paired with for the REU during this (her junior) year and the next. She is using it for her senior thesis. I don’t think she would have had much opportunity for research as an undergrad at a school as large as Penn State without the REU since she isn’t a star student.
Miami, once again, it is great that your D had such a robust experience but it is an absolute exaggeration to state that every college will have quality research opportunities in the sciences. Complete nonsense. There are colleges where “research” amounts to lit searches, with some editing and trimming, to create a review of the work of other teams. I’m not disparaging this- it is great experience, but it is NOT the same preparation for a doctoral program in the sciences vs. a kid who has been actually working alongside scientists who are developing their own hypothesis and them testing them in a lab.
Not the same.
You love to proclaim that any kid can get anywhere from where he or she starts. Which may or may not be true for your D and her friends but is absolutely not true for some colleges. Poorly funded and equipped labs; money spent on fancy athletic stadiums but no investment in faculty; small grants which need to spread out over multiple teams or departments; professors who do not attend the key symposium in his or her field and are not the lead researcher or author on meaningful studies.
We know you are an expert on medical education and becoming an engineer and working in IT. You are NOT an expert in what it takes to get admitted to a doctoral program in the sciences and I think you need to defer to the OP who has already stated his/her credentials here.
I love this post! I’m a postdoc in the social sciences, and I agree with all of it. I went to a small LAC for undergrad, an Ivy for my PhD and am doing my postdoc at a well-known public research university in the Northeast.
I really love when you note that 1) crucial research for undergrad can be performed at an LAC department with good facilities and 2) the exact major doesn’t matter as long as you are taking the prerequisite courses.
While some faculty members may enjoy working with undergraduates and give some or many of them time and resources - it is absolutely true that they are not there for undergrads, in that it is not their primary job or task to educate undergraduates. Undergraduate education takes a back burner to generating research money for the university and educating and advising graduate students.
@dadof1 didn’t say that undergraduates absolutely cannot get good mentorship or research opportunities at large prestigious research universities. He simply said that the faculty at a place like MIT or Harvard have running research laboratories and getting grant funding as their primary purpose, and advising and teaching graduate students and postdocs as their secondary purpose. Having gotten my PhD at one major research university and currently doing a postdoc at another, I must concur. There are some faculty members, of course, who are excited to work with undergraduates and find a way to work it into their time (just like there are probably a few LAC professors who are deadwood and not up to date with their fields). But unfortunately, these professors do tend to be the exception to the rule.
And it’s not really through any fault of their own - it’s the way the jobs are structured. For example, my department in grad school was 80% soft money, which meant that faculty needed to fund 80% of their salary through grant funding (most from the NIH). Many large research universities work this way in their social science and natural/physical science departments. The way they hire and retain faculty promotes this, too. You are hired on the quality of your research record, not your teaching; and you are tenured and promoted on your research record, too. Publications are the currency of the field. Our provost flat out said that teaching plays a very minor role in the tenuring of professors, and quite frankly, many professors find ways to buy themselves out of teaching (particularly teaching undergrad classes, which tend to be time-consuming without having the benefit of being a test lab for new ideas and projects).
That’s not important for undergraduates, though. Undergrads don’t need to be publishing at the most important journals in the field; they just need to learn the basics and have a mentor who can foster passion and intellectual curiosity in them. (And this may be field-dependent, but I have absolutely seen posters and orals at meetings given by LAC professors. In fact, the person who had the poster space next to me at my most recent meeting was from Bates College, and we actually had a little chat about teaching at a small LAC because that’s what I would like to do, since I love working with undergrads.)
^^Couldn’t have said it better!
Thank you OP for this helpful post.
I think the original post is spot on! (I am a scientist also.)
Thanks @dadof1 and others for your advice. Son is well underway with his applications, so he’ll make the Feb. deadlines. He’s nervous about his grades (organic chem was no picnic!) But hopefully his demonstrated interest and recs will help him. Appreciate the insight from all.
MiamiDAP said : “I would think that just as with Med. School, it is not important where you attend for your UG, but what you as a student and person will do there, what opportunities you will not neglect, and opprotunites are absolutely everywhere. actually at schools that are supposed to be “top”, you will find many lectures are not taught by profs.”
I attended Penn State and graduated with a BS in Engineering. I never attended a lecture by anyone other than a professor. I don’t know where this idea came. Furthermore, I was very fortunate that almost every professor I had was also an excellent teacher.
“dh says he has rarely seen posters at meetings or read papers from professors at LACs in the most important journals in his field.” (Post #10)
A major reason is the comparative numbers of students/faculty at the large public & private research universities versus the LACs. Ohio State, for example, has 64,000 students and 6200 academic staff. But Earlham College has only 1,200 students. It would take more than 50 Earlhams to make up one OSU. Yet, on a percentage basis, Earlham is in the top 2% of higher ed institutions whose grads go on to get PhDs.
On our visits this past year to Earlham, Sewanee, Kenyon, Wooster, Union and several other LACs we have seen posters displayed in the science buildings describing the research work of undergrads. Our just-graduated tour guide at Union was moving to Philadelphia the following week to begin a graduate degree at Penn. He spoke directly about some of the research that was displayed in the hallway. Student tour guides at several of the LACs spoke of trips to conferences with professors to present their work.
I think OP’s point was that some LACs can be outstanding places to gain experience in significant scientific research. But as with anything, parents and students should be educated consumers. In choosing a college at which to study science, ask the right questions, speak directly to faculty members (admissions reps aren’t always knowledgeable or reliable on specifics in the sciences), see what alums have done, and pay attention to the vibe if you can visit the science departments while school is in session.
^^It’s true that science published in “the most important journals” usually doesn’t come from LACs. It’s equally true that the authors of science published in “the most important journals” are NOT undergraduate students at ANY college/university.
As an undergraduate, I think the most important thing is to “learn how to do science”; whatever the question may be is secondary. Choosing a graduate school is an entirely different question.
BTW, choosing the right lab for your posdoc is of the most importance for your scientific career.
As you can see, it’s a long journey.