<p>Being admitted to a top graduate program is a scaled down version of a holistic process. The two major criteria are grades/GREs and research experience. If you speak of elite LACs, the grads will do well getting into excellent graduate programs because of their high test scores (remember GREs are a modified version of SATs, which played a role in the students being admitted into the elite schools) and a bump for the competiveness of the classes. The reduced exposure to top research and course offerings at elite LACs is off set by their high test scores. We consider these factors when evaluating applicants for our own grad program (a molecular biology program). We overlook the poorer research environment because of their high admission stats. However, recall that the OP implied he/she does not have those type of stats. If he/she did, Yale, Penn, Harvard, which are real stem cell/cell bio powerhouses, would have been on the list.
Now, I happen to know of a few labs a small LACs that are doing some good research, but even in these cases, they are limited in the systems and techniques they can use. </p>
<p>A pathway for a student to set themselves up for admission into the top programs, and subsequently, to be competitive for both graduate and postdoctoral fellowships is to be an author on a paper. This requires the lab they join to publish regularly (large university). Labs at LACs typically don’t publish that much (1 paper every 3-4 years, if that). Even if students don’t publish, the advantages of being exposed to a competitive research environment cannot be overlooked. In addition to facilities and breadth of research areas, another advantage is that labs at larger universities contain a mixture of personnel- Postdocs, graduate students, undergrads and technicians. There are advantages to this, both in mentoring and networking. </p>
<p>While I understand the dissenting view that planning to run a research lab is a bit far off, I disagree that success can be measured by gaining admission to a PhD program or even obtaining that PhD. If you read the writings/opinions from organizations like ASBMB, they conclude that obtaining a PhD is not a good indicator of success. It’s what happens afterwards. I concede that large universities aren’t for everyone. Being at a large university when it is not a good fit is not good.</p>