@CrewDad Students at LACs are likely to have a much easier time getting research opportunities, since there are no grad students hogging the lab opportunities or time from the PIs. Take a look at which schools are producing doctoral student admissions at a high rate – plenty of LACs on the lists for the sciences and otherwise. My kids went to LACs – my science oriented kid had research every summer starting after frosh year and 2.5 of the school years she was on campus, and presented at multiple conferences. The other kid did an original research senior thesis in a social science that was nominated as one of the top 60 undergrad thesis in that subject in the US the year she graduated. Your statistic is misleading and not very meaningful.
@prezbucky, funny you should mention Vassar. My daughter is a freshman there. Doubt that S would consider applying for that reason, and then he couldn’t tease her anymore. But you’re right, it seems a good academic fit for him. Thanks for your tip on Princeton.
@inparent, What does my post have to do with whether students at LACs have an easier time doing research than their counterparts at universities? I referred to the prestige of the journals where *facility * publish, which may be a consideration for some prospective students.
Apparently you’ve missed the countless times that I’ve posted the following information.
Relying on data supplied by the National Science Foundation, the following schools produced the highest percentage of students who went on to earn a PhD.
@CrewDad, What do you think is a good way to evaluate undergraduate economics programs at LACs and small universities? I’m guessing that all the departments at the schools mentioned would be strong. What else should we be looking for?
With respect to economics department strength at liberal arts colleges, Hartley and Robinson reached a few conclusions:
and
and
Since the original studies of the authors above date to the 1990s, their conclusions with respect to actual schools might benefit a modern analysis (however experimental):
So, maybe the first 20 colleges included might be those to look towards first for the undergraduate study of economics.
The top 8 might deserve additional consideration, in that they also appear below among universities (often over five times their size) in non-normalized data:
Take a look at teaching load. A tenure track appointment at Wesleyan would normally have a two course per semester teaching load which is a tad low for a NESCAC. The expectation is that they will make good use of their time outside the classroom in order to conduct research.
It’s noteworthy that James Hartley, the renown professor of economics at Mount Holyoke, and
who co-authored Economic Research at National Liberal Arts Colleges: School Rankings, is not registered with RePEc.
As matter of fact, only 3 of the11 MHC econ professors are registered. By comparison, at Bowdoin, it’s only 6 of 13; Smith, 4 of 16; Kenyon, 3 of 10; Pomona, 6 of 17; Carleton, 6 of 12. And I haven’t included any emeriti faculty.
Additionally, there are professors who no longer teach at the college under which they are registered.
The ideas.repec.org data is so deficient as to render the ranking worthless.
Re #28, However, it’s notable that Hartley’s own comprehensive study (with Robinson) comports fairly well with the MyIdeas ranking:
Hartley and Robinson’s overall top ten
Williams
Wellesley
Colby
Trinity
Wesleyan
Colgate
Middlebury
Hamilton
Claremont McKenna
Bowdoin
Hobart & William Smith
Union
From the same paper, when adjusted for department size
Hendrix
Colby
Trinity
Hamilton
Claremont McKenna
Grinnell
Wesleyan
Middlebury
Swarthmore
Agnes Scott
From MyIdeas
Williams
Wellesley
Middlebury
Claremont McKenna
Wesleyan
Barnard
Colgate
Hamilton
URichmond
Vassar
When considered together, these two analyses, though differing in methodology and time periods considered, might at least indicate which schools perennially support notably strong economics departments.
Sources
(Hartley and Robinson. Economics Research at National Liberal Arts Colleges: School Rankings. 1995.)
The Hartley/Robinson study used publication data from 1989-1994. Very few of the professors in the Hartley/Robinson study are still teaching. Or if they are, they may be at another college. Hence, publication data that is 24-29 years old is worthless when assessing and/or comparing current publication statistics.
When juxtaposing the ancient publication data of professors who no longer teach to a current ranking that is garbage because it doesn’t measure the publication data for a very significant number of professors, all you arrive at is more garbage!
I wish that were not the case because a few of my favorite LACs are listed.
You were the one who introduced the Hartley/Robinson study into this thread. Why are you now claiming it is meaningless? It has been acknowledged that the study is old. However, based on the more recent data from IDEAS, the schools listed remain similar. Are you here to claim that the listed colleges do not have strong economics departments? If so, where is your (current) data?
Note as well that Williams College still promotes the Hartley/Robinson study (updated, 1997) with a link to it on their current About the Department page:
I introduced the study to make the point that liberal arts faculty do not publish primarily in top journals.
I made no mention of the ranking because it’s meaningless.
Nope. Only that the ranking order is worthless. Without complete current data, how do we know that Kenyon shouldn’t be #1 in the ranking? I’ve highly recommended a number of colleges on the list to those interested in econ.
Of course they do. Williams is listed as #1. Great marketing. Few will realize that the study in antiquated. No other top college that I know of uses the study to tout their econ dept. Wonder why?
@apple23, Williams is listed as #1 the ideas.repec.org ranking as well. It’s interesting that Williams also doesn’t tout the Ideas ranking. As matter of fact, no college that is listed makes mention of the ranking. Could it be because the ranking is severely flawed and no college with any integrity would do so?
@apple23, agree that the Hartley Robinson study, which is referenced in the first sentence of Williams’ “About/Research” section, is well respected within the academic community, and yes still holds weight twenty years later.
This subtopic stemmed from a simple recommendation of five schools with an included source (reply #3). Note that, as @Chembiodad points out (reply #36), academia – irrespective of unsupported claims on this thread to the contrary – does indeed reference the study. That should be enough to validate its inclusion here.
I really do appreciate all the suggestions. This can be a stressful and overwhelming process even though this is my second time around, so hearing recommendations that may narrow down choices is a big help.
I recommend Carleton (suggested above, I think). It’s a reach but not a super reach. My younger daughter double majored in economics and math there, and she has at least one friend who majored in physics. Both felt well prepared for the work force (first) and graduate school (now).
But you’re right, it seems a good academic fit for him. Thanks for your tip on Princeton.