Recommended Schools

<p>I don’t understand: you said your parents had saved money for your education and have a certain income that guarantees almost no financial aid, yet all they’d be able to provide is less than $10,000? (ie;, you said you included direct loans and job and personal savings in the 15-20 so I deducted that from the amount.) Have you talked with them about how much they can contribute without loans (as it seemed it was “if I had to guess”…)</p>

<p>The name of the school will only get you so far in graduate admissions, meaning that how you do in your school and how you take advantage of your resources will be much more important in the long run. If finances are an issue ( as it seems like it is) consider the merit schools (abeit smaller ones that fit your needs), consider attending CC for a year or two, or take out some loans yourself under your name. I know your parents said they can take out that much, but do you really want them to? It will severely cripple them in their repayment of loans for YOUR education in the long run. Also, graduate school cost a ton too, so choosing a cheaper school for undergrad may not be such a bad idea…</p>

<p>$30,000 in loans per year for 4 years? Did I read that correctly?</p>

<p>@lab317 USC is gonna be a huge financial stretch for the OP</p>

<p>OP, I highly suggest you speak to @mom2collegekids or @ucbalumnus extensively about this. If you don’t want to post your income publicly, PM them and have a convo about it. </p>

<p>If your family would have to take out $30,000 in loans per year for you to go to a $60,000 school, you should not be going to a $60,000 school. It means the most you can afford is around $35,000 per year. I’m also confused about something. If you would need to take out $30,000 in loans per year then you must qualify for substantial need. Try looking at schools tht meet 100% demonstrated need. I’m nt that great when it comes to financial stuff, but the people I cited above will be of great use to you</p>

<p>OK, in physics the name of the school where you get your B.S. degree is not terribly important. That is because the physics curriculum is basically the same everywhere. I speak as a physics professor at Illinois Tech, where we have had our undergraduates accepted to just about any “top” graduate program you care to name and we have taken students from many different universities into our Ph.D. program. </p>

<p>So, you have to decide what you want in a college and it is not too hard to list the possibilities. Do you want a big state school or a smaller private one? Do you want an urban environment or a small college town? Do you want a research university or a primarily undergraduate school? There are pros and cons to all of them but in my opinion, the financial aspect has to be a primary consideration as many other have mentioned. If you choose a school that really wants you and makes it affordable then you can certainly get the education you need to prepare yourself for graduate school. Remember that in physics no one specializes until their second year of a Ph.D. program. All the undergraduate courses and the first year of graduate courses are standard everywhere. If, instead, your plan is to move into an engineering field for graduate school, you might be better off in an Engineering Physics or Applied Physics program. This may limit your choices because not all schools have this kind of program.</p>

<p>^“OK, in physics the name of the school where you get your B.S. degree is not terribly important. That is because the physics curriculum is basically the same everywhere. I speak as a physics professor at Illinois Tech,”</p>

<p>This is totally FALSE! Sounds like someone spent his entire career at no-name institutions.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Wow. That was incredibly rude.</p>

<p>FWIW, it is the exact same advice our ds heard from physicists at top science camps. He was consistently told that where he did his undergrad was not as important as what he did there. Being actively involved in research was always emphasized as vital, as well as high GPA, and GRE scores. But, name of the undergrad school, no.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>i don’t know that it is false. But I do note that the poster is a rep for his college here on CC. I admit, I usually take a college rep’s posts with a grain of salt (sorry, @xrammancs) because it is their role to talk up their institution. I believe it is possible for students from lower ranked institutions to get into top graduate schools, but they have to be superstars to do so.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>There was a serious lack of professionalism in that response. I wonder if disdain is a hallmark of the poster’s institution.</p>

<p>Oops, I see I misread intparent’s response. I was thinking rgh3rd was the rep, not the IL professor. </p>

<p>But, regardless, the professor’s response matches the responses of the physicists ds has sought guidance from. </p>

<p>@rhg3rd you are entitled to your opinion but this is a matter of fact not opinion. There are plenty of solid physicists who do their undergraduate work at what you call a “no name” institution. A graduate program looks for a good students with high GPA, good GRE scores and research experience. You do not have to be at a so-callled “top” school to get that in physics. What you have to do is to take the most demanding curriculum possible and really learn physics. End of story.</p>

<p>As for bias @Intparent, I hope that mentioning my university is not misconstrued. I am merely stating my experience and qualifications and the fact that I am certainly not ashamed of my university. It is always best to disclose fully, after all. When I do mention my university, it is to provide information to those who are interested in it. Anything more is done by PM. In the case of the comment in this thread I thought my remarks were completely general.</p>

<p>If you look at my comments over the years, i am pretty consistent. i believe that students should go to the most affordable college possible because they can get a quality education at just about any accredited 4-year university and it is never worth going into debt for a Bachelor’s degree. This is the advice that i have followed with my own children and the first two who have already completed college are totally debt free without any sacrifices from us parents.</p>

<p>It is true that students can potentially get into a top program coming from any reputable school. However, I do think that coming from a well known school (either a very highly ranked undergrad program or a top 10-20 physics department like UIUC or UCSB) does come with a lot of advantages. You will often have more/better on campus research opportunities and can get letters from very well known professors who know the professors at the top grad schools. For research you can always do REUs outside of your school, but those are only for the summer and it is hard to really get a lot done if you don’t continue research doing the year.</p>

<p>Additionally, while I agree the physics curriculum is standard everywhere, that does not mean that there are not large variations in the difficulty of the coursework and level of competition among the students at different institutions. The reason it may be easier for students from top programs to get into top grad schools is that it is easier for them to show that they are prepared. My professor (at a top 20 program) was the first who told me this. It is harder to gauge an applicant’s preparation and qualifications when they come from a lesser known/ranked school since you don’t know how they will end up when they are no longer the big fish in the small pound. Some people will thrive in the new environment, but you are taking a chance. I have heard from some students that grad school coursework can be a really tough transition if you don’t come from a more rigorous school.</p>

<p>If I were the OP I would strongly consider the college of creative studies at UCSB. UCSB has an absolutely phenomenal physics department, students love it there and go on to the top grad programs. The three that I met that I remember off the top of my head are going to Princeton, Berkeley, and Harvard respectively. </p>

<p>It is true that there are different research opportunities at Ph.D. granting universities than at LACs but there are many LACs which send a lot of their students to good graduate programs even thought the faculty are not known for their research programs. These days, there are many research opportunities available for students outside of the home institution in REU programs at the like (for U.S. Citizens and permanent residents, of course). Furthermore, it is not exactly true that well-known researchers only exist in the “top” Ph.D. programs. There are very good researchers in even lesser known schools and the community knows this and pays attention. </p>

<p>The OP is interested in engineering … parents cannot afford more than about $20K/y (without loans) … he doesn’t think he’ll qualify for need-based aid from expensive private schools … he’s a CA resident. </p>

<p>The obvious choices, for this scenario, are in the University of California system. Most LACs are out (too expensive w/o aid, no engineering). Selective private universities are out (too expensive w/o aid). Most OOS publics are out (too expensive) unless they offer big merit scholarships. </p>

<p>I think the OP is actually interested in Physics. That’s why I suggested UCSB. Berkeley would be great too but I know admissions is more of a crapshoot. I have hear CCS at UCSB is a great program and gives you a lot of opportunities to take smaller classes and more advanced classes with a lot of flexibility in your curriculum. The quality of a science education at these schools (especially in physics) is on par with that at the elite undergrad institutions.</p>

<p>@xraymancs, it is hard to be really productive during the summer unless you have previous research experience. Most students in REUs and other summer programs do not really get much done because it is simply not enough time. I have also found that working on a project long term was really beneficial to my development as a researcher (it also got a first author PRL) and helped me do great work at my REU before senior year.</p>

<p>Also, while some LACs seem to have great research opportunities and send a lot of students to top grad programs, this does not seem to be the case with most LACs. I met a student from Harvey Mudd at an REU and even he said that Harvey Mudd does not have that many research opportunities. While this is okay for people not planning to go the Phd route, gaining research experience does appear very crucial for admission to grad school.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>LACs in general tend to have relatively high PhD production rates. This is true even of some LACs that are not especially selective (such as Earlham, Lawrence, Wabash, and Hendrix). Among the top ~50 schools for PhD production rates, there are many more LACs than public research universities, and slightly more LACs than private research universities. <a href=“http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf08311/”>http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf08311/&lt;/a&gt; (see table 2)
I have never found a comprehensive comparison of which schools send the most students (by percentage) to “top” PhD programs. According to a Wall Street Journal “feeder school” survey of schools sending the most graduates (by percentage) to top professional schools (medical, business, law), almost half of the top 50 “feeders” were LACs.</p>

<p>However, the OP did indicate interests in both mechanical and aerospace engineering (as well as in Physics). Very few LACs cover these areas. Furthermore, given his family’s apparent financial situation (cannot afford more than ~$20K/y, but does not qualify for n-b aid) very few LACs are likely to be affordable unless he gets a very large merit scholarship. Lawrence University is a LAC that seems to have a pretty strong physics department; it does award merit scholarships. But I’m not sure it would be a better fit for the OP than some of the UCs, given his interests.</p>

<p>To get into a top ten science program these days you need significant research experiences. People here keep saying that LACs send just as many kids to grad school as research universities but I did not see that when I went on grad school visits. I did not see many LAC students at all. The ones I saw were from Reed, Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore (I think), Smith, Carlton, and Oberlin (I think) all very prestigious and well known LACs. While there were probably others that I didn’t notice, even accounting for the size of LACs, (I’m guessing around 10 majors a year) I don’t think the number was that high (most universities have probably 20-40 physics majors). So while it seems the top LACs do produce a lot of students going to the best grad school, the others do not do nearly as well as many state universities like UCSB, which many people view as a party school.</p>

<p>The UCSB physics department is also nice I’ve heard since it’s very close knit. Students have said the professors are great and the physics majors seem to be close.</p>

<p><a href=“most%20universities%20have%20probably%2020-40%20physics%20majors”>quote</a>.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>If anyone would like to see a breakdown of the # of actual jr/sr/total/bachelor degrees awarded/grad student data for physics depts around the country, 2012’s data is right here:</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.aip.org/sites/default/files/statistics/rosters/physrost122.pdf”>http://www.aip.org/sites/default/files/statistics/rosters/physrost122.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>@Poeme, universities will, almost always, have more representatives due to the size of their student population. There are a couple of LACs that stand out in the data @Mom2aphysicsgeek‌ posted. From a quick perusal Reed and Oberlin put out more Physics degrees than Oregon U. Looking at PhD students and their undergrad universities, once size is taken into account many LACs are right up there. <a href=“The Colleges Where PhD's Get Their Start”>http://www.thecollegesolution.com/the-colleges-where-phds-get-their-start/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;