<p>No, but seriously. Middlebury has a very “lacrosse-bro” culture - I did an overnight there, and I was a little put off by the amount of backwards-baseball-caps dudes who slammed beers all night. I’m not averse to partying myself, but I must say the degree of partying that I witnessed was ridiculous. Haverford… I don’t know much about. Rice probably has the best reputation and I probably the strongest for math and the sciences. Carleton balances excellent science programs with excellent programs in just about everything else and generally has an intellectual vibe that I find appealing. Also, Minnesota is great. I would (and did) go with Carleton, but I didn’t have nearly as many appealing options to choose from as you did. You can’t go wrong.</p>
<p>modestmelody: You might want to consult a more detailed map and talk to more scientists. I had no interest in rehashing the age old debate of LAC vs. university. Both can prepare you well for grad schools. Generally more 1:1 direct mentoring with profs at LACs. Generally more famous names and research $ at uni’s. Different, yes. One better than the other, no.</p>
<p>If you look at lists of the colleges of origin of PhDs in the sciences (as tk21769 alluded), the school of these four that is most notable is actually Carleton - top 10 in the general Life Sciences, the Physical Sciences and specifically in subfields of Chemistry, Physics, and Geology. As you may know, LACs produce a disproportionate number of PhDs c/w their university BA/BS counterparts. </p>
<p>I know you’re a recent Brown alum and obviously very “university” minded, but just a few miles down the road from your alma mater in Middletown, Wesleyan kids are getting the same quality education you did. And you’ll find them with Brown on any map of NE. And if you get lost looking for their campus, ask any scientist - they’ll help you find your way.</p>
<p>I’m not hating on LACs, not hating on Wesleyan (a school I would have been very happy at), nor am I using numbers like PhD production which has much more to do with self-selection than the university itself.</p>
<p>Rice is one of the few schools in the country that has a phenomenal balance of graduate and undergraduate students such that undergraduates are served far better than they would be without the graduate school, plain and simple.</p>
<p>In terms of PhD production in the life and physical sciences combined, Carleton is #4, Haverford is #6, Rice is #17, and Middlebury is #59, on a per student basis.</p>
<p>There are several issues in interpreting the HEDS PhD origins data. These include self-selection (as modestmelody mentioned). We don’t know how many Rice students who might have gone to graduate school in biology chose medical school instead. Another issue is, which disciplines do you include in the comparison count, over what time period? For the subtotal of all science and engineering categories, counting doctorates earned from 1991-2000, Carleton, Rice and Haverford ranked 6th, 9th, and 10th respectively (virtually neck and neck). Yet another issue is the sparseness of the data. Even at some of the highest-production schools, only about 10-20% of graduates go on to earn doctorates in all disciplines. So for schools as small as these, we are talking about very small samples for any one major.</p>
<p>In other words, PhD origins data would not be a good basis to choose Carleton over Rice. I think it does, however, suggest that good LACs can prepare good students for graduate work in major science disciplines at least as well as good universities can. Generally speaking.</p>
<p>What about the difference between Middlebury and the others? Is that significant? I’m not sure. Suppose one chemistry department graduates 4 or 5 students a year who go on to earn doctorates in that field; another school’s chem department graduates 2 or 3 every couple of years. That, to me, might represent a significant difference in the department’s atmosphere. But I’m just making an educated guess at the number spreads and speculating about the impact.</p>
<p>Should a good science student care about the PhD numbers at all? In my opinion, yes. It’s an interesting “diversity” number. But it’s just one data point.</p>