<p>I'm looking to go to school for a B.S. in physics and eventually a Ph.D. Pretending money isn't an option, is it better to go to an LAC or a large state affiliated school (Such as Ohio State or Penn State). LACs have smaller departments so I feel I could really get to know my professors and lead in individual research, but larger research schools would have more expensive research budgets so I could participate in a large project-with many others.</p>
<p>So basically, what are the REAL advantages and disadvantages of both school types.</p>
<p>Honestly, I think it very much depends on the person. Campus visits help a lot-- I went into the process unsure whether I wanted to attend an LAC or a larger university (UCs would be my “large state schools”). On my campus visits, it quickly became clear that I strongly preferred smaller colleges.</p>
<p>Visit several different types of colleges before applying, if you can. I visited two large state schools, three medium-large elite private universities, two elite LACs, two “normal” LACs, and two Christian colleges. You can base your visit list on what is convenient to your location and what you think your current preference is.</p>
<p>^^I agree. There are a lot of threads about the differences between these types of schools on CC already. Basically it is smaller, more personal vs more choices. IMO, the decision about what type of school is best is a personal one. Two reasonable people with the same statistics could reach two different conclusions as to where they want to attend colleges. Finances may also come into the decision as well. You can get a great education at either type of institution. I agree that you should visit different types of schools and see for yourself. I would also suggest that you try to visit a mid-sized university which is a good option as well.</p>
<p>For Physics majors, large research universities (public or private) is the way to go. First of all, Physics is an unusual major. Even at public universities, Physics classes, past the intro-level classes taken by premeds and Engineering students, will seldom have more than 20 students enrolled, and they will be taught by faculty that are leaders in their respective fields. Also, Physics departments at major research universities have the resources to build and operate advanced labs and conduct ground-breaking research, something most LACS cannot duplicate. For the Social Sciences and Humanities, there are certain trade-offs between the personal attention afforded at LACs and the breadth and depth of offerings provided at large research universities, but in the hard sciences like Chemistry and Physics, the argument in favor of LACs is much harder to make.</p>
<p>No matter what size you pick, a school or department that requires a masters-level undergrad thesis may increase your chances of being admitted to a PhD program, showing that you already know how to research and write about it. If you’re determined enough, you could do it without the requirement, but it may be easier when those around you are enmeshed in the same culture.</p>
<p>Of course, there are exceptions like Harvey Mudd and Reed (with a [nuclear</a> reactor](<a href=“http://reactor.reed.edu/]nuclear”>http://reactor.reed.edu/)). But that means that one has to carefully evaluate each school individually for what its physics department offers, rather than consider them generically within the class of “LAC” versus “big university”. (And there are small universities like Caltech that fit into neither class.)</p>
<p>UC Berkeley appears to have among the smallest overall average class sizes of any public university in the USNWR top 100 (according to the distributions reported in the CDS files and aggregated by US News). In the Autumn 2013 Physics department “upper division” course offerings (100-199 level), I count 30 classes with enrollments of more than 20 students, and 10 with enrollments of 20 or less. Even at these levels, most discussion/lab sections appear to be led by graduate students. Small classes (<=20 students) with professors don’t seem to happen much until you get to the 190 levels (senior honors thesis, “special topics” or directed studies courses).</p>
<p>Now, maybe the average Berkeley grad student teaches physics about as well as the average professor at many LACs. There’s no easy way to compare quality short of visiting classes at both kinds of schools.</p>
<p>Physics does appear to be a larger major at Berkeley than at many other schools; a recent career survey indicates 83 graduates in physics and 25 in astrophysics. There are 33 in engineering science (some of which are engineering physics) and 46 in earth and planetary science (some of which are geophysics).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>However, note that you do get both a faculty member and a PhD student TA teaching the class. Two instructors may be better than one in some cases.</p>
<p>UCB points out that you should be evaluating the colleges/uni’s individually esp when it comes to the LAC’s. Another famous exception is Lawrence University which promised built in research and shows up as one of the top producers of Physics Phds in an NSF survey. The complete list is:</p>
<p>Graduate students are listed as the sole instructors for most of the small discussion/lab classes (<=20 students) below the 190+ level. Typically, they teach 1 hr/week discussion/lab sections. These sections generally have corresponding 3 hr/week lecture classes taught by professors. 100-level (“upper division”) lecture enrollments vary widely (from less than 20 in one case to over 100 in one case.)</p>
<p>This is Berkeley we’re talking about. At most other big research universities, classes will tend to be larger (on average for all subjects). For courses covering the pre-med track, or for entry-to-intermediate prerequisites in popular majors, expect enrollments of well over 100 students for the lecture classes. </p>
<p>At some (not all) LACs, class sizes are capped at or below 50 students.</p>
<p>^^ According to my calculations from NSF data, the top 30 schools for PhD production in physics, adjusted for institution size, are (in order):</p>
<p>California Institute of Technology
Harvey Mudd College
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Swarthmore College
Reed College
Bryn Mawr College
Harvard University
Lawrence University
Williams College
University of Chicago
Haverford College
Princeton University
Carleton College
Stanford University
Cornell University, All Campuses
Grinnell College
Vassar College
University of California-Berkeley
Colorado College
Johns Hopkins University
Columbia University in the City of New York
Oberlin College
Brown University
Yale University
Wesleyan University
University of Arizona
University of Michigan at Ann Arbor
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
University of Washington - Seattle
University of Texas at Austin </p>
<p>From 2007-2011, 18 alumni of Swarthmore College (with an enrollment of ~1,500 students) earned PhDs in physics. 40 alumni of Michigan - Ann Arbor (with an enrollment of ~28,000 students) earned PhDs in physics. 13 of the top 30 physics PhD producers were LACs; 11 were private research universities; 6 were public research universities.</p>
<p>Your first sentence contradicts the rest of your paragraph. Students enroll in a class with both the faculty lecture and the TA discussion and/or lab, in courses where that format is used. I.e. there is not a “sole instructor” for the course.</p>
<p>What’s better, chocolate or vanilla? This is a personal preference question for the most part. (Anyway, I think it’s silly to pretend that there’s a meaningful difference between a college of arts and sciences in a research university that may have other colleges, and a liberal arts college, other than that one is based in a bigger campus.)</p>
<p>Probably not a good denominator, since the mix of undergraduate majors is a significant factor when considering major-specific outcomes like PhDs in physics (anyone surprised that the top three are Caltech, Harvey Mudd, and MIT?).</p>