<p>Hey guys, I know that the responses to this will probably be bias because this is on the Tufts thread so I'm also going to post it on the Barnard thread. Anyways, I was just wondering if anyone could shed some light onto the Neuroscience and Behavior major at Barnard vs the Biopsychology major at Tufts. Do any of you know any significant differences? Further, what are the benefits of going to a university versus a liberal arts college? I know Barnard is kind of ambiguous because of its special relationship with Columbia, but is it harder to get research opportunities or easier? Thanks to all who respond.</p>
Hi! I am in the same position…which one did you choose?? Please respond asap
This is a tricky one because there are actually 3 colleges involved and Tufts and Columbia have a joint tissue engineering lab that developed a model of the human brain.
I will give it a shot…
The majors are similar in structure.
Tufts is about twice the size of Barnard
Columbia is about twice the size of Tufts
The number of bio majors at Tufts is about 30% more than Columbia and over twice the number at Barnard. Columbia bio Phd program graduates about three times the number of Phds than Tufts, but Tufts has a Nutrition research program that is one of top in the world and a top ranked vet program.
The number of biomedical engineers is much larger at Columbia than Tufts, but Tufts actually runs the joint Tufts/Columbia tissue engineering lab.
Barnard actually has a fairly large traditional psych program, It is about 80% the size of Columbia but without a grad program. Tufts traditional psych program is about 20% smaller than Barnard, but the overall psych environment is about double the size of Columbia and much more diverse because it adds clinical psych, child development, cognitive and brain science, and engineering psychology (including human computer interaction). Columbia’s psych Phd program graduates about five times the number of Phd’s as Tufts’ psych Phd program
So basically, Tufts has more interdisciplinary undergrad offerings in this area than either Barnard or Columbia and broader set of related graduate research areas with significant depth in a few specialized areas…
But Columbia has much more overall research going on in the traditional disciplines.
This kind of puts Tufts in between Barnard and Columbia. It has less research than Columbia, but there are much fewer Phd students and post docs to compete with for the professor’s time - either for teaching or research.
Tufts is probably best characterized as a bigger, more interdisciplinary, coed Barnard (most likely with the downside of bigger introductory classes), with a smaller amount of the high quality research of Columbia, but with potentially easier access.
Tufts students can also do research in the MIT labs (4 miles away), but Barnard students can also do that in the summertime through special programs.
I would lean towards Tufts for the ease of exploring different areas at the undergrad level, but I do not have a good feel for how tightly coupled Barnard and Columbia are. I also have a bias toward exposure to computer science and engineering (because that is the field I am in) and Tufts does a really good job of making these subjects accessible and drawing new students into the field.
Best of luck!
http://now.tufts.edu/news-releases/bioengineers-make-functional-3d-brain-tissue-model
http://ase.tufts.edu/terc/