<p>I am interested in majoring in either Chemistry or Biochemistry. Do you guys know rankings for the undergraduate programs? I can only find graduate ranking. </p>
<p>Schools like Harvard and Stanford are obviously ranked high, but I would like to know more.</p>
<p>thanks!</p>
<p>IMO, most top 50 research universities have excellent chemistry departments so really you can't go wrong with any research university. Are you interested in specifics like lot's of research opps or great undergrad chem teachers? But generally even if someone tells you something like "MIT is better in chemistry than Stanford", they are splitting hairs. It seems that when people talk about the strengths of a department they are mostly referring to the graduate departments which shouldn't interest you if you are looking for a good undergraduate chem department.</p>
<p>I would say of the many excellent research university pick the one that endorses undergrad research, has excellent teachers who can actually teach and not just conduct research, and somewhere where you "fit". I feel that if you can find somewhere that meets all of that criteria you've found the best school for undergrad chem/biochem.</p>
<p>I eventually want to do pre-med so I guess research opps and teachers are both important.
I do agree that MIT and Stanford undergrad chemistry has no difference, but there is a certain point where you can distinguish the programs. Harvard and UCSD are just not the same. </p>
<p>do you guys also have any opinions on schools for pre-med?</p>
<p>I agree with js416256. Chemistry and biology departments at just about any major research school will be very developed.</p>
<p>buuuummmmp</p>
<p>Check out the liberal arts colleges with great science facilities; for example</p>
<p>Allegheny College, PA
Hood College, MD
Case Western Reserve University, OH
Ohio Wesleyan University
Wofford College, SC
Worcester Polytechic Institute, MA</p>
<p>Gourman Report undergrad chemistry ranking:
Caltech
UC Berkeley
Harvard
MIT
Columbia
Stanford
Illimois Urbana Champaign
U Chicago
UCLA
Wisconsin Madison
Cornell
Northwestern
Princeton
Yale
Purdue
UNC Chapel Hill
Ohio State
Texas Austin
Iowa State
Indiana Bloomington
UC San Diego
Minnesota
Notre Dame
Penn State
Brown
U Rochester
Carnegie Mellon
U Penn
Rice
Michigan Ann Arbor
U Washington
Colorado Boulder
Texas A&M
USC
U Pittsburgh
U Florida
UC Riverside
dartmouth
UC Santa Barbara
UC Irvine
Johns Hopkins
UC Davis
U Utah
U Oregon
Duke
Michigan State
RPI
UVA
Florida State
Vanderbilt
Case Western
u Iowa
Georgia Tech</p>
<p>Rugg’s Recommendations – LACs for chemistry</p>
<p>Amherst
Barnard
Bates
Bowdoin
Bryn Mawr
Bucknell
Carleton
Centre
Colgate
Davidson
Drew
Franklin and Marshall
Grinnell
Hamilton
Harvey Mudd
Haverford
Kalamazoo
Kenyon
Lafayette
Lawrence
Mount Holyoke
New College
Oberlin
Occidental
Pomona
Reed
St Olaf
Trinity (TX)
Union
Wellesley
Wheaton
Whitman
Willamette
Williams</p>
<p>wow thanks!
where did you get these rankings?</p>
<p>Go ahead and ignore the Gourman report - it is basically a graduate ranking.
When ranking undergraduate departments, it awards more points for having more students, more TAs, how many graduate students go onto become scholars and stuff like that - things that are explicitly graduate measures, etc. It also provides no data, and Gourman hasn't done research in probably a decade. If you look at the "criteria" Gourman uses, you'll laugh and realize that the Gourman report is not very helpful.</p>
<p>Good undergrad Chem? You can find that at any US News top 50 school. </p>
<p>The best programs belong to the Ivies, Stanford, Duke, MIT, JHU, and a few other top schools. </p>
<p>Are you a premed?</p>
<p>yes I am
so I guess, I am not only limiting to Chemistry.</p>
<p>isn't US news also grad?
also I am not sure if ALL ives are good for undergrad Chem. For one, Brown is not so good.</p>
<p>Well, in terms of science all the Ivies are top notch - atleast in terms of preparing you in your undergrad studies. Brown might not have a big name because its a smaller school, but its a great feeder to top med schools (btw, my perspective is more relevant for pre-med than chemistry).</p>
<p>US News National Universities ranking is for undergrads - its geared towards high school seniors.</p>
<p>To westcoastlove, in response to your comment "I am not sure if ALL ives are good for undergrad Chem. For one, Brown is not so good." I feel that is definitely off. I feel like Brown's undergrad chem program offers all the key components to a "great undergrad chemistry department". With very few grad students professors rely on undergraduates to aid in their research and professors can focus more on undergrads giving undergrads a much better chem education.</p>
<p>When you say Stanford or Harvard is a good school for chem, you are basing this claim on the strengths of the graduate schools (i.e. research grants, publications, etc.) and while the strength of a grad school might be important for a grad student it shouldn't matter to an undergrad. In fact, I believe that these schools with prestigious graduate schools will offer less to an undergraduate chemistry student because the profs will be more graduate focused meaning that students will have less support in their studies, research positions will be more menial and scarce, and frankly the students don't get the education they deserve.</p>
<p>I think at Ivies like Princeton, Brown, and Dartmouth, you can really get a good undergrad chem program that can prove invaluable when it is time to apply for med school or grad school because of the close faculty/student interaction. </p>
<p>Just my 2 cents...</p>
<p>westcoastlove-
thethoughtprocess knocks the Gourman report reflexively. But, his/her recommendations actually support the Gourman report. Notice that every one of the schools named by thethoughtprocess is in the Gourman list.</p>
<p>There are ways to corroborate the Gourman UNDERGRADUATE rankings. They agree well with the US News Business and Engineering undergrad rankings. Eighteen out of the 22 most prolific chemistry PhD-producing universities are listed in the Gourman chemistry ranking. That is, schools whose undergrads go on to earn PhDs.</p>
<p>Just for the record, thethoughtprocess, tell us which schools in the Gourman list don't belong or were left off. And, what is your method for determining your recommendations? Where is your data?</p>
<p>I'd like to throw Wesleyan's name out there... it's size is ideal for a great science education (chem, bio, etc). It has the science facilities of a larger research university, yet being an LAC, as a small graduate population, allowing for significant undergrad research participation, as well as top-notch professors who are there to teach:)</p>
<p>I’d second Smartalic34’s recommendation and add, among other LACs, Carleton, Harvey Mudd, Swarthmore, Pomona, Haverford, Bowdoin, Reed, and Oberlin. Don’t underestimate their small sizes.<br>
Carleton, for example, turns out more physical science PhD’s based on student body size than any of the Ivys and more female PhD’s, even in absolute numbers, than much larger research institutions such as Princeton, Hopkins, and Dartmouth.</p>
<p>If you’re interested in research powerhouses, Berkeley still reigns supreme. Northwestern and Cornell offer not only top chemistry departments, but uniquely strong supporting nanotechnology sections that set them aside as cutting the cutting edge. CalTech, MIT, HYPS, Chicago and Columbia all have excellent programs as do, on the state level, Wisconsin-Illinois-UNC.</p>
<p>If you really see yourself as pre-med first and a basic scientist second, I believe that all of the above schools (and many not listed) will serve you well and would suggest you focus less on strength of major and more on the multitude of other factors in play in choosing a college.</p>
<p>thanks guys for the info!
I was not planning on considering LACs are much, but I will look into a few! And Berekley is perfect for me because I am in-state for California!</p>
<p>I am more interested in research universities and I have basically narrowed my list to: (I can only apply for 8--school policy) Harvard, Princeton, Columbia, Northwestern, Brown, Rice. But I still need some adjustments.</p>
<p>js416256, I do think Brown is a good school, please don't understand my intentions. I am ONLY applying to Brown, however, for the PLME program. I personally do not value Brown's undergrad chem as much as the other school's. I get much of my influence from researchers and professors at Caltech--including my dad. They all agree that schools like Brown is good and that's just it good, not excellent. If people are interested and feel as if Brown is a good fit, then that's great! But I would just like to let others know that some professors do not value Brown as much as high schools.</p>
<p>If you are in-state and actually interested in research, Berkeley should definitely be on your list.</p>
<p>If you are interested in chem research, the top ten (by percentage) future chem PhD producers were (last report) Harvey Mudd, Reed, CalTech, Wabash, Carleton, Grinnell, Wooster, Kalamazoo, Texas Lutheran and Bowdoin. Notice that the undergrads from big research universities are not so well represented; those are mainly excellent grad schools where the PhDs are earned. Ask your dad what he thinks about the above schools and this issue.</p>
<p>Source: Weighted Baccalaureate Origins Study, Higher Education Data Sharing Consortium, PhDs granted from 1992 to 2001.</p>
<p>I meant to include the College of Wooster in my previous list of LACs with solid Biology/Chemistry departments.</p>