<p>What if someone doesn't plan to go to graduate school and wants to work internationally? for those people, I'd suggest prestigious university.</p>
<p>Drab, no one ever said they don't do 'world class research'.</p>
<p>The top 10-15 LACs are prestigious to those who have heard of them, they're just not as widely known to the average person.</p>
<p>I think the answer here is, that while LACs may not have as many Nobel laureates on their payrolls and the scale of govenment funding is obviously going to be different, the equipment and laboratories to which an average undergraduate would have access are usually just as sophisticated as those available to u/gs attending research universities.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think the answer here is, that while LACs may not have as many Nobel laureates on their payrolls and the scale of govenment funding is obviously going to be different, the equipment and laboratories to which an average undergraduate would have access are usually just as sophisticated as those available to u/gs attending research universities.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Actually, not necessarily. Most research institutions have sophisticated and numerous amounts of lab equipment.</p>
<p>Liberal arts colleges would have a different focus, as per their name. Some of them have huge endowments that would allow them to purchase such equipment, but for the most part, as there usually isn't nearly as much active research, the resources would be less than a major research university as there is less need for them and the focus is elsewhere.</p>
<p>It's not to say that LACs are worse than research universities, but if research is a consideration, it is likely the better research is at the research university.</p>
<p>the operative phrase is, "available to the average undergraduate". I mean, we're all agreed that the Manhattan Project took place at places like Columbia, Chicago, Berkeley, etc. But, I don't recall reading of any undergraduates being involved in the development of the first atomic bomb.</p>
<p>Well, you might be right, but your claim is very broad and so far unsubstantiated.</p>
<p>
[quote]
the operative phrase is, "available to the average undergraduate". I mean, we're all agreed that the Manhattan Project took place at places like Columbia, Chicago, Berkeley, etc. But, I don't recall reading of any undergraduates being involved in the development of the first atomic bomb.
[/quote]
Well, the lab is there to be used.</p>
<p>I used a good deal of Berkeley's lab equipment (expensive too, I got a "you break it, you go broke" speech) as a high school student, not even an undergrad. I'm assuming undergrad would have the opportunity to use lab equipment in research.</p>
<p>Though I suppose I agree the average undergraduate wouldn't exactly be using nuclear centrifuges, for example. But then again, if the research calls for it, the opportunity is there. It just depends on how involved you want to get.</p>
<p>I can give you another example: Both Wesleyan and Berkeley offer undergraduate instruction in bioinfomatics, which encompasses modern molecular genetics and the human genome. It would be difficult to get hands-on experience in this area without access to a micro-array machine, an innovative piece of technology that measures the turning on and off of thousands of genes at the same time. Same, extremely costly machine, vastly different institutions.</p>
<p>There is a growing sentiment in education circles that the modern research university, with its increasingly commercial emphasis, no longer serves the purpose of undergraduate education.</p>
<p>Former Harvard Dean Harry Lewis makes this point in his new book "Education Without a Soul". For example, when a university announces a major investment in "bio tech", what this typically means is a commercial enterprise to develop technologies and spin-off R&D ventures for the biomedical industry. Anyone who thinks those investments are made with undergraduates in mind is dreaming.</p>
<p>For a real eye-opener, look at the financial statements of Emory University. Their revenue from operating a chain of hospitals and drug patents dwarfs the revenues associated with teaching students. In many ways, it is a drug "R&D" company with a subsidiary that does a little teaching. This is increasingly the model of the modern research university. The commercialization of the university began in earnest in the 1950s and has increased exponentially since.</p>
<p>A corollary of this increased commercial/research focus is extreme specialization of the faculty. That's great for a PhD student. But, an undergrad is really looking for great teachers who can tie together various discplines and give them a good "big-picture" foundation.</p>
<p>There is a huge regional difference in LAC name recognition. In the NE, virtually all of the aforementioned names are recognized. And throw in Kenyon into the familiarity pile in the NE. But when I moved South, many of these, or should I say most of these are unfamiliar to many, except, fortunately, Vassar. It has familiarity/name recognition,though many still ask if it is a girls school. Down here familiar names are things like Davidson, Elon, Sewanee.. not well known up north.</p>
<p>I think the name of the book is: 'Excellence Without a Soul: How a Great University Forgot Education'</p>
<p>Davidson, Colgate, Holy Cross, Bucknell-all have very good academics and are Division 1 in sports.</p>
<p>Add Lafayette to the above list.</p>
<p>LACs I had heard of before seriously beginning the college search near the end of my junior year: Amherst, Swarthmore, Carleton, Wellesley, Bryn Mawr</p>
<p>I know someone going to U Chicago and everyone's like, "Oh, so you're going to state school. They must be giving you a lot of money." It sucks for him</p>
<p>That's cuz of UIC (University of Illinois in Chicago). Everyone gets the two confused.</p>
<p>U of Chicago is not nearly as famous as it should be. Not sure why!!! It has had a great influence in Academics in the last 100 years. Especially in Sociology and Economics (those are the 2 ones I know of anyway). But I guess your future employer should be aware of it.</p>
<p>Too bad UChicago isn't a LAC...</p>
<p>It kinda sneaked into the conversation!!</p>