<p>Right now, I’m leaning heavily towards LACs. I see so many great advantages that LACs have but before I fully commit, I want at least some other opinions.</p>
<p>Here are the advantages of research universities that I can come up off the top of my head:</p>
<li>More exciting (more in cities, more people, more diversity?, more cutting-edge research)</li>
<li>Cheaper (not necessarily, but let’s face it, LACs are overwhelmingly private and expensive)</li>
<li>more “prestige”</li>
<li>more choices in classes, majors, etc</li>
</ol>
<p>I always felt that I would be best suited for a LAC. Coming from a small high school, I was looking forward to small classes, ample opportunity for student/faculty discourse, and lively discussions in seminars. I ended up at a large research university--though the education is definitely adequate, I find myself very much missing those LAC elements. Because I am not planning to do research in the sciences myself, the availability of labs and working professors is useless to me. Being at this sort of school means that teachers are very much focused on their non-teaching work, their personal research. Classes are often run by grad students--or even juniors/seniors. It's quite a disappointment and it eliminates the opportunities for individual attention. If you are looking for a relationship with your teachers, you truly have to make the time and effort. All are willing to connect with their pupils, but there is this barrier not present at the smaller schools.</p>
<p>I encourage you to think about your personal needs, what you are looking for in the college experience. Rather than comparing the types of schools, think about your own learning style. Once you understand what you require to enjoy learning, you should be more able to select the proper kind of institution.</p>
<p>As someone who went to a major research university, and has also attended a smaller school that is on the borderline between LAC and research university, here are advantages that I see to major research universities:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Even though classes tend to be larger, there also tends to be a wider variety of class offerings, and required classes are offered more frequently (an extension of the big department vs. little department issue).</p></li>
<li><p>I liked having grad students around. They could be good for mentorship and advice, and their being TAs meant that I got to hear the material in multiple styles and from multiple perspectives (prof and TA), which I thought was helpful.</p></li>
<li><p>If you want to go to grad school, professors at research universities are more likely to know professors at other research universities, i.e. the professors at your desired programs are more likely to know your recommenders.</p></li>
<li><p>The college academic experience is far more than what you get from lectures...it's not like high school. The opportunity to be exposed to and participate in cutting-edge research as an undergrad is pretty valuable. People do that at LACs, too, but there's just more research going on at research universities, and more money to hire undergrad helpers, and the supervising professors/postdocs/grad students are more research-focused.</p></li>
<li><p>I liked being surrounded by the atmosphere of exciting things happening. It's just a very different feel than a place where the focus is on teaching you in classes. This is going to sound odd to some people, but I didn't really want a place where I was the center of the mission. I wanted to feel part of a place that went beyond that, where I could contribute to and learn from a wider mission. Some people prefer one atmosphere, some, the other.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>Different people are going to prefer different choices on this matter. There are merits to both. I was happy with the choice that I made.</p>
<p>@JteH: Off the top of my head, here are a few</p>
<ol>
<li>Better teacher/student ratios</li>
<li>More focus on undergrads</li>
<li>Actual professors, not TAs</li>
<li>Better research oppertunities</li>
<li>Smaller community (some ppl like it, some don't)</li>
</ol>
<p>There's more, but those are some of the most important (at least to me).</p>
<p>Sorry for not including a disclaimer (i could have sworn i did). Well, it's controversial, but yeah, I think that LACs have better ones. As far as I understand it, here are the arguments:</p>
<p>For research unis:
Well, duh, cutting edge research is done here. Lots of research, lots of labs, lots of equipment.</p>
<p>For LACs:
1. research unis have lots of grad students that perform the research, not the undergrads.
2. many disciplines don't need super modern and powerful equipment for research.</p>
<p>
[quote]
2. many disciplines don't need super modern and powerful equipment for research.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's true, but the professors are not so research-focused at LACs either. You're likely to do more interesting research with a professor whose job is to do research, than one who does it on the side.</p>
<p>
[quote]
1. research unis have lots of grad students that perform the research, not the undergrads.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I've heard this one before, but I never really bought it. Sure, the LACs don't have grad students, but they also have correspondingly smaller research programs. Over 80% of the undergrads at the research university that I attended do research as undergrads, and about 20% are published as undergrads. Granted, that doesn't happen at every research university, but the point is that it wasn't like there was any lack of opportunities because of the grads. And the grads and postdocs were helpful mentors in their own right.</p>
<p>Where does this assumption come from that a professor will be a better instructor than a TA? Professors who teach undergrads at large schools do so because they haven't risen in the ranks yet. Everyone can think of an anecdotal counterexample but the trend is that teaching is done by not yet tenured faculty. For many, this is the bane of their job and teaching awards are commonly considered a nail in the coffin for your career. TA's on the other hand can be enthusiastic, not jaded, would be able and willing to put more time into preparation and be able to relate better to undergrads.</p>
<p>@belevitt: The key point is that professors at LACs will be better than grad students at research universities because they have a lot more experience. Their position generally isn't a stepping-stone to anything.</p>
<p>@jessiehl: You make some good points. Can you provide any stats or at least some anecdotal accounts for your second point though? And as for you first point, yeah, I basically agree.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The key point is that professors at LACs will be better than grad students at research universities because they have a lot more experience.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I might turn that around to say that a graduate student at a top quality research university is a more generally capable person than the kind of professor who ends up at an LAC. That would be a gross generalization, but it would be a gross generalization with about the same accuracy as the generalization I have quoted. </p>
<p>What I personally like about research universities as contrasted with liberal arts colleges, and this is a pervasive difference I notice both within my own extended family among people who have attended each kind of college and in CC forum posts, is that research universities have an atmosphere of RESEARCH, that is checking facts and making sure that statements about external reality are as correct as they can be. I've summed up this difference sometimes by the statement, which I acknowledge is controversial and debatable, that students go to LACs to be taught but to research universities to learn. I think an attitude that "I have to take my own initiative to learn, and verify everything I am told," which I think is the attitude an undergraduate student will pick up at a research university, is a more successful attitude for life than demanding that classes be small and that classroom teachers have a particular set of formal credentials. </p>
<p>This, of course, is just my humble opinion, and I wish you and all readers of this thread well in finding a good fit for college. Good luck in your applications.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Here are the advantages of research universities that I can come up off the top of my head:....
...Any more that I'm missing?<<</p>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>Big time college athletics and the school spirit that engenders - if that sort of thing is important to you.</p>
<p>That brings to mind an important corollary to my original question. What are some schools besides LACs that offer good student-teacher ratios/average class sizes.</p>
<p>I don't think there's any shame in desiring to be taught. There's a certain humility and luxury in that.</p>
<p>I am reminded of the example of the differences between an only child and a child with many siblings.</p>
<p>Whereas the only child has the complete and focused nurturing love, affection, attention of his parents--and ultimately may become more dependent on them for resources and care-- the child with many siblings simply can't get that same sort of TLC, and on account of his circumstances, must learn how to become independent quickly lest he fall behind his brothers, sisters, and peers. There's no father to pick him up when he falls off his bike and no mother to console him when he's feeling down: he has to suck it up and grow up on his own.</p>
<p>Anyhow, enough of that. Who's to say who's more prepared for the real world? The kid from the loving, attentive background, or the kid from the tough and gritty one?</p>