I don’t for a moment endorse the arrogance behind post #47, nor do I think that if my son doesn’t end up as a theoretical physicist it will be due to the inadequacy of his “intellectual level” (the kid’s SAT and SAT subject scores match the average scores of admitted Caltech students - he ain’t stupid).
Having said that, I fully agree with the recurring message in this thread - generally couched in less dismissive language than BrightSunshine’s - that CairoSon should have a “Plan B” when it comes to career aspirations. That would be good advice for anyone who wants to go into an intellectually rigorous field which can only absorb a few people. Hell, it’s good advice for anyone. Just thought I’d go on record with that, in case anyone was thinking I believed the world should bend itself around my Speshul Snowflake so he can get whatever he wants from life. Not true. CairoSon knows that he needs to be ready to have a productive, happy life and career even if his dream doesn’t work out. However, it’s a little early to be giving up on it just yet.
Now, back to topic - for the record, we spent a couple of hours today on a conference call with a family friend who is an experimental physicist, currently in the private sector but with previous affiliations that include Harvard and Lawrence Livermore. With regard to the question I posed in the OP, she’s very positive about UTexas (and thinks the Jefferson Scholar program would be fantastic for rounding him out as a person and therefore increasing his chances of success in whatever field he ends up with) and UCSB (which she likes in part because of department quality and in part because “professors take you more seriously when you in the honors program” [which he is]). Colorado she’s okay with … Rochester, not so much. Not to say that Rochester isn’t a good school, she just doesn’t think their physics department is the best of his options as an undergrad. However, if he clears the waitlist at Williams or Haverford, she thinks either one should take precedence.
So that’s one more bit of advice to add to the mix.
Huh? My brother got his Doctorate in theoretical physics at the Clarendon. But to even stand a chance of getting a Rhodes Scholarship, CairoCarol’s son should start as soon as possible.
That all sounds great. And yeah, it sounds like you are having practical discussions with your son, and balancing all of the factors involved well.
Interesting to hear your comment on Haverford - by the way, congrats on getting on the wait list! Obviously an excellent school, but I have no insight on their physics dept. I would’ve assumed that UCSB and UT Austin would have superior programs. Again, I say that in compete ignorance, thinking of Haverford as a liberal arts school and maybe Swarthmore, its Quaker cousin up the road, having engineering. ??
Perhaps you could read more carefully in the future? I said
Does your son find the academic challenges for undergrads appropriate for his intellectual level? Nobody knows since he hasn’t started! The point is if he is far and away the best physics student at whichever school he ended up in your list, he has a chance but he still has a significant handicap compared to those who go to better schools (which means if he can transfer, he should). If he is not, then plan B is in order.
Another piece: he should think about what he wants to do with that degree. That way he can think about other paths leading to similar careers. I keep encountering people who chose their field of study based on “it looked neat/pretty/interesting” and never looked to “what do I want to do in those decades once I’ve got my degree” (and then there’s the ones who start Biology and then realize it involves dissecting worms…).
Look, I’m sure it’s good “whatever it is” but people in Texas think BBQ comes from a cow, so, you know.
I know in big schools your experience really depends on your smaller circles - your department, etc., and that people in the same huge university can have radically different experiences. But I would point out that UT is HUGE. I mean, absolutely enormous. Ridiculously big. It is very easy to get lost in a place that big, with nobody looking out for you in particular. It depends on the person, but if I were him and you, I’d feel that was a factor.
I mentioned that earlier; some people like being at a huge school and some really, really hate it. I think UCSB is about 2,000 students. And don’t forget about the climate differences between Austin/Santa Barbara and Colorado/Rochester. Will your kid be happy in a cold, snowy winter?
One of my moments of clarity was when I heard a long-time star teacher explain the difference in how he uses the terms education versus schooling.
Schooling is what is done to you. Be quiet, stand in a single-file line, don’t answer a question without raising your hand and being called upon.
Education is what you take into yourself. It’s what makes you want to learn more and seek out active opportunities to find the answers.
K-12 is about schooling. College and above is about education. I had a good education at a mediocre school because I wanted it. I needed it to support my family and I was hungry for it because I enjoyed the field I was going into. So I sought out those professors who also had a passion for it, and I became their lab assistant, or worked on special projects, or helped with grants. We even had game nights and social time with faculty members where they’d come to our student apartment and play games and talk shop.
My mother would sometimes look at my halfhearted efforts in my k-12 years and say “well, you’re only hurting yourself. I know this stuff, your dad knows this stuff, it’s you that doesn’t. And as sad as I am that you’ve chosen not to learn it, it’s your life and you if you don’t care then I can’t make you.”
Little did I know how much she was preparing me for college.
The Clarendon Laboratories is primarly an experimental sciences lab with a focus on atomic, condensed matter, and planetary sciences. It is not where someone interested in theoretical particle physics would look for a position. The Rhodes scholarship focuses largely on leadership and civic responsibility. It is not in any way focused on development of the sciences, and less than 10% of Rhodes scholars are selected from science or medicine backgrounds. As I stated previously, this is an odd set of recommendations that doesn’t really even fit with what the o.p.'s son is interested in doing. There are many other fellowships and scholarships that are focused specifically on the sciences that would be more advisable for someone interested in theoretical physics (or any hard science) to pursue, and many programs and institutes that would be better suited to a career in that field, but it would first make sense for a student get some coursework and research experience under his or her belt to be able to consider whether it is really the field in which they want to devote their career.
If we’re going to be frank, it should be pointed out that even if a student goes to a Top 3 (or whatever) physics program with the intent of getting into a top flight graduate program, there is still a statistically likely chance that he or she will not succeed in that program or even work professionally as a physicist. There are so few opportunities for theoretical physicists in the US (or indeed, even worldwide) that it doesn’t just take preparation and aptitude, or even a passion for the subject matter; being successful in such a career takes a combination of luck, sheer brilliance, an obsession with the subject matter bordering on dysfunctionality, and luck. No amount of just being bright and a hard worker, or even starting out at Harvard, MIT, or Princeton is going to guarantee success; conversely, a student with these qualities will probably rise to the top wherever they start from. In any case, someone who hopes to be in the forefront of physics research had better be adept at research and self-study instead of relying on the standard sequence of coursework to be suffiicent preparation; in fact, they probably need to be asking and seeking answers to the kinds of questions that stump their professors.
Regardless, it isn’t as if the eductation a student receives in the physics program is useless if they don’t make it into one of the few research and/or academic positions available in physics. The grounding in basic mechanics, introduction to laboratory work, and computation methods is a good basis to work in other fields from programming and simulation to engineering, medical research, or even law and economics.
On the other hand, I don’t think any high school student really has the basis to realistically evaluate what they want to do as a career. It is certainly good to keep an open mind and consider alternatives to the primary career path, but the point of post-secondary education should be to a) get a good fundamental basis of knowledge to grow from, b) be exposed to different people, ideas, and fields that you won’t get from your limited experience living at home and going to high school, and c) realize that however big a fish you may have been in your little pond, you’re actually one of many minnows swimming in the ocean, many of whom may be in their own way much bigger than you even if you are a world-class intellect. This goes against the idea that colleges and university should just be advanced vocational factories churning out intellectual workers; we should expect and encourage students to explore different educational options rather than be highly focused on a singular vocational path, especially when it comes to particularly gifted students who may fixate on one area of knowledge when they could benefit and contribute to other areas.
Regarding the Rhodes Scholarships, there are only 32 of them awarded each year to Americans. Plus my understanding is that they prefer “student-athletes” or kids who are sporty and smart.
With the internet the amount of information out there has changed dramatically since I was in college. You say that you couldn’t take QFT, but today if you can’t and want to learn that you can take a class in it through MIT’s open courseware:
For OP’s kid, IMHO the most important thing is that he should go where he will be happy. That, by far, is going to be more impactful to his career than the quality of the school. It doesn’t matter if UofR is better than UCSB academically if he’s miserable because of the cold and snow in the winter.
I’ve known quite a few who did. Often but not always it’s because they wanted to do what someone close to them did; often but not always a relative.
My youngest brother wanted to work in business administration. No surprises there, kid was born admin, he just needed to get the degree. Then again, he’s the son and double-grandson of admin folk, and great-grandson of several other admin people, so it’s not as if it was a surprise choice.
Santi waffled between architecture and his family’s art business until he found out about “interior architecture”, aka decoration.
Alfonso wanted to be a veterinarian, like his dad.
Javi (one of our many Javis) wanted to be an economist. He knew he wasn’t interested in business admin (which several of his relatives did) but in country admin. He’s surpassed his aim: works for the Central European Bank.
I didn’t so much have a business title in mind as a way of life. I wanted to travel to different places and live in different cultures. I chose ChemE over Chem because the second one’s future prospectuses were sold as repetitive and routine, the first one’s as “you could end up about anywhere, doing about anything”. Last time I went to the US, my Visa request form had an arrow in the little space asking about “countries visited in the last year” pointing to the back of the form, and there a list of a dozen countries, all visited for work.
Some of my classmates were considering “pretty fields” until our teachers asked “and what do you want to do after?”. Some of those pretty fields, well, you can teach… or teach… or, uhm, teach… or take one of those jobs where you need a college degree but it doesn’t matter in what. That led to a sudden reorganization of aims by those who would rather cut off their own hands than teach.
Once more a big thank you to everyone for the useful insights, which go far beyond my original question but are coming at a perfect time.
On the Rhodes - I’ve heard it has changed a bit from its earlier focus (no idea where I get that, though) but yes, historically being a student athlete was crucial. I made it surprisingly far in the process myself decades ago (one of the top three in my state), but I’m pretty sure the point where I got dinged was when the committee asked me, “so when you rode crew, what position?” and I couldn’t remember (it was only dorm crew my freshman year, but that was the only athletic activity I had). So probably not a realistic option for CairoSon.
Though you never know; maybe he will opt to become more physically active in college. That’s one thing his parents really like about CU Boulder (and Williams) - both schools seems to have a very healthy, physically active culture in a way that goes beyond a narrow focus on competitive sports. As far as non-academic characteristics are concerned, that’s a plus, and even CairoSon is kind of swayed by that.
Anyway - we spent yesterday touring the CU Boulder campus and today, even as I write, CairoSon is meeting with a physics department rep to discuss his options. I have to say for the record that despite its rather mediocre academic reputation*, it seems like a terrific school. Based on what I’ve seen, I’d highly recommend it for a lot of people - it’s clear that a motivated person could excel and get a great education there, in spectacular surroundings. And while it is a huge school, it somehow has a fairly intimate feel.
*During a session for parents, one person asked what their acceptance rate is - the answer was 85%.
Frank Bruni, a NYTimes columnist I can take or leave, writes about college admissions a lot. This time it is pretty funny - from behind their paywall:
[QUOTE=NYTimes Frank Bruni]
PALO ALTO, California — Cementing its standing as the most selective institution of higher education in the country, Stanford University announced this week that it had once again received a record-setting number of applications and that its acceptance rate — which had dropped to a previously uncharted low of 5 percent last year — plummeted all the way to its inevitable conclusion of 0 percent.
With no one admitted to the class of 2020, Stanford is assured that no other school can match its desirability in the near future.
“We had exceptional applicants, yes, but not a single student we couldn’t live without,” said a Stanford administrator who requested anonymity. “In the stack of applications that I reviewed, I didn’t see any gold medalists from the last Olympics — Summer or Winter Games — and while there was a 17-year-old who’d performed surgery, it wasn’t open-heart or a transplant or anything like that. She’ll thrive at Yale.”
[/QUOTE]
Sometimes it really does feel that way. He spoofs on a few other schools, too.
The final set of decisions from most schools, including Ivy’s, is this week. Fun times.
Sounds great, sounds like you guys had a good visit there. When it comes time to make a final decision, remember that the right fit is important and may be somewhat subjective, and might be something CairoSon can’t fully articulate or a decision he can’t fully defend.
What I mean is that he may want to go to school C, even though you may point out that school A is better in X or school B is better in Y, and still to him school C is a better choice even though he can’t refute the attributes of A and B.
Love it! That is not unlike a joke I’ve been making for the past few months - “So few people get into Caltech, you wonder how they ever manage to fill their class.”
This is an excellent point - fortunately for CairoSon, we understand that this is ultimately his decision. If he makes what we think is the “wrong” choice, we will have an in-depth conversation to discuss the pros and cons of various options and do our damnedest to convince him otherwise (and make sure he understands the consequences of his choice). But yes, at the end of the day it is up to him.
I feel quite strongly about this as I was raised in a “mother knows best” household where my wishes were routinely over-ridden. I was not even allowed to apply to a lot of schools that interested me and basically was told I could choose either Smith or Wellesley. My mother preferred Smith, my father Wellesley. I chose Wellesley for reasons that had nothing to do with either parent. But my mother reminded me that she was pissed off about it for the rest of her life, thinking I’d basically voted for my dad over her. This is not the kind of memory I want to leave my son with.