Gas station without pumps

2014 September 1

Where PhDs get their Bachelors’ degrees

Last year I wrote about a study that looked at where CS PhD students got their bachelors’ degrees. Now Reed College has extended that question to other fields as well: Doctoral Degree Productivity.  Their point was to show how high Reed ranked on the standard they chose: the number of students who went on to get PhDs divided by the number of students getting bachelor’s degrees.  I quote the tables and accompanying text below, but I take no credit or blame for the data—this is directly from Reed’s site:

Undergraduate Origins of Doctoral Degrees

Percentage ranking of doctorates, by academic field, conferred upon graduates of listed institutions.

Rank All Disciplines Science and Math Social Sciences Humanities and Arts
1 Calif. Inst. of Tech. Calif. Inst. of Tech. Swarthmore New England Conserv. of Music
2 Harvey Mudd Harvey Mudd Grinnell Curtis Institute of Music
3 Swarthmore Reed Reed Juilliard
4 Reed MIT Bryn Mawr Cleveland Inst. of Music
5 Carleton NM Institute Mining & Tech. Spelman St. John’s College
6 MIT Carleton Oberlin Reed
7 Grinnell Wabash Wesleyan Hellenic College-Holy Cross Greek Orthodox Sch. of Theology
8 Princeton Rice St. Joseph Seminary Swarthmore
9 Harvard Univ. of Chicago Harvard Oberlin
10 Oberlin Grinnell Pomona Amherst

Percentage Ranking by Specific Fields of Study

Rank Life Sciences Physical Sciences Psychology Other Social Sciences* Humanities
1 Calif. Inst. of Tech. Calif. Inst. of Tech. Univ. Puerto Rico – Aguadilla Swarthmore St. John’s, MD
2 Reed Harvey Mudd Wellesley Reed Reed
3 Swarthmore Reed Vassar Harvard Amherst
4 Carleton MIT Hendrix Grinnell Swarthmore
5 Grinnell NM Institute Mining/Tech. Pontifical Coll. Josephinum Univ. of Chicago Carleton
6 Harvey Mudd Carleton Grinnell Bryn Mawr Yale
7 Univ. of Chicago Wabash Swarthmore Thomas More College of Lib. Arts Thomas More College of Lib. Arts
8 Haverford Rice Barnard Oberlin Bryn Mawr
9 MIT Univ. of Chicago St. Joseph Seminary Coll. Bard College at Simon’s Rock St. John’s, NM
10 Earlham Grinnell Pomona Wesleyan Wesleyan
11 Harvard Haverford Reed Amherst Princeton
12 Cornell Univ. Swarthmore Wesleyan Pomona Bard College at Simon’s Rock

*Does not include psychology, education, or communications and librarianship.

Source: National Science Foundation and Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. The listing shows the top institutions in the nation ranked by estimated percentage of graduates who went on to earn a doctoral degree in selected disciplines between 2001-2010.

All the schools listed are private schools except Univ. Puerto Rico—Aguadilla and NM Institute Mining/Tech., but seeing dominance by expensive private schools is not very surprising—grad school is expensive, and students who can afford expensive private schools are more likely to be able to afford expensive grad school and are less likely to need to work immediately after getting their B.S. or B.A. A PhD is not a working-class degree—it is prepares one for only a small number of jobs, mainly in academia or national labs, so for many it is just an elite status symbol.  What is more surprising is how poorly the Ivy League schools do on this list—perhaps those who get their elite status conferred by their bachelor’s institution see no need to continue on to get higher degrees.

Reed does not report numbers directly comparable with the ones in the Computing Research Association report, which reports only on computer science PhDs, where

Only one institution (MIT) had an annual average production of 15 or more undergraduates.   Three other institutions (Berkeley, CMU, and Cornell) had an average production of more than 10 but less than 15.  Together, these four baccalaureate institutions accounted for over 10% of all Ph.D.’s awarded to domestic students.   The next 10% of all Ph.D.’s in that period came from only eight other baccalaureate institutions (Harvard, Brigham Young, Stanford, UT Austin, UIUC, Princeton, University of Michigan, and UCLA). 

Note that five of the top producers of bachelor’s in CS who went on to get PhDs were public schools.  The CRA does not report PhD/BS numbers for individual institutions, probably because the numbers are too small to be meaningful for most colleges—you have to aggregate either across many colleges or across many fields before the denominators are big enough to avoid just reporting noise.  Reed did the aggregating across fields, while the CRA report aggregated across colleges, finding that research universities sent about 2.5% of their CS graduates on to get PhDs, 4-year colleges about 0.9% and masters-granting institutions about 0.6%.  They did have one finding that supports Reed’s analysis:

The top 25 liberal arts colleges (using the U.S. News and World Reports ranking) collectively enroll slightly less than 50,000 students per year in all majors and were the origins of 190 Ph.D. degrees between 2000 and 2010, collectively ranking ahead of any single research university.

Reed’s findings are also consistent with the NSF report that put the “Oberlin 50″ colleges highest at over 5% of their science and engineering graduates going on to get PhDs, compared to about 3% for research universities.  The NSF report supports somewhat the analysis that socio-economic status is important in determining who goes on to grad school—private research universities match the Oberlin 50, but public research universities have only about half as large a fraction of their graduates go on to grad school.

I found out about this site from The Colleges Where PhD’s Get Their Start, which has a copy of the tables that probably came from an earlier, buggy  version of the site, because Lynn O’Shaughnessy wrote

I bet most families assume that attending a public flagship university or a nationally known private research university is the best ticket to graduate school. If you look at the following lists of the most successful PhD feeder schools for different majors, you will see a somewhat different story. Not a single public university makes any of the lists. The entire Cal State system, however, is considered the No. 1 producer of humanities PhD’s.

I could believe that the Cal State system had the largest raw numbers of students going on to get PhDs in humanities, as they are a huge 4-year college, enrolling about 438,000 students [http://www.calstate.edu/as/cyr/cyr13-14/table01.shtml], with about 76,000 bachelor’s degrees per year [http://www.calstate.edu/PA/2013Facts/degrees.shtml]. Are there any other colleges in the US graduating so many BS or BA students per year? But the fact remains that Cal State is not the flagship university of California, and the University of California probably has a much higher percentage of its alumni go on to get PhDs.

In fact, one of the big problems with these lists is the question of scale—most of the colleges that come up high on Reed’s lists (which means high on NSF’s lists) do so by having very small denominators—they don’t graduate many students, though a high percentage of those go on to get PhDs.  In terms of raw numbers of students who go on to get PhDs, the public research universities produce many more than the private research universities, and the liberal arts schools are just a drop in the bucket. Of the top 25 schools in terms of raw numbers who go on to get PhDs in science and engineering, 19 are public research universities and 6 are private research universities—of the top 50 only 17 are private research universities.

When you are looking for a cohort of similarly minded students, you get slightly higher enrichment at some very selective private schools, but there are actually more peers at a large public research university—if you can find them.

2014 August 19

Two papers submitted

I got two papers with a co-author finished and submitted today.

One of them is based on the segmenter algorithms that I wrote up in this blog (with some improved parameterization): Segmenting noisy signals from nanopores, Segmenting filtered signals, and Segmenting noisy signals revisited.

The other one is an HMM paper that uses the automatic segmentation and an HMM that models the DNA motor behavior to do the same analysis that was done by hand in an earlier paper “Error Rates for Nanopore Discrimination Among Cytosine, Methylcytosine, and Hydroxymethylcytosine Along Individual DNA Strands” in PNAS.  The automatic HMM method was more accurate than the hand curation and feature extraction followed by sophisticated machine learning methods like support vector machines and random forests—I think that we were limited before by the biases of the hand curation and feature extraction.

Unfortunately, we were not able to do side-by-side comparison on exactly the same data, as the original data for the PNAS paper was lost in a 2-drive failure on a RAID that had not been properly backed up.

The paper writing did not take much of my time this summer, as my co-author did a lot of the writing and kept me from procrastinating too much.

I’ve also been working on my book, tentatively titled Applied Electronics for Bioengineers, but without a co-author to keep me honest, I’ve been doing a lot of procrastinating.  Yesterday I had planned to show the waveform of the gate signal on a nFET being used for pulse-width modulation, to show the “flat spot” that results from feedback through the gate-drain capacitance.  I fussed with that for quite a while, but never got a recording I liked the looks of—so ended up getting nothing written on the book.  I’ll probably try again tomorrow, but with a backup plan of working on a different section if that one gets too frustrating, or of writing some of the text that will go around the figure, once I get a figure I can use.

The book is currently 215 pages, but that includes the front matter and back matter.  The core of the book is only about 188 pages, with 74 figures.  I probably need a bunch more figures (schematics, graphs, photos, …), but those are what take the longest to produce.  There’s a little over a month left until classes start, but I don’t see myself finishing by then.

2014 August 17

New bedroom furniture

Filed under: Uncategorized — gasstationwithoutpumps @ 12:58
Tags: , , , ,

I’ve added some new furniture to the bedroom:

My new 42" rolling cabinet tool box.

My new 42″ rolling cabinet tool box. The plastic tool box on the top is my son’s.

For several years I’ve been planning to clean up the garage, put up shelving, and get all the “stuff” in the garage organized. It has been a firm commitment each summer, and each summer nothing happens (well, one year I got some nasty old shelving taken down and everything put into boxes, but that was sort of negative progress, as I never got new shelves put up).

Part of the plan was to get all (or most) of my tools into a rolling tool box, so that I could have easier access to them. I’ve often ended up buying a new hand tool because I couldn’t find what I was looking for in the garage. This summer I finally bought a 42″ rolling tool box from Harbor Freight for $370, after giving up on finding anything locally. The shipping from southern California added another $97 to the price (shipping weight is 289 pounds). Because most of the tools get used in the house, not the garage, I decided to keep the toolbox in the house. I’m planning to clear my son’s stuff out of the living room and into his bedroom when he leaves for college (so the robotics table, scroll saw, and drill press would move out of the living room, restoring it to a more livable space), so I didn’t want to put the tool box in the living room. Since I want the tools to be readily available when I’m working on electronics stuff, I ended up putting the tool box in my bedroom, which has gradually been becoming my workshop for computer and electronics stuff.

My wife has been patient with the gradual conversion of our bedroom into a workshop, but I think that we could make the room more comfortable by rearranging the furniture. I hope to get the floor of the bedroom mostly cleared of junk before school starts, though that may require getting some shelving that fits under the window to tidy up the junk that has accumulated while still leaving it mostly accessible. I’ll probably have to buy the new bed she wants, though this will require some careful selection, as there won’t be room for bedside tables and our current bedside lamps are not tall enough to work with a conventional bed.

I spent some time yesterday getting the tool box into the house—the delivery service wouldn’t even put it on the porch, so I had to uncrate it on the driveway, remove all the drawers, then get my son and my wife to help me put it up the front steps. While I had all the drawers out, I lubricated the slides with paraffin (the T9 lubricant I use on my bike chain). I then spent most of the afternoon unearthing tools in my garage and organizing them in the tool box. I couldn’t get all the hand tools into the toolbox, but most of them fit.

At the end of the day, I had my son go through his tool box and mine, selecting what he would take to college. He ended up with a somewhat smaller set of tools than the rather large list I had put together, rejecting the socket wrench set and the screwdriver security bit set as too big.

  • metric Allen wrenches (from a set from Harbor Freight, I’ll keep the English and star bits)
  • screwdrivers (he already had a handle and bit set)
  • claw hammer (he already had one)
  • mini hammer with screwdrivers
  • mini level (which comes with a warning for people with pacemakers, which is pretty silly considering how weak the magnet on it is)
  • adjustable wrench (an 8″ one with a 1″ jaw opening, the second smallest of the set of laser-marked ones from Harbor Freight)
  • measuring tape (he’s only taking one of the two 25′ ones he already had)
  • razor knives
  • Leatherman pocket tool (which he already had)
  • zip ties
  • velcro cable straps
  • needle nose pliers (2, which he already had)
  • diagonal cutters (which he already had)
  • end nippers (which he already had)
  • self-adjusting wire strippers
  • electrical tape
  • multimeter (from his chemistry lab kit)

There were also several leftovers from my first prototype run of the circuits course:

We still have some things not added to his tool box, which is already full:

  • bike patch kit
  • stainless steel bike tire levers
  • needles and thread
  • tweezers
  • Arduino and Freedom KL25Z boards
  • power supply for Arduino boards?
  • Ethernet cable
  • USB cables
  • soldering iron and stand (my old Unger iron, or perhaps he’ll take the one bought for his company)
  • Power strip with surge protector
  • solder
  • 22-gauge wire for breadboarding
  • first aid kit: band aids, larger gauze pads, antibacterial ointment, paper tape, medic scissors, thermometer, ibuprofen, antacid, simethicone

We’ll have to go over the previous list to check for other things he might need, but I think this list has most of the things I’m responsible for.  We might make a trip to Home Depot on move-in day to pick up a few other things.

 

 

Oregon Shakespeare Festival

I’m a little envious of my son—he’s gotten to go to Ashland twice this year to see plays at the Oregon Shakespeare Festival.  He’s seen nine different plays there this year, two of them twice.

For the first trip this year he went with Alternative Family Education, as part of their Dramatic Literature course in spring semester.  They teach the course each year around the plays that they’ll be seeing in Ashland—he’s taken the course three times and enjoyed it each time (except for some of the written assignments).  The first time he went, I was on sabbatical, so took the time to travel with the group as a “chaperone”—we’d had to fly to Ashland separately, rather than travel with them on the bus, because the trip left the day of the state science fair, though we both rode the bus home.  Since then he’s been able to travel both ways with the school group, but I’ve always had a heavy teaching load in the spring, and couldn’t justify skipping class for a pleasure trip to Ashland.

Last week, he traveled with a group from West Performing Arts.  This is the first time that WEST has done an Ashland trip, and it was planned at the last minute, so they were not able to get enough tickets or transportation for parents to accompany the group. It was a smaller group than the AFE—only ten teens and two adults. They were originally planning to see five plays, but while they were in Ashland they managed to get the last twelve standing-room tickets to Into the Woods, so they ended up seeing six plays—a pretty intense schedule with only three hotel nights!  They didn’t do as many workshops as the AFE group, but a lot of the workshops are aimed at general school groups, not at kids who had as much theater training as this group.  I don’t think that the teens minded not having a lot of workshops—most of them had just finished a two-week intensive Shakespeare conservatory, and all of them had done at least one of the Shakespeare conservatories (either this year or in a previous year).  It was an older group than the AFE trip also, as three of the teens were 18 or older and had graduated from high school.

I had some time this summer and could have gone myself, but arranging my own transportation and lodging at the last minute did not appeal to me, and my wife was not particularly interested in going there. She would travel to see world-class opera, particularly if the destination also had great art museums, but not for theater—the local productions are high enough quality for her and not much trouble to attend.  We had season tickets for Santa Cruz Shakespeare this year (as we did for Shakespeare Santa Cruz most previous years), and we’ve got season tickets for next year’s Jewel Theatre season.  We’ll also go to 8 tens at 8, an annual production of 8 new (or fairly new) ten-minute one-acts, and probably the best of the rest, a staged reading of another 8 from the pool considered for 8 tens at 8.  We also usually see the Shakespeare To Go performance, though not together—my wife sees it when they tour to her school, and I see the last performance they do, up on the UCSC campus. We’ll probably also go to the WEST Ensemble Players performances and the summer teen show by WEST. Though our son won’t be in them any more, we still know a number of the actors and they kids usually do a good job (tickets are cheap also).  If Santa Cruz Shakespeare puts on a holiday pantomime this year, we’ll probably go to that to, and possibly go to see the long-form improv group Freefall at one of their shows.

We’ll be going to one more WEST Performing Arts performance this year—a fund-raiser for their scholarship program this Friday.  This is not a rehearsed production—they’ve just requested a number of their more reliable actors to do monologues or sketches.  So my son will have one last chance to perform at West End Studio Theatre, though he hasn’t decided what he’ll do yet.

So with 14 or 15 theater events a year, and more available if we wanted them (UCSC stages several plays every quarter, but we rarely go to any of them), it isn’t as if I was starving for theater. My wife doesn’t get to anywhere near that number of operas (a few in San Jose and a few in San Francisco) and has to make do with broadcasts in the movie theater—and I wasn’t counting the broadcasts of National Theatre London that we see at the movie house, so I shouldn’t count opera broadcasts either. I’ve no cause for complaint.

Still, the Oregon Shakespeare Festival has a bigger budget than anything in Santa Cruz and produces some pretty impressive shows—I would like to see them again. Maybe next year.

2014 August 14

ScratchJr

Filed under: Uncategorized — gasstationwithoutpumps @ 11:42
Tags: , , ,

If you’ve been wanting to teach your child to program, but found Scratch too complicated for your 5-year-old, there is a new option: ScratchJr.

On the  ScratchJr – About page, the developers say

What is ScratchJr?

ScratchJr is an introductory programming language that enables young children (ages 5-7) to create their own interactive stories and games. Children snap together graphical programming blocks to make characters move, jump, dance, and sing. Children can modify characters in the paint editor, add their own voices and sounds, even insert photos of themselves—then use the programming blocks to make their characters come to life.

ScratchJr was inspired by the popular Scratch programming language (http://scratch.mit.edu), used by millions of young people (ages 8 and up) around the world. In creating ScratchJr, we redesigned the interface and programming language to make them developmentally appropriate for younger children, carefully designing features to match young children’s cognitive, personal, social, and emotional development.

ScratchJr is now available as a free iPad app. We expect to release an Android version later in 2014 and a web-based version in 2015.

Unfortunately, I can’t give you a review of the program, as I don’t have an iPad to check it out on (nor do I have easy access to 5-year-olds, now that my son has grown up).  They did a great job on Scratch, though, so I would hope that ScratchJr has extended the concepts to a lower age group appropriately.

Next Page »

The Rubric Theme. Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 266 other followers

%d bloggers like this: