Harvard or Scripps

[MrsButterworth]

I'm looking at doing synthetic / biological chemistry and was accepted at both. They're both great, but the environments are so different, I'm having a hard time figuring out where I fit in best. Does anyone here have any perspective / advice?

[tso123d]

I'm looking at doing synthetic / biological chemistry and was accepted at both. They're both great, but the environments are so different, I'm having a hard time figuring out where I fit in best. Does anyone here have any perspective / advice?

Are you visiting Harvard tomorrow? If so, maybe you'll get a vibe one way or another. Also, I'm not organic, so take my advice with a grain of salt, but when I heard organic people comparing Scripps and Harvard, an important point that was made was that since Scripps doesn't have any undegrads, you would not get the teaching experience that you would at Harvard. While this may be beneficial as it would let you focus more on research, perhaps it could be a handicap if you ever pursued an academic position.

[Vanderboy]

I used to be organic but am now more in the biological chemistry area. I didn't apply to either school but what I've heard (which should be considered little more than rumor) is that the environment at Harvard can be very stressful for many. Very competetive, like class mates sabotaiging each other in many different ways competetive. Its possible this is just a vicious rumor started by those that didn't get in, who knows. What I do know is that by many(certainly not all), Harvard is considered the hands down best instituition in the US for organic chemistry so if that's what you want to do its a great opportunity. I don't know anything about their biological chemistry opportunities. Also be very judicious in deciding who to work for as some professors can be exceedingly demanding and a good personality match might be necessary to succeed under them.

I have heard some good things about the Scripps environment but I think it boils down to are you a California person or a Boston person or both or neither? If you are laid back Scripps may be best, if you are regimented or like being kept on task or professional Harvard may be beter. There are other factors too, remember you'll be there for 4-7 years (broadly) and the surronding community will inevitably affect the environment. The things you like to do to keep sane will be important. The kinds of people you like to be friends with is a factor since very likely different personalities will be more inclined to go to these schools.

So not much help there but the question of where to go for graduate school is so intensely personal its difficult to give any real objective help. I myself am debating between NYU Chemistry and Stony Brook Biochemistry and Structural Biology and its a tough call.

Edited March 10, 2011 by Vanderboy

[chaospaladin]

Does an unranked PhD Chemistry Program indicate? I do not believe that an unranked PhD Chemistry Program is necessarily bad since the OP is deciding between Scripps and Harvard, but I would like someone to give input on this. Granted, the PhD Program at Scripps has only been established in 1992, so the program may be too new to rank. I believe UC Merced's PhD Chemistry Program is also new so it has not yet been ranked.

[Eigen]

Does an unranked PhD Chemistry Program indicate? I do not believe that an unranked PhD Chemistry Program is necessarily bad since the OP is deciding between Scripps and Harvard, but I would like someone to give input on this. Granted, the PhD Program at Scripps has only been established in 1992, so the program may be too new to rank. I believe UC Merced's PhD Chemistry Program is also new so it has not yet been ranked.

? Not sure what you're getting at here, but both Harvard and Scripps are top-notch chemistry programs.

I'd say visit both schools (doesn't Scripps do an interview/visit weekend? Has that passed already?) and see where you personally feel you fit.

You also need to start looking at specific groups that you would want to work with/wouldn't want to work with. I think finding a group you fit into/specific research that really interests you is the deciding factor at this stage.

Edited March 11, 2011 by Eigen

[chaospaladin]

? Not sure what you're getting at here, but both Harvard and Scripps are top-notch chemistry programs.

I'd say visit both schools (doesn't Scripps do an interview/visit weekend? Has that passed already?) and see where you personally feel you fit.

You also need to start looking at specific groups that you would want to work with/wouldn't want to work with. I think finding a group you fit into/specific research that really interests you is the deciding factor at this stage.

So far when I've been looking at PhD Programs, I've been using this: http://graduate-scho...______________U since I didn't know where to start in terms of looking for PhD Chemistry Programs to apply in Fall 2011. In the link, Harvard is ranked, but Scripps Research Institute --- The Kellogg School of Science and Technology is not ranked, so that is why I asked the question since I was under the impression that unranked programs are not as good as ranked program. I bring up UC Merced since its PhD Chemistry Program like Scripps Research Institute --- The Kellogg School of Science and Technology's PhD Chemistry Program also isn't ranked. I had a feeling that the PhD Chemistry Program at Scripps Research Institute --- The Kellogg School of Science and Technology was also good since the OP was comparing the PhD Program at Scripps Research Institute --- The Kellogg School of Science and Technology with the PhD Program at Harvard.

EDIT: Yeah, I'll start looking for a research group that I think best fits me. I do understand that this is a deciding factor for me at this stage and I will take your advice. Thanks for reminding me. I'll ask you more questions if I need to and thanks for answering my questions so far.

Edited March 11, 2011 by chaospaladin

[Eigen]

So far when I've been looking at PhD Programs, I've been using this: http://graduate-scho...______________U since I didn't know where to start in terms of looking for PhD Chemistry Programs to apply in Fall 2011. In the link, Harvard is ranked, but Scripps Research Institute --- The Kellogg School of Science and Technology is not ranked, so that is why I asked the question since I was under the impression that unranked programs are not as good as ranked program. I bring up UC Merced since its PhD Chemistry Program like Scripps Research Institute --- The Kellogg School of Science and Technology's PhD Chemistry Program also isn't ranked. I had a feeling that the PhD Chemistry Program at Scripps Research Institute --- The Kellogg School of Science and Technology was also good since the OP was comparing the PhD Program at Scripps Research Institute --- The Kellogg School of Science and Technology with the PhD Program at Harvard.

EDIT: Yeah, I'll start looking for a research group that I think best fits me. I do understand that this is a deciding factor for me at this stage and I will take your advice. Thanks for reminding me. I'll ask you more questions if I need to and thanks for answering my questions so far.

I've never heard of that site, so I can't validate it's ranking system.

That said, there are very few legitimate methods for ranking graduate programs... It's generally a feeling of "consensus" within the field as to which programs are "best".

My comment on deciding based on specific research groups was primarily directed at the OP- she has two excellent programs, and the best way to decide between them is to find the group among the two where she feels most comfortable.

Here are some very relevant (and recent) ACS articles on Rankings:

http://pubs.acs.org/...8843cover2.html

http://pubs.acs.org/.../8843cover.html

It's worth noting that the NRC only did "ranges" this time around- going with the idea that everyone knows who, say, the top 10 programs are, but ranking them past that is really tricky. Unlike other disciplines that might have fewer reputable programs, NRC ranked over 175 doctoral programs in chemistry for this last data set (collected mostly in 2005-06).

Edited March 11, 2011 by Eigen

[chaospaladin]

It's generally a felling of "consensus" within the field as to which programs are "best".

Don't you mean "feeling"?

[Eigen]

Don't you mean "feeling"?

Hah, yeah.

[prolixity]

I used to be organic but am now more in the biological chemistry area. I didn't apply to either school but what I've heard (which should be considered little more than rumor) is that the environment at Harvard can be very stressful for many. Very competetive, like class mates sabotaiging each other in many different ways competetive. Its possible this is just a vicious rumor started by those that didn't get in, who knows. What I do know is that by many(certainly not all), Harvard is considered the hands down best instituition in the US for organic chemistry so if that's what you want to do its a great opportunity. I don't know anything about their biological chemistry opportunities. Also be very judicious in deciding who to work for as some professors can be exceedingly demanding and a good personality match might be necessary to succeed under them.

I have heard some good things about the Scripps environment but I think it boils down to are you a California person or a Boston person or both or neither? If you are laid back Scripps may be best, if you are regimented or like being kept on task or professional Harvard may be beter. There are other factors too, remember you'll be there for 4-7 years (broadly) and the surronding community will inevitably affect the environment. The things you like to do to keep sane will be important. The kinds of people you like to be friends with is a factor since very likely different personalities will be more inclined to go to these schools.

So not much help there but the question of where to go for graduate school is so intensely personal its difficult to give any real objective help. I myself am debating between NYU Chemistry and Stony Brook Biochemistry and Structural Biology and its a tough call.

I'm sorry, but I have to call you on this giant mountain of tripe. Harvard is a collaborative and expansive environment. Because of the size of the laboratories, a student is bound to encounter individuals with whom he does not get along; however, there is no generally toxic atmosphere as you've described.

Your characterizations of the personalities of the two schools are also quite incorrect. There are many labs at Harvard in which the students are expected to be self-directed. There are many labs at Scripps in which the students are kept under thumb.

[phoenix245]

I don't know much about Harvard but I worked at Scripps and went to the Open day. Here in Europe, it's considered by many the place to be for synthetic organic chemistry, mainly because of Phil Baran's lab really taking off in recent years. But there are other great labs, KC and Jin-Quan Yu to name a couple. Harvard obviously doesn't need an introduction in that respect.

I personally chose to work at an institute because I felt the bureaucracy of a big university can sometimes be a hindrance and in a way that's one of the reasons why these institutes are built in the first place. If you're desperate to TA, you can TA the graduate classes as a senior PhD student.

Again, I don't know much about Harvard so all I can say is Scripps is a great place to go and can really make your career take off. However, if you end up at either of those, you should have a great, though quite intense, research training experience. All in all, there is no 'bad choice' at this point.

[prolixity]

I don't know much about Harvard but I worked at Scripps and went to the Open day. Here in Europe, it's considered by many the place to be for synthetic organic chemistry, mainly because of Phil Baran's lab really taking off in recent years. But there are other great labs, KC and Jin-Quan Yu to name a couple. Harvard obviously doesn't need an introduction in that respect.

I personally chose to work at an institute because I felt the bureaucracy of a big university can sometimes be a hindrance and in a way that's one of the reasons why these institutes are built in the first place. If you're desperate to TA, you can TA the graduate classes as a senior PhD student.

Again, I don't know much about Harvard so all I can say is Scripps is a great place to go and can really make your career take off. However, if you end up at either of those, you should have a great, though quite intense, research training experience. All in all, there is no 'bad choice' at this point.

I'll tack on to this:

Harvard graduate students in chemistry can work for PIs at several highly-visible institutes and campuses as well, including the Broad Institute, MGH, The Harvard Medical School, other Harvard Schools, and MIT. I noticed a lot of prospective students had no idea about this during visitation weekend and only met with PIs within the Chemistry department.

[tso123d]

Harvard graduate students in chemistry can work for PIs at several highly-visible institutes and campuses as well, including the Broad Institute, MGH, The Harvard Medical School, other Harvard Schools, and MIT.

Really, MIT? I heard Harvard students were allowed to take graduate classes at MIT, but I didn't realize that it was possible for them to work with a PI from MIT.

[prolixity]

Really, MIT? I heard Harvard students were allowed to take graduate classes at MIT, but I didn't realize that it was possible for them to work with a PI from MIT.

yep.

[Vanderboy]

I'm sorry, but I have to call you on this giant mountain of tripe. Harvard is a collaborative and expansive environment. Because of the size of the laboratories, a student is bound to encounter individuals with whom he does not get along; however, there is no generally toxic atmosphere as you've described.

Your characterizations of the personalities of the two schools are also quite incorrect. There are many labs at Harvard in which the students are expected to be self-directed. There are many labs at Scripps in which the students are kept under thumb.

Prolixity,

I am sorry if what I have posted has offended you but your response is highly inappropriate in tone. Firstly, collaborative can mean the labs work together, not that the students get along, so firstly lets both agree that this forum gives us neither the time nor the space to give exhaustive and perfectly accurate descriptions. Secondly, I never claimed to describe every single lab at either institution nor implied that they were uniform in management style. I merely related the surrounding environments and that those inevitably influence how the department is run, the personalities it attracts, and the larger framework of the university in which every single individual in the program must interact, even those that isolate themselves from it.

It is highly likely that your information on both of these programs are better than mine, as I clearly indicated that I was only commenting on what I heard about Harvard when I was an undergrad and even suggested it could be completely inaccurate. This prospective wants information, I consider it more helpful to impart what I have heard so that they can look into its validity rather than say nothing at all and let an issue go unexamined. (I am by no means under the delussion that this person needs or even wants my help, but it was open in being asked for.)

You are more than welcome to point out that my characterizations are not uniform, as I myself did not mean them to seem that way and if my language implied as such I appologize although I am quite certain I made a point to avoid this by 1 acknowleging my uncertainty and 2 stating generals "and environment MAY be a better fit " as opposed to "the whole program WILL be a better fit". You had every ability to point out contradictions, exceptions, or your own personal knowledge that argues differently, but there was no necessity to be rude.

I'll leave it alone from here on as this forum has a specific subject matter but as your response was personal and combative in nature I wanted to answer it. I suggest if you have any more negative comments for me you either keep them to yourself or message me directly instead of having this forum devolve further.

[chaospaladin]

Prolixity,

I am sorry if what I have posted has offended you but your response is highly inappropriate in tone. Firstly, collaborative can mean the labs work together, not that the students get along, so firstly lets both agree that this forum gives us neither the time nor the space to give exhaustive and perfectly accurate descriptions. Secondly, I never claimed to describe every single lab at either institution nor implied that they were uniform in management style. I merely related the surrounding environments and that those inevitably influence how the department is run, the personalities it attracts, and the larger framework of the university in which every single individual in the program must interact, even those that isolate themselves from it.

It is highly likely that your information on both of these programs are better than mine, as I clearly indicated that I was only commenting on what I heard about Harvard when I was an undergrad and even suggested it could be completely inaccurate. This prospective wants information, I consider it more helpful to impart what I have heard so that they can look into its validity rather than say nothing at all and let an issue go unexamined. (I am by no means under the delussion that this person needs or even wants my help, but it was open in being asked for.)

You are more than welcome to point out that my characterizations are not uniform, as I myself did not mean them to seem that way and if my language implied as such I appologize although I am quite certain I made a point to avoid this by 1 acknowleging my uncertainty and 2 stating generals "and environment MAY be a better fit " as opposed to "the whole program WILL be a better fit". You had every ability to point out contradictions, exceptions, or your own personal knowledge that argues differently, but there was no necessity to be rude.

I'll leave it alone from here on as this forum has a specific subject matter but as your response was personal and combative in nature I wanted to answer it. I suggest if you have any more negative comments for me you either keep them to yourself or message me directly instead of having this forum devolve further.

You don't have to waste your time apologizing to Prolixity. Prolixity has trolled me as well as others several times. Prolixity also sometimes has inappropriate tones when people ask him questions or respond to his questions.