Choosing a school (biostats)

[GoPackGo89]

Biostat_prof posted a few years ago about looking at ENAR student paper award winners as another factor in choosing a school. Just wanted to update for 2015 and 2016 and on my next study break do WNAR as well (I lied, I can't find the list of WNAR paper winners)
 

So from 2014-2016 

UNC: 11
Minn: 6
Harvard: 4 (2016 Van Ryzin award)
JHU: 5 (2015 Van Ryzin award)
Penn: 4
NCSU: 2
Columbia: 2
Michigan: 3
Wisconsin: 2 (2014 Van Ryzin award)
Rice: 2
Pitt: 2
 

Edited February 26, 2017 by statbiostat2017

[cyberwulf]

This certainly isn't a useless metric, but the number of ENAR award winners from an institution is closely tied to the number of submissions from that institution, which in turn is a function of the culture/expectations about submitting to student paper competitions at that institution. It simply strains belief that, if the number of submissions were similar, Harvard and Hopkins wouldn't rack up at least as many awards as UNC. 

Edited February 27, 2017 by cyberwulf

[Biostat_Assistant_Prof]

I don't think this is a pointless metric, but as Cyberwulf said, it is closely related to the number of submissions from a given institution and the relative size of the cohort. Also, if you're considering ENAR, you should also consider JSM's student paper competition, as certain institutions may have a preference towards one or the other. JSM's paper competition is done by section, including 'Biometrics' and 'Biopharmaceutical' sections which would be similar to ENAR paper topics, as well as other sections like 'Bayesian Statistics' or 'Epidemiology Statistics'. 

 

 

[StatsG0d]

2 hours ago, Biostat_student_22 said:

I don't think this is a pointless metric, but as Cyberwulf said, it is closely related to the number of submissions from a given institution and the relative size of the cohort. Also, if you're considering ENAR, you should also consider JSM's student paper competition, as certain institutions may have a preference towards one or the other. JSM's paper competition is done by section, including 'Biometrics' and 'Biopharmaceutical' sections which would be similar to ENAR paper topics, as well as other sections like 'Bayesian Statistics' or 'Epidemiology Statistics'. 

 

 

The size of cohort thing may not factor in too much. While UNC is the largest program, Harvard isn't too far behind. But yeah, based on the visit at UNC they stress a lot about how their students have winning papers.

[Biostat_Assistant_Prof]

On 2/28/2017 at 1:22 PM, footballman2399 said:

The size of cohort thing may not factor in too much. While UNC is the largest program, Harvard isn't too far behind. But yeah, based on the visit at UNC they stress a lot about how their students have winning papers.

 

I'd argue cohort size is far from a trivial factor  - the more students in the program, the more that can (and assumingly do) submit papers for the award. You only reference two programs here though; while Harvard and UNC (and Michigan while we're at it) boast large cohorts, places like Brown, Yale, and Vanderbilt, all have relatively small cohorts, and I think Columbia and Emory are also a bit smaller than UNC. 

Overall though, this metric is misleading in my opinion in terms of judging the "quality of a graduate program." I don't believe the cohort of UNC graduate students is a higher tier than those at Harvard, Michigan, Hopkins, or Minnesota. The only thing this really tells me is that the school has a culture of encouraging and pushing students to submit for these awards. Other institutions likely just have a more "hands off" philosophy, giving their graduate students more independence with regards to choosing to submit a paper or not. 

[cyberwulf]

11 hours ago, Biostat_student_22 said:

Overall though, this metric is misleading in my opinion in terms of judging the "quality of a graduate program." I don't believe the cohort of UNC graduate students is a higher tier than those at Harvard, Michigan, Hopkins, or Minnesota. The only thing this really tells me is that the school has a culture of encouraging and pushing students to submit for these awards. Other institutions likely just have a more "hands off" philosophy, giving their graduate students more independence with regards to choosing to submit a paper or not. 

Yes, this. Indeed, the top departments tend to be the most "hands off" because they have (on average) stronger students who can work quasi-independently. As you move down in the ranks, faculty often play a bigger and bigger role in driving student research and publications.