Boston College Master Plan

Re: Boston College Master Plan debut

I wouldn't say that BC is "uniquely weak" in engineering/medicine. MIT and Tufts are the only Boston-area schools with strong engineering programs. Harvard, Tufts and BU are the only local universities with strong medical schools.

I also don't know what you classify as an "economic engine"; if it means buying lab equipment (which would maybe average out to, at the most, a few million dollars per year for the biggest programs at Harvard/MIT), then the liberal arts and graduate law/business schools would not be economic drivers.

But minting new liberal arts graduates -- whether it be in English, chemistry or economics -- is an economic driver itself. Creating and attracting human capital capable of general problem-solving at a high level and entering a workforce that needs educated and skilled workers (even if they aren't chemical engineers ... Belarus has tons of chemical engineers but that hasn't done much for its economy) is a boost to the local economy in and of itself.

Ditto for MBAs and JDs -- despite the sneering that too-often accompanies discussion of those degrees, any functioning, highly developed economy will need entrepreneurs and business-minded individuals (which scientists too often are not) as well as, for better or worse, lawyers. I don't know whether graduates of Harvard Business School or Harvard's chemistry department create more economic impact for the Boston area, but I would not be at all surprised if it was the MBAs.
 
Re: Boston College Master Plan debut

itchy, IIRC, the number of MIT graduates who work for Google is around 700 (current Boston mag article on Google expanding in Cambridge).

And I read recently an enumerated listing of R&D licenses for Boston area universities in either 2010 or 2011, Harvard and MIT were at the top with IIRC a hundred or more. I do remember BC's total: two, and at the bottom of the list.

From Harvard's Provost:
Harvard’s largest single source for research funding is the federal government, with more than $612 million of federally sponsored research in FY2010, and of that funding, more than 80% came from the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). An additional $157 million of sponsored funding came from non-federal sources.
Click to expand...

Re: MIT
In 2009, the research expenditure of MIT research was over $718 million. The largest sponsor of research at MIT is the U.S. federal government. The biggest department to sponsor researchers at MIT is the Department of Health and Human Services (who granted $255.9 million in 2009); this is followed by the Department of Defense who granted $97.5 million and the Department of Energy with $65.8 million. The National Science Foundation and NASA are also large sponsors of MIT research.
There are approximately 3,500 researchers currently employed at MIT in addition to the university faculty. Each of the researchers specializes in different areas and some of the world’s most important inventions are made by MIT researchers. In 2009 alone, over 530 inventions were disclosed, 184 patent applications were filed and the university received over $136 million in royalties and other income.
Click to expand...
http://cambridge.net/us/mit-research/


Not deprecating the academic stature of BC, but most of their academic apples are in carts not powered by research.
 
Re: Boston College Master Plan debut

I would never, ever argue that BC is on par with Harvard and/or MIT as a research institution in the sciences. It is not -- and, for that matter, neither is Brown, Cornell, U Chicago, Columbia, or any university in the country (and perhaps world) other than Stanford, Yale (no engineering), Princeton (no med school) and CalTech.

Harvard and MIT will obviously be conducting orders of magnitude more research than BC, and they will be sending more engineers to Google (usually to be based across the country in Mountain View).

However, BC certainly produces plenty of economic benefit for the region. Even if BC is not the research powerhouse that MIT/Harvard are, many BC sciences majors go on to grad school in the sciences or work as researchers -- and my guess is that the percentage of them who remain in the Boston area is higher than the corresponding figures for Harvard/MIT.

Of course, looking a bit broader, the vast, vast majority of the MA economy is not in tech or bio/life sciences ... and even in those industries, most jobs are in management, sales, marketing or blue-collar tasks, not in the actual R&D. BC produces highly educated, highly intelligent people who, even when they aren't scientists (as 99% of MA residents are not), are themselves a driver of the regional economy. And while BC is smaller than BU or NU, at the undergraduate level and in some of the graduate schools it has, on average it attracts a higher-achieving student and potentially a "less-local" student.
 
Re: Boston College Master Plan debut

I agree that BC is--reputationally--probably a bit ahead of BU. Obviously, all of this is subjective but listening to/reading international/national newcasts you disproportionately hear BC faculty brought on as content experts. BU certainly has pockets of excellence and the facilities to move into the upper tier of research universities, but NU (in my view) is currently reaping the benefits of strategic vision, investment and PR rather than deep structural improvement though it is undeniably becoming a very solid second-tier university. Although it might seem frivolous, I think something that will be a drag on both BU and NU is their uninspired, fast-food urban settings and architecture. BC looks like a "hallowed halls" kinda place--that is a draw for faculty and students.
 
Re: Boston College Master Plan debut

BU has focused for so long on it's graduate programs, largely to the detriment of it's undergraduate national rankings. There was a time, about a decade ago, that it was neck and neck with BC and NYU in the undergraduate national rankings. It's specialized graduate programs continue to rise in the rankings, if not already in the top 5-10 programs in the country. It's immense research portfolio and medical center will be it's economic driver, placing it only behind Harvard and MIT locally in terms of $$, brain power, and scientific discoveries.

BU is now more focused on the undergraduate programs (see the East Campus Center for Student Services). I'd say BC is ahead in this category.
 
Re: Boston College Master Plan debut

Itch -- Stell has got this one pegged fairly closely on the Bulls Eye

Research, development and other innovative activities drives the economy in the developed world and hence the world as a whole

More specifically -- Today -- we essentially re-invent everything which we touch and depend on within the typical human work life -- if you think back 25 to 40 years ago we didn't have (just a few);
1) cel phones
2) composite air frames
3) GPS guided weapons
4) MRI
5) Viagra
6) Antilock brakes
7) Flat screen TV
8) LED flashlights
9) Optical fiber communications
10) parkas with "artificial down" insulation

All of those ultimately can be traced to R&D much from university labs and many of those sources of R&D are connected with Physics, Chemistry, Biology (including Medical related R&D), Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering -- increasing importance of Systems Engineering and Biological Engineering

In that context the pecking order locally is something like the following;
1) Global leaders:
MIT -- super strong in nearly all the above
HU -- likewise but less in engineering

2) - Global 2nd Tier -- Nationally and regionally critical (order is somewhat arbitrary)
BU
NEU
U Mass Amherst
U Mass Lowell
WPI

3) 3rd Tier which would be highly valued elsewhere -- most are mostly undergrad only or lacking in complete engineering programs

BC
Tufts
Brandeis
UMass Boston
U Mass Dartmouth

4) all the rest ....

Note that a few years ago the FW Olen Foundation created the first "clean sheet" engineering school since WWII and its located in Needham -- so far its undergrad only

The above is why I and others have defined Boston/Cambridge to be the true global hub of the Knowledge Economy
 
Last edited:
Re: Boston College Master Plan debut

Tombstoner said:
I agree that BC is--reputationally--probably a bit ahead of BU. Obviously, all of this is subjective but listening to/reading international/national newcasts you disproportionately hear BC faculty brought on as content experts. BU certainly has pockets of excellence and the facilities to move into the upper tier of research universities, but NU (in my view) is currently reaping the benefits of strategic vision, investment and PR rather than deep structural improvement though it is undeniably becoming a very solid second-tier university. Although it might seem frivolous, I think something that will be a drag on both BU and NU is their uninspired, fast-food urban settings and architecture. BC looks like a "hallowed halls" kinda place--that is a draw for faculty and students.
Click to expand...

Tomb -- Bernie Gordon (funded a major award for engineering education) chose to give NU $20 M for The Bernard M. Gordon Center for Subsurface Sensing and Imaging Systems (Gordon CenSSIS) -- also supported by NSF
" Northeastern’s engineering school is known for being practice oriented because of the co-op program. There is a track record of graduating very practical engineers,” says Gordon, an MIT graduate who was attracted to Northeastern because of its emphasis on marrying research with practical applications. " -- B.G.

if you look at NSF centers as one measure of a university then NEU is right up there with BU and both are ahead of BC (none that I'm aware of)

NSF & Gordon funded -- Center for Subsurface Sensing and Imaging Systems -- (Gordon-CenSSIS)-- NEU with BU
NSF Center for High-rate Nanomanufacturing -- NEU, UMass Lowell and UNH
NSF Smart Lighting Engineering Research Center (ERC) -- BU
NSF Center for Integrated Space Weather Modeling -- BU
NSF Biophotonic Sensors and Systems (CBSS) -- BU with UC Davis
 
Re: Boston College Master Plan debut

This has really turned into apples and oranges now, and should be moved into general. I will be getting photos o stokes today.
 
Re: Boston College Master Plan debut

palindrome said:
This has really turned into apples and oranges now, and should be moved into general. I will be getting photos o stokes today.
Click to expand...

Photos are great, but I don't think any of this is off topic--the topic is the neo-gothic master plan for BC and I was suggesting how that might translate into perceptions of reputation and academic quality. But please, I've never seen an ogive arch...
 
Re: Boston College Master Plan debut

Tombstoner said:
Photos are great, but I don't think any of this is off topic--the topic is the neo-gothic master plan for BC and I was suggesting how that might translate into perceptions of reputation and academic quality. But please, I've never seen an ogive arch...
Click to expand...

fair enough, and that was an unnecessarily sarcastic response.
 
Re: Boston College Master Plan debut

palindrome said:
fair enough, and that was an unnecessarily sarcastic response.
Click to expand...

Sorry. I thought your "okay kids--playtime's over, let me get us back onto the real topic" tone was unwarranted.
 
Re: Boston College Master Plan debut

didn't mean to sound condescending, and my post wasn't actually directed at your replies.

Regardless...carry on kids! ;)
 
Re: Boston College Master Plan debut

I would agree that BC is lacking in research in the areas mentioned above, however they are all related to engineering. Northeastern and BU have much better engineering programs - and therefore much better engineering research - than BC because such a program does not exist at the school. A comparison on these grounds will inevitably be biased.

However, the BC IMP includes initiatives in addition to construction projects. One of such in a new collaborative science initiative to increase research, explained in greater detail here.

Also, there seems to only be a focus on scientific research, excluding much research done in the humanities and the professional schools that BC does have, such as human development work at the education school or the economic research conducted by the business school and the liberal arts college.
 
Re: Boston College Master Plan debut

A.) BC is landlocked, so aspirations aside......

B.) BC has no engineering program, and has no intention of starting one.

C.) BC conferred degrees in 3,075 undergraduate majors in 2010. A tenth of those were in Science/Math/Computer Science, and about half of this subset of majors was in biology (16 degrees in computer sciences, or 0.5 percent of all degrees).
 
Re: Boston College Master Plan debut

You people are drinking waaayyy too much of the currently-in-vogue "innovation" punch. As a sciences major myself, I am appalled at the degree to which you seem to think that "all economic growth" must of necessity come from high-tech start-ups -- and that such start-ups are staffed exclusively by people with sciences degrees.

1) The VAST majority of the economy is in non-high-tech disciplines. That is true no matter what economy you're looking at -- in the Boston area, in Massachusetts at large, in New England, in the US, and in the world.

2) The VAST majority of students at any school other than MIT or CalTech is non-sciences majors. I don't think BC's percentage of undergrads majoring in the sciences is that different from any Boston-area school apart from MIT.

3) Despite (2), a large majority of graduates from top universities (Harvard, MIT), very strong ones (BC, Tufts), good ones (BU, NU), and even middling or bad ones are still extremely valuable for a local economy. Let's not forget that only about 1/5 of the US adult population has a BA (and that is higher than most OECD states). The tiny fraction that gets a BA from a good university has great potential for a local economy, "even if" they aren't a sciences major.

I'm a bit gobsmacked by the odd BC-bashing because it "doesn't have an engineering program." Are you people for real? Neither does Amherst or Williams (or Harvard). Yet those schools are among the nation's best, and graduates (yes, even non-sciences grads) of those schools go on to start businesses (yes, even high-tech ones), gain employment in industries from law to consulting to finance (which brings in much more money per employee than the vast majority of high-tech businesses) to IT to any type of corporate you can imagine (yes, even high-tech ones). Any regional or national economy would salivate to have that sort of human capital -- and the same goes for most BC, BU and NU undergrads.

The fetish a few are making of engineering programs is just plain disproportionate. I don't mean to demean the importance of engineering programs by any means, but it's absurd to pretend that a university is not "serious" or does not deliver economic value or produce graduates who contribute economically if it doesn't have an engineering school ... which relatively few universities in the area do. As I said, Belarus has tons of chemical engineers, but you sure don't want to swap the Boston economy for Belarus'.

In a word: Scientists are typically good. So are engineers. So are the people who actually manage and oversee a business. So are good marketing people. So are financiers. So are investment bankers. So are consultants. So are lawyers (in moderation!). So are graphic designers. So are IT people. So are many, many others who can create value for a business.
 
Re: Boston College Master Plan debut

itchy said:
You people are drinking waaayyy too much of the currently-in-vogue "innovation" punch. As a sciences major myself, I am appalled at the degree to which you seem to think that "all economic growth" must of necessity come from high-tech start-ups -- and that such start-ups are staffed exclusively by people with sciences degrees.

1) The VAST majority of the economy is in non-high-tech disciplines. That is true no matter what economy you're looking at -- in the Boston area, in Massachusetts at large, in New England, in the US, and in the world.

2) The VAST majority of students at any school other than MIT or CalTech is non-sciences majors. I don't think BC's percentage of undergrads majoring in the sciences is that different from any Boston-area school apart from MIT.

3) Despite (2), a large majority of graduates from top universities (Harvard, MIT), very strong ones (BC, Tufts), good ones (BU, NU), and even middling or bad ones are still extremely valuable for a local economy. Let's not forget that only about 1/5 of the US adult population has a BA (and that is higher than most OECD states). The tiny fraction that gets a BA from a good university has great potential for a local economy, "even if" they aren't a sciences major.

I'm a bit gobsmacked by the odd BC-bashing because it "doesn't have an engineering program." Are you people for real? Neither does Amherst or Williams (or Harvard). Yet those schools are among the nation's best, and graduates (yes, even non-sciences grads) of those schools go on to start businesses (yes, even high-tech ones), gain employment in industries from law to consulting to finance (which brings in much more money per employee than the vast majority of high-tech businesses) to IT to any type of corporate you can imagine (yes, even high-tech ones). Any regional or national economy would salivate to have that sort of human capital -- and the same goes for most BC, BU and NU undergrads.

The fetish a few are making of engineering programs is just plain disproportionate. I don't mean to demean the importance of engineering programs by any means, but it's absurd to pretend that a university is not "serious" or does not deliver economic value or produce graduates who contribute economically if it doesn't have an engineering school ... which relatively few universities in the area do. As I said, Belarus has tons of chemical engineers, but you sure don't want to swap the Boston economy for Belarus'.

In a word: Scientists are typically good. So are engineers. So are the people who actually manage and oversee a business. So are good marketing people. So are financiers. So are investment bankers. So are consultants. So are lawyers (in moderation!). So are graphic designers. So are IT people. So are many, many others who can create value for a business.
Click to expand...

itch -- You make some good points about the need for many disciplines to make an economy a gazelle -- but you must admit that at some particular time and place some degrees are more opportune and appropriate than others

At the present time -- innovation in technology (bio, nano, computer/communications) is key to the gazelle economies and that means colleges and universities offering degrees which emphasize such technology and the practical applications of relevant science ==> through what we call engineering

These schools in the Greater Boston Area are some of the leaders in the entire world:
MIT
HU
BU/NEU

WPI
Umass Amherst
Umass Lowell

then there is a gap:
BC/Tufts/Brandeis
UMass other

undergraduate only -- Olin College
Wentworth -- so far

others
 
Last edited:
Re: Boston College Master Plan debut

As of today:

iEcXG.jpg


9X1zO.jpg


XEP9s.jpg


EdwJa.jpg
 
Re: Boston College Master Plan debut

Not bad...
 
Re: Boston College Master Plan debut

czsz said:
Not bad...
Click to expand...

Adam -- Nice pix and Nice to see that you can still build with real stone -- albeit with a steel frame -- those BC buildings will still be there and appreciated a long time after all the modern veneer panel walls have gone or wished to be so -- and not just the ignominious Alucobond
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top