I am split between two graduate schools in my decision. One of them is ranked about 25 places higher on the latest NRC rankings. The higher-ranked school emphasizes research, and over half its graduates get postdocs, while only around 25% of its graduates go straight into tenure-track positions. I spoke to the graduate advisor, who said it would be possible to make special arrangements for me to teach more than once at instructor of record if I desired.


The second school is almost the inverse of the first: over 50% of its graduates get tenure-track positions (most often at 4-year colleges or liberal arts colleges), and only around 23% of its grads get postdocs. Students are allowed to be instructor of record as many times as they want after their first year.


As someone really unsure of which of these paths I'd rather pursue, is there a clear answer on what to do here? Both schools offer many professors in my areas of interest. The lower-ranked school offers a better location, more money, and I felt like it fit me very slightly better when I visited. However, I've heard that if I decide to look for a job at a larger research university, it's difficult to move *up* the rankings list, while most end up moving *down*.


I look forward to your advice.


Thanks!



As a student split very closely between seeking a research university career and a liberal arts career after getting a math Ph.D., should I choose a school that prioritizes research or teaching?
You should go to the higher-ranked school. You are likely to be surrounded by stronger students and learn more math there. Unless the higher-ranked school is one of a very few VERY highly-ranked places, the faculty will be very friendly to and supportive of your ambitions towards LAC teaching, should that be the direction you decide to go.


On the other hand, you should probably not take the NRC rankings too seriously. Ask your undergrad advisor whether the "higher-ranked" department is *really* a lot higher-ranked.


