In their editorial “Doing more for Kate” (16 Dec. 2005, p. [1741][1]), T. Cech and D. Kennedy describe a young woman who might have been a productive scientist, but was transformed into a business major by the anomie of a large research university. Keisha, a valedictorian from a working class high school, was also overwhelmed at a large research university. Rather than changing majors, however, Keisha transferred to a smaller public comprehensive university. There she was soon noticed by an instructor, who drew out her story and introduced her to other faculty. She is now engaged in an undergraduate research project, is academically successful, and seems well on the way to graduate school and a scientific career. Although efforts to energize teaching in large classes should be applauded, it is a mistake to believe that this is more than a palliative for the real pathology that afflicts the U.S. scientific pipeline. The anecdotes about Kate and Keisha really say that scientific training and the development of a scientific workforce are intensely personal and human activities. This is not the mission of large research universities, nor are teachers of even the best large classes particularly good at it. Assuming that intellectual capability in the young is not determined solely by the income of their parents, perhaps the greatest unexploited pool of scientific talent exists among the children of the working class. It is the public comprehensive universities, those invisible and disregarded institutions, that are most likely and best qualified to mentor and develop this impecunious human resource. Yet it is precisely those institutions that are being starved to death by state legislatures nationwide. If Cech and Kennedy are correct that the U.S. scientific enterprise is threatened, then the science establishment might do even more for Kate and Keisha by attacking the political disease rather than the pedagogical symptoms. [1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.1123580