Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Try a collge which focuses on both like University of Rochester. It is one of the "new Ivies."
What does "new Ivies" mean?
It means nothing. Every few years a crop of schools becomes fashionable and becomes very competitive or maybe it was already. I know that Rochester is a very good school but the "new Ivies" thing is a way to try to make it something that it isn't The old school version was the "little 3"--Amherst, Williams and I can't remember the third. Most people haven't heard of that and many people don't even know what schools make up the 7 sisters. When I was young, the trendy "new Ivies" were Duke, Wake Forest, Rice, Wash U., McGill. Today I think Reed is a biggie and maybe Rochester too. The Ivies are the Ivies and that is that. There are quite a few schools that are generally considered better than some of the Ivies anyway (Berkeley, Stanford, UVa, Chicago, are just a few).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think you've got two different questions.
One is whether to study a liberal arts discipline, and the other is whether or not to choose a small liberal arts college. You can study English at UVA or College Park, or physics at Wellesley or Morehouse.
This person read my mind. I went to Virginia Tech. With parents from the Northeast, I was expected to go to a Liberal Arts college but we visited Tech on a whim and loved it. It was a great decision. I thought I wanted to do the science thing and I did for several years but ultimately switched majors into History--a liberal arts discipline--and went to law school. Universities give options that smaller liberal arts colleges can't offer. And for the sciences, the Universities typically have larger departments that support Masters and PHD students and thus have teachers and facilities that the typical liberal arts college cannot provide. If the child has no clue what they want to do, then I vote for a University. If they know they want to do a liberal arts degree and then go on to grad school for that discipline, then I think liberal arts colleges may have an edge. Even then, I would push for a University because at 17 I KNEW I wanted to do science. At 20, I KNEW I did not and was happy to have the options my school offered.
Seems like the predominant view is that if DC "KNOWS" what they want to do...(e.g., go to law school), then Liberal Arts may be the better route to go. Problem is that as this post points out very clearly..people change their minds. Then / when that happens, will the Liberal Arts degree be worth anything?
Anonymous wrote:I posted this in another thread, but the best they you can do for your DC is help them find the right school for them. That might mean a huge university, or a teeny tiny "no name" liberal arts school. All students should attend a place where they will thrive as a person and a student. I know everyone is concerned about future earning or what imaginary future employers might think about your DC's undergrad school, but, please, STOP. Worry about finding an environment where your DC will be happy and excel.
If your DC loves English and history, why no encourage them to pursue that (and, yes, they'll probably change majors at least once. Oh to be 19 again!). There's lots that can be done with those interests....teaching. PoliSci. Government. Regardless, English and history will teach them all sorts of transferable skills. I wish more students were English/writing majors (history majors have to do a lot of writing, too); then I wouldn't have to suffer through all the horrible cover letters and writing sample whenever I have to fill a position.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think you've got two different questions.
One is whether to study a liberal arts discipline, and the other is whether or not to choose a small liberal arts college. You can study English at UVA or College Park, or physics at Wellesley or Morehouse.
This person read my mind. I went to Virginia Tech. With parents from the Northeast, I was expected to go to a Liberal Arts college but we visited Tech on a whim and loved it. It was a great decision. I thought I wanted to do the science thing and I did for several years but ultimately switched majors into History--a liberal arts discipline--and went to law school. Universities give options that smaller liberal arts colleges can't offer. And for the sciences, the Universities typically have larger departments that support Masters and PHD students and thus have teachers and facilities that the typical liberal arts college cannot provide. If the child has no clue what they want to do, then I vote for a University. If they know they want to do a liberal arts degree and then go on to grad school for that discipline, then I think liberal arts colleges may have an edge. Even then, I would push for a University because at 17 I KNEW I wanted to do science. At 20, I KNEW I did not and was happy to have the options my school offered.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Try a collge which focuses on both like University of Rochester. It is one of the "new Ivies."
What does "new Ivies" mean?
Anonymous wrote:I think you've got two different questions.
One is whether to study a liberal arts discipline, and the other is whether or not to choose a small liberal arts college. You can study English at UVA or College Park, or physics at Wellesley or Morehouse.
Anonymous wrote:What undergrad degree, liberal arts or otherwise, doesn't require a graduate degree? Assuming there will be some kind of graduate education in order to succeed, a liberal arts education is a valuable foundation. I actually resent that our kids don't get this in high school - why must we go to university to learn to write well and think critically? - but given the state of affairs, a liberal arts education is almost a necessity in my view.
Anonymous wrote:Try a collge which focuses on both like University of Rochester. It is one of the "new Ivies."
Anonymous wrote:I posted this in another thread, but the best they you can do for your DC is help them find the right school for them. That might mean a huge university, or a teeny tiny "no name" liberal arts school. All students should attend a place where they will thrive as a person and a student. I know everyone is concerned about future earning or what imaginary future employers might think about your DC's undergrad school, but, please, STOP. Worry about finding an environment where your DC will be happy and excel.
If your DC loves English and history, why no encourage them to pursue that (and, yes, they'll probably change majors at least once. Oh to be 19 again!). There's lots that can be done with those interests....teaching. PoliSci. Government. Regardless, English and history will teach them all sorts of transferable skills. I wish more students were English/writing majors (history majors have to do a lot of writing, too); then I wouldn't have to suffer through all the horrible cover letters and writing sample whenever I have to fill a position.