What is the appeal of SLACs for non-1%ers?

[Anonymous]

Kids who want to be taught by professors and not TAs go. Not 1 %ers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kids who want to be taught by professors and not TAs go. Not 1 %ers

Why would you actually care abt the quality of education? College is mostly about job prospects, plain and simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SLACs have very low ROI compared to state schools:

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

They seem like a total scam except for the 1%. Much better for your future to go to UMD or Ohio State or Indians or Purdue or VA Tech to study engineering or business while enjoying college sports.

SLACs seem like a waste for all but the wealthy 1%era who don’t have to worry about finding a job after graduation. Many of them don’t have big college sports or Greek Life to generate alumni loyalty. What’s the point of them?

You won't win this argument here. Most parents on here are lawyers or have grad degrees via a liberal arts undergrad route. A lot of them are SAHMs who vehemently support a SLAC education and have the time and energy to rip you apart on this anonymous forum, lest their choices and decisions be deemed inferior. Almost like how every car buyer thinks they bought the best car at the best price. Much like sports (where kids typically seem to play a sport one of the parent's played) they 'push' their kids down a path similar to theirs. Most have grad school expectations for their kids and save money accordingly (as is obvious from the various college threads). BTW, these are the same parents who scoff at Asians for clamoring over TJ (read the AAP threads) and look down on their "prepping" but have no problem "enriching" their kids and shelling out multiple hundreds per hour for SAT prep (even in this test optional era) and college counselor (who pretty much tells the kids where to apply, what to write about, and writes the essay while making the kid and parent believe they came up with the idea and wrote the essays ).

Anyhoo.. If you want to study a 'hard' subject that gives you a job after an undergrad, go Public or top large private (non-LAC). If you want an undergrad education with plans for immediate grad school (law, medicine, etc.) go (S)LAC. Most are unreasonably expensive for what you get in return but tend to subsidize COA outside the top 10-20, maybe 30.

Wow, you have a LOT of biases built into one response. Maybe look at the ROI data with a more careful lens (e.g., what majors are kids attracted to/capable in, what is your particular funding situation--for many MC folks SLACS are as cheap as in-state, but the level of ROI data provided masks that) and impose fewer biases and maybe you'll get some insight into why people might reasonably make this choice.

Most decent SLACs only give out a small amount of merit aid. Getting the total CoA below $30k/year is very difficult unless you’re low-income.

And no doubt about it — being a CS major at UMD is better than being a CS major at Bates, for example.

Speaking as someone who did years of graduate CS admissions at one of the top-five grad CS programs in the country, you are flat-out wrong. Sometimes this is true. But it is far from being universally true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your kid’s ROI depends on your kid’s abilities and hustle, not the college.

+1000

SLAC really help develop critical thinking, research and writing skills, no matter what the major. Kids are much more deeply involved in their education, in Classes of 20-25 vs 200-400. Or rather, it's much harder not to be deeply involved in the smaller classes.

+1. Also, some students find the smaller scale much better for social/happiness reasons. I loved my big State U but my kids both ended up at SLACS and were very happy with their choices.

At the risk of being flamed by the SLAC haters, I recommend reading "Colleges that Change Lives."

Oooh, now you’ve done it. The crazies are really going to come out the woodwork now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids who want to be taught by professors and not TAs go. Not 1 %ers

Why would you actually care abt the quality of education? College is mostly about job prospects, plain and simple.

For you, ok. Not for my family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids who want to be taught by professors and not TAs go. Not 1 %ers

Why would you actually care abt the quality of education? College is mostly about job prospects, plain and simple.

Jesus wept.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP's (and society's) devaluation of the humanities is sad and, in large part, why we have the society we have today. The humanities are nuclear subjects that give us direct access to knowledge on what is fundamentally human. Studying the humanities gives us comprehensive knowledge, skills and mindsets that come with studying the field, which are not easily outdated. The study of humanities allows us to question and reflect, maintain a global vision, acknowledge differences, communicate effectively, etc. These mindsets and skillsets are not emphasized in the study of science and math.

yeah, but they don't pay that much

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A SLAC is a college version of private high school. A school with teachers who have time to teach the student.

The SLAC hate is from the same people who were jealous of people who paid for private high school.

Or from those who actually attended an SLAC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids who want to be taught by professors and not TAs go. Not 1 %ers

Why would you actually care abt the quality of education? College is mostly about job prospects, plain and simple.

You seem to.be plain and simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids who want to be taught by professors and not TAs go. Not 1 %ers

Why would you actually care abt the quality of education? College is mostly about job prospects, plain and simple.

Two reasons:
1) The quality of education directly correlates with employment
2) College education is so much more than about jobs

[Anonymous]

SLAC posters refuse to acknowledge the realities of today regarding both LACs and National Universities.

SLAC hucksters might gain more credibility if they named the supposed "large public university" that is trashed in various posts. LAC people won't name the schools because then their assaults could be addressed in a mature, reasonable, and factual manner.

Anyone who wants small intro classes and immediate attention from professors at a "large public university" just needs to join or be admitted to that large public university's Honors College. Getting to know a professor is as simple as meeting that prof during his or her office hours--whether or not a student in the honors college.

Many public universities offer a variety of honors options as well as living-learning communities which are open to students who share a common interest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your kid’s ROI depends on your kid’s abilities and hustle, not the college.

+1000

SLAC really help develop critical thinking, research and writing skills, no matter what the major. Kids are much more deeply involved in their education, in Classes of 20-25 vs 200-400. Or rather, it's much harder not to be deeply involved in the smaller classes.

+1. Also, some students find the smaller scale much better for social/happiness reasons. I loved my big State U but my kids both ended up at SLACS and were very happy with their choices.

At the risk of being flamed by the SLAC haters, I recommend reading "Colleges that Change Lives."

Oooh, now you’ve done it. The crazies are really going to come out the woodwork now.

Nope--you are already here. Welcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree that if a student needs hand-holding that a small more intimate atmosphere might be better.

And if a student doesn't want to be called upon to participate in class discussions because of apathy or fear that they will be unmasked as an imposter, wants to be able to skip class or go to class without even skimming the reading without worry that they'll even fall behind since the lectures will be dumbed down by grad students in recitation sections, and wants to have a curriculum that allows them to avoid having to do any meaningful research or writing over their four years if they plan it right, a big school might be a better option for them.

(see, both sides can damn with faint praise)

As it turns out, there are pros and cons to both types of schools. Some folks won't admit that because they are oddly jealous of SLACs, which I think they associate with wealth (and the associated benefits of privilege/elitism etc). Whether that is accurate for the type of school as a group is highly questionable, but these critics view wealth/privilege/elitism negatively. That's kind of ironic, though, because these are the same posters whose whole college search for their kids is focused on what will make their kids the most money so their kids get to access the privilege/elitism they associate with that money (and maybe never had themselves).

Again, you engage in a self-serving, gross over-simplification of reality in your first paragraph.

The bolded statement is accurate and a first step toward sobriety. Congratulations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SLAC posters refuse to acknowledge the realities of today regarding both LACs and National Universities.

SLAC hucksters might gain more credibility if they named the supposed "large public university" that is trashed in various posts. LAC people won't name the schools because then their assaults could be addressed in a mature, reasonable, and factual manner.

Anyone who wants small intro classes and immediate attention from professors at a "large public university" just needs to join or be admitted to that large public university's Honors College. Getting to know a professor is as simple as meeting that prof during his or her office hours--whether or not a student in the honors college.

Many public universities offer a variety of honors options as well as living-learning communities which are open to students who share a common interest.

There is not one “large public university” that everyone is trashing. Various posters are sharing their experiences at various universities. You seem to refuse to acknowledge that some people don’t want to attend a large school, just as some people don’t want to attend a small one. Why do you continue to act like there is only one way to attend college. Not everyone wants to be part of the honors college or live in a living and learning community.

For what it’s worth, my experience at UMD was not enjoyable and friends share the same feelings about Penn State and VA Tech. However, plenty of others loved their experiences at each of these schools.

Seriously, do what works for you and stop criticizing people who make different choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids who want to be taught by professors and not TAs go. Not 1 %ers

Why would you actually care abt the quality of education? College is mostly about job prospects, plain and simple.

Two reasons:
1) The quality of education directly correlates with employment
2) College education is so much more than about jobs

1. It's your major, not your school, that directly correlates with employment.
2. At some point what you get from college that is "more than just jobs" is not worth paying for - not least because you can get a lot of it elsewhere.