WASP a fraud? The true top LACs?

[Anonymous]

Responding to this post on the Wellesley thread
“such an underrated point. There’s so many better outcome LACs than WASP, but they get all the cache for whatever reason. People are too obsessed with acceptance rates to understand the quality of the non-WASP LACs, so all the other schools get dunked on. For some reason, people here love Davidson though.”

Are the WASP schools one big sham?! Should we be looking at a different group of top lacs, based on outcomes, not “prestige,” whatever that means?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Responding to this post on the Wellesley thread
“such an underrated point. There’s so many better outcome LACs than WASP, but they get all the cache for whatever reason. People are too obsessed with acceptance rates to understand the quality of the non-WASP LACs, so all the other schools get dunked on. For some reason, people here love Davidson though.”

Are the WASP schools one big sham?! Should we be looking at a different group of top lacs, based on outcomes, not “prestige,” whatever that means?

Should you be starting another thread?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Responding to this post on the Wellesley thread
“such an underrated point. There’s so many better outcome LACs than WASP, but they get all the cache for whatever reason. People are too obsessed with acceptance rates to understand the quality of the non-WASP LACs, so all the other schools get dunked on. For some reason, people here love Davidson though.”

Are the WASP schools one big sham?! Should we be looking at a different group of top lacs, based on outcomes, not “prestige,” whatever that means?

Should you be starting another thread?

Yes, a thread with a better outcome, even if it's less prestigious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Responding to this post on the Wellesley thread
“such an underrated point. There’s so many better outcome LACs than WASP, but they get all the cache for whatever reason. People are too obsessed with acceptance rates to understand the quality of the non-WASP LACs, so all the other schools get dunked on. For some reason, people here love Davidson though.”

Are the WASP schools one big sham?! Should we be looking at a different group of top lacs, based on outcomes, not “prestige,” whatever that means?

Should you be starting another thread?

Should you be making useless comments again?

[Anonymous]

Ahh DCUM.

*has a 14 page Ivy tier list*
*condemns rethinking the best lacs*

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Responding to this post on the Wellesley thread
“such an underrated point. There’s so many better outcome LACs than WASP, but they get all the cache for whatever reason. People are too obsessed with acceptance rates to understand the quality of the non-WASP LACs, so all the other schools get dunked on. For some reason, people here love Davidson though.”

Are the WASP schools one big sham?! Should we be looking at a different group of top lacs, based on outcomes, not “prestige,” whatever that means?

Should you be starting another thread?

Yes, a thread with a better outcome, even if it's less prestigious.

Sure

West Point
Harvey Mudd
Annapolis
Middlebury

WHAM

You're welcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Responding to this post on the Wellesley thread
“such an underrated point. There’s so many better outcome LACs than WASP, but they get all the cache for whatever reason. People are too obsessed with acceptance rates to understand the quality of the non-WASP LACs, so all the other schools get dunked on. For some reason, people here love Davidson though.”

Are the WASP schools one big sham?! Should we be looking at a different group of top lacs, based on outcomes, not “prestige,” whatever that means?

Should you be starting another thread?

Yes, a thread with a better outcome, even if it's less prestigious.

Sure

West Point
Harvey Mudd
Annapolis
Middlebury

WHAM

You're welcome.

Middlebury, what? And the others are highly specific schools for very particular kids.

[Anonymous]

Outcomes based rank would look something like
1. Harvey Mudd
2. Claremont McKenna
3. Williams
4. Colgate
5. W&L

HCWCW doesn’t roll off the tongue too easy.

[Anonymous]

Well WASP Is a fraud. They aren’t the best LACs by a mile, but they are well known and have more money than other LACs. They just don’t have much ROI worth anything other than Williams.

[Anonymous]

They just make an acronym folks think is cool or aspirational or something. There are plenty of other excellent LACs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They just make an acronym folks think is cool or aspirational or something. There are plenty of other excellent LACs.

+1. They’re okay. Id happily choose a lot of lower ranked LACs over Williams and especially amherst. Someone’s gotta be at the top of the ranking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Outcomes based rank would look something like
1. Harvey Mudd
2. Claremont McKenna
3. Williams
4. Colgate
5. W&L

HCWCW doesn’t roll off the tongue too easy.

What kind of outcomes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Outcomes based rank would look something like
1. Harvey Mudd
2. Claremont McKenna
3. Williams
4. Colgate
5. W&L

HCWCW doesn’t roll off the tongue too easy.

What kind of outcomes?

Career, if the rankings followed the Money over night there’d be a different top LAC list. If you’re looking for grad school outcomes mixed with career outcomes shift Williams up, cmc drops to the 5th, and insert swarthmore and Carleton. Thats still a very different list than what the narrative has been on the best lacs.

[Anonymous]

Why wouldn’t we lower ranked schools like Mudd who serve a less financial and racial diverse community, who only accept a certain niche of student, and who have much fewer financial resources than the traditional lacs.

[Anonymous]

I mean, the Ivy Leagues have had a long run. These days? Overweened hysteria-ridden liberal fringe ideas, for no reason except for the sake of presenting new and novel ideas. Hey, let's confuse today's youth about their sexuality, and let's get the media on-board! End result 40% (I don't know the actual numbers but know it's significant) of adolescent girls, understandably questioning changes happening to their bodies and lives, now think they are gender fluid or trans or whatever the media is screaming about. Definitely, some of them are fluid or trans, and that's fine. But a percentage such as 40% ? Get out of town.

This is why the Ivy Leagues are losing their cachet. They're living la vida loca in an imaginary playground in their minds.