Do professors really send their kids to LACs at higher rates? And why?

[Anonymous]

I’ve heard this many times as I’ve been looking into LACs for my kid. I tried to search for some data, but didn’t find anything substantial.

Can anyone chime in with some thoughts? Also, why do they send their kids to LACs at higher rates?

[Anonymous]

Professors are insiders. They know so well at research universities undergraduate students are not their priority.

Their offspring are more academically oriented rather than business oriented. Many of them would pursue advanced degrees. LAC is perfect for that.

[Anonymous]

Many SLACs offer generous (or even full) tuition assistance for the dependents of faculty who also teach at SLACs. Children of Wooster faculty, for example, can get a full ride at Oberlin, Grinnell, or other schools in the Great Lakes tuition exchange, and most of the schools in the national tuition exchange are SLACs. There is a strong academic case, but a lot of it comes down to finances too. A lot of faculty couldn’t actually save enough to send their kids to the SLACs they teach at, so the tuition exchanges are a huge perk.

[Anonymous]

No

[Anonymous]

I think those comments are based on this study.

https://ir.vanderbilt.edu/items/d93ad09f-b3ac-42e8-a22c-b024f47558e3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Professors are insiders. They know so well at research universities undergraduate students are not their priority.

Their offspring are more academically oriented rather than business oriented. Many of them would pursue advanced degrees. LAC is perfect for that.

+1 All of this is true for DC 1, who will be going on to grad school. They are attending a WASP school, which has been a far better academic experience than I had as an UG. Socially it’s perfect for them, too. However, DC2 is very different, wants big school spirit. As long as they understand what they’re potentially losing in terms of UG teaching experience, I’m okay with it. This kid is more pre-professional and less intellectual, unlikely to go on to grad school beyond an MA. Not going to force them into an educational model they don’t want. HYP grad and current professor, who thinks HYP is best for grad school.

[Anonymous]

Made up story by SLAC bosters.

[Anonymous]

It’s simply not true across the board.

[Anonymous]

More than most other professions, professors at R1 schools work closely with recent college graduates from a variety of settings. My in-laws sent their children to LACs because the recent LAC graduates they worked with impressed them as particularly well-educated compared to students who had done their undergrad at R1s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More than most other professions, professors at R1 schools work closely with recent college graduates from a variety of settings. My in-laws sent their children to LACs because the recent LAC graduates they worked with impressed them as particularly well-educated compared to students who had done their undergrad at R1s.

My SLAC-educated classmates were far better prepared for a doctoral program than I was. I had to work hard to catch up.

[Anonymous]

Professor parent here. My kids can only get tuition exchange at some less competitive SLACs (similar to employing institution). I'll encourage them to apply because free college is a massive gift, and we don't make anywhere near enough to pay for a private school. If they want a brand name and can't get into the very top SLACs/Ivies with great aid packages, then the state flagship might be their best bet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s simply not true across the board.

Yup, I was a Chemistry professor (retired now). If you want to "science", don't get a BA in it, unless your goal is to teach HS.

[Anonymous]

The only hard data I’ve seen referenced is the Vanderbilt study.

Anecdote is worth the price you pay for it, but fwiw I live in a college town and it definitely feels true. Extremely high rate of SLAC attendance here — particular favorites are NESCACs, seven sisters, Kenyon, Swat, Skidmore, a handful of Grinnell and Carleton

[Anonymous]

I attended a no-name, catholic arts college and would not recommend attending a liberal arts college. There was little learning - the curriculum was on level with my high-ranked middle school. The requirements to attend anything ranked less than top the 50 are having a pulse and breathing. My friends at R1 got stronger educations, even with 600 students in a class.

[Anonymous]

I know lots of professors at name schools. Their preference for any academic-minded kid is always SLAC for undergraduate, Ivy or Ivy-like for graduate school.

For what it’s worth, I have one kid at a top-ranked public and another at a top-ranked SLAC. There is no question, the SLAC has the more intense academics, professor relationships, and study-minded peers. Of course, that’s not the experience everyone wants, but for those who do, that’s the target-rich environment.

And no, the SLAC kid doesn’t find the school too small. When the students are first-rate and like-minded, it’s easy to make a lot of friends. And what’s better than doing what you love with other people doing the same? Would you rather have 2000 people around you focused on the same goal or 20,000 people, 80% of whom are not focused on the same goal, and you have to find your people?