Why is DCUM so obsessed with small liberal arts colleges?

[Anonymous]

I agree with above. Some students get lost at big State school or end up with the “drinking degree”

[Anonymous]

A terrific, thoughtful post - with the bona fides to back it up. Thank you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The earnings in that link don't look dismal. What are you seeing?

OP here, Grinnell’s average salary ten years out from graduation is around $77K which is quite concerning. Same thing with Skidmore and other selective, but not too selective, LACs.

It's not that "concerning" to me; a lot of those graduates are in PhD programs at ten years out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

OP here, that’s exactly what baffles me about the response on this thread. Individual this, personalized attention that; you can find these at state schools too if you seek them out, but no one serves them to you on a silver spoon. You have to be a go-getter. And being a go-getter is much more emotionally healthy for kids in the long run than coddling them from 18-22. How do these graduates even function in companies? No wonder so many of them are shoehorned into the ivory tower as adjunct lecturers are what not. Honestly sad that their parents would *encourage* that sort of decision. Listen up SLAC parents: if your kids don’t have the executive function skills to cut it at a state school or a large/medium-sized private (like an Ivy), they’re probably not ready for college at all.

So, there are many excellent large universities...in other states. My own state, well, not so much. I attended a top 10 SLAC and then went to graduate school at my state’s ‘flagship’ university. I had an on campus job during grad school that put me in close contact with lots of undergraduates of said university. They were perfectly pleasant people with not an ounce of intellectual curiosity. I suppose they could navigate the campus to get to their lectures taught by TAs when they weren’t too hungover from the latest frat or sorority party but that was the extent of their ability to navigate the real world at the time. In the spirit of fairness my own focus at the university was purely to get a piece of paper degree necessary for my chosen profession.

Given that my SLAC did equip me to make enough money to allow my children to have complete choice in their college and grad school selection, they are looking at SLACs. If they wanted to be veterinarians or journalists, our main state school would be an excellent choice. Given that that is not their likely path, they will look elsewhere. I would certainly have no concerns of they wanted to attend a large university in another state provided they had specific goals in mind, but that would have similar costs as a SLAC and based on my own experience, would likely not provide a particularly stimulating or challenging undergraduate experience. Just as likely to be a waste of money as the critic so cleverly noted above.

I absolutely believe that kids can get excellent educations in a variety of settings and that if your DC goes to college with an advance plan for preferred career, the set of choices may be specific and very practical. I don’t understand why any poster would be blindly critical of another family’s choices without having any background on why they made those choices or even the wealth of options available. The only thing such condemnation illustrates is a lack of critical thinking skills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who wants to pay to have their kid be a number in giant lecture halls?

It takes a somewhat smart & mature kid to make it through large lecture halls. You are not doing your young adult any favors by trying to shelter them. They will fail in real life if you do.

Because sitting in a lecture hall and not asking questions or venturing your opinion is good preparation for the work world? Hmmm . . .

Because being in a ridiculously coddled environment with everything handed to you is good preparation for the work world? Hmmm....

The standards are quite high at SLACs. . You can’t sit in the back row and be anonymous. BUT if you have trouble with a concept, there will likely be a highly educated adult there to work with you more. Not a grad student who barely knows more than you and is only tutoring you for the money. Nothing is handed to SLAC students but actual people care how they do. They are not at the mercy of a huge state administered machine that has no time or money to look into their issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who wants to pay to have their kid be a number in giant lecture halls?

It takes a somewhat smart & mature kid to make it through large lecture halls. You are not doing your young adult any favors by trying to shelter them. They will fail in real life if you do.

Because sitting in a lecture hall and not asking questions or venturing your opinion is good preparation for the work world? Hmmm . . .

Because being in a ridiculously coddled environment with everything handed to you is good preparation for the work world? Hmmm....

The standards are quite high at SLACs. . You can’t sit in the back row and be anonymous. BUT if you have trouble with a concept, there will likely be a highly educated adult there to work with you more. Not a grad student who barely knows more than you and is only tutoring you for the money. Nothing is handed to SLAC students but actual people care how they do. They are not at the mercy of a huge state administered machine that has no time or money to look into their issue.

Agree. I don't understand the suggestion that SLACs "coddle" students. If anything, it is the opposite. We were held accountable for our learning. PP, what do you think is being "handed to you" at a SLAC? Nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since Grinnell has bee n singled out as white and high income, I thought I would provide some data. Grinnell offers great financial and merit aid, 18% of student body is international and 26% are domestic students of color. Only 13% of Grinnell students pay full tuition, 17 million a year is spent of low income students.

In terms of income after 10 years, two issues are at play. A significant percentage of grads want to improve the world, become teachers, activists, social workers and share their passion for education. Also, 20% of grads go straight to grad school and are usually fully funded because of the excellent education / reputation of Grinnell. Also, CS major is growing and students end up at high paying jobs every year so there is a place for all types of students.

This just goes to show how absurd LACs are, and the fact that you don’t know it is a sign of the weakness of their graduates. 26% students of color means the school is overwhelmingly (3/4ths) white. And if LACs encourage graduates to pursue low-paying SJW careers, that’s a blight on the school. And CS majors make a lot everywhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

OP here, that’s exactly what baffles me about the response on this thread. Individual this, personalized attention that; you can find these at state schools too if you seek them out, but no one serves them to you on a silver spoon. You have to be a go-getter. And being a go-getter is much more emotionally healthy for kids in the long run than coddling them from 18-22. How do these graduates even function in companies? No wonder so many of them are shoehorned into the ivory tower as adjunct lecturers are what not. Honestly sad that their parents would *encourage* that sort of decision. Listen up SLAC parents: if your kids don’t have the executive function skills to cut it at a state school or a large/medium-sized private (like an Ivy), they’re probably not ready for college at all.

So, there are many excellent large universities...in other states. My own state, well, not so much. I attended a top 10 SLAC and then went to graduate school at my state’s ‘flagship’ university. I had an on campus job during grad school that put me in close contact with lots of undergraduates of said university. They were perfectly pleasant people with not an ounce of intellectual curiosity. I suppose they could navigate the campus to get to their lectures taught by TAs when they weren’t too hungover from the latest frat or sorority party but that was the extent of their ability to navigate the real world at the time. In the spirit of fairness my own focus at the university was purely to get a piece of paper degree necessary for my chosen profession.

Given that my SLAC did equip me to make enough money to allow my children to have complete choice in their college and grad school selection, they are looking at SLACs. If they wanted to be veterinarians or journalists, our main state school would be an excellent choice. Given that that is not their likely path, they will look elsewhere. I would certainly have no concerns of they wanted to attend a large university in another state provided they had specific goals in mind, but that would have similar costs as a SLAC and based on my own experience, would likely not provide a particularly stimulating or challenging undergraduate experience. Just as likely to be a waste of money as the critic so cleverly noted above.

I absolutely believe that kids can get excellent educations in a variety of settings and that if your DC goes to college with an advance plan for preferred career, the set of choices may be specific and very practical. I don’t understand why any poster would be blindly critical of another family’s choices without having any background on why they made those choices or even the wealth of options available. The only thing such condemnation illustrates is a lack of critical thinking skills.

Right. Berkeley, UCLA, UMich. Not rigorous at all.

[Anonymous]

Re: Berkeley, U MI, etc. Yes, obviously those are great schools and if you can work directly with professors as opposed to TAs as an undergraduate you are going to get an excellent education. But unless you happen to live in CA or MI or your kid gets a decent scholarship, they are as expensive as but no better than a S(elective) LAC for most students at the undergraduate level.

If the OP’s actual intent was a not so humble brag on why you would consider a SLAC if your kid got a full ride at a nationally ranked university, well, that’s an entirely different thread. There still might be justifiable reasons for that choice, but definitely a different scenario. And if that is your DC’s situation, congratulations to DC!

[Anonymous]

State flagships cost just as much when you don't live in a state.

[Anonymous]

Didn’t read the whole thread, sorry, but my guess is that a fair amount of people in this area went to a SLAC, had a great time, and make a reasonable salary. And they want other parents to realize the benefits of a liberal arts education.

I went to Wesleyan in CT and my spouse went to a huge UC school, so we’ve seen both sides. Both of us were STEM majors and we got STEM PhDs from the same grad school. My spouse is constantly startled at how much I learned and retained in my really amazing non-science classes - I’ll happily expound for hours on American art from 1865-1945, social psychology, government (political action committees, gerrymandering), John Stuart Mill, etc. I actually think I enjoy life more because of this liberal arts education. We do fine financially as well - I made 3x what my spouse makes; however, his job is a labor of love and “good for the world”- which is made possible by my salary.

[Anonymous]

Variety is the spice of life.

[Anonymous]

I went to a prestigious SLAC (my choice), and found it somewhat stifling and intense. Overall, I wasn't that happy. But I have no regrets about NOT doing a pre-professional program.

[Anonymous]

SLACs, even the best, are relatively easier admits compared to selective national universities. Personally, I agree that SLACs provide a great education, but I can understand why some consider them bastions of privilege for smart kids who couldn’t get into comparably good national universities. I understand that student preferences and fit are different for each student. I’m just saying that this is the “dig” that some parents would make to parents of SLAC admits. Essentially, they want to say that Harvard is better than Williams, any day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SLACs, even the best, are relatively easier admits compared to selective national universities. Personally, I agree that SLACs provide a great education, but I can understand why some consider them bastions of privilege for smart kids who couldn’t get into comparably good national universities. I understand that student preferences and fit are different for each student. I’m just saying that this is the “dig” that some parents would make to parents of SLAC admits. Essentially, they want to say that Harvard is better than Williams, any day.

That's like saying an apple is better than an orange, any day.