LACs are overrated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Feels relevant with the insane boosting currently.

Why so much resentment? A lot of excellent students choose these schools for a reason. They’re popular with the DCUM demographic, and many of us are SLAC alums. No, they aren’t a good fit for everyone, but they have a good thing to offer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why did someone revive a years-old old thread? How do people even find these old threads? They search on a college name and scroll through 20 pages?

Doesn’t seem healthy tbh

The SLAC haters are weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Feels relevant with the insane boosting currently.

Why so much resentment? A lot of excellent students choose these schools for a reason. They’re popular with the DCUM demographic, and many of us are SLAC alums. No, they aren’t a good fit for everyone, but they have a good thing to offer.

+1 They’re not for everyone but even in places where it’s all about the popular state flagship, there are kids who prefer and choose SLAC’s if it works financially for their families. I also know older adults who attended private T-25’s but wish they had attended an LAC.

[Anonymous]

Long wall of text incoming but I'm a STEM grad from a top LAC with some reflections on my experience.

The short answer is that I think LACs are appropriately rated... for the right type of student from the right type of family. I was certainly the former, but I'm not sure I came from the latter.

For the academically inclined, the quality of education offered is second to none, even when compared to Ivy League institutions. My view on this is because I have a parent and sibling who went to different Ivies and they have relayed to me fairly lukewarm educational experiences (most profs not interested in teaching apparently). In contrast, every student at my LAC was given close attention that might've only been reserved for a handful of professors' favorites at a larger institution. This has great appeal for a certain type of student, and is probably the reason that, as other noted, per capita PhD/grad school numbers at LACs are through the roof.

But frankly, this type of education is costly and I felt coerced into pursuing a career in asset management after graduation rather than my initial plan of medicine/academia because of the financial strain full-pay tuition ($50k at the time) put on my parents. They were well educated and solidly upper middle class but still needed to scrape to afford sending two kids to private colleges, and I did come out with sizeable debt (5 figures). I suppose this can be said for any full-pay private though and not just LACs.

While I'm thankful my transition to a highly competitive career path was made accessible thanks to my school's reputation, I sometimes wonder what my life would be like had I just accepted my offers to my public flagship with in-state tuition or one of the multiple scholarships I received to mid-tier private schools. Almost certainly wouldn't have broken into finance, but probably still could have gotten into medical school. Or maybe would've shifted into tech, who knows. I likely would've done fine, come out with little-to-no debt, and my parents would've saved a ton of money. It wouldn't be a bad life.. and it would've been choices I made under less duress.

Anyways, the name itself is not a golden ticket. My present situation is a decent one because I was under pressure, recognized the need for ROI rather early, and positioned myself accordingly, but I could've easily been in much worse financial shape if had I accumulated the debt I did without a plan to pay it off. Even with help from his family, a college friend of mine had over $600k of debt after finishing his schooling in his 30s (he's a medical specialist now)!

On careers, I would say that large universities have a more universal brand utility. LAC networks are very strong but somewhat confined to a narrower set of elite, coastal industries or academia. Jobs in finance, consulting, law, tech, etc. are high paying and available, but there is less choice outside of those fields to make the math work, and even fewer options if looking outside the school's geographic region. An accounting firm, for example, is not going to have many LAC grads because none of these schools teach accounting! Neither will a regional bank in the South. But even so, in geographies where they have a presence, outcomes for the T10 LACs are very similar to the T10 research universities.

So if optimizing for ROI & career optionality rather than intellectual development is top priority, I would probably go with an Ivy League or similar (or a cheaper in-state option). But against any equally costly private school below that T15-20, a top LAC is a very compelling choice for ROI alone even with its limitations.

For families that can write $100k checks without a sweat, and to a lesser extent those who can receive significant financial aid (VERY generous aid at most of these top LACs), I truly think it is an excellent choice to allow their children to experience the luxury of the 'life of the mind' in this sort of environment while making a slight compromise on career options. However, for families that cannot easily pay what's due, it will be granting a great educational gift at the cost of heavy financial shackles.

All this to say that I would be very pleased to send my own child to be educated at a LAC, but only because I expect to be able to comfortably afford it thanks to my LAC education

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Long wall of text incoming but I'm a STEM grad from a top LAC with some reflections on my experience.

The short answer is that I think LACs are appropriately rated... for the right type of student from the right type of family. I was certainly the former, but I'm not sure I came from the latter.

For the academically inclined, the quality of education offered is second to none, even when compared to Ivy League institutions. My view on this is because I have a parent and sibling who went to different Ivies and they have relayed to me fairly lukewarm educational experiences (most profs not interested in teaching apparently). In contrast, every student at my LAC was given close attention that might've only been reserved for a handful of professors' favorites at a larger institution. This has great appeal for a certain type of student, and is probably the reason that, as other noted, per capita PhD/grad school numbers at LACs are through the roof.

But frankly, this type of education is costly and I felt coerced into pursuing a career in asset management after graduation rather than my initial plan of medicine/academia because of the financial strain full-pay tuition ($50k at the time) put on my parents. They were well educated and solidly upper middle class but still needed to scrape to afford sending two kids to private colleges, and I did come out with sizeable debt (5 figures). I suppose this can be said for any full-pay private though and not just LACs.

While I'm thankful my transition to a highly competitive career path was made accessible thanks to my school's reputation, I sometimes wonder what my life would be like had I just accepted my offers to my public flagship with in-state tuition or one of the multiple scholarships I received to mid-tier private schools. Almost certainly wouldn't have broken into finance, but probably still could have gotten into medical school. Or maybe would've shifted into tech, who knows. I likely would've done fine, come out with little-to-no debt, and my parents would've saved a ton of money. It wouldn't be a bad life.. and it would've been choices I made under less duress.

Anyways, the name itself is not a golden ticket. My present situation is a decent one because I was under pressure, recognized the need for ROI rather early, and positioned myself accordingly, but I could've easily been in much worse financial shape if had I accumulated the debt I did without a plan to pay it off. Even with help from his family, a college friend of mine had over $600k of debt after finishing his schooling in his 30s (he's a medical specialist now)!

On careers, I would say that large universities have a more universal brand utility. LAC networks are very strong but somewhat confined to a narrower set of elite, coastal industries or academia. Jobs in finance, consulting, law, tech, etc. are high paying and available, but there is less choice outside of those fields to make the math work, and even fewer options if looking outside the school's geographic region. An accounting firm, for example, is not going to have many LAC grads because none of these schools teach accounting! Neither will a regional bank in the South. But even so, in geographies where they have a presence, outcomes for the T10 LACs are very similar to the T10 research universities.

So if optimizing for ROI & career optionality rather than intellectual development is top priority, I would probably go with an Ivy League or similar (or a cheaper in-state option). But against any equally costly private school below that T15-20, a top LAC is a very compelling choice for ROI alone even with its limitations.

For families that can write $100k checks without a sweat, and to a lesser extent those who can receive significant financial aid (VERY generous aid at most of these top LACs), I truly think it is an excellent choice to allow their children to experience the luxury of the 'life of the mind' in this sort of environment while making a slight compromise on career options. However, for families that cannot easily pay what's due, it will be granting a great educational gift at the cost of heavy financial shackles.

All this to say that I would be very pleased to send my own child to be educated at a LAC, but only because I expect to be able to comfortably afford it thanks to my LAC education

+100 LAC grad here. For families who can swing it without straining or compromising their finances, being able to give your child the option of attending a “life of the mind”-type LAC is great. However, kids can also find “life of the mind”-type cohorts at other places if they’re more proactive about seeking that out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Long wall of text incoming but I'm a STEM grad from a top LAC with some reflections on my experience.

The short answer is that I think LACs are appropriately rated... for the right type of student from the right type of family. I was certainly the former, but I'm not sure I came from the latter.

For the academically inclined, the quality of education offered is second to none, even when compared to Ivy League institutions. My view on this is because I have a parent and sibling who went to different Ivies and they have relayed to me fairly lukewarm educational experiences (most profs not interested in teaching apparently). In contrast, every student at my LAC was given close attention that might've only been reserved for a handful of professors' favorites at a larger institution. This has great appeal for a certain type of student, and is probably the reason that, as other noted, per capita PhD/grad school numbers at LACs are through the roof.

But frankly, this type of education is costly and I felt coerced into pursuing a career in asset management after graduation rather than my initial plan of medicine/academia because of the financial strain full-pay tuition ($50k at the time) put on my parents. They were well educated and solidly upper middle class but still needed to scrape to afford sending two kids to private colleges, and I did come out with sizeable debt (5 figures). I suppose this can be said for any full-pay private though and not just LACs.

While I'm thankful my transition to a highly competitive career path was made accessible thanks to my school's reputation, I sometimes wonder what my life would be like had I just accepted my offers to my public flagship with in-state tuition or one of the multiple scholarships I received to mid-tier private schools. Almost certainly wouldn't have broken into finance, but probably still could have gotten into medical school. Or maybe would've shifted into tech, who knows. I likely would've done fine, come out with little-to-no debt, and my parents would've saved a ton of money. It wouldn't be a bad life.. and it would've been choices I made under less duress.

Anyways, the name itself is not a golden ticket. My present situation is a decent one because I was under pressure, recognized the need for ROI rather early, and positioned myself accordingly, but I could've easily been in much worse financial shape if had I accumulated the debt I did without a plan to pay it off. Even with help from his family, a college friend of mine had over $600k of debt after finishing his schooling in his 30s (he's a medical specialist now)!

On careers, I would say that large universities have a more universal brand utility. LAC networks are very strong but somewhat confined to a narrower set of elite, coastal industries or academia. Jobs in finance, consulting, law, tech, etc. are high paying and available, but there is less choice outside of those fields to make the math work, and even fewer options if looking outside the school's geographic region. An accounting firm, for example, is not going to have many LAC grads because none of these schools teach accounting! Neither will a regional bank in the South. But even so, in geographies where they have a presence, outcomes for the T10 LACs are very similar to the T10 research universities.

So if optimizing for ROI & career optionality rather than intellectual development is top priority, I would probably go with an Ivy League or similar (or a cheaper in-state option). But against any equally costly private school below that T15-20, a top LAC is a very compelling choice for ROI alone even with its limitations.

For families that can write $100k checks without a sweat, and to a lesser extent those who can receive significant financial aid (VERY generous aid at most of these top LACs), I truly think it is an excellent choice to allow their children to experience the luxury of the 'life of the mind' in this sort of environment while making a slight compromise on career options. However, for families that cannot easily pay what's due, it will be granting a great educational gift at the cost of heavy financial shackles.

All this to say that I would be very pleased to send my own child to be educated at a LAC, but only because I expect to be able to comfortably afford it thanks to my LAC education

I made it 1/2 way through the text wall. I just want you to know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why did someone revive a years-old old thread? How do people even find these old threads? They search on a college name and scroll through 20 pages?

Doesn’t seem healthy tbh

The SLAC haters are weird.

+1

I went to HYPSM. Spouse went to a well regarded large public univ. We encouraged both kids to look at SLACs, they did and liked them better than other types. One is now happily at a SLAC and the other is headed there. I don't get the haters at all. If this doesn't work for you and your kid, fine, move on. OTOH, I wonder how many just discount these wonderful schools without any direct knowledge?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Feels relevant with the insane boosting currently.

Why so much resentment? A lot of excellent students choose these schools for a reason. They’re popular with the DCUM demographic, and many of us are SLAC alums. No, they aren’t a good fit for everyone, but they have a good thing to offer.

+1 They’re not for everyone but even in places where it’s all about the popular state flagship, there are kids who prefer and choose SLAC’s if it works financially for their families. I also know older adults who attended private T-25’s but wish they had attended an LAC.

I went to HYPSM and knowing what I know now I think I would have been better off at a SLAC. Blown away by the quality of kid's education compared to my own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I made it 1/2 way through the text wall. I just want you to know.

Your efforts are appreciated

[Anonymous]

And many are underrated.

[Anonymous]

I think LACs are safe bubbles for some students who struggle with the transition from home to more independent campus life. The campus feel is more like supportive summer camp vibes in sleepy towns. Some students would feel overwhelmed and need the scaffolding of learning in this kind of environment.

Other kids are more confident and mature and crave a bigger pond to spread their wings. Different strokes for different folks. I have noticed more straight guys at DC's school are not interested in LACs and prefer larger environments. LACs do seem to be sought after and welcoming spaces for LGBTQ students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think LACs are safe bubbles for some students who struggle with the transition from home to more independent campus life. The campus feel is more like supportive summer camp vibes in sleepy towns. Some students would feel overwhelmed and need the scaffolding of learning in this kind of environment.

Other kids are more confident and mature and crave a bigger pond to spread their wings. Different strokes for different folks. I have noticed more straight guys at DC's school are not interested in LACs and prefer larger environments. LACs do seem to be sought after and welcoming spaces for LGBTQ students.

This is unsubstantiated.

[Anonymous]

Thinking of LAC’s as “safe bubbles” for kids who might need extra support can be misleading. Yes, they can offer smaller, more personal learning environments. However, they come with some of the same adjustments and temptations that face all college students. Not only that, but many LAC’s are in remote areas, far away from certain sources of support and community- family, health, cultural. It’s really up to the kid to make/find their support system. I went to a rural LAC several states away from where I grew up and I thought I was pretty independent/adventuresome. My kid is at an in-state urban university- near family and friends who live nearby and/or attend nearby colleges. Their comfort zone and the type of support they wanted was different from mine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Long wall of text incoming but I'm a STEM grad from a top LAC with some reflections on my experience.

The short answer is that I think LACs are appropriately rated... for the right type of student from the right type of family. I was certainly the former, but I'm not sure I came from the latter.

For the academically inclined, the quality of education offered is second to none, even when compared to Ivy League institutions. My view on this is because I have a parent and sibling who went to different Ivies and they have relayed to me fairly lukewarm educational experiences (most profs not interested in teaching apparently). In contrast, every student at my LAC was given close attention that might've only been reserved for a handful of professors' favorites at a larger institution. This has great appeal for a certain type of student, and is probably the reason that, as other noted, per capita PhD/grad school numbers at LACs are through the roof.

But frankly, this type of education is costly and I felt coerced into pursuing a career in asset management after graduation rather than my initial plan of medicine/academia because of the financial strain full-pay tuition ($50k at the time) put on my parents. They were well educated and solidly upper middle class but still needed to scrape to afford sending two kids to private colleges, and I did come out with sizeable debt (5 figures). I suppose this can be said for any full-pay private though and not just LACs.

While I'm thankful my transition to a highly competitive career path was made accessible thanks to my school's reputation, I sometimes wonder what my life would be like had I just accepted my offers to my public flagship with in-state tuition or one of the multiple scholarships I received to mid-tier private schools. Almost certainly wouldn't have broken into finance, but probably still could have gotten into medical school. Or maybe would've shifted into tech, who knows. I likely would've done fine, come out with little-to-no debt, and my parents would've saved a ton of money. It wouldn't be a bad life.. and it would've been choices I made under less duress.

Anyways, the name itself is not a golden ticket. My present situation is a decent one because I was under pressure, recognized the need for ROI rather early, and positioned myself accordingly, but I could've easily been in much worse financial shape if had I accumulated the debt I did without a plan to pay it off. Even with help from his family, a college friend of mine had over $600k of debt after finishing his schooling in his 30s (he's a medical specialist now)!

On careers, I would say that large universities have a more universal brand utility. LAC networks are very strong but somewhat confined to a narrower set of elite, coastal industries or academia. Jobs in finance, consulting, law, tech, etc. are high paying and available, but there is less choice outside of those fields to make the math work, and even fewer options if looking outside the school's geographic region. An accounting firm, for example, is not going to have many LAC grads because none of these schools teach accounting! Neither will a regional bank in the South. But even so, in geographies where they have a presence, outcomes for the T10 LACs are very similar to the T10 research universities.

So if optimizing for ROI & career optionality rather than intellectual development is top priority, I would probably go with an Ivy League or similar (or a cheaper in-state option). But against any equally costly private school below that T15-20, a top LAC is a very compelling choice for ROI alone even with its limitations.

For families that can write $100k checks without a sweat, and to a lesser extent those who can receive significant financial aid (VERY generous aid at most of these top LACs), I truly think it is an excellent choice to allow their children to experience the luxury of the 'life of the mind' in this sort of environment while making a slight compromise on career options. However, for families that cannot easily pay what's due, it will be granting a great educational gift at the cost of heavy financial shackles.

All this to say that I would be very pleased to send my own child to be educated at a LAC, but only because I expect to be able to comfortably afford it thanks to my LAC education

I made it through and I agree with your thoughtful and informed wall of text.

Signed,
HYPSM grad with a kid at an LAC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thinking of LAC’s as “safe bubbles” for kids who might need extra support can be misleading. Yes, they can offer smaller, more personal learning environments. However, they come with some of the same adjustments and temptations that face all college students. Not only that, but many LAC’s are in remote areas, far away from certain sources of support and community- family, health, cultural. It’s really up to the kid to make/find their support system. I went to a rural LAC several states away from where I grew up and I thought I was pretty independent/adventuresome. My kid is at an in-state urban university- near family and friends who live nearby and/or attend nearby colleges. Their comfort zone and the type of support they wanted was different from mine.

+1 PP is a frequent troll who frequently makes this same unsubstantiated criticism. No chance this person has any actual insight into connection to the SLAC experience. Imaging thinking a school like Swat, for example, is some safe space for kids who need extra support with the college transition because the class sizes are small and kids have access to professors. What a joke.