The rigor of LACs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very few LACs are anywhere near the rigor of top engineering universities. That's what happens when your school is mostly "soft" subjects.

Of course you have zero context for this statement and you are just pulling stuff out of you behind….butt whatever.

Just ignore this troll.

Having not attended a Reed/Swarthmore/etc I can't comment on those specifically but comparing workloads to my peers who went to those, my LAC not particularly known for intensity still provided me with plenty of work to keep me up all night. I ended up in the top 5 or so of my graduating class, so hard workers can work hard anywhere.

Maybe the difference is that the baseline is higher at the Reeds and Swarthmores of the country, whereas my peers in college could have probably skirted by and gotten Cs with lower effort than it would take to do so at Reed.

That's really the difference. I don't think Reed or Swarthmore students are getting a different math education than Pomona and Williams students; but, I think they probably expect a little more work for a B at the former than the latter.

[Anonymous]

Troll. lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very few LACs are anywhere near the rigor of top engineering universities. That's what happens when your school is mostly "soft" subjects.

Bull crap.

Say more, then.

You're dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very few LACs are anywhere near the rigor of top engineering universities. That's what happens when your school is mostly "soft" subjects.

Bull crap.

Say more, then.

You're dumb.

Ah a troll, great.

[Anonymous]

I think that most accredited colleges, LAC or otherwise, offer students more educational opportunities than they can take advantage of. I think that the quality of education any student at any college receives is determined more by the extent to which they apply themselves and take advantage of those opportunities than by the name of the institution awarding their diploma. Therefore, I think it is better to find the best college for a student, that will best motivate and facilitate that particular student, than to assume that some published ranking of “best” colleges will provide that particular student with the best outcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think that most accredited colleges, LAC or otherwise, offer students more educational opportunities than they can take advantage of. I think that the quality of education any student at any college receives is determined more by the extent to which they apply themselves and take advantage of those opportunities than by the name of the institution awarding their diploma. Therefore, I think it is better to find the best college for a student, that will best motivate and facilitate that particular student, than to assume that some published ranking of “best” colleges will provide that particular student with the best outcome.

What a ridiculous statement. You're going to get a better education at Stanford or MIT than Williams.

[Anonymous]

If rigor is defined as workload, I don't think there's a meaningful difference among the top LACs. For instance, Pomona and Swat have an exchange program and, by most reports, the workload is the same. Both are great schools, but Pomona is culturally akin to Stanford--it's culturally laidback but there is a little bit of the duck syndrome in which the easygoing attitude we see above the water belies the furious paddling underneath. Swat is more like Chicago, where there's long been a culture of outward intellectual bootcampism. I think both schools are fantastic. My DS initially committed to Swarthmore but decided to go to Pomona for geographic reasons. And, FWIW, DS studies a ton (so much reading) and much more than I did at my T20 undergrad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that most accredited colleges, LAC or otherwise, offer students more educational opportunities than they can take advantage of. I think that the quality of education any student at any college receives is determined more by the extent to which they apply themselves and take advantage of those opportunities than by the name of the institution awarding their diploma. Therefore, I think it is better to find the best college for a student, that will best motivate and facilitate that particular student, than to assume that some published ranking of “best” colleges will provide that particular student with the best outcome.

What a ridiculous statement. You're going to get a better education at Stanford or MIT than Williams.

Classic DCUM: Respond to a reasonable comment with a sweeping, unembellished, and unprovable statement that manages to disparage an incredibly good school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that most accredited colleges, LAC or otherwise, offer students more educational opportunities than they can take advantage of. I think that the quality of education any student at any college receives is determined more by the extent to which they apply themselves and take advantage of those opportunities than by the name of the institution awarding their diploma. Therefore, I think it is better to find the best college for a student, that will best motivate and facilitate that particular student, than to assume that some published ranking of “best” colleges will provide that particular student with the best outcome.

What a ridiculous statement. You're going to get a better education at Stanford or MIT than Williams.

Classic DCUM: Respond to a reasonable comment with a sweeping, unembellished, and unprovable statement that manages to disparage an incredibly good school.

+1 It’s really hard to have a rational discussion about SLACs on this board. Striver types just don’t get it, or respect only one or two, and will jump into a thread to say how much they don’t compare to other schools. It’s so exhausting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If rigor is defined as workload, I don't think there's a meaningful difference among the top LACs. For instance, Pomona and Swat have an exchange program and, by most reports, the workload is the same. Both are great schools, but Pomona is culturally akin to Stanford--it's culturally laidback but there is a little bit of the duck syndrome in which the easygoing attitude we see above the water belies the furious paddling underneath. Swat is more like Chicago, where there's long been a culture of outward intellectual bootcampism. I think both schools are fantastic. My DS initially committed to Swarthmore but decided to go to Pomona for geographic reasons. And, FWIW, DS studies a ton (so much reading) and much more than I did at my T20 undergrad.

You wouldn't go to Pomona expecting to get any of the work done at the level of Swarthmore.There's a big difference in rigor like comparing UIowa to Princeton.

[Anonymous]

Id take a Pomona/Bowdin/Williams math major over a random state school Engineering major any day. I’m not alone because those small SLACS are over represented in math circles.

I get that OP is a troll, but what a strange list of contrasting programs.

[Anonymous]

Amherst math is relatively low-rigor, but the physics department is highly rigorous. The LJST (law) department is also known for its high standards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that most accredited colleges, LAC or otherwise, offer students more educational opportunities than they can take advantage of. I think that the quality of education any student at any college receives is determined more by the extent to which they apply themselves and take advantage of those opportunities than by the name of the institution awarding their diploma. Therefore, I think it is better to find the best college for a student, that will best motivate and facilitate that particular student, than to assume that some published ranking of “best” colleges will provide that particular student with the best outcome.

What a ridiculous statement. You're going to get a better education at Stanford or MIT than Williams.

Depends on the students learning style and what they are interested in learning. The tutorial system at Williams truly offers something no other American college can. Williams also has a leg up for any course that is taught seminar style (i.e. discussion based rather than lecture based).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are a few LACs known for their intense rigor such as Harvey Mudd, Reed, and Swarthmore, but really how much more rigorous is Swarthmore to Amherst or Harvey Mudd math to Pomona Math? Obviously, there are big differences between these hard schools and the non-rigorous top lacs like Pomona, Amherst, and Bowdoin, but do you think there are some LACs that are underrated for their rigor and intensity?

🤣

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that most accredited colleges, LAC or otherwise, offer students more educational opportunities than they can take advantage of. I think that the quality of education any student at any college receives is determined more by the extent to which they apply themselves and take advantage of those opportunities than by the name of the institution awarding their diploma. Therefore, I think it is better to find the best college for a student, that will best motivate and facilitate that particular student, than to assume that some published ranking of “best” colleges will provide that particular student with the best outcome.

What a ridiculous statement. You're going to get a better education at Stanford or MIT than Williams.

Depends on the students learning style and what they are interested in learning. The tutorial system at Williams truly offers something no other American college can. Williams also has a leg up for any course that is taught seminar style (i.e. discussion based rather than lecture based).

Tutorial isn’t that unique from an independent study. Also other colleges have tutorial curriculums, CMC is the first that comes to mind. It’s not the best idea for many majors, but great for the humanities.

discussion based courses can be massive wastes of time, even for well-trained students if the professor isn’t flexible about lecturing or doesn’t demand high standards when conducting the seminar.