LACs are overrated.

[Anonymous]

For premed I would rather my DC go to LACs. Big Us have tons of resources, true. But the big U professors don't give a fxxk about their undergraduate students, or teaching undergraduate in general. This is generally okay if you are engineering major, getting a couple Cs and Ds here and there won't preclude you from getting a job. For premed, entirely another story. They love to weed you out at the introductory courses as the Big U can support all the premed-interested kids.

Unless you are 100% certain you will always be that top 10% kid, and never will have an exam on a sick day and getting an F. LACs are a better bet for parents' investment in the kid's medical career.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They sit in that odd in-between where they're lesser-known by the general populace, but are incredibly overhyped by those in the know.

No one cares about your Williams or Amherst or Swarthmore, and they're slowly but surely becoming increasingly irrelevant in today's higher ed landscape.

Then why waste time whining about them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They sit in that odd in-between where they're lesser-known by the general populace, but are incredibly overhyped by those in the know.

No one cares about your Williams or Amherst or Swarthmore, and they're slowly but surely becoming increasingly irrelevant in today's higher ed landscape.

Then why waste time whining about them?

Agreed. There are a few posters that relentlessly hammer LACs and repeatedly argue the rankings of national universities.

Obviously, they have a stake in how schools are perceived because they work so hard to influence that perception.

Amongst this small group, there is an obvious bias for the highest ranked national universities - especially those that emphasize STEM - diverse enrollment - especially Asian - and schools located in the NE, perhaps with the exceptions of Stanford and Caltech.

And, they will have it no other way.

[Anonymous]

they are overrated. but I can see how some students and parents (esp helicopter ones) like the small bubble and perception of suburban or rural security they provide. it's like sending your kid off to a well-heeled boarding school out in the middle of nowhere as opposed to having them compete against thousands of kids globally in a huge metropolis or city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:they are overrated. but I can see how some students and parents (esp helicopter ones) like the small bubble and perception of suburban or rural security they provide. it's like sending your kid off to a well-heeled boarding school out in the middle of nowhere as opposed to having them compete against thousands of kids globally in a huge metropolis or city.

Please define what you mean by overrated. Because even if your criticism is a valid opinion, it still doesn’t change the fact that these are excellent schools by any measure (selectivity, academic intensity, student outcomes).

[Anonymous]

I have been on these boards for a bit and my hypothesis is that what really bothers people about LACs is that they are a bit outside the standard ranking system. The hierarchy (in their minds) is supposed be clear: HSYMP> Cornell/Columbia > Vandy/Emory, etc. but Williams or Swat etc. doesn’t fit tidily anywhere in there. I think to people who care a lot about sharply defined hierarchy, these schools feel like a workaround, like some sort of cheat.

But whatever. Who cares. Someday we’re all going to be corpses, every last one of us, and sometime after that the earth will crash into the sun, after that the sun will cool into a white dwarf, and no one will remember anything about our having been here. Just live your lives, people. Enjoy them. Think cool thoughts, listen to great music. Read a line of poetry, pet a dog, maybe dance a bit. We are but a blip.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:they are overrated. but I can see how some students and parents (esp helicopter ones) like the small bubble and perception of suburban or rural security they provide. it's like sending your kid off to a well-heeled boarding school out in the middle of nowhere as opposed to having them compete against thousands of kids globally in a huge metropolis or city.

Idk any parents like this that send their kids to a lac. LAC are mostly chosen out of fit and a student wanting a small environment. Helicopter parents want the namebrands

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have been on these boards for a bit and my hypothesis is that what really bothers people about LACs is that they are a bit outside the standard ranking system. The hierarchy (in their minds) is supposed be clear: HSYMP> Cornell/Columbia > Vandy/Emory, etc. but Williams or Swat etc. doesn’t fit tidily anywhere in there. I think to people who care a lot about sharply defined hierarchy, these schools feel like a workaround, like some sort of cheat.

But whatever. Who cares. Someday we’re all going to be corpses, every last one of us, and sometime after that the earth will crash into the sun, after that the sun will cool into a white dwarf, and no one will remember anything about our having been here. Just live your lives, people. Enjoy them. Think cool thoughts, listen to great music. Read a line of poetry, pet a dog, maybe dance a bit. We are but a blip.

Nice. Our eccentricity is their thorn!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They sit in that odd in-between where they're lesser-known by the general populace, but are incredibly overhyped by those in the know.

No one cares about your Williams or Amherst or Swarthmore, and they're slowly but surely becoming increasingly irrelevant in today's higher ed landscape.

Then why waste time whining about them?

Agreed. There are a few posters that relentlessly hammer LACs and repeatedly argue the rankings of national universities.

Obviously, they have a stake in how schools are perceived because they work so hard to influence that perception.

Amongst this small group, there is an obvious bias for the highest ranked national universities - especially those that emphasize STEM - diverse enrollment - especially Asian - and schools located in the NE, perhaps with the exceptions of Stanford and Caltech.

And, they will have it no other way.

Maybe it’s a dmv thing but people here care way too much about fitting in. One of the biggest critiques about the small size is their worry their boy won’t fit in. There’s this constant anxiety here of being in the right crowd- away from riff raff, away from strivers, away from…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:they are overrated. but I can see how some students and parents (esp helicopter ones) like the small bubble and perception of suburban or rural security they provide. it's like sending your kid off to a well-heeled boarding school out in the middle of nowhere as opposed to having them compete against thousands of kids globally in a huge metropolis or city.

I asked AI to rewrite you answer for you here was their take:

“I am talking out my ass with zero knowledge grounding my opinion. My opinion is based on jealousy and feelings of insecurity because I realize that those who attend these elite small schools will experience a level of learning and growth that my children will never have the opportunity to live. This makes me feel bad and lash out with ignorance because I have no other response mechanism. I put on a strong front but ask for your pity.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:they are overrated. but I can see how some students and parents (esp helicopter ones) like the small bubble and perception of suburban or rural security they provide. it's like sending your kid off to a well-heeled boarding school out in the middle of nowhere as opposed to having them compete against thousands of kids globally in a huge metropolis or city.

I asked AI to rewrite you answer for you here was their take:

“I am talking out my ass with zero knowledge grounding my opinion. My opinion is based on jealousy and feelings of insecurity because I realize that those who attend these elite small schools will experience a level of learning and growth that my children will never have the opportunity to live. This makes me feel bad and lash out with ignorance because I have no other response mechanism. I put on a strong front but ask for your pity.”

+1. 😂

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

+2 another HYPSM alum with a kid at an LAC (who is beyond content and receiving a fabulous education compared to my own UG experience)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:they are overrated. but I can see how some students and parents (esp helicopter ones) like the small bubble and perception of suburban or rural security they provide. it's like sending your kid off to a well-heeled boarding school out in the middle of nowhere as opposed to having them compete against thousands of kids globally in a huge metropolis or city.

Many LACs are also competitive, and there are plenty of universities in rural areas, you numbnut

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:they are overrated. but I can see how some students and parents (esp helicopter ones) like the small bubble and perception of suburban or rural security they provide. it's like sending your kid off to a well-heeled boarding school out in the middle of nowhere as opposed to having them compete against thousands of kids globally in a huge metropolis or city.

If students are happy, engaged, challenged, and come out of the experience thoughful educated adults who have satisfying careers, it doesn't really matter if someone overrated them.

Plus, I guess you didn't know, but many LACs are in walkable towns and city neighborhoods while many universities are standalone campuses in suburban areas or small towns and are poorly integrated into the neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:they are overrated. but I can see how some students and parents (esp helicopter ones) like the small bubble and perception of suburban or rural security they provide. it's like sending your kid off to a well-heeled boarding school out in the middle of nowhere as opposed to having them compete against thousands of kids globally in a huge metropolis or city.

I asked AI to rewrite you answer for you here was their take:

“I am talking out my ass with zero knowledge grounding my opinion. My opinion is based on jealousy and feelings of insecurity because I realize that those who attend these elite small schools will experience a level of learning and growth that my children will never have the opportunity to live. This makes me feel bad and lash out with ignorance because I have no other response mechanism. I put on a strong front but ask for your pity.”

+1. 😂

+1 😂