Why is DCUM so obsessed with small liberal arts colleges?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most graduates of SLACs have pretty dismal earnings compared to their Ivy/Public University peers. So why are SLACs throw around here so often? I see a lot of people recommend random schools like Grinnell but why would you send your kid there for a pretty hefty sum when they could go to a state flagship and be in either a better or similar position?

Source:

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

The DC area and DCUM in particular is chock full of lawyers/consultants. Many of them turn into SAHPs and want to toot their alma mater's horn in these forums. Have you noticed the prickly response whenever SLACs are criticized and how the comments look down on large publics as "trade schools"?

SLACs are likely great places if your intended career requires grad school (medicine, law, teaching, etc.). For engineering/CS, avoid them at all cost and head to a large public.

You get one trip through life and it does not only have to be focused non stop on a career. God gave you a brain and you are allowed to develop it and go through life as an educated person whatever your career.

The prickly response I was talking about Do you realize that you can get an education at many, many places starting with your computer all the way through an ivy league school? Do you think people pursing a career are not "educated people"? Career is a choice. For you it may be Starbucks, for others it could be engineer at Google.

And while I have you, can you make that a Venti, please?

This is the ultimate "Give me an answer that shows you don't understand at all" kind of response. Maybe if you had gone to a SLAC you could follow the point.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a conference call with your boss's boss that's about to start.

[Anonymous]

For my kid, her SLAC turned out to be wonderful choice. She turned down UVA and William & Mary in state to go to Davidson. With financial aid, the price for us was about $3-5k more per year than UVA--well worth it in my book. She feels she got the attention and support from her professors and the college that she likely wouldn't have received had she gone to UVA. Even with a semester abroad cut short by the pandemic, she has loved her 4 years at Davidson, and she'll be graduating this May with a six figure job waiting for her in NYC this fall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why? Because old fart parents remember the early 1980s, when SLACs were popular "colleges." Now, it's a hedge against a UVA rejection and the sting that comes from that in nova. That is, the wealthy white parent peer group will still vaguely respect a sweatshirt or decal from one of the "top ranked" SLACs.

WHAT? If you are a middle aged person that actually cares what other parents or family members think about where your child goes to college you have huge issues. Therapy!!

Around DC, there are plenty of people that meet this profile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most graduates of SLACs have pretty dismal earnings compared to their Ivy/Public University peers. So why are SLACs throw around here so often? I see a lot of people recommend random schools like Grinnell but why would you send your kid there for a pretty hefty sum when they could go to a state flagship and be in either a better or similar position?

Source:

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

The DC area and DCUM in particular is chock full of lawyers/consultants. Many of them turn into SAHPs and want to toot their alma mater's horn in these forums. Have you noticed the prickly response whenever SLACs are criticized and how the comments look down on large publics as "trade schools"?

SLACs are likely great places if your intended career requires grad school (medicine, law, teaching, etc.). For engineering/CS, avoid them at all cost and head to a large public.

You get one trip through life and it does not only have to be focused non stop on a career. God gave you a brain and you are allowed to develop it and go through life as an educated person whatever your career.

The prickly response I was talking about Do you realize that you can get an education at many, many places starting with your computer all the way through an ivy league school? Do you think people pursing a career are not "educated people"? Career is a choice. For you it may be Starbucks, for others it could be engineer at Google.

And while I have you, can you make that a Venti, please?

This is the ultimate "Give me an answer that shows you don't understand at all" kind of response. Maybe if you had gone to a SLAC you could follow the point.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a conference call with your boss's boss that's about to start.

Don't daydream on the job. Might get you fired..

[Anonymous]

Because they are great!

[Anonymous]

That’s a good point. The data in the link is probably some combination of middling-earning SLAC grads (like one of the PPs said), plus kids with jobs harvested for them by mom or dad (like this PP said), plus people who went to grad school after the SLAC and earn a decent living (plus, people who go on to do meaningful work for a non profit, or a family business, or stay home for a spell to take care of a loved one, or whatever).
------------------

Data points - my two kids both graduated from SLACs (one of them a top-3, the other a top-20). The econ major got a finance job in NYC through an alumni connection, eventually went to an Ivy B-school, now works in M&A for a medium-size company. The philosophy major got a NYC econ consulting job (with no econ courses on the resume), went to a top-3 law school after 2 years, did 2 federal clerkships, now practices in DC with a major international law firm. While this may not be typical of SLAC grads, it's not all that uncommon either. Not all of them join Teach for America or work on organic kale farms (not that there's anything wrong with that..)

Both of them could have been admitted to and would have done well at big state schools or Ivies but chose SLACs because of the perceived benefits of that type of college. Neither was disappointed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Question for 11:40
Isn’t SLAC better for potential medical school students because of small classes and easier access to professors.

Yes, much better. LACs get a much higher percentage of their graduates into med school that state school graduates. Not even close.

[Anonymous]

My spouse and I both went to large prestigious research universities. One of us has a great college experience and one of us didn't, but we both wanted our kids to go to SLACs because SLACs are usually more friendly, less pressured, and more likely to provide close interactions with professors. They also do well with grad and professional school placement.

[Anonymous]

Check this out (data is a little old but still it's interesting)

https://thecollegesolution.com/50-schools-that-produce-the-most-science-and-engineering-phds/

[Anonymous]

Also this

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-phd-programs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My private school kid, who has worked hard but not done well, will likely only have SLACs as his choice. Already deferred at one state university and will likely get rejected from the other three he's applying to. Our local pressure cooker privates have a direct line to the SLACs for the bottom of the class kids who can't get into the large universities. For my kid with a severe executive function disorder, he would have a difficult time navigating a large state university anyway. Though I have no stress about him navigating life once he graduates. He's smarter than 99% of the world.

Interesting post.

OP: Did your son end up at an SLAC ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought it was fairly well known that SLACs, particularly the tippy top ones, result in high salaries over the long run? The reason why salaries are deflated for SLACs immediately out of college is because so many SLAC graduates end up going to graduate school or doing things like working for the Peace Corps, working for not-for-profits, gov't (e.g., working for a congress person), teaching in foreign countries, etc. However, these students at a much higher rate end up going to graduate school and then out-perform their large university peers.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereknewton/2020/01/28/if-you-go-to-a-liberal-arts-college-youll-make-more-money/?sh=7b2e16f04fc5

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/01/14/long-term-look-return-investment-reveals-positive-indicators-liberal-arts

Both articles refer to the same Georgetown University study. However, the study may contain a major flaw. It almost certainly failed to include the cost of graduate school / professional school for LAC graduates in its calculations regarding ROI (return on investment). Failing to include hundreds of thousands of dollars for a graduate degree (law school or medical school) completely invalidates this Georgetown University study.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought it was fairly well known that SLACs, particularly the tippy top ones, result in high salaries over the long run? The reason why salaries are deflated for SLACs immediately out of college is because so many SLAC graduates end up going to graduate school or doing things like working for the Peace Corps, working for not-for-profits, gov't (e.g., working for a congress person), teaching in foreign countries, etc. However, these students at a much higher rate end up going to graduate school and then out-perform their large university peers.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereknewton/2020/01/28/if-you-go-to-a-liberal-arts-college-youll-make-more-money/?sh=7b2e16f04fc5

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/01/14/long-term-look-return-investment-reveals-positive-indicators-liberal-arts

Both articles refer to the same Georgetown University study. However, the study may contain a major flaw. It almost certainly failed to include the cost of graduate school / professional school for LAC graduates in its calculations regarding ROI (return on investment). Failing to include hundreds of thousands of dollars for a graduate degree (law school or medical school) completely invalidates this Georgetown University study.

Forgot to include MBA program costs along with law school and medical school outlays.

[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.

Liberal arts college are more likely than have trust funds, and they don’t have to spend as much to have what they see as a nice quality of life. Chasing status is expensive.

[Anonymous]

Another significant flaw in the Georgetown University study is the failure to account for pay differences based on regional geography. Most SLACs are located in the Northeastern part of the US which typically pays more than all other regions of the country except for California.