Why is DCUM so obsessed with small liberal arts colleges?

[Anonymous]

LAC hucksters will say anything.

Apparently LAC people major in BS and excel in this area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:LAC hucksters will say anything.

Apparently LAC people major in BS and excel in this area.

Whatever you say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread prompted me to look at the undergraduate school attended by the 43 associates of what is arguably the most impressive law firm in the country (41 of the 43 associates did federal clerkships after law school with most having done 2 clerkships and the associates graduated from the top US law schools (most from Harvard Law, followed by Yale Law, then Chicago, Stanford, and U Penn law schools).

Of the 43 associates, 37 went to universities (34 US universities) and 6 went to LACs (2 from Pomona, 2 attended Vassar, 1 from Bard, and 1 from Dickinson).

Is it possible that biglaw isn’t the goal of all SLAC grads? (Yes. Yes it is.)

So about 15% of associates attended SLACs, and 85% attended universities? Given that only 5% of college students attend SLACs, SLACs are over-represented by 300%. This pretty much is in line with the disproportionately high percentage of SLACs grads who go onto graduate school compared to graduates of universities.

Almost 14% (6 of 43) associates attended LACs. The law firm has a total of 90 lawyers (43 associates, 34 partners, and 3 of counsel) 9 of which (10%) attended LACs.

Many students at National Universities are in business school or are majoring in engineering, education, nursing, or other pre-professional training that typically does not lead one to apply to law school, while those attending LACs typically need to attend graduate school because they lack training in a profession or occupation. Assuming that your numbers are correct and that only 5% of all college students attend LACs, then the basis of your assertion needs to be refined as a much higher percentage of LAC students apply to and attend law school than do graduates of National Universities.

[Anonymous]

Also, if LACs are so great, why do so few students--just 5%--attend LACs and why are so many LACs struggling financially and desperate for students ?

Of course, the most elite LACs--SLACs--are fine, but the remaining 90% are not.

[Anonymous]

The main reason why DCUM posters are “obsessed” with liberal arts colleges is that the website skews white and wealthy and white and wealthy folks whose kids can’t get into top public schools like UVA or top 20 private universities think their kids are too good for second tier publics so they send them to no-name liberal arts colleges and tell themselves that’ the schools are better and more exclusive when the facts say otherwise.

There’s really nothing else to all of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, if LACs are so great, why do so few students--just 5%--attend LACs and why are so many LACs struggling financially and desperate for students ?

Of course, the most elite LACs--SLACs--are fine, but the remaining 90% are not.

That doesn't undermine the value of the liberal arts education. Most people don't understand the value of a liberal arts education. They're hyper focused on narrowly defined hard skills and career building. That's not the type of education that LACs provide.

If someone finds a diamond and throws it away because they think it's glass, the value of the diamond is the same. It isn't changed by the finder's ignorance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, if LACs are so great, why do so few students--just 5%--attend LACs and why are so many LACs struggling financially and desperate for students ?

Of course, the most elite LACs--SLACs--are fine, but the remaining 90% are not.

That’s simply not true.

https://journals.sagepub.com/pb-assets/cmscontent/TCZ/Commentaries%20Collection/2021%20Commentaries/Are%20liberal%20arts%20colleges%20in%20trouble_-1650325574.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, if LACs are so great, why do so few students--just 5%--attend LACs and why are so many LACs struggling financially and desperate for students ?

Of course, the most elite LACs--SLACs--are fine, but the remaining 90% are not.

That doesn't undermine the value of the liberal arts education. Most people don't understand the value of a liberal arts education. They're hyper focused on narrowly defined hard skills and career building. That's not the type of education that LACs provide.

If someone finds a diamond and throws it away because they think it's glass, the value of the diamond is the same. It isn't changed by the finder's ignorance.

Good Lord ! What a ridiculous way to explain the difference between a National University and an LAC.

My thought is that some are obsessed with LACs because they have to be.

Even though just 5% attend LACs, an LAC education is still a choice. But, as a choice, it must be scrutinized thoroughly because LACs are small colleges typically enrolling less than 2,000 students. Students need to select LACs carefully because there tends to be a dominant culture at these small schools which are often located in rural, isolated places. If one doesn't fit in, it can lead to a very uncomfortable and boring 4 years. But, if one wishes to replicate the boarding prep school experience at a higher level for 4 years, then LACs are the best option.

Some enjoy living in small communities with limited options where everyone knows each others business, while others thrive on diversity and having a multitude of options.

In sum, different strokes for different folks, but trying to portray an LAC education as superior to that at a National University is ludicrous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:LAC hucksters will say anything.

Apparently LAC people major in BS and excel in this area.

So strange. Why are you so
Emotional about SLACs. You don’t like them, don’t go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread prompted me to look at the undergraduate school attended by the 43 associates of what is arguably the most impressive law firm in the country (41 of the 43 associates did federal clerkships after law school with most having done 2 clerkships and the associates graduated from the top US law schools (most from Harvard Law, followed by Yale Law, then Chicago, Stanford, and U Penn law schools).

Of the 43 associates, 37 went to universities (34 US universities) and 6 went to LACs (2 from Pomona, 2 attended Vassar, 1 from Bard, and 1 from Dickinson).

Is it possible that biglaw isn’t the goal of all SLAC grads? (Yes. Yes it is.)

So about 15% of associates attended SLACs, and 85% attended universities? Given that only 5% of college students attend SLACs, SLACs are over-represented by 300%. This pretty much is in line with the disproportionately high percentage of SLACs grads who go onto graduate school compared to graduates of universities.

Almost 14% (6 of 43) associates attended LACs. The law firm has a total of 90 lawyers (43 associates, 34 partners, and 3 of counsel) 9 of which (10%) attended LACs.

Many students at National Universities are in business school or are majoring in engineering, education, nursing, or other pre-professional training that typically does not lead one to apply to law school, while those attending LACs typically need to attend graduate school because they lack training in a profession or occupation. Assuming that your numbers are correct and that only 5% of all college students attend LACs, then the basis of your assertion needs to be refined as a much higher percentage of LAC students apply to and attend law school than do graduates of National Universities.

Nice attempt at a diving save after your original lack of statistical competence was neatly shown, but this is a failed attempt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, if LACs are so great, why do so few students--just 5%--attend LACs and why are so many LACs struggling financially and desperate for students ?

Of course, the most elite LACs--SLACs--are fine, but the remaining 90% are not.

That doesn't undermine the value of the liberal arts education. Most people don't understand the value of a liberal arts education. They're hyper focused on narrowly defined hard skills and career building. That's not the type of education that LACs provide.

If someone finds a diamond and throws it away because they think it's glass, the value of the diamond is the same. It isn't changed by the finder's ignorance.

Good Lord ! What a ridiculous way to explain the difference between a National University and an LAC.

My thought is that some are obsessed with LACs because they have to be.

Even though just 5% attend LACs, an LAC education is still a choice. But, as a choice, it must be scrutinized thoroughly because LACs are small colleges typically enrolling less than 2,000 students. Students need to select LACs carefully because there tends to be a dominant culture at these small schools which are often located in rural, isolated places. If one doesn't fit in, it can lead to a very uncomfortable and boring 4 years. But, if one wishes to replicate the boarding prep school experience at a higher level for 4 years, then LACs are the best option.

Some enjoy living in small communities with limited options where everyone knows each others business, while others thrive on diversity and having a multitude of options.

In sum, different strokes for different folks, but trying to portray an LAC education as superior to that at a National University is ludicrous.

I don't think PP was saying one is better than the other. Stop being so sanctimonious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The main reason why DCUM posters are “obsessed” with liberal arts colleges is that the website skews white and wealthy and white and wealthy folks whose kids can’t get into top public schools like UVA or top 20 private universities think their kids are too good for second tier publics so they send them to no-name liberal arts colleges and tell themselves that’ the schools are better and more exclusive when the facts say otherwise.

There’s really nothing else to all of this.

You sound triggered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, if LACs are so great, why do so few students--just 5%--attend LACs and why are so many LACs struggling financially and desperate for students ?

Of course, the most elite LACs--SLACs--are fine, but the remaining 90% are not.

That’s simply not true.

https://journals.sagepub.com/pb-assets/cmscontent/TCZ/Commentaries%20Collection/2021%20Commentaries/Are%20liberal%20arts%20colleges%20in%20trouble_-1650325574.pdf

Have you read this article ? It is nothing article that points out--correctly--that one can obtain a liberal arts education at a National University if one so desires. The article does not address the financial health and declining enrollment numbers at the 223 LACs.

If one desires a liberal arts education, it can be obtained at almost any and every National University.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, if LACs are so great, why do so few students--just 5%--attend LACs and why are so many LACs struggling financially and desperate for students ?

Of course, the most elite LACs--SLACs--are fine, but the remaining 90% are not.

That’s simply not true.

https://journals.sagepub.com/pb-assets/cmscontent/TCZ/Commentaries%20Collection/2021%20Commentaries/Are%20liberal%20arts%20colleges%20in%20trouble_-1650325574.pdf

Have you read this article ? It is nothing article that points out--correctly--that one can obtain a liberal arts education at a National University if one so desires. The article does not address the financial health and declining enrollment numbers at the 223 LACs.

If one desires a liberal arts education, it can be obtained at almost any and every National University.

Not a good one, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LAC hucksters will say anything.

Apparently LAC people major in BS and excel in this area.

So strange. Why are you so
Emotional about SLACs. You don’t like them, don’t go.

Unfortunately, I went.