Are Asian Americans not interested in top SLACs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Top SLACs are as hard to get into as Harvard. Asian-Americans lack grades and money to get into them.

This is a joke.

Many people consider all SLACs to be below the top 100 national universities

Many people are ignorant. That doesn’t mean they are correct. Those who put in the time to research top schools know that there are some amazing SLAC options that are consistently “ranked” higher than their larger counterparts.

Yeah, I am sure they serve the requirements of other communities.

Many people also don’t want to send their kid to a college with zero name recognition, which would exclude SLACs. Zero name recognition in *Asia* I think u mean and that's fine - more room for my kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Top SLACs are as hard to get into as Harvard. Asian-Americans lack grades and money to get into them.

This is a joke.

Many people consider all SLACs to be below the top 100 national universities

Many people are ignorant. That doesn’t mean they are correct. Those who put in the time to research top schools know that there are some amazing SLAC options that are consistently “ranked” higher than their larger counterparts.

Yeah, I am sure they serve the requirements of other communities.

Many people also don’t want to send their kid to a college with zero name recognition, which would exclude SLACs.

Zero name recognition in *Asia* I think u mean and that's fine - more room for my kids.

Zero name recognition within the USA

[Anonymous]

I suspect that SLACs will be the next white people’s hiring pool (like the Ivies once were) now that the Ivies are letting in so many people from outside the old boy white people club.

I don’t think that’s how it should be but I would not be surprised.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Top SLACs are as hard to get into as Harvard. Asian-Americans lack grades and money to get into them.

This is a joke.

Many people consider all SLACs to be below the top 100 national universities

Many people are ignorant. That doesn’t mean they are correct. Those who put in the time to research top schools know that there are some amazing SLAC options that are consistently “ranked” higher than their larger counterparts.

Yeah, I am sure they serve the requirements of other communities.

Many people also don’t want to send their kid to a college with zero name recognition, which would exclude SLACs.

The top SLACs are similarly regarded in top circles to the elite universities. They are called "little ivies".

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-banking For instance, 9 LACs represented in the top 30 feeder schools to top Wall Street firms on a size adjusted basis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:HYPSM or bust status chasing.

That's why.

SLACs are considered below top50 national universities

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Top SLACs are as hard to get into as Harvard. Asian-Americans lack grades and money to get into them.

This is a joke.

Many people consider all SLACs to be below the top 100 national universities

Many people are ignorant. That doesn’t mean they are correct. Those who put in the time to research top schools know that there are some amazing SLAC options that are consistently “ranked” higher than their larger counterparts.

Yeah, I am sure they serve the requirements of other communities.

Many people also don’t want to send their kid to a college with zero name recognition, which would exclude SLACs.

The top SLACs are similarly regarded in top circles to the elite universities. They are called "little ivies".

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-banking For instance, 9 LACs represented in the top 30 feeder schools to top Wall Street firms on a size adjusted basis.




Nobody calls them little ivies. It is not surprising that rich kids at SLACs are getting entry level jobs on Wall Street. Who cares though?

[Anonymous]

I feel like there’s a sick puppet on this thread who doesn’t know how to use the quote button!

[Anonymous]

*Sock puppet, lol!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:HYPSM or bust status chasing.

That's why.

SLACs are considered below top50 national universities

By whom?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:HYPSM or bust status chasing.

That's why.

SLACs are considered below top50 national universities

Oh boy that does it I'm a gonna ask for my 350K back. Shoulda sent my kid to U. of Georgia /s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:HYPSM or bust status chasing.

That's why.

SLACs are considered below top50 national universities

By whom?

Everyone without a good reason to boost SLACs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:HYPSM or bust status chasing.

That's why.

SLACs are considered below top50 national universities

Most combined rankings have at least 10 LACs represented in the top 50 colleges in the USA.

The top 5 LACs (Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, Pomona, and Bowdoin) are as difficult to get into as a top 20 national university.

So what is this based off?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For my husband and I, we don't want to spend that kind of money unless there are both hard benefits (top feeder to good outcomes and will ensure some sort of safety net for our kids) and soft benefits (wide recognition, perhaps useful for relationships). And this sentiment is shared amongst our friends who have kids going to college soon as well. Our "no questions asked" scenario would be if our kid got into HPSM, Caltech, Duke, Penn/Wharton, Yale, or Columbia. There are other schools that we'd likely pay for full as well, but we'd have to give a bit more thought. There are not many schools we'd think are worth it over UVA with in-state tuition, although the in-state is not on the cheaper end across the country (but justifiably).

Do you care about other potential benefits of SLACs, or are those the only things you care about in the college decision? ("top feeder to good outcomes, will ensure some sort of safety net for our kids, wide recognition, perhaps useful for relationships")

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Top SLACs are as hard to get into as Harvard. Asian-Americans lack grades and money to get into them.

This is a joke.

Many people consider all SLACs to be below the top 100 national universities

Many people are ignorant. That doesn’t mean they are correct. Those who put in the time to research top schools know that there are some amazing SLAC options that are consistently “ranked” higher than their larger counterparts.

Tal about ignorance.

Whites have been in this country for a while (centuries) and accumulated social wealth/connections and financial wealth so they can dick around w/ SLACs for their average intellectual offsprings but unfortunately, many Asians are first or second generations (mostly due to Chinese Exclusion act etc.) so they have to go to public universities which are less expensive and major in something employable such as engineering/cs even though they know it will take sh*tload of work and perseverance to graduate w/ such degrees not because they love STEM but because they HAVE TO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For my husband and I, we don't want to spend that kind of money unless there are both hard benefits (top feeder to good outcomes and will ensure some sort of safety net for our kids) and soft benefits (wide recognition, perhaps useful for relationships). And this sentiment is shared amongst our friends who have kids going to college soon as well. Our "no questions asked" scenario would be if our kid got into HPSM, Caltech, Duke, Penn/Wharton, Yale, or Columbia. There are other schools that we'd likely pay for full as well, but we'd have to give a bit more thought. There are not many schools we'd think are worth it over UVA with in-state tuition, although the in-state is not on the cheaper end across the country (but justifiably).

I don't think the so-called hard benefits are unique colleges based in Universities. As for the soft benefits, I think this goes back to "what will people back in Asia think?" And that's a legit concern if that's where your heart is.