This is an interesting article on why some LACs are struggling with enrollment, most LACs lag R1s on yield

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think LACs should start offering lower prices to high stats kids to make it more attractive to attend. My high stats kid doesn't want to go to a small LAC, but he might if he got a half-ride for having high GPA/SAT over 1500.

Lacs don’t want to have a student body that doesn’t want to be there. College is so much better when people actually fit the culture and care beyond the COA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think LACs should start offering lower prices to high stats kids to make it more attractive to attend. My high stats kid doesn't want to go to a small LAC, but he might if he got a half-ride for having high GPA/SAT over 1500.

Lacs don’t want to have a student body that doesn’t want to be there. College is so much better when people actually fit the culture and care beyond the COA

+1, it’s also important in general that a student actually wants to be there because the communities are small and their life those 4 years will be centered around their small college. It’s not about convincing people with 0 interest in a small school, but opening the possibility to someone who doesn’t know about it or hasn’t considered it yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most of the LACs just need to accept that integration of pre professional resources is important to families. Why don’t the Claremont schools have pipelines to Hollywood? To aerospace? To tech?

Why doesn’t Williams have a program with the local department of public health? Or a major conservation organization in western mass? Or rural healthcare?

All of these lacs have alum and students mass applying and scrambling for internship and job opportunities. Many major universities give them out like candy. You have to actually integrate your college into daily life rather than keeping these students sheltered.

You constantly hear university moms on here complaining that their kids can’t get internships. Getting internships honestly isn’t an issue for kids from top LACs, they readily available due to their networks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the LACs just need to accept that integration of pre professional resources is important to families. Why don’t the Claremont schools have pipelines to Hollywood? To aerospace? To tech?

Mudd has pipelines to aerospace and tech. Always has! Also has pipelines to grad schools. Many Mudd grads become professors. Mudd costs a lot but is worth it.

(Source, I went there)

But it doesn’t have guaranteed hire pipelines like state schools do. The connections are because alum work there, not collaborations with the college itself

Guaranteed hire pipelines?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the LACs just need to accept that integration of pre professional resources is important to families. Why don’t the Claremont schools have pipelines to Hollywood? To aerospace? To tech?

Mudd has pipelines to aerospace and tech. Always has! Also has pipelines to grad schools. Many Mudd grads become professors. Mudd costs a lot but is worth it.

(Source, I went there)

But it doesn’t have guaranteed hire pipelines like state schools do. The connections are because alum work there, not collaborations with the college itself

There is no such thing as a guaranteed hire pipeline lol. What happens at Mudd is the professors have extensive contacts in industry and can recommend students to them. That can happen at state schools too but at a state school there is less chance that a prof will know you personally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think LACs should start offering lower prices to high stats kids to make it more attractive to attend. My high stats kid doesn't want to go to a small LAC, but he might if he got a half-ride for having high GPA/SAT over 1500.

They essentially do through merit aid. DS got merit from Oberlin, Macalester, and Denison.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the LACs just need to accept that integration of pre professional resources is important to families. Why don’t the Claremont schools have pipelines to Hollywood? To aerospace? To tech?

Mudd has pipelines to aerospace and tech. Always has! Also has pipelines to grad schools. Many Mudd grads become professors. Mudd costs a lot but is worth it.

(Source, I went there)

But it doesn’t have guaranteed hire pipelines like state schools do. The connections are because alum work there, not collaborations with the college itself

You clearly aren't familiar with Bucknell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This trend is due to STEM being pushed in grade school and high school. Now that is slowly reversing, so the tide will turn again.

Pushing? It would be nice if rates of passing the basic math exams nationwide was not abysmal. Hoping the tide continues to value real world studies and needs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the LACs just need to accept that integration of pre professional resources is important to families. Why don’t the Claremont schools have pipelines to Hollywood? To aerospace? To tech?

Mudd has pipelines to aerospace and tech. Always has! Also has pipelines to grad schools. Many Mudd grads become professors. Mudd costs a lot but is worth it.

(Source, I went there)

But it doesn’t have guaranteed hire pipelines like state schools do. The connections are because alum work there, not collaborations with the college itself

You clearly aren't familiar with Bucknell.

LOL, according to College Scorecard, the median income four years after graduating is $96,035 at Bucknell and $80,487 at Williams. Maybe the Bucknell booster is onto something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not at all surprising that top tier LACs are doing better than lower tier LACs. The value proposition for Oberlin or Kenyon is weak.

Plenty of people are going to choose a state flagship over a second tier LAC, this makes great sense just from a financial perspective, which the article doesn’t really emphasize.

Except that 2nd-tier LACs like Kenyon, Oxy, Macalester, etc. do offer merit aid of around $25K per year, which brings them in line with OOS public schools for those who want/need more scaffolding and smaller classes in their college experience. My DD is ADHD inattentive and chose a small LAC over an OOS public flagship for that reason. Both would have tuition of around $45K/year but she felt she'd struggle more in a large place.

And Kenyon, Macalester, and Oberlin are excellent colleges filled with high performing students who go on to have successful, fulfilling, careers and lives. They are not slouches by any stretch of the imagination.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not at all surprising that top tier LACs are doing better than lower tier LACs. The value proposition for Oberlin or Kenyon is weak.

Plenty of people are going to choose a state flagship over a second tier LAC, this makes great sense just from a financial perspective, which the article doesn’t really emphasize.

Except that 2nd-tier LACs like Kenyon, Oxy, Macalester, etc. do offer merit aid of around $25K per year, which brings them in line with OOS public schools for those who want/need more scaffolding and smaller classes in their college experience. My DD is ADHD inattentive and chose a small LAC over an OOS public flagship for that reason. Both would have tuition of around $45K/year but she felt she'd struggle more in a large place.

And Kenyon, Macalester, and Oberlin are excellent colleges filled with high performing students who go on to have successful, fulfilling, careers and lives. They are not slouches by any stretch of the imagination.

I know a Macalester kid who just got an elite firm IB internship. Smarts and hustle all the way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the LACs just need to accept that integration of pre professional resources is important to families. Why don’t the Claremont schools have pipelines to Hollywood? To aerospace? To tech?

Mudd has pipelines to aerospace and tech. Always has! Also has pipelines to grad schools. Many Mudd grads become professors. Mudd costs a lot but is worth it.

(Source, I went there)

But it doesn’t have guaranteed hire pipelines like state schools do. The connections are because alum work there, not collaborations with the college itself

There is no such thing as a guaranteed hire pipeline lol. What happens at Mudd is the professors have extensive contacts in industry and can recommend students to them. That can happen at state schools too but at a state school there is less chance that a prof will know you personally.

Can you give an example? Almost every professor I’ve seen has worked solely in academia and only has academic connections.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the LACs just need to accept that integration of pre professional resources is important to families. Why don’t the Claremont schools have pipelines to Hollywood? To aerospace? To tech?

Mudd has pipelines to aerospace and tech. Always has! Also has pipelines to grad schools. Many Mudd grads become professors. Mudd costs a lot but is worth it.

(Source, I went there)

But it doesn’t have guaranteed hire pipelines like state schools do. The connections are because alum work there, not collaborations with the college itself

You clearly aren't familiar with Bucknell.

LOL, according to College Scorecard, the median income four years after graduating is $96,035 at Bucknell and $80,487 at Williams. Maybe the Bucknell booster is onto something.

You have to consider the % of Williams grad who go on to grad/medical/law schools within 2 years after graduation, something crazy high like 80%. So 4 years after graduating, a lot od these people are just finishing school or have only been working for 2 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not at all surprising that top tier LACs are doing better than lower tier LACs. The value proposition for Oberlin or Kenyon is weak.

Plenty of people are going to choose a state flagship over a second tier LAC, this makes great sense just from a financial perspective, which the article doesn’t really emphasize.

Except that 2nd-tier LACs like Kenyon, Oxy, Macalester, etc. do offer merit aid of around $25K per year, which brings them in line with OOS public schools for those who want/need more scaffolding and smaller classes in their college experience. My DD is ADHD inattentive and chose a small LAC over an OOS public flagship for that reason. Both would have tuition of around $45K/year but she felt she'd struggle more in a large place.

And Kenyon, Macalester, and Oberlin are excellent colleges filled with high performing students who go on to have successful, fulfilling, careers and lives. They are not slouches by any stretch of the imagination.

I know a Macalester kid who just got an elite firm IB internship. Smarts and hustle all the way.

Isn't Macalester super woke? I didn't know it attracted IB types.

[Anonymous]

Yield is a useless metric and the increased obsession with it is really annoying. Schools should focus their money and effort on more important things than gaming a dumb system.

Top LACs are the perfect case of "IYKYK." A lot of people don't know about them and/or don't appreciate them. And I don't want my kids going to school with the children of these people anyway.

I have met a number of people who say "why would you send your kid to Williams/Amherst/Bowdoin/etc." Yet in the next breath act like they know everything about colleges. I prefer to stay far away. Please keep your ignorance away from my kid.