Should LACs no longer be considered the model of excellence?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Frankly, friend does not seem to "get" the culture or values of elite LACs. When I read complaints about how there is no business degree offered at a LAC, that's very telling. Tippy top LACs (e.g., AWS) don't offer business or finance or marketing degrees. Instead, students major in economics, and then go onto Wall St or McKinsey. It's a class and culture difference, not one of quality.

Every college has an economics major. Why not go to one that also offers finance and marketing?

Because finance and marketing classes are vocational classes. They do not help the student develop the kind of analytical, critical thinking and clear writing skills that e.g. an economics major does.

exactly. lol at the idea that Amherst needs to offer a marketing major! No doubt some Amherst students will end up in marketing and advertising, but it will be via the actual intellectual underpinnings of the profession (eg math, computer science, psychology, art).

[Anonymous]

Harvard Law doesn't care where you go to school (State School or LAC) so long as the GPA and scores are at the top of the class - which goes back to fit if you are trying to game admissions.

http://hls.harvard.edu/dept/jdadmissions/apply-to-harvard-law-school/undergraduate-colleges/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Stupid red baiting bullshit.

Many liberal arts colleges provide excellent educations. It really just comes down to fit -- whether the student will do best in a small environment (with the plusses and minuses that go along with that).

Whose mantra is "fit" and what does it mean? First, it's the mantra of people who are willing and able to spent tons of money on college and who are not expecting college to be sufficient preparation for their childrens' careers/financial independence. Fit is a luxury good. Ok, how do such parents define fit? "Fit" is where my child thrives. In college, where your child thrives is, for most parents, where your child gets good grades, where s/he finds good friends, where at least some of the adults in charge know and care about your kid. Nothing wrong with those things or with paying for them if you can afford them, but they've got little or nothing to do with academic excellence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stupid red baiting bullshit.

Many liberal arts colleges provide excellent educations. It really just comes down to fit -- whether the student will do best in a small environment (with the plusses and minuses that go along with that).

Whose mantra is "fit" and what does it mean? First, it's the mantra of people who are willing and able to spent tons of money on college and who are not expecting college to be sufficient preparation for their childrens' careers/financial independence. Fit is a luxury good. Ok, how do such parents define fit? "Fit" is where my child thrives. In college, where your child thrives is, for most parents, where your child gets good grades, where s/he finds good friends, where at least some of the adults in charge know and care about your kid. Nothing wrong with those things or with paying for them if you can afford them, but they've got little or nothing to do with academic excellence.

I don't understand your agenda here. Yes, fit is a luxury for those top students who can a) have their choice between a slac and a flagship public university and b) afford to pay for either. The choice of fit between Cal and Amherst is indeed a fortunate one. Kids who get in to Cal or Amherst are going to do just fine in their careers.

If what you want to say is that middle tier public universities offer a solid education for middle tier students (and perhaps a good ROI for some upper tier students) you'll hear no argument from me.

If what you want to say is that there are some crappy lower tier small private so-called LACs you will also hear no argument from me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Frankly, friend does not seem to "get" the culture or values of elite LACs. When I read complaints about how there is no business degree offered at a LAC, that's very telling. Tippy top LACs (e.g., AWS) don't offer business or finance or marketing degrees. Instead, students major in economics, and then go onto Wall St or McKinsey. It's a class and culture difference, not one of quality.

Every college has an economics major. Why not go to one that also offers finance and marketing?

Middle class = business major
UMC/UC = Econ major

The UMC does not see college as a direct precursor to a job, but rather a foundation for a career (typically requiring a graduate degree further down thto line) and for cultural enrichment.

[Anonymous]

Weird. At my undergrad school, the business school was filled to the brim with wealthy/affluent students. I double majored in a business subject and a liberal arts subject and the difference was striking.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, and it's not as if affluent kids who want to work in finance steer clear of Wharton which, is after all, a business school. But state schools are so déclassé.

Honestly, economics is not known as a major that fosters/demands critical thinking or clear writing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Weird. At my undergrad school, the business school was filled to the brim with wealthy/affluent students. I double majored in a business subject and a liberal arts subject and the difference was striking.

Also wanted to add that at my school (WUSTL - which, according to a recent thread posted here, has the highest concentration of 1 percenters), the majority of Econ majors were those who couldn't get into the business school (Olin).

[Anonymous]

I had a similar experience at my undergrad (UW-Madison). The b-school was made up almost entirely of wealthy "coasties" (aka California and the northeast), and wealthy suburbanites from Chicago/Milwaukee/Minneapolis. Pretty exclusive crowd. I felt like a fish out of water the first semester with my middle class WI background.

[Anonymous]

Liberal arts colleges are not the same as liberal arts degrees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I had a similar experience at my undergrad (UW-Madison). The b-school was made up almost entirely of wealthy "coasties" (aka California and the northeast), and wealthy suburbanites from Chicago/Milwaukee/Minneapolis. Pretty exclusive crowd. I felt like a fish out of water the first semester with my middle class WI background.

You get many affluent students whose fathers are in "business" (corporate execs or business owner) and when they apply to colleges they don't know what to study, aren't particularly interested in academics, so go into the business track as the perceived quicker route to a successful future in "business" (just like daddy). Outside a handful of schools like Wharton, most undergraduate business degrees are hardly bastions of intellectualism or genius. At many schools the undergraduate economics major will be harder than the business major.

This is fine, FYI. Not being judgmental. We all need something different from the college experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had a similar experience at my undergrad (UW-Madison). The b-school was made up almost entirely of wealthy "coasties" (aka California and the northeast), and wealthy suburbanites from Chicago/Milwaukee/Minneapolis. Pretty exclusive crowd. I felt like a fish out of water the first semester with my middle class WI background.

You get many affluent students whose fathers are in "business" (corporate execs or business owner) and when they apply to colleges they don't know what to study, aren't particularly interested in academics, so go into the business track as the perceived quicker route to a successful future in "business" (just like daddy). Outside a handful of schools like Wharton, most undergraduate business degrees are hardly bastions of intellectualism or genius. At many schools the undergraduate economics major will be harder than the business major.

This is fine, FYI. Not being judgmental. We all need something different from the college experience.

LOL. Okay, yeah. Go tell the Wisconsin School of Business students they're only there to "be like daddy" (wtf).

[Anonymous]

LACs are hardly "bastions of intellectualism or genius" either. They are high-touch schools for the mostly wealthy who expect to get what they're paying for -- connections, a high GPA, admission to grad/professional school, a certain amount of tolerance for youthful transgressions.

Doesn't mean you can't get an excellent education in them (frankly, a smart, hard-working kid who is actively seeking an excellent education can get it almost anywhere -- though those kids are extremely rare). But the education LACs deliver is in no way inherently superior to the education that major research universities have to offer. LACs aren't and never have been a model of academic excellence.

For most kids, college is getting your ticket punched. Among certain UMC demographics (East Coast professionals

[Anonymous]

) certain LACs get fetishized as elite because they connote old money. But rather than admit that, they sell/are sold this line that their kids will get this exceptional education because the school is small, has no grad students, and doesn't teach anything that seems practical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:LACs are hardly "bastions of intellectualism or genius" either. They are high-touch schools for the mostly wealthy who expect to get what they're paying for -- connections, a high GPA, admission to grad/professional school, a certain amount of tolerance for youthful transgressions.

Doesn't mean you can't get an excellent education in them (frankly, a smart, hard-working kid who is actively seeking an excellent education can get it almost anywhere -- though those kids are extremely rare). But the education LACs deliver is in no way inherently superior to the education that major research universities have to offer. LACs aren't and never have been a model of academic excellence.

For most kids, college is getting your ticket punched. Among certain UMC demographics (East Coast professionals

Right, you tell yourself that if it makes you feel better. Don't bother explaining why Harvard decided to look at Williams and Amherst when it was thinking of fixing its poorly regarded undergraduate teaching, or Northwestern/Stanford to Harvey Mudd to better support students in CS. Or why Wall Street Journal named Pomona and Haverford in the top ten colleges for "Where Great Research Meets Great Teaching" and none of the Ivies. Or why notoriously rigorous Carleton and Harvey Mudd enjoy some of the highest RateMyProfessors teacher ratings of any college in the country.

Want some student surveys? Sure. Don't bother to explain this; it's not like these surveys were rated by actual students or anything (source: Niche). Clearly there's a group of LAC lovers who fake reviews to make them look better! Don't believe the hype, people!

UCLA--
86% of students say professors are passionate about the topics they teach. 324 responses
69% of students say professors are engaging and easy to understand. 323 responses
71% of students say professors care about their students' success. 323 responses
72% of students agree professors are approachable and helpful when needed. 324 responses

U'Penn--
92% of students say professors are passionate about the topics they teach. 90 responses
72% of students say professors are engaging and easy to understand. 92 responses
75% of students say professors care about their students' success. 92 responses
76% of students agree professors are approachable and helpful when needed. 92 responses

Vassar--
97% of students say professors are passionate about the topics they teach. 35 responses
91% of students say professors are engaging and easy to understand. 35 responses
97% of students say professors care about their students' success. 35 responses
91% of students agree professors are approachable and helpful when needed. 35 responses

Middlebury--
100% of students say professors are passionate about the topics they teach. 39 responses
97% of students say professors are engaging and easy to understand. 39 responses
100% of students say professors care about their students' success. 39 responses
97% of students agree professors are approachable and helpful when needed. 39 responses