Most over-ranked/under-ranked LACS on USNWR?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMHO they are all basically the same academically, so choose the one your kid likes best.

+1 it’s all angels dancing on the head of a pin at this level

So Kenyon is the same level as Pomona? Yeah…right

Yes.

This is delusional. Someone is Kenyon boosting for no reason.

Not PP - but honestly what greatness is going to befall a Pomona grad that will elude a Kenyon grad? The percentage of the population that has heard of these schools or can meaningfully differentiate among them (including educated people) is very small. Frankly the debates that take place here - where there is vast disagreement about the schools among people who are weirdly obsessed with them - prove the point. It’s like asking which of two obscure cheeses nobody heard of is definitively better.

I can’t tell if this is the DC bias or an honest opinion. There’s quite a bit of professional and academic outcome difference. I get that most people haven’t heard of them, but any recruiter would see the difference, unless you’re applying for a job in Cincinnati.

+1, saying that you can’t tell the difference between Williams and Oberlin or Pomona and Kenyon is a ridiculous statement. It’s definitely an incorrect and dumb assessment by a mom “fed up” with LAC talk.

Honestly, you take the same kid, put him or her at any of these schools, they will likely end up in the same place.

100% true as long as you aren’t majoring in Econ, political science, bio, thinking about grad school and want to go to a good one, or want a nice fellowship post grad! Otherwise, the exact same places.

You think a grad from say a t35 lac is going to be at a disadvantage to one from a t15 lac when say applying to law school if lsat scores are same; gpa is same; essays are same?

The main reason outcomes are better at higher ranked schools is that student quality is on average higher.

It’s actually possible that a student might have a shot at a better outcome coming from a school where the competition is less fierce.

Look, all things being equal, there is value in having a marginally stronger brand… but let’s not get carried away with the impact.

+100

Maybe, but if you're in the top 10% at a T5 LAC you will have better outcomes than if you're top 10% at a T35 LAC. There is a difference. Employers and grad schools know it.

Most grad school admissions are not focused on undergraduate school rank (within reason). And if you’re a top 10% student at a T5 LAC you would likely be a top 1/2/5% student at a T35. We are talking about the same student just in different places.

This is actually a real poor understanding of the differences between faculty. It sounds nice and all that everything is equitable, but the reality is that the top lacs have better research faculty than most lac that means their recommendations carry heavier weight when you’re applying to a grad program. Especially the lacs with their own REUs benefit, because that indicates they have teaching faculty that also have decent research output.

Nope, I’m actually well aware of that. The problem with your take is that you are going to have tons of strong students at a top LAC all competing for those same recs from a few truly top profs, with most likely needing to settle for recs from the “lesser” profs. In the end there won’t be that big of a difference with the strong kid at the somewhat lower ranked LAC that can get the department head to provide a rec, for example.

There’s quite a few hard-hitting prof in each department, at least in science and mathematics) LACs have stumbled a bit in the humanities). Not everyone is gunning for those profs as advisors as most, presumably, aren’t going to grad school. No LAC is producing 10 incoming PhD candidates in every department in 1 year, so any “competition” is artificial.

And to the other comment, while the lac phd producing list isn’t an exact replica of the USNews list, it’s pretty damn similar. The only shocking difference is Reed, who has been explained 1000 times as a previous top 10 LAC.

Maybe that’s the case in science and math. It definitely isn’t the case in social sciences or humanities at all. Most of the professors are not well known researchers.

For a while, Reed was sending a ton of history PhD candidates to Princeton. And I know of two English.

It wasn’t a point about Reed and sending kids to phd programs. It was about the research reputation of the professors at LACs.

Just incorrect. Maybe they arent the first known historians you find on Google (if that mattered Berkeley and Yale would be the only important research universities for the humanities), but they’re definitely known in their respective fields.

It’s not incorrect. Here’s RePEc for econ:

https://ideas.repec.org/top/top.person.all.html

Here’s for political science:

https://research.com/scientists-rankings/political-science

You won’t find many LAC professors listed here, and definitely not ranked highly at all.

You can do this for other subjects too. It’s fine! You don’t become a LAC professor to do research. There’s no expectation that they would be highly regarded researchers. But there’s also no reason to pretend otherwise.

I think it’s pretty obvious that the most famous academics in the world are not generally associated with LACS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMHO they are all basically the same academically, so choose the one your kid likes best.

+1 it’s all angels dancing on the head of a pin at this level

So Kenyon is the same level as Pomona? Yeah…right

Yes.

This is delusional. Someone is Kenyon boosting for no reason.

Not PP - but honestly what greatness is going to befall a Pomona grad that will elude a Kenyon grad? The percentage of the population that has heard of these schools or can meaningfully differentiate among them (including educated people) is very small. Frankly the debates that take place here - where there is vast disagreement about the schools among people who are weirdly obsessed with them - prove the point. It’s like asking which of two obscure cheeses nobody heard of is definitively better.

I can’t tell if this is the DC bias or an honest opinion. There’s quite a bit of professional and academic outcome difference. I get that most people haven’t heard of them, but any recruiter would see the difference, unless you’re applying for a job in Cincinnati.

+1, saying that you can’t tell the difference between Williams and Oberlin or Pomona and Kenyon is a ridiculous statement. It’s definitely an incorrect and dumb assessment by a mom “fed up” with LAC talk.

Honestly, you take the same kid, put him or her at any of these schools, they will likely end up in the same place.

100% true as long as you aren’t majoring in Econ, political science, bio, thinking about grad school and want to go to a good one, or want a nice fellowship post grad! Otherwise, the exact same places.

You think a grad from say a t35 lac is going to be at a disadvantage to one from a t15 lac when say applying to law school if lsat scores are same; gpa is same; essays are same?

The main reason outcomes are better at higher ranked schools is that student quality is on average higher.

It’s actually possible that a student might have a shot at a better outcome coming from a school where the competition is less fierce.

Look, all things being equal, there is value in having a marginally stronger brand… but let’s not get carried away with the impact.

+100

Maybe, but if you're in the top 10% at a T5 LAC you will have better outcomes than if you're top 10% at a T35 LAC. There is a difference. Employers and grad schools know it.

Most grad school admissions are not focused on undergraduate school rank (within reason). And if you’re a top 10% student at a T5 LAC you would likely be a top 1/2/5% student at a T35. We are talking about the same student just in different places.

This is actually a real poor understanding of the differences between faculty. It sounds nice and all that everything is equitable, but the reality is that the top lacs have better research faculty than most lac that means their recommendations carry heavier weight when you’re applying to a grad program. Especially the lacs with their own REUs benefit, because that indicates they have teaching faculty that also have decent research output.

Nope, I’m actually well aware of that. The problem with your take is that you are going to have tons of strong students at a top LAC all competing for those same recs from a few truly top profs, with most likely needing to settle for recs from the “lesser” profs. In the end there won’t be that big of a difference with the strong kid at the somewhat lower ranked LAC that can get the department head to provide a rec, for example.

There’s quite a few hard-hitting prof in each department, at least in science and mathematics) LACs have stumbled a bit in the humanities). Not everyone is gunning for those profs as advisors as most, presumably, aren’t going to grad school. No LAC is producing 10 incoming PhD candidates in every department in 1 year, so any “competition” is artificial.

And to the other comment, while the lac phd producing list isn’t an exact replica of the USNews list, it’s pretty damn similar. The only shocking difference is Reed, who has been explained 1000 times as a previous top 10 LAC.

Maybe that’s the case in science and math. It definitely isn’t the case in social sciences or humanities at all. Most of the professors are not well known researchers.

For a while, Reed was sending a ton of history PhD candidates to Princeton. And I know of two English.

It wasn’t a point about Reed and sending kids to phd programs. It was about the research reputation of the professors at LACs.

Just incorrect. Maybe they arent the first known historians you find on Google (if that mattered Berkeley and Yale would be the only important research universities for the humanities), but they’re definitely known in their respective fields.

It’s not incorrect. Here’s RePEc for econ:

https://ideas.repec.org/top/top.person.all.html

Here’s for political science:

https://research.com/scientists-rankings/political-science

You won’t find many LAC professors listed here, and definitely not ranked highly at all.

You can do this for other subjects too. It’s fine! You don’t become a LAC professor to do research. There’s no expectation that they would be highly regarded researchers. But there’s also no reason to pretend otherwise.

I think it’s pretty obvious that the most famous academics in the world are not generally associated with LACS.

The world’s most famous academics also don’t teach undergraduates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMHO they are all basically the same academically, so choose the one your kid likes best.

+1 it’s all angels dancing on the head of a pin at this level

So Kenyon is the same level as Pomona? Yeah…right

Yes.

This is delusional. Someone is Kenyon boosting for no reason.

Not PP - but honestly what greatness is going to befall a Pomona grad that will elude a Kenyon grad? The percentage of the population that has heard of these schools or can meaningfully differentiate among them (including educated people) is very small. Frankly the debates that take place here - where there is vast disagreement about the schools among people who are weirdly obsessed with them - prove the point. It’s like asking which of two obscure cheeses nobody heard of is definitively better.

I can’t tell if this is the DC bias or an honest opinion. There’s quite a bit of professional and academic outcome difference. I get that most people haven’t heard of them, but any recruiter would see the difference, unless you’re applying for a job in Cincinnati.

+1, saying that you can’t tell the difference between Williams and Oberlin or Pomona and Kenyon is a ridiculous statement. It’s definitely an incorrect and dumb assessment by a mom “fed up” with LAC talk.

Honestly, you take the same kid, put him or her at any of these schools, they will likely end up in the same place.

100% true as long as you aren’t majoring in Econ, political science, bio, thinking about grad school and want to go to a good one, or want a nice fellowship post grad! Otherwise, the exact same places.

You think a grad from say a t35 lac is going to be at a disadvantage to one from a t15 lac when say applying to law school if lsat scores are same; gpa is same; essays are same?

The main reason outcomes are better at higher ranked schools is that student quality is on average higher.

It’s actually possible that a student might have a shot at a better outcome coming from a school where the competition is less fierce.

Look, all things being equal, there is value in having a marginally stronger brand… but let’s not get carried away with the impact.

+100

Maybe, but if you're in the top 10% at a T5 LAC you will have better outcomes than if you're top 10% at a T35 LAC. There is a difference. Employers and grad schools know it.

Most grad school admissions are not focused on undergraduate school rank (within reason). And if you’re a top 10% student at a T5 LAC you would likely be a top 1/2/5% student at a T35. We are talking about the same student just in different places.

This is actually a real poor understanding of the differences between faculty. It sounds nice and all that everything is equitable, but the reality is that the top lacs have better research faculty than most lac that means their recommendations carry heavier weight when you’re applying to a grad program. Especially the lacs with their own REUs benefit, because that indicates they have teaching faculty that also have decent research output.

Nope, I’m actually well aware of that. The problem with your take is that you are going to have tons of strong students at a top LAC all competing for those same recs from a few truly top profs, with most likely needing to settle for recs from the “lesser” profs. In the end there won’t be that big of a difference with the strong kid at the somewhat lower ranked LAC that can get the department head to provide a rec, for example.

There’s quite a few hard-hitting prof in each department, at least in science and mathematics) LACs have stumbled a bit in the humanities). Not everyone is gunning for those profs as advisors as most, presumably, aren’t going to grad school. No LAC is producing 10 incoming PhD candidates in every department in 1 year, so any “competition” is artificial.

And to the other comment, while the lac phd producing list isn’t an exact replica of the USNews list, it’s pretty damn similar. The only shocking difference is Reed, who has been explained 1000 times as a previous top 10 LAC.

Maybe that’s the case in science and math. It definitely isn’t the case in social sciences or humanities at all. Most of the professors are not well known researchers.

For a while, Reed was sending a ton of history PhD candidates to Princeton. And I know of two English.

It wasn’t a point about Reed and sending kids to phd programs. It was about the research reputation of the professors at LACs.

Just incorrect. Maybe they arent the first known historians you find on Google (if that mattered Berkeley and Yale would be the only important research universities for the humanities), but they’re definitely known in their respective fields.

It’s not incorrect. Here’s RePEc for econ:

https://ideas.repec.org/top/top.person.all.html

Here’s for political science:

https://research.com/scientists-rankings/political-science

You won’t find many LAC professors listed here, and definitely not ranked highly at all.

You can do this for other subjects too. It’s fine! You don’t become a LAC professor to do research. There’s no expectation that they would be highly regarded researchers. But there’s also no reason to pretend otherwise.

I think it’s pretty obvious that the most famous academics in the world are not generally associated with LACS.

Except as their undergraduate alma maters, maybe?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMHO they are all basically the same academically, so choose the one your kid likes best.

+1 it’s all angels dancing on the head of a pin at this level

So Kenyon is the same level as Pomona? Yeah…right

Yes.

This is delusional. Someone is Kenyon boosting for no reason.

Not PP - but honestly what greatness is going to befall a Pomona grad that will elude a Kenyon grad? The percentage of the population that has heard of these schools or can meaningfully differentiate among them (including educated people) is very small. Frankly the debates that take place here - where there is vast disagreement about the schools among people who are weirdly obsessed with them - prove the point. It’s like asking which of two obscure cheeses nobody heard of is definitively better.

I can’t tell if this is the DC bias or an honest opinion. There’s quite a bit of professional and academic outcome difference. I get that most people haven’t heard of them, but any recruiter would see the difference, unless you’re applying for a job in Cincinnati.

+1, saying that you can’t tell the difference between Williams and Oberlin or Pomona and Kenyon is a ridiculous statement. It’s definitely an incorrect and dumb assessment by a mom “fed up” with LAC talk.

Honestly, you take the same kid, put him or her at any of these schools, they will likely end up in the same place.

100% true as long as you aren’t majoring in Econ, political science, bio, thinking about grad school and want to go to a good one, or want a nice fellowship post grad! Otherwise, the exact same places.

You think a grad from say a t35 lac is going to be at a disadvantage to one from a t15 lac when say applying to law school if lsat scores are same; gpa is same; essays are same?

The main reason outcomes are better at higher ranked schools is that student quality is on average higher.

It’s actually possible that a student might have a shot at a better outcome coming from a school where the competition is less fierce.

Look, all things being equal, there is value in having a marginally stronger brand… but let’s not get carried away with the impact.

+100

Maybe, but if you're in the top 10% at a T5 LAC you will have better outcomes than if you're top 10% at a T35 LAC. There is a difference. Employers and grad schools know it.

Most grad school admissions are not focused on undergraduate school rank (within reason). And if you’re a top 10% student at a T5 LAC you would likely be a top 1/2/5% student at a T35. We are talking about the same student just in different places.

This is actually a real poor understanding of the differences between faculty. It sounds nice and all that everything is equitable, but the reality is that the top lacs have better research faculty than most lac that means their recommendations carry heavier weight when you’re applying to a grad program. Especially the lacs with their own REUs benefit, because that indicates they have teaching faculty that also have decent research output.

Nope, I’m actually well aware of that. The problem with your take is that you are going to have tons of strong students at a top LAC all competing for those same recs from a few truly top profs, with most likely needing to settle for recs from the “lesser” profs. In the end there won’t be that big of a difference with the strong kid at the somewhat lower ranked LAC that can get the department head to provide a rec, for example.

There’s quite a few hard-hitting prof in each department, at least in science and mathematics) LACs have stumbled a bit in the humanities). Not everyone is gunning for those profs as advisors as most, presumably, aren’t going to grad school. No LAC is producing 10 incoming PhD candidates in every department in 1 year, so any “competition” is artificial.

And to the other comment, while the lac phd producing list isn’t an exact replica of the USNews list, it’s pretty damn similar. The only shocking difference is Reed, who has been explained 1000 times as a previous top 10 LAC.

Maybe that’s the case in science and math. It definitely isn’t the case in social sciences or humanities at all. Most of the professors are not well known researchers.

For a while, Reed was sending a ton of history PhD candidates to Princeton. And I know of two English.

It wasn’t a point about Reed and sending kids to phd programs. It was about the research reputation of the professors at LACs.

Just incorrect. Maybe they arent the first known historians you find on Google (if that mattered Berkeley and Yale would be the only important research universities for the humanities), but they’re definitely known in their respective fields.

It’s not incorrect. Here’s RePEc for econ:

https://ideas.repec.org/top/top.person.all.html

Here’s for political science:

https://research.com/scientists-rankings/political-science

You won’t find many LAC professors listed here, and definitely not ranked highly at all.

You can do this for other subjects too. It’s fine! You don’t become a LAC professor to do research. There’s no expectation that they would be highly regarded researchers. But there’s also no reason to pretend otherwise.

I think it’s pretty obvious that the most famous academics in the world are not generally associated with LACS.

The world’s most famous academics also don’t teach undergraduates.

+1, a lot of the best academics teach one grad class semester and commit fully to research, all the time. Undergrads annoy them (ironic seeing as they had to start somewhere).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Overrated- all lacs. The best lac would be a bottom t100 university.

This isn't true. Check out the Forbes ranking to see how the LACs stack up

I do you say that I am clueless about college education with out saying that are clueless about college education? This is the stuff that comes from the blithering fools that are still telling their kids to go into CS even though AI is about to destroy huge swaths of the profession.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you ranked the top 30/40 schools by standardized test score profile (taking into account SAT, ACT and very importantly percentage of students who submit, because if only 25 percent submit, the average scores are inflated)… you would get a list that is similar to USNWR but with some notable differences too. Frankly I think the list you would get would be a better reflection of academic strength than USNWR.

+1. I like objective and transparent measures.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do think that the focus of popular universities is moving west and south.

Nope. I have two arguments for you: Climate change and Roe v Wade overturned. Why would one want to send DCs to states with hurricanes, fires, rising temps and banned abortions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think that the focus of popular universities is moving west and south.

Nope. I have two arguments for you: Climate change and Roe v Wade overturned. Why would one want to send DCs to states with hurricanes, fires, rising temps and banned abortions?

Census data and college application increases disagree