Okay, so where is DS/DD going to go to college next fall?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yale. We are very pleased, especially because DH is a proud alum.

Next DS has got to focus on getting into a top law school in four years!

Gag me.

Signed,

A lawyer with a degree from a "top law school."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So first my background--I have experienced the range of schools: I attended a state school, went to a HYP for grad, and taught at a Top 25 liberal arts college.

I'm just curious...I went through this thread and I see a lot of people saying that they are going to stretch financially to send their kids to places like the place I used to teach. Which is to say schools like Bates or Pomona.

And I guess I'm just curious and trying to understand why. Based on my experience, these are places that are great and where a student will get a decent education and have a pleasant life for four years. But very honestly, they are a similar price as HYP without offering the same level of name recognition, facilities, faculty, peers, etc. You can get an equivalent education at the University of Maryland--maybe better if you are interested in doing undergraduate research--and typically go to the grad or professional school of your choice. So what draws people to faraway expensive colleges?

The answers I came up with myself are that for some parents college is not just about education but about DS/DD finding a partner, or maybe the family is interested in a religious education (Catholic schools, BYU, etc.), or maybe they think that four years on an idyllic campus and what are hopefully lifelong friendships are worth the $240k price tag. But I still honestly have some trouble wrapping my mind around that. I'd be curious to hear people's responses.

Another academic here -- and, abstractly, I have the same reaction to SLACs vs. public schools (with some exceptions re specific schools and specific majors). But I'd also throw in the mix the facts that the best state universities are getting harder to get into for in-state residents and, of course, for those of us in DC, there's no high-quality public university. So, yeah, Berkeley over Bates but if the choice is Claremont vs. JMU (or Carleton vs. UC Merced), it's not so clear cut to me.

What I don't get is why so many private school parents seem be more inclined to pay for Colby than to pay OOS tuition to send their kids to Ann Arbor or Madison. But then I'm biased toward major research universities and am not particularly invested in the public/private distinction. And I'm guessing that not many parents (or kids) are primarily interested in seeking out schools where the intellectual action is. They're looking at social environment, networks, job prospects, and grad school acceptance rates.

True. Michigan and Wisconsin have outstanding academics in so many fields and so many opportunities. Some parents can't see past small private schools.

Michigan and Wisconsin are actually on the lists of many area teens. Michigan is very difficult for OOS students to get into, and it has extremely high OOS tuition and generally offers no merit or financial aid to OOS applicants.

I don't think there is much evidence to support the notion that grads of Michigan and Wisconsin have more opportunities than their counterparts at SLACs. Many SLACs have terrific grad/professional school placement rates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't get is why so many private school parents seem be more inclined to pay for Colby than to pay OOS tuition to send their kids to Ann Arbor or Madison. But then I'm biased toward major research universities and am not particularly invested in the public/private distinction. And I'm guessing that not many parents (or kids) are primarily interested in seeking out schools where the intellectual action is. They're looking at social environment, networks, job prospects, and grad school acceptance rates.

Michigan and Wisconsin are actually on the lists of many area teens. Michigan is very difficult for OOS students to get into, and it has extremely high OOS tuition and generally offers no merit or financial aid to OOS students.

But Michigan is still cheaper than Colby. I guess I'd find it easier to get my head around paying HYP-level tuition for Michigan than to shell out that kind of money for Colby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't get is why so many private school parents seem be more inclined to pay for Colby than to pay OOS tuition to send their kids to Ann Arbor or Madison. But then I'm biased toward major research universities and am not particularly invested in the public/private distinction. And I'm guessing that not many parents (or kids) are primarily interested in seeking out schools where the intellectual action is. They're looking at social environment, networks, job prospects, and grad school acceptance rates.

Michigan and Wisconsin are actually on the lists of many area teens. Michigan is very difficult for OOS students to get into, and it has extremely high OOS tuition and generally offers no merit or financial aid to OOS students.

But Michigan is still cheaper than Colby. I guess I'd find it easier to get my head around paying HYP-level tuition for Michigan than to shell out that kind of money for Colby.

Cost of attendance for full-pay students, 2014-2015:
Michigan OOS: $55,404
Colby: $61,100

Note that virtually all Michigan OOS students are full pay. For many DC-area students, financial aid will make Colby cheaper than Michigan.

I'm no apologist for Colby--I have no relationship to the school and don't know anyone who does. But the relative costs of schools are not always what they seem, and as with airline tickets, prices paid can differ dramatically from customer to customer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yale. We are very pleased, especially because DH is a proud alum.

Next DS has got to focus on getting into a top law school in four years!

Gag me.

Signed,

A lawyer with a degree from a "top law school."

I like you, lawyer from "a top law school." You seem to have a very good perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's a "Boston College"?

Is this sarcastic or have you really never heard of Boston College? You're like the PP who had never heard of Scripps...you guys need to do some serious research before you and your kids head into the college application process!

Not the PP, but calm down. BC has certainly come up in the world, but it is not in the same league as the Claremont Colleges.

LOL. Very few people on a easy coast know the Claremont colleges - they are regional.

Actually - no. We are all from the east coast and DD's first choice two years ago was Claremont McKenna but she didn't get in. Two kid's for DS's class are going to Pomona (I think) and Harvey Mudd. There are big in the private school world maybe as they are very expensive and selective.

I'm both a west coast and east coast person. All educated people know about the Claremont colleges and its design to offer University-type services to five distinct colleges. Money is pooled to create state of the art facilities like library and health center, but students apply to each college (very very walkable). The child of a friend of mine coming in from Boston could not get into Claremont McKenna so accepted Scripps (all women) but is taking classes at Claremont mcKenna and will reapply every year until she gets in. In my day, I got into Pomona, which is an xlnt school. Pitzer wasn't a serious contender then because they did not give grades, just teacher letters, and since I wanted to go onto law school, that concerned me. The dorms were nicer at Scripps so I thought I would board there but take classes at then Claremont Men's College and Pomona. I went to Stanford instead. But I would rank Pomona and Claremont McKenna very high.

Sadly, in my experience all educated people are definitely not familiar with the Claremont colleges--which is no reflection on the colleges' quality. Word about SLAC's just doesn't get around--my Swarthmore and Williams friends say many employers haven't heard of their schools either. I'm an East Coast academic and used to be a professor at a SLAC similar to those colleges on the East Coast--and even so I am only vaguely familiar with the Claremont schools and I didn't even know that they were some kind of consortium until I read that here.

You sound moronic.

LOL. Your response is getting old. Sorry you can't accept it. I grew up in a well-educated area of the NE. My public HS was an Ivy factory. A handful went to East Coast SLACs - most of the them were driven by family traditions rather than deep-rooted educational philosophies. People only went out to the West Coast for Stanford, Berkeley, USC, UW, etc.

Ask a broad group of people from the East Coast and see who has heard of them. I'm guessing a few people from SLACs, but that's it. Please report back when you've concluded your research.

SLACs are declining in popularity. But I have never met anyone from the East Coast who went out West to UW. That's a mediocre school at best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yale. We are very pleased, especially because DH is a proud alum.

Next DS has got to focus on getting into a top law school in four years!

Cliche.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So first my background--I have experienced the range of schools: I attended a state school, went to a HYP for grad, and taught at a Top 25 liberal arts college.

I'm just curious...I went through this thread and I see a lot of people saying that they are going to stretch financially to send their kids to places like the place I used to teach. Which is to say schools like Bates or Pomona.

And I guess I'm just curious and trying to understand why. Based on my experience, these are places that are great and where a student will get a decent education and have a pleasant life for four years. But very honestly, they are a similar price as HYP without offering the same level of name recognition, facilities, faculty, peers, etc. You can get an equivalent education at the University of Maryland--maybe better if you are interested in doing undergraduate research--and typically go to the grad or professional school of your choice. So what draws people to faraway expensive colleges?

The answers I came up with myself are that for some parents college is not just about education but about DS/DD finding a partner, or maybe the family is interested in a religious education (Catholic schools, BYU, etc.), or maybe they think that four years on an idyllic campus and what are hopefully lifelong friendships are worth the $240k price tag. But I still honestly have some trouble wrapping my mind around that. I'd be curious to hear people's responses.

My DD is going to Tulane. She applied to a range of mid level schools like that (Wash U was the highest ranked school she got into). Anyway, she was torn between Tulane and U of Miami. We will pay fill freight due to our income and have been saving all her life for this purpose. We will also pay for grad school if she chooses to go. She's very excited about moving to Nola and going to Tulane and that's what I wanted for her. To be excited about this next step.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's a "Boston College"?

Is this sarcastic or have you really never heard of Boston College? You're like the PP who had never heard of Scripps...you guys need to do some serious research before you and your kids head into the college application process!

Not the PP, but calm down. BC has certainly come up in the world, but it is not in the same league as the Claremont Colleges.

LOL. Very few people on a easy coast know the Claremont colleges - they are regional.

Actually - no. We are all from the east coast and DD's first choice two years ago was Claremont McKenna but she didn't get in. Two kid's for DS's class are going to Pomona (I think) and Harvey Mudd. There are big in the private school world maybe as they are very expensive and selective.

I'm both a west coast and east coast person. All educated people know about the Claremont colleges and its design to offer University-type services to five distinct colleges. Money is pooled to create state of the art facilities like library and health center, but students apply to each college (very very walkable). The child of a friend of mine coming in from Boston could not get into Claremont McKenna so accepted Scripps (all women) but is taking classes at Claremont mcKenna and will reapply every year until she gets in. In my day, I got into Pomona, which is an xlnt school. Pitzer wasn't a serious contender then because they did not give grades, just teacher letters, and since I wanted to go onto law school, that concerned me. The dorms were nicer at Scripps so I thought I would board there but take classes at then Claremont Men's College and Pomona. I went to Stanford instead. But I would rank Pomona and Claremont McKenna very high.

Sadly, in my experience all educated people are definitely not familiar with the Claremont colleges--which is no reflection on the colleges' quality. Word about SLAC's just doesn't get around--my Swarthmore and Williams friends say many employers haven't heard of their schools either. I'm an East Coast academic and used to be a professor at a SLAC similar to those colleges on the East Coast--and even so I am only vaguely familiar with the Claremont schools and I didn't even know that they were some kind of consortium until I read that here.

You sound moronic.

LOL. Your response is getting old. Sorry you can't accept it. I grew up in a well-educated area of the NE. My public HS was an Ivy factory. A handful went to East Coast SLACs - most of the them were driven by family traditions rather than deep-rooted educational philosophies. People only went out to the West Coast for Stanford, Berkeley, USC, UW, etc.

Ask a broad group of people from the East Coast and see who has heard of them. I'm guessing a few people from SLACs, but that's it. Please report back when you've concluded your research.

SLACs are declining in popularity. But I have never met anyone from the East Coast who went out West to UW. That's a mediocre school at best.

It may have been somewhat mediocre years ago. Not any longer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's a "Boston College"?

Is this sarcastic or have you really never heard of Boston College? You're like the PP who had never heard of Scripps...you guys need to do some serious research before you and your kids head into the college application process!

Not the PP, but calm down. BC has certainly come up in the world, but it is not in the same league as the Claremont Colleges.

LOL. Very few people on a easy coast know the Claremont colleges - they are regional.

Actually - no. We are all from the east coast and DD's first choice two years ago was Claremont McKenna but she didn't get in. Two kid's for DS's class are going to Pomona (I think) and Harvey Mudd. There are big in the private school world maybe as they are very expensive and selective.

I'm both a west coast and east coast person. All educated people know about the Claremont colleges and its design to offer University-type services to five distinct colleges. Money is pooled to create state of the art facilities like library and health center, but students apply to each college (very very walkable). The child of a friend of mine coming in from Boston could not get into Claremont McKenna so accepted Scripps (all women) but is taking classes at Claremont mcKenna and will reapply every year until she gets in. In my day, I got into Pomona, which is an xlnt school. Pitzer wasn't a serious contender then because they did not give grades, just teacher letters, and since I wanted to go onto law school, that concerned me. The dorms were nicer at Scripps so I thought I would board there but take classes at then Claremont Men's College and Pomona. I went to Stanford instead. But I would rank Pomona and Claremont McKenna very high.

Sadly, in my experience all educated people are definitely not familiar with the Claremont colleges--which is no reflection on the colleges' quality. Word about SLAC's just doesn't get around--my Swarthmore and Williams friends say many employers haven't heard of their schools either. I'm an East Coast academic and used to be a professor at a SLAC similar to those colleges on the East Coast--and even so I am only vaguely familiar with the Claremont schools and I didn't even know that they were some kind of consortium until I read that here.

You sound moronic.

LOL. Your response is getting old. Sorry you can't accept it. I grew up in a well-educated area of the NE. My public HS was an Ivy factory. A handful went to East Coast SLACs - most of the them were driven by family traditions rather than deep-rooted educational philosophies. People only went out to the West Coast for Stanford, Berkeley, USC, UW, etc.

Ask a broad group of people from the East Coast and see who has heard of them. I'm guessing a few people from SLACs, but that's it. Please report back when you've concluded your research.

SLACs are declining in popularity. But I have never met anyone from the East Coast who went out West to UW. That's a mediocre school at best.

Then why are applications up at SLACs? And not just the top schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's a "Boston College"?

Is this sarcastic or have you really never heard of Boston College? You're like the PP who had never heard of Scripps...you guys need to do some serious research before you and your kids head into the college application process!

Not the PP, but calm down. BC has certainly come up in the world, but it is not in the same league as the Claremont Colleges.

LOL. Very few people on a easy coast know the Claremont colleges - they are regional.

Actually - no. We are all from the east coast and DD's first choice two years ago was Claremont McKenna but she didn't get in. Two kid's for DS's class are going to Pomona (I think) and Harvey Mudd. There are big in the private school world maybe as they are very expensive and selective.

I'm both a west coast and east coast person. All educated people know about the Claremont colleges and its design to offer University-type services to five distinct colleges. Money is pooled to create state of the art facilities like library and health center, but students apply to each college (very very walkable). The child of a friend of mine coming in from Boston could not get into Claremont McKenna so accepted Scripps (all women) but is taking classes at Claremont mcKenna and will reapply every year until she gets in. In my day, I got into Pomona, which is an xlnt school. Pitzer wasn't a serious contender then because they did not give grades, just teacher letters, and since I wanted to go onto law school, that concerned me. The dorms were nicer at Scripps so I thought I would board there but take classes at then Claremont Men's College and Pomona. I went to Stanford instead. But I would rank Pomona and Claremont McKenna very high.

Sadly, in my experience all educated people are definitely not familiar with the Claremont colleges--which is no reflection on the colleges' quality. Word about SLAC's just doesn't get around--my Swarthmore and Williams friends say many employers haven't heard of their schools either. I'm an East Coast academic and used to be a professor at a SLAC similar to those colleges on the East Coast--and even so I am only vaguely familiar with the Claremont schools and I didn't even know that they were some kind of consortium until I read that here.

You sound moronic.

LOL. Your response is getting old. Sorry you can't accept it. I grew up in a well-educated area of the NE. My public HS was an Ivy factory. A handful went to East Coast SLACs - most of the them were driven by family traditions rather than deep-rooted educational philosophies. People only went out to the West Coast for Stanford, Berkeley, USC, UW, etc.

Ask a broad group of people from the East Coast and see who has heard of them. I'm guessing a few people from SLACs, but that's it. Please report back when you've concluded your research.

SLACs are declining in popularity. But I have never met anyone from the East Coast who went out West to UW. That's a mediocre school at best.

Then why are applications up at SLACs? And not just the top schools.

Do they do the Common Application?

Not the PP, and I don't really care, but the boys at DS's pubic HS in NoVa mostly seem disinterested in SLACs. Don't know if it's cost, the perception that the liberal arts degrees aren't valuable enough anymore, or something else, but it's quite noticeable. I keep thinking there must be boys from privates who will feel at home in these schools and fill them up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So first my background--I have experienced the range of schools: I attended a state school, went to a HYP for grad, and taught at a Top 25 liberal arts college.

I'm just curious...I went through this thread and I see a lot of people saying that they are going to stretch financially to send their kids to places like the place I used to teach. Which is to say schools like Bates or Pomona.

And I guess I'm just curious and trying to understand why. Based on my experience, these are places that are great and where a student will get a decent education and have a pleasant life for four years. But very honestly, they are a similar price as HYP without offering the same level of name recognition, facilities, faculty, peers, etc. You can get an equivalent education at the University of Maryland--maybe better if you are interested in doing undergraduate research--and typically go to the grad or professional school of your choice. So what draws people to faraway expensive colleges?

The answers I came up with myself are that for some parents college is not just about education but about DS/DD finding a partner, or maybe the family is interested in a religious education (Catholic schools, BYU, etc.), or maybe they think that four years on an idyllic campus and what are hopefully lifelong friendships are worth the $240k price tag. But I still honestly have some trouble wrapping my mind around that. I'd be curious to hear people's responses.

Another academic here -- and, abstractly, I have the same reaction to SLACs vs. public schools (with some exceptions re specific schools and specific majors). But I'd also throw in the mix the facts that the best state universities are getting harder to get into for in-state residents and, of course, for those of us in DC, there's no high-quality public university. So, yeah, Berkeley over Bates but if the choice is Claremont vs. JMU (or Carleton vs. UC Merced), it's not so clear cut to me.

What I don't get is why so many private school parents seem be more inclined to pay for Colby than to pay OOS tuition to send their kids to Ann Arbor or Madison. But then I'm biased toward major research universities and am not particularly invested in the public/private distinction. And I'm guessing that not many parents (or kids) are primarily interested in seeking out schools where the intellectual action is. They're looking at social environment, networks, job prospects, and grad school acceptance rates.

I guess not everyone sees the benefit of large research universities for undergraduates nor do they underestimate the intellectual firepower of SLAC professors and students. The sports emphasis at places like Michigan and Wisconsin can also be a major turn-off. I find your perspective and attitude to be narrow and narrow-minded - all the most reason for me to support the kind of broad education a liberal arts college provides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's a "Boston College"?

Is this sarcastic or have you really never heard of Boston College? You're like the PP who had never heard of Scripps...you guys need to do some serious research before you and your kids head into the college application process!

Not the PP, but calm down. BC has certainly come up in the world, but it is not in the same league as the Claremont Colleges.

LOL. Very few people on a easy coast know the Claremont colleges - they are regional.

Actually - no. We are all from the east coast and DD's first choice two years ago was Claremont McKenna but she didn't get in. Two kid's for DS's class are going to Pomona (I think) and Harvey Mudd. There are big in the private school world maybe as they are very expensive and selective.

I'm both a west coast and east coast person. All educated people know about the Claremont colleges and its design to offer University-type services to five distinct colleges. Money is pooled to create state of the art facilities like library and health center, but students apply to each college (very very walkable). The child of a friend of mine coming in from Boston could not get into Claremont McKenna so accepted Scripps (all women) but is taking classes at Claremont mcKenna and will reapply every year until she gets in. In my day, I got into Pomona, which is an xlnt school. Pitzer wasn't a serious contender then because they did not give grades, just teacher letters, and since I wanted to go onto law school, that concerned me. The dorms were nicer at Scripps so I thought I would board there but take classes at then Claremont Men's College and Pomona. I went to Stanford instead. But I would rank Pomona and Claremont McKenna very high.

Sadly, in my experience all educated people are definitely not familiar with the Claremont colleges--which is no reflection on the colleges' quality. Word about SLAC's just doesn't get around--my Swarthmore and Williams friends say many employers haven't heard of their schools either. I'm an East Coast academic and used to be a professor at a SLAC similar to those colleges on the East Coast--and even so I am only vaguely familiar with the Claremont schools and I didn't even know that they were some kind of consortium until I read that here.

You sound moronic.

LOL. Your response is getting old. Sorry you can't accept it. I grew up in a well-educated area of the NE. My public HS was an Ivy factory. A handful went to East Coast SLACs - most of the them were driven by family traditions rather than deep-rooted educational philosophies. People only went out to the West Coast for Stanford, Berkeley, USC, UW, etc.

Ask a broad group of people from the East Coast and see who has heard of them. I'm guessing a few people from SLACs, but that's it. Please report back when you've concluded your research.

SLACs are declining in popularity. But I have never met anyone from the East Coast who went out West to UW. That's a mediocre school at best.

It may have been somewhat mediocre years ago. Not any longer.

Incorrect.

[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:What's a "Boston College"?

Is this sarcastic or have you really never heard of Boston College? You're like the PP who had never heard of Scripps...you guys need to do some serious research before you and your kids head into the college application process!

Not the PP, but calm down. BC has certainly come up in the world, but it is not in the same league as the Claremont Colleges.

LOL. Very few people on a easy coast know the Claremont colleges - they are regional.

Actually - no. We are all from the east coast and DD's first choice two years ago was Claremont McKenna but she didn't get in. Two kid's for DS's class are going to Pomona (I think) and Harvey Mudd. There are big in the private school world maybe as they are very expensive and selective.

I'm both a west coast and east coast person. All educated people know about the Claremont colleges and its design to offer University-type services to five distinct colleges. Money is pooled to create state of the art facilities like library and health center, but students apply to each college (very very walkable). The child of a friend of mine coming in from Boston could not get into Claremont McKenna so accepted Scripps (all women) but is taking classes at Claremont mcKenna and will reapply every year until she gets in. In my day, I got into Pomona, which is an xlnt school. Pitzer wasn't a serious contender then because they did not give grades, just teacher letters, and since I wanted to go onto law school, that concerned me. The dorms were nicer at Scripps so I thought I would board there but take classes at then Claremont Men's College and Pomona. I went to Stanford instead. But I would rank Pomona and Claremont McKenna very high.

Sadly, in my experience all educated people are definitely not familiar with the Claremont colleges--which is no reflection on the colleges' quality. Word about SLAC's just doesn't get around--my Swarthmore and Williams friends say many employers haven't heard of their schools either. I'm an East Coast academic and used to be a professor at a SLAC similar to those colleges on the East Coast--and even so I am only vaguely familiar with the Claremont schools and I didn't even know that they were some kind of consortium until I read that here.

You sound moronic.

LOL. Your response is getting old. Sorry you can't accept it. I grew up in a well-educated area of the NE. My public HS was an Ivy factory. A handful went to East Coast SLACs - most of the them were driven by family traditions rather than deep-rooted educational philosophies. People only went out to the West Coast for Stanford, Berkeley, USC, UW, etc.

Ask a broad group of people from the East Coast and see who has heard of them. I'm guessing a few people from SLACs, but that's it. Please report back when you've concluded your research.

SLACs are declining in popularity. But I have never met anyone from the East Coast who went out West to UW. That's a mediocre school at best.

It may have been somewhat mediocre years ago. Not any longer.

Incorrect.

Are you talking about Univ of Wisconsin or Univ of Washington? If it's Wisconsin then you're wrong - it's a great school with many options. I don't know too much about Washington and, you're right, not many East Coast kids are scrambling to get out there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So first my background--I have experienced the range of schools: I attended a state school, went to a HYP for grad, and taught at a Top 25 liberal arts college.

I'm just curious...I went through this thread and I see a lot of people saying that they are going to stretch financially to send their kids to places like the place I used to teach. Which is to say schools like Bates or Pomona.

And I guess I'm just curious and trying to understand why. Based on my experience, these are places that are great and where a student will get a decent education and have a pleasant life for four years. But very honestly, they are a similar price as HYP without offering the same level of name recognition, facilities, faculty, peers, etc. You can get an equivalent education at the University of Maryland--maybe better if you are interested in doing undergraduate research--and typically go to the grad or professional school of your choice. So what draws people to faraway expensive colleges?

The answers I came up with myself are that for some parents college is not just about education but about DS/DD finding a partner, or maybe the family is interested in a religious education (Catholic schools, BYU, etc.), or maybe they think that four years on an idyllic campus and what are hopefully lifelong friendships are worth the $240k price tag. But I still honestly have some trouble wrapping my mind around that. I'd be curious to hear people's responses.

Another academic here -- and, abstractly, I have the same reaction to SLACs vs. public schools (with some exceptions re specific schools and specific majors). But I'd also throw in the mix the facts that the best state universities are getting harder to get into for in-state residents and, of course, for those of us in DC, there's no high-quality public university. So, yeah, Berkeley over Bates but if the choice is Claremont vs. JMU (or Carleton vs. UC Merced), it's not so clear cut to me.

What I don't get is why so many private school parents seem be more inclined to pay for Colby than to pay OOS tuition to send their kids to Ann Arbor or Madison. But then I'm biased toward major research universities and am not particularly invested in the public/private distinction. And I'm guessing that not many parents (or kids) are primarily interested in seeking out schools where the intellectual action is. They're looking at social environment, networks, job prospects, and grad school acceptance rates.

I guess not everyone sees the benefit of large research universities for undergraduates nor do they underestimate the intellectual firepower of SLAC professors and students. The sports emphasis at places like Michigan and Wisconsin can also be a major turn-off. I find your perspective and attitude to be narrow and narrow-minded - all the most reason for me to support the kind of broad education a liberal arts college provides.

Clearly it's true that people don't see the benefit of large research universities for undergraduates -- that was my point. There's a much broader education available on a campus where 3676 are offered to undergraduates (Michigan) vs one where 395 courses are offered (Swarthmore). As for the "intellectual firepower" of SLAC professors, it really depends on personality and field. Intellectual stagnation is a real risk in situations where you don't have grad students, colleagues in your subfield, funding for state-of-the-art labs, and where the emphasis is on undergraduate teaching (which, of necessity, tends to get repetitious -- some courses need to be offered year in and year out and there may be only one faculty member who can teach them). SLACs are not the most intellectually stimulating environment for faculty.

As for the students at SLACs, I'm not making assumptions about their "firepower." Just saying that access to grad courses, better facilities (labs, libraries, museums, hospitals), and a larger and more diverse faculty and student body can be a really important (and "broadening") experience for an intellectually-inclined kid. Maybe parents who are more concerned, at this stage, with small class sizes, personal attention, and the right cohort sometimes do their kids a disservice when they encourage them to select a college using the same criteria we use for selecting an elementary school.