Are the NESCACs worth the money?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My wife and I both graduated nescacs and our two children graduated ivies and my impression is that nescacs deliver a far superior undergrad experience. Abundant opportunities to work with professors on research and loads of mentorship. Go visit and decide for yourself. I wouldn’t bankrupt myself for the opportunity but attending a NESCAC is a special experienc.

LOL, ok.

PP, are you still using a rotary or a flip phone and thinking your rotary or flip works just as well as a smartphone in calling or receiving phone calls? The original PP is trying to explain to you the benefits of a smartphone. If you never owned one, everything goes over your head.

If you think yours is a clever retort I got news for you . . .

But I'll elaborate. First, NESCAC is an athletic conference. For this poster to group them all together and say attending any single one of them is a "special experience" is ridiculous. Some are better than others, and several are not "special" at all.

In any event, my real reason for the "LOL, ok" is that this poster isn't going to school with her kids or sitting in on their classes so she has no idea whether every NESCAC delivers a "far superior undergrad experience" than their Ivy League schools. And if she responds to this post with "well, we talk about their classes all the time as a family," or words to that effect, my response is both "well, that's really weird" and "so what, it's not the same thing."

NP -- And my response to that is, sorry that you show no interest in your kid's intellectual life and growth and they seem to respond in kind. But, LOL, you do you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NECSAC is an athletic conference of 11 schools of differing levels of excellence. The best NECSAC schools offer some of the best undergraduate education in the US. Let's momentarily set aside the USNWR ranking that stupidly splits universities and colleges into two lists, and temporarily ignore the ill-informed chatter of its DCUM groupies. The (better) WSJ ranking system places the top six NESCAC schools (Amherst, Williams, Tufts, Bowdoin, Middlebury, Wesleyan) among the top 50 in the nation. The others NECSACs aren't quite as highly ranked, with Trinity (104) and Connecticut (109) although fine bringing up the rear.

Obviously for NECSAC -- just as for Ivy or Big Ten or State U -- the finances have to work (and if $ is a concern, you'll probably want to major in something a little more marketable than say gender studies). But it's not like a NECSAC education is a lesser product that's only attractive at a discounted rate. That one even feels the need to explain that about extraordinary colleges like Williams or Amherst is just further evidence of the general uselessness of DCUM's received wisdom.

The best NECSAC schools will be (well-) known to employers, and grad schools. They may not be as well known to your father's second cousin or your grandmother's neighbor back in the old country, though, so if impressing them is a top priority and determinant of "worth the money," better to go to some huge university where a few professors have Nobel prizes and you need binoculars to see from the back of the lecture hall.

+1

For a similar and less expensive experience, consider other LACs such as e.g. Oberlin, Grinnell, Denison, College of Wooster, Allegheny.

~NESCAC alum whose DCs had better experiences at other non-NESCAC LACs

Grinnell is as good and highly respected as any NESCAC. Any prof at, say, Williams or Amherst would agree with that. The other schools on your list? Not so much.

We are talking about NESCACs and the student experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I graduated almost 35 years ago from a NESCAC school and am eternally grateful to my parents for this gift. I got a great education and was well-prepared for law school. Equally important, I made friends for life and have so many happy memories of that time. I just moved my youngest in for her senior year at the same school. She's been so happy there and I can see how the experience has shaped her intellectually and emotionally. Sorry if this sounds sappy, but, yeah, worth every penny.

Interesting that you shared that your NESCAC school education left you "well-prepared for law school".

I, too, think that an SLAC education can prepare one well for law school. But, if law schools just required two years of college (essentially an associate's degree) and stopped requiring an undergraduate degree (BA or BS or BFA), then I suspect that most LACs would close--although I do not know what percentage of SLAC graduates eventually earn a law degree.

Most other countries do not require a college degree in order to study law.

Does nyone have any knowledge of the percentage of NESCAC graduates who earn a law degree ? (TIA)

[Anonymous]

Adding an important point: US law schools do not care where one earned his or her undergraduate degree. Law schools care about one's undergraduate GPA, LSAT score, URM status, and--to a far lesser degree--an applicant's personal statement.

[Anonymous]

whats the basis for saying law schools dont care about undergrad. I have to believe that top law schools do care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Adding an important point: US law schools do not care where one earned his or her undergraduate degree. Law schools care about one's undergraduate GPA, LSAT score, URM status, and--to a far lesser degree--an applicant's personal statement.

True, but the hardest part of the LSAT to game, reading comprehension, is the one that tends to be easiest for people from rigorous academic environments. You're absolutely right that a person with similar grades and similar scores is going to perform similarly (except perhaps at Yale where professors do a lot of the admitting directly). But getting that all-important high LSAT score might be easier for a student who had a more academic undergrad experience.

(This is to say nothing of success in law school itself. A lot of the top of the class at my law school went to either an Ivy or SLAC, but there could be confounding factors there, so I don't want to generalize too much from that observation.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:whats the basis for saying law schools dont care about undergrad. I have to believe that top law schools do care.

The short and quick response is that law schools don't care because the US News rating and ranking system for law schools doesn't care.

[Anonymous]

I'm so surprised to hear this. I would have to believe that law school admissions officers would be influenced by the undergrad, but maybe not...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NECSAC is an athletic conference of 11 schools of differing levels of excellence. The best NECSAC schools offer some of the best undergraduate education in the US. Let's momentarily set aside the USNWR ranking that stupidly splits universities and colleges into two lists, and temporarily ignore the ill-informed chatter of its DCUM groupies. The (better) WSJ ranking system places the top six NESCAC schools (Amherst, Williams, Tufts, Bowdoin, Middlebury, Wesleyan) among the top 50 in the nation. The others NECSACs aren't quite as highly ranked, with Trinity (104) and Connecticut (109) although fine bringing up the rear.

Obviously for NECSAC -- just as for Ivy or Big Ten or State U -- the finances have to work (and if $ is a concern, you'll probably want to major in something a little more marketable than say gender studies). But it's not like a NECSAC education is a lesser product that's only attractive at a discounted rate. That one even feels the need to explain that about extraordinary colleges like Williams or Amherst is just further evidence of the general uselessness of DCUM's received wisdom.

The best NECSAC schools will be (well-) known to employers, and grad schools. They may not be as well known to your father's second cousin or your grandmother's neighbor back in the old country, though, so if impressing them is a top priority and determinant of "worth the money," better to go to some huge university where a few professors have Nobel prizes and you need binoculars to see from the back of the lecture hall.

+1

For a similar and less expensive experience, consider other LACs such as e.g. Oberlin, Grinnell, Denison, College of Wooster, Allegheny.

~NESCAC alum whose DCs had better experiences at other non-NESCAC LACs

What’s with the bizarre Wall Street ranking plug?

Its mention, though, smacks of a good litmus test: if you are the type of person/family who thinks going to #23 Williams on that there ranking is even close to equivalent to going to, say, #19 Emory, do not — and I repeat do not — go the NESCAC route. It is just not for you. No need to discuss it or debate it further.

If, however, you are of the ilk who think Williams is superior to Emory, so much so that even comparing the two is silly (let alone ranking Williams lower), then the NESCAC’s, even the lower NESCAC’s, are indeed for you. This isn’t really a discussion issue: these are two different types of people. You know who you are, and that won’t change.

In the off chance you do not know who you are, and think this merits further discussion, my advice is not to bother: do not go the NESCAC route. So-called national universities are the default group now; enjoy your default status.

Williams must not be for her then because Williams is not superior to Emory. And that is not the only ranking that puts Emory ahead of Williams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NECSAC is an athletic conference of 11 schools of differing levels of excellence. The best NECSAC schools offer some of the best undergraduate education in the US. Let's momentarily set aside the USNWR ranking that stupidly splits universities and colleges into two lists, and temporarily ignore the ill-informed chatter of its DCUM groupies. The (better) WSJ ranking system places the top six NESCAC schools (Amherst, Williams, Tufts, Bowdoin, Middlebury, Wesleyan) among the top 50 in the nation. The others NECSACs aren't quite as highly ranked, with Trinity (104) and Connecticut (109) although fine bringing up the rear.

Obviously for NECSAC -- just as for Ivy or Big Ten or State U -- the finances have to work (and if $ is a concern, you'll probably want to major in something a little more marketable than say gender studies). But it's not like a NECSAC education is a lesser product that's only attractive at a discounted rate. That one even feels the need to explain that about extraordinary colleges like Williams or Amherst is just further evidence of the general uselessness of DCUM's received wisdom.

The best NECSAC schools will be (well-) known to employers, and grad schools. They may not be as well known to your father's second cousin or your grandmother's neighbor back in the old country, though, so if impressing them is a top priority and determinant of "worth the money," better to go to some huge university where a few professors have Nobel prizes and you need binoculars to see from the back of the lecture hall.

+1

For a similar and less expensive experience, consider other LACs such as e.g. Oberlin, Grinnell, Denison, College of Wooster, Allegheny.

~NESCAC alum whose DCs had better experiences at other non-NESCAC LACs

Grinnell is as good and highly respected as any NESCAC. Any prof at, say, Williams or Amherst would agree with that. The other schools on your list? Not so much.

We are talking about NESCACs and the student experience.

And? My point is that there are other SLACS that are just as good if not better. Why does being in the NESCAC by definition make the experience different / better than Pomona, Swarthmore, Grinnell, Davidson, etc? They’re all elite SLACS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm so surprised to hear this. I would have to believe that law school admissions officers would be influenced by the undergrad, but maybe not...

They don’t. It’s all about the GPA and the LSAT. Sorry to disappoint, but throwing $80k a year at a NESCAC doesn’t give you an edge over a kid from state U with a high GPA and the same LSAT score.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Adding an important point: US law schools do not care where one earned his or her undergraduate degree. Law schools care about one's undergraduate GPA, LSAT score, URM status, and--to a far lesser degree--an applicant's personal statement.

True, but the hardest part of the LSAT to game, reading comprehension, is the one that tends to be easiest for people from rigorous academic environments. You're absolutely right that a person with similar grades and similar scores is going to perform similarly (except perhaps at Yale where professors do a lot of the admitting directly). But getting that all-important high LSAT score might be easier for a student who had a more academic undergrad experience.

(This is to say nothing of success in law school itself. A lot of the top of the class at my law school went to either an Ivy or SLAC, but there could be confounding factors there, so I don't want to generalize too much from that observation.)

And you’d be wrong. The typical student at, say, Williams is already a good test taker. There’s no evidence that a good LSAT score coming out of Williams has anything to do with the education that the school provided. If you scored a 1500+ on the SAT and went to state U, you’re still very likely to do well on the LSAT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My wife and I both graduated nescacs and our two children graduated ivies and my impression is that nescacs deliver a far superior undergrad experience. Abundant opportunities to work with professors on research and loads of mentorship. Go visit and decide for yourself. I wouldn’t bankrupt myself for the opportunity but attending a NESCAC is a special experienc.

LOL, ok.

PP, are you still using a rotary or a flip phone and thinking your rotary or flip works just as well as a smartphone in calling or receiving phone calls? The original PP is trying to explain to you the benefits of a smartphone. If you never owned one, everything goes over your head.

If you think yours is a clever retort I got news for you . . .

But I'll elaborate. First, NESCAC is an athletic conference. For this poster to group them all together and say attending any single one of them is a "special experience" is ridiculous. Some are better than others, and several are not "special" at all.

In any event, my real reason for the "LOL, ok" is that this poster isn't going to school with her kids or sitting in on their classes so she has no idea whether every NESCAC delivers a "far superior undergrad experience" than their Ivy League schools. And if she responds to this post with "well, we talk about their classes all the time as a family," or words to that effect, my response is both "well, that's really weird" and "so what, it's not the same thing."

NP -- And my response to that is, sorry that you show no interest in your kid's intellectual life and growth and they seem to respond in kind. But, LOL, you do you.

“Nerd Alert”

- Austin Powers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NECSAC is an athletic conference of 11 schools of differing levels of excellence. The best NECSAC schools offer some of the best undergraduate education in the US. Let's momentarily set aside the USNWR ranking that stupidly splits universities and colleges into two lists, and temporarily ignore the ill-informed chatter of its DCUM groupies. The (better) WSJ ranking system places the top six NESCAC schools (Amherst, Williams, Tufts, Bowdoin, Middlebury, Wesleyan) among the top 50 in the nation. The others NECSACs aren't quite as highly ranked, with Trinity (104) and Connecticut (109) although fine bringing up the rear.

Obviously for NECSAC -- just as for Ivy or Big Ten or State U -- the finances have to work (and if $ is a concern, you'll probably want to major in something a little more marketable than say gender studies). But it's not like a NECSAC education is a lesser product that's only attractive at a discounted rate. That one even feels the need to explain that about extraordinary colleges like Williams or Amherst is just further evidence of the general uselessness of DCUM's received wisdom.

The best NECSAC schools will be (well-) known to employers, and grad schools. They may not be as well known to your father's second cousin or your grandmother's neighbor back in the old country, though, so if impressing them is a top priority and determinant of "worth the money," better to go to some huge university where a few professors have Nobel prizes and you need binoculars to see from the back of the lecture hall.

+1

For a similar and less expensive experience, consider other LACs such as e.g. Oberlin, Grinnell, Denison, College of Wooster, Allegheny.

~NESCAC alum whose DCs had better experiences at other non-NESCAC LACs

What’s with the bizarre Wall Street ranking plug?

Its mention, though, smacks of a good litmus test: if you are the type of person/family who thinks going to #23 Williams on that there ranking is even close to equivalent to going to, say, #19 Emory, do not — and I repeat do not — go the NESCAC route. It is just not for you. No need to discuss it or debate it further.

If, however, you are of the ilk who think Williams is superior to Emory, so much so that even comparing the two is silly (let alone ranking Williams lower), then the NESCAC’s, even the lower NESCAC’s, are indeed for you. This isn’t really a discussion issue: these are two different types of people. You know who you are, and that won’t change.

In the off chance you do not know who you are, and think this merits further discussion, my advice is not to bother: do not go the NESCAC route. So-called national universities are the default group now; enjoy your default status.

To the writer of the above post: Did you attend a NESCAC school ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NECSAC is an athletic conference of 11 schools of differing levels of excellence. The best NECSAC schools offer some of the best undergraduate education in the US. Let's momentarily set aside the USNWR ranking that stupidly splits universities and colleges into two lists, and temporarily ignore the ill-informed chatter of its DCUM groupies. The (better) WSJ ranking system places the top six NESCAC schools (Amherst, Williams, Tufts, Bowdoin, Middlebury, Wesleyan) among the top 50 in the nation. The others NECSACs aren't quite as highly ranked, with Trinity (104) and Connecticut (109) although fine bringing up the rear.

Obviously for NECSAC -- just as for Ivy or Big Ten or State U -- the finances have to work (and if $ is a concern, you'll probably want to major in something a little more marketable than say gender studies). But it's not like a NECSAC education is a lesser product that's only attractive at a discounted rate. That one even feels the need to explain that about extraordinary colleges like Williams or Amherst is just further evidence of the general uselessness of DCUM's received wisdom.

The best NECSAC schools will be (well-) known to employers, and grad schools. They may not be as well known to your father's second cousin or your grandmother's neighbor back in the old country, though, so if impressing them is a top priority and determinant of "worth the money," better to go to some huge university where a few professors have Nobel prizes and you need binoculars to see from the back of the lecture hall.

+1

For a similar and less expensive experience, consider other LACs such as e.g. Oberlin, Grinnell, Denison, College of Wooster, Allegheny.

~NESCAC alum whose DCs had better experiences at other non-NESCAC LACs

Grinnell is as good and highly respected as any NESCAC. Any prof at, say, Williams or Amherst would agree with that. The other schools on your list? Not so much.

We are talking about NESCACs and the student experience.

And? My point is that there are other SLACS that are just as good if not better. Why does being in the NESCAC by definition make the experience different / better than Pomona, Swarthmore, Grinnell, Davidson, etc? They’re all elite SLACS.

It doesn’t. Nor does being in the NESCAC make the experience different/better than Oberlin (for example).