Question of Parents of Kids at SLACs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The < 20 kids/class number at the national universities is significantly skewed by upper division students who get work as undergrad lab assistants, which counts as a 1:1 professor class for them.

I was coming to ask this! Because I graduated from Penn (in the mid 90s) and was surprised to read its statistic - I had very few classes less than 20 students and they were only in my final year, and my first year I had many classes over 100 students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are the obsessed anti/SLAC posters so obsessed? It’s really sad. If you think they are inferior, why are you threatened by them? And why not be happy that those students aren’t taking up spots in the schools you covet?

Why do the handful of obsessed SLAC posters write inaccurate descriptions of National Universities and often resort to insults and name-calling rather than discussing the realities ?

If LACs were so great, there would be more of them and fewer of the existing LACs would be in such dire financial situations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've never really paid attention to SLACs for my kid because of two concerns, but I wonder if they are justified.

1. My current junior is very undecided in terms of major or career path, and so it seems like a larger university would have more options once her direction becomes clearer. I'm certain she won't be interested in engineering, so there's no need for an engineering school. But generally speaking, it seems like larger schools would have a broader and deeper set of majors.

2. I'm wondering about the process of getting a job at graduation. I'm not questioning the quality of the schools. But large schools have tons of employers coming to campus for on-campus interviews. And it may even matter in terms of internships and that kind of thing, given that a large school with more infrastructure for career services would be beneficial. (I have an older kid (current sophomore) at a lower ivy and she has had a ton of summer internship interviews -- and I get the impressing that many of those firms have a list of schools they draw from.)

If your kid is at a SLAC, have you found the above to be challenging, or am I overthinking things?

OP: Really depends upon the particular schools one is considering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The < 20 kids/class number at the national universities is significantly skewed by upper division students who get work as undergrad lab assistants, which counts as a 1:1 professor class for them.

I have never come across this other than at Williams College tutorials and Ohio University.

Many of the posters obsessed with LACs seem to have little understanding of private National Universities and large public flagship honors colleges / programs.

You betray your profound lack of knowledge of any kind of university or college with this comment.

At the very least you certainly don’t know how labs work in the big schools. My goodness. You should not post about topics far beyond your understanding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are the obsessed anti/SLAC posters so obsessed? It’s really sad. If you think they are inferior, why are you threatened by them? And why not be happy that those students aren’t taking up spots in the schools you covet?

Why do the handful of obsessed SLAC posters write inaccurate descriptions of National Universities and often resort to insults and name-calling rather than discussing the realities ?

If LACs were so great, there would be more of them and fewer of the existing LACs would be in such dire financial situations.

I am not that PP and I went to state schools and HYS so no personal experience with SLACs. I started reading this forum about a year ago. As a FYI, my kids aren’t at SLACS, except that now that I’ve been reading your obsessed posts on DCUM for awhile, I’m going to encourage my youngest to look at SLACs. Your posts are distinctive — you post ALL the time on any post even slightly related to SLACS — and over the past year or so have made me look a lot more deeply at SLACs because you sound so bizarrely jealous and unhinged. I figure there must be something really good for someone to be so bitter about not getting into one and to blanket the College forum so incessantly. Then I learned about the spectacular educational possibilities. So thanks for that education! I think my youngest will benefit!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are the obsessed anti/SLAC posters so obsessed? It’s really sad. If you think they are inferior, why are you threatened by them? And why not be happy that those students aren’t taking up spots in the schools you covet?

Why do the handful of obsessed SLAC posters write inaccurate descriptions of National Universities and often resort to insults and name-calling rather than discussing the realities ?

If LACs were so great, there would be more of them and fewer of the existing LACs would be in such dire financial situations.

I am not that PP and I went to state schools and HYS so no personal experience with SLACs. I started reading this forum about a year ago. As a FYI, my kids aren’t at SLACS, except that now that I’ve been reading your obsessed posts on DCUM for awhile, I’m going to encourage my youngest to look at SLACs. Your posts are distinctive — you post ALL the time on any post even slightly related to SLACS — and over the past year or so have made me look a lot more deeply at SLACs because you sound so bizarrely jealous and unhinged. I figure there must be something really good for someone to be so bitter about not getting into one and to blanket the College forum so incessantly. Then I learned about the spectacular educational possibilities. So thanks for that education! I think my youngest will benefit!

Great response!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You have to be careful when interpreting these numbers. Many national universities have a large number of faculty but, at the highest levels, many of them don't teach undergrads or, if they do, have very limited teaching responsibility. The main responsibility of the most esteemed faculty is research, writing books, giving lectures outside their school, etc. I have a kid at a top 20 National University, and I can tell you that the professors oversee teaching more so than actual teaching.

Princeton Review and Niche do ask questions about professor availability, commitment, teaching quality, concern for undergraduates, etc., which may be useful information for an undergraduate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have to be careful when interpreting these numbers. Many national universities have a large number of faculty but, at the highest levels, many of them don't teach undergrads or, if they do, have very limited teaching responsibility. The main responsibility of the most esteemed faculty is research, writing books, giving lectures outside their school, etc. I have a kid at a top 20 National University, and I can tell you that the professors oversee teaching more so than actual teaching.

Princeton Review and Niche do ask questions about professor availability, commitment, teaching quality, concern for undergraduates, etc., which may be useful information for an undergraduate.

All these questions are quite nebulous and subject to personal interpretation by college/professor.

[Anonymous]

I’m another anti-SLAC poster, but not because I think they’re overrated or you can’t get a job coming out of them etc. I think they’re fine schools generally, but only if they’re top 14-20, and below that (CTCL level) they’re just not worth the extra money and attract too many underachieving students with well to do parents who somehow have convinced themselves that simply by virtue of smaller size and larger price they are better than the other option available to their kids - second tier state schools - when in fact the truly important metrics (quality of entering study body, graduation rates, and employment statistics) are equal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have to be careful when interpreting these numbers. Many national universities have a large number of faculty but, at the highest levels, many of them don't teach undergrads or, if they do, have very limited teaching responsibility. The main responsibility of the most esteemed faculty is research, writing books, giving lectures outside their school, etc. I have a kid at a top 20 National University, and I can tell you that the professors oversee teaching more so than actual teaching.

Princeton Review and Niche do ask questions about professor availability, commitment, teaching quality, concern for undergraduates, etc., which may be useful information for an undergraduate.

All these questions are quite nebulous and subject to personal interpretation by college/professor.

I’m the PP above who went to big state schools and HYS. People don’t actually believe HYS and the big state schools have many professors with deep and frequent interactions with students, do they? Like we aren’t seriously debating that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are the obsessed anti/SLAC posters so obsessed? It’s really sad. If you think they are inferior, why are you threatened by them? And why not be happy that those students aren’t taking up spots in the schools you covet?

Why do the handful of obsessed SLAC posters write inaccurate descriptions of National Universities and often resort to insults and name-calling rather than discussing the realities ?

If LACs were so great, there would be more of them and fewer of the existing LACs would be in such dire financial situations.

There are way more liberal arts colleges than there are universities. Most are not in dire financial circumstances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m another anti-SLAC poster, but not because I think they’re overrated or you can’t get a job coming out of them etc. I think they’re fine schools generally, but only if they’re top 14-20, and below that (CTCL level) they’re just not worth the extra money and attract too many underachieving students with well to do parents who somehow have convinced themselves that simply by virtue of smaller size and larger price they are better than the other option available to their kids - second tier state schools - when in fact the truly important metrics (quality of entering study body, graduation rates, and employment statistics) are equal.

I’m the HYS/state school PP who said the anti-SLAC posters have convinced me to look at SLACs more closely, and this response is another example of why. It’s just not very thoughtful and sounds more like jealousy and resentment than anything substantive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m another anti-SLAC poster, but not because I think they’re overrated or you can’t get a job coming out of them etc. I think they’re fine schools generally, but only if they’re top 14-20, and below that (CTCL level) they’re just not worth the extra money and attract too many underachieving students with well to do parents who somehow have convinced themselves that simply by virtue of smaller size and larger price they are better than the other option available to their kids - second tier state schools - when in fact the truly important metrics (quality of entering study body, graduation rates, and employment statistics) are equal.

I’m the HYS/state school PP who said the anti-SLAC posters have convinced me to look at SLACs more closely, and this response is another example of why. It’s just not very thoughtful and sounds more like jealousy and resentment than anything substantive.

Please explain how it’s a sign of “jealousy.” One of my kids actually went to a SLAC for Pete’s sake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have to be careful when interpreting these numbers. Many national universities have a large number of faculty but, at the highest levels, many of them don't teach undergrads or, if they do, have very limited teaching responsibility. The main responsibility of the most esteemed faculty is research, writing books, giving lectures outside their school, etc. I have a kid at a top 20 National University, and I can tell you that the professors oversee teaching more so than actual teaching.

Princeton Review and Niche do ask questions about professor availability, commitment, teaching quality, concern for undergraduates, etc., which may be useful information for an undergraduate.

All these questions are quite nebulous and subject to personal interpretation by college/professor.

I’m the PP above who went to big state schools and HYS. People don’t actually believe HYS and the big state schools have many professors with deep and frequent interactions with students, do they? Like we aren’t seriously debating that?

No debate, I actually agree with you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are the obsessed anti/SLAC posters so obsessed? It’s really sad. If you think they are inferior, why are you threatened by them? And why not be happy that those students aren’t taking up spots in the schools you covet?

Why do the handful of obsessed SLAC posters write inaccurate descriptions of National Universities and often resort to insults and name-calling rather than discussing the realities ?

If LACs were so great, there would be more of them and fewer of the existing LACs would be in such dire financial situations.

There are way more liberal arts colleges than there are universities. Most are not in dire financial circumstances.

Actually this isn’t true. There are more universities than liberal arts colleges. Look it up.