What is the appeal of SLACs for non-1%ers?

[Anonymous]

D.C. doesn't have a state school. So with the exception of a few, most can't get the tuition at a State school or a SLAC down to the tuition rate of in-staters in other places. This means looking at schools for all sorts of variables. For some it will be all about scholarships and DC TAG. For others, it will be about any number of things outside of cost because we can't get the tuition down but still have to leave the District to send our kids to college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SLACs have very low ROI compared to state schools:

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

They seem like a total scam except for the 1%. Much better for your future to go to UMD or Ohio State or Indians or Purdue or VA Tech to study engineering or business while enjoying college sports.

SLACs seem like a waste for all but the wealthy 1%era who don’t have to worry about finding a job after graduation. Many of them don’t have big college sports or Greek Life to generate alumni loyalty. What’s the point of them?

Anyhoo.. If you want to study a 'hard' subject that gives you a job after an undergrad, go Public or top large private (non-LAC). If you want an undergrad education with plans for immediate grad school (law, medicine, etc.) go (S)LAC. Most are unreasonably expensive for what you get in return but tend to subsidize COA outside the top 10-20, maybe 30.

Simplistic advice reflective of ignorance.

My DC graduated from a LAC last year and is making six figures working on data analysis. DC plans to go to grad school for applied math eventually.

Awesome for your kid! Congratulations! However, unless you can tell me that this is the outcome every kid enjoys from that SLAC, I'm not sure it's relevant. Students out of GMU that study analytics have similar outcomes.

By that metric, can you tell me every student out of GMU has the same outcome? Of course not. It comes down most of the time to choice of major and the learning environment where a student can do best.

FWIW, I have one student at a big state U in a STEM major and another headed to a LAC in a different, more research-focused STEM major. The LAC costs close to what we pay for big state U so from an ROI standpoint the college cost part is the same. #1's major will likely be higher paying at least just out of school. #2's major will require a master's and what she wanted most in undergrad was close faculty relationships, mentoring, research involvement, and a close student community. Which she will get at the LAC and which #1 does not seem to have gotten at his big school (which he likes).

I don't get why the anti-SLAC poster is so personally offended by the existence of SLACs and that some people find it a good educational choice. If you think they are so awful why not just smugly go on your way, happy that the misguided will not be competing with your kid.

Of course not! But you are paying a fraction of the cost of a Private college education at GMU. Again, if ROI works out, it doesn't matter for most people. I agree that an anti-SLAC bias is stupid but the SLAC-pushing on here is bizarre as well. DS1 goes to an expensive non-SLAC OOS school and (S)LACS never entered the picture because of what he wanted to study. We recently started looking at SLACs for DC2 (has exec functioning issues; unsure what he wants to study, etc.) and he was quite unimpressed by the first SLAC we visited (Bucknell). He categorically said he can't see himself going there. We will be visiting a few more over the summer that hopefully make a better impression on him.

Not always. If you have high need you may pay less at a highly ranked meets-need LAC or other private u. And even if not getting need aid, most mid-range LACs will be price competitive with in-state publics. My kid applied to a range of LACs plus a couple in-state publics. Yes, a couple LACs ended up out of budget but several were competitive with the public Us and cost less than public W&M.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Your kid’s ROI depends on your kid’s abilities and hustle, not the college.

+1000

SLAC really help develop critical thinking, research and writing skills, no matter what the major. Kids are much more deeply involved in their education, in Classes of 20-25 vs 200-400. Or rather, it's much harder not to be deeply involved in the smaller classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SLACs have very low ROI compared to state schools:

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

They seem like a total scam except for the 1%. Much better for your future to go to UMD or Ohio State or Indians or Purdue or VA Tech to study engineering or business while enjoying college sports.

SLACs seem like a waste for all but the wealthy 1%era who don’t have to worry about finding a job after graduation. Many of them don’t have big college sports or Greek Life to generate alumni loyalty. What’s the point of them?

Greek Life . . . College Sports . . . Engineering/business/hard sciences . . . all things that would completely turn my kid off of a college.

The notion that SLACs don’t have alumni loyalty because of a lack of Greek life or big sports is stupid. Many SLACs have a very avid alumni base. My SLAC has a great one and I have leaned on the network many times for jobs. Reunions are also a good indicator of alumni loyalty. I have gone to every one. At my 25th reunion, 70% of my class came, that’s huge compared with most schools, esp. big state schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SLACs have very low ROI compared to state schools:

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

They seem like a total scam except for the 1%. Much better for your future to go to UMD or Ohio State or Indians or Purdue or VA Tech to study engineering or business while enjoying college sports.

SLACs seem like a waste for all but the wealthy 1%era who don’t have to worry about finding a job after graduation. Many of them don’t have big college sports or Greek Life to generate alumni loyalty. What’s the point of them?

Greek Life . . . College Sports . . . Engineering/business/hard sciences . . . all things that would completely turn my kid off of a college.

The notion that SLACs don’t have alumni loyalty because of a lack of Greek life or big sports is stupid. Many SLACs have a very avid alumni base. My SLAC has a great one and I have leaned on the network many times for jobs. Reunions are also a good indicator of alumni loyalty. I have gone to every one. At my 25th reunion, 70% of my class came, that’s huge compared with most schools, esp. big state schools.

Maybe that’s your case. I went to a SLAC ranked currently in the high 20s, and the alumni network has been useless and most don’t come to reunions or city-based alumni meetups.

I will definitely be encouraging my kids to attend a flagship state school with big time college sports. College sports are a good way to connect students with alumni. No such thing exists at SLACs except for being a varsity athlete yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SLACs have very low ROI compared to state schools:

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

They seem like a total scam except for the 1%. Much better for your future to go to UMD or Ohio State or Indians or Purdue or VA Tech to study engineering or business while enjoying college sports.

SLACs seem like a waste for all but the wealthy 1%era who don’t have to worry about finding a job after graduation. Many of them don’t have big college sports or Greek Life to generate alumni loyalty. What’s the point of them?

Greek Life . . . College Sports . . . Engineering/business/hard sciences . . . all things that would completely turn my kid off of a college.

The notion that SLACs don’t have alumni loyalty because of a lack of Greek life or big sports is stupid. Many SLACs have a very avid alumni base. My SLAC has a great one and I have leaned on the network many times for jobs. Reunions are also a good indicator of alumni loyalty. I have gone to every one. At my 25th reunion, 70% of my class came, that’s huge compared with most schools, esp. big state schools.

Maybe that’s your case. I went to a SLAC ranked currently in the high 20s, and the alumni network has been useless and most don’t come to reunions or city-based alumni meetups.

I will definitely be encouraging my kids to attend a flagship state school with big time college sports. College sports are a good way to connect students with alumni. No such thing exists at SLACs except for being a varsity athlete yourself.

DS is looking at SLACs. Which one did you attend?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SLACs have very low ROI compared to state schools:

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

They seem like a total scam except for the 1%. Much better for your future to go to UMD or Ohio State or Indians or Purdue or VA Tech to study engineering or business while enjoying college sports.

SLACs seem like a waste for all but the wealthy 1%era who don’t have to worry about finding a job after graduation. Many of them don’t have big college sports or Greek Life to generate alumni loyalty. What’s the point of them?

Greek Life . . . College Sports . . . Engineering/business/hard sciences . . . all things that would completely turn my kid off of a college.

The notion that SLACs don’t have alumni loyalty because of a lack of Greek life or big sports is stupid. Many SLACs have a very avid alumni base. My SLAC has a great one and I have leaned on the network many times for jobs. Reunions are also a good indicator of alumni loyalty. I have gone to every one. At my 25th reunion, 70% of my class came, that’s huge compared with most schools, esp. big state schools.

Maybe that’s your case. I went to a SLAC ranked currently in the high 20s, and the alumni network has been useless and most don’t come to reunions or city-based alumni meetups.

I will definitely be encouraging my kids to attend a flagship state school with big time college sports. College sports are a good way to connect students with alumni. No such thing exists at SLACs except for being a varsity athlete yourself.

DS is looking at SLACs. Which one did you attend?

Macalester

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SLACs have very low ROI compared to state schools:

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

They seem like a total scam except for the 1%. Much better for your future to go to UMD or Ohio State or Indians or Purdue or VA Tech to study engineering or business while enjoying college sports.

SLACs seem like a waste for all but the wealthy 1%era who don’t have to worry about finding a job after graduation. Many of them don’t have big college sports or Greek Life to generate alumni loyalty. What’s the point of them?

Anyhoo.. If you want to study a 'hard' subject that gives you a job after an undergrad, go Public or top large private (non-LAC). If you want an undergrad education with plans for immediate grad school (law, medicine, etc.) go (S)LAC. Most are unreasonably expensive for what you get in return but tend to subsidize COA outside the top 10-20, maybe 30.

Simplistic advice reflective of ignorance.

My DC graduated from a LAC last year and is making six figures working on data analysis. DC plans to go to grad school for applied math eventually.

Awesome for your kid! Congratulations! However, unless you can tell me that this is the outcome every kid enjoys from that SLAC, I'm not sure it's relevant. Students out of GMU that study analytics have similar outcomes.

That's why a student's major - no matter where they go to school - along with graduate education drive the "ROI" (a silly way to look at education IMO).

Do you have a trust fund? For most, ROI is the most important part of college.

No trust fund, also don’t think this is true. 4 year colleges are not a business transaction for most. Young people are transitioning to adulthood, finding independence, exploring interests, taking risks, and possibly trying out career ideas with motivations other than earning top dollar. People like money but many people don’t *want* to work the jobs that earn the most…. I certainly don’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SLACs have very low ROI compared to state schools:

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

They seem like a total scam except for the 1%. Much better for your future to go to UMD or Ohio State or Indians or Purdue or VA Tech to study engineering or business while enjoying college sports.

SLACs seem like a waste for all but the wealthy 1%era who don’t have to worry about finding a job after graduation. Many of them don’t have big college sports or Greek Life to generate alumni loyalty. What’s the point of them?

Anyhoo.. If you want to study a 'hard' subject that gives you a job after an undergrad, go Public or top large private (non-LAC). If you want an undergrad education with plans for immediate grad school (law, medicine, etc.) go (S)LAC. Most are unreasonably expensive for what you get in return but tend to subsidize COA outside the top 10-20, maybe 30.

Simplistic advice reflective of ignorance.

My DC graduated from a LAC last year and is making six figures working on data analysis. DC plans to go to grad school for applied math eventually.

Awesome for your kid! Congratulations! However, unless you can tell me that this is the outcome every kid enjoys from that SLAC, I'm not sure it's relevant. Students out of GMU that study analytics have similar outcomes.

That's why a student's major - no matter where they go to school - along with graduate education drive the "ROI" (a silly way to look at education IMO).

Do you have a trust fund? For most, ROI is the most important part of college.

No trust fund, also don’t think this is true. 4 year colleges are not a business transaction for most. Young people are transitioning to adulthood, finding independence, exploring interests, taking risks, and possibly trying out career ideas with motivations other than earning top dollar. People like money but many people don’t *want* to work the jobs that earn the most…. I certainly don’t.

This.

[Anonymous]

The point is it’s a better education. I went to an HYP and got half as good an education as those taught by actual professors

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SLACs have very low ROI compared to state schools:

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

They seem like a total scam except for the 1%. Much better for your future to go to UMD or Ohio State or Indians or Purdue or VA Tech to study engineering or business while enjoying college sports.

SLACs seem like a waste for all but the wealthy 1%era who don’t have to worry about finding a job after graduation. Many of them don’t have big college sports or Greek Life to generate alumni loyalty. What’s the point of them?

Greek Life . . . College Sports . . . Engineering/business/hard sciences . . . all things that would completely turn my kid off of a college.

The notion that SLACs don’t have alumni loyalty because of a lack of Greek life or big sports is stupid. Many SLACs have a very avid alumni base. My SLAC has a great one and I have leaned on the network many times for jobs. Reunions are also a good indicator of alumni loyalty. I have gone to every one. At my 25th reunion, 70% of my class came, that’s huge compared with most schools, esp. big state schools.

Maybe that’s your case. I went to a SLAC ranked currently in the high 20s, and the alumni network has been useless and most don’t come to reunions or city-based alumni meetups.

I will definitely be encouraging my kids to attend a flagship state school with big time college sports. College sports are a good way to connect students with alumni. No such thing exists at SLACs except for being a varsity athlete yourself.

I have several colleagues who went to LACs and even ‘lesser’ Ivy League schools and they are not pleased with their alumni experiences & outcomes at all. Some of them even mentioned that they should have gone to big state schools instead. They don’t feel any connections to their respective alma maters. That’s why bigtime college athletics is so important to many people.

I think prospective students should not solely select schools based on education and expected on-campus experiences but also consider what these schools could do for them in the future (and networking is just one factor here).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SLACs have very low ROI compared to state schools:

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

They seem like a total scam except for the 1%. Much better for your future to go to UMD or Ohio State or Indians or Purdue or VA Tech to study engineering or business while enjoying college sports.

SLACs seem like a waste for all but the wealthy 1%era who don’t have to worry about finding a job after graduation. Many of them don’t have big college sports or Greek Life to generate alumni loyalty. What’s the point of them?

You won't win this argument here. Most parents on here are lawyers or have grad degrees via a liberal arts undergrad route. A lot of them are SAHMs who vehemently support a SLAC education and have the time and energy to rip you apart on this anonymous forum, lest their choices and decisions be deemed inferior. Almost like how every car buyer thinks they bought the best car at the best price. Much like sports (where kids typically seem to play a sport one of the parent's played) they 'push' their kids down a path similar to theirs. Most have grad school expectations for their kids and save money accordingly (as is obvious from the various college ds per hour for SAT prep (even in this test optional era) and college counselor (who pretty much tells the kids where to apply, what to write about, and writes the essay while making the kid and parent believe they came up with the idea and wrote the essays ).

Anyhoo.. If you want to study a 'hard' subject that gives you a job after an undergrad, go Public or top large private (non-LAC). If you want an undergrad education with plans for immediate grad school (law, medicine, etc.) go (S)LAC. Most are unreasonably expensive for what you get in return but tend to subsidize COA outside the top 10-20, maybe 30.

OP here. Agree 100% with you. I see the threads on here calling Asians “strivers” and “grinding robots” and see the obvious hate for people wanting to better their lot. Paying $50k for Macalester or Haverford after merit aid seems like a total waste.

And yes, it’s obvious here that most of DCUM is useless humanities or social sciences majors who went to law school. But these days, you’ll get more ROI as a CS major from UMD than having a law degree from NYU.

NYU is not a SLAC.

I have one son who wants to go to med school. SLAC would suit him better than a large state school. I don’t think he would do well in huge classes.

We can easily afford to pay tuition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SLACs have very low ROI compared to state schools:

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

They seem like a total scam except for the 1%. Much better for your future to go to UMD or Ohio State or Indians or Purdue or VA Tech to study engineering or business while enjoying college sports.

SLACs seem like a waste for all but the wealthy 1%era who don’t have to worry about finding a job after graduation. Many of them don’t have big college sports or Greek Life to generate alumni loyalty. What’s the point of them?

Ironically, one argument raised in favor of the creation of state schools was that it would provide a place for the great unwashed masses and keep the SLACs for the elite, so class distinctions would be preserved. You just unintentionally reinforced that old argument!

I call bull. Many SLACs were founded by religious institutions. Many Catholic SLACs were founded specifically to educate working class kids, although these colleges are fading away. In Southern states the flagship state school always had the elite cachet, which is why there's few SLACs in the South. Same with Midwest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the SLACs offer a smaller environment and a more personalized education, don't they? You're not jostling with 100s for the attention of a professor. This is just going to suit some students better than others.

Exactly. You pay for the handholding, like in pre-K

Ah, I see what you did there

I went to a large state school, did well and enjoyed myself, but I can see the appeal of what PP described. It's someone actually caring (being paid to care?) about the student's experience. Sounds nice.

[Anonymous]

Some kids wouldn’t do well in huge schools. They need the small classes and personally attention.