Why is DCUM so obsessed with small liberal arts colleges?

[Anonymous]

As long as kids have a job that can support them after graduation and are happy - not sure what else matters. There are many paths to success in life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A better question might be “Why are some people so obsessed with what others choose to do with their money”?

No clue. Ask OP.

If OP must know about my expenses, the small private college my kid is likely to end up at costs the same, after merit aid, as a popular in-state option. Yes it’s still a bit more than the flagship, but DCs stats are just under the typical accepted student from our area so that’s not likely to be an option anyway (plus it’s not really a good fit for my kid and price is the ONLY reason DC even applied, which when you have other affordable options is, IMO, almost as dumb as picking a school solely for the campus).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most graduates of SLACs have pretty dismal earnings compared to their Ivy/Public University peers. So why are SLACs throw around here so often? I see a lot of people recommend random schools like Grinnell but why would you send your kid there for a pretty hefty sum when they could go to a state flagship and be in either a better or similar position?

Source:

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

Is it the same poster who always talks about what you earn after college? Is that the only thing we care about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have you seen the Williams campus? Skidmore? Lehigh? Denison?

+1

And mid-career earnings are more reflective of the reality that most LAC graduates go on to graduate or professional school.

My ‘18 graduate of one of the above three schools is making $102K. Not bad for a 24 year old.

Again, most grad students will be out of school at 32 (when this data was taken)

But, a PhD or MD will be three years into their career. Engineers will be 7-10. Plus, major Us usually have Business schools and engineering schools and these degrees pay more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My private school kid, who has worked hard but not done well, will likely only have SLACs as his choice. Already deferred at one state university and will likely get rejected from the other three he's applying to. Our local pressure cooker privates have a direct line to the SLACs for the bottom of the class kids who can't get into the large universities. For my kid with a severe executive function disorder, he would have a difficult time navigating a large state university anyway. Though I have no stress about him navigating life once he graduates. He's smarter than 99% of the world.

My DS sounds similar. I wish you could share the names of the SLACs?

[Anonymous]

I’ll bite.

And will use this thread as an example.

I saw title and looked forward to reading it this quiet morning.

It is not an engaging discussion regarding the merits of differing educational models.

It has a derogatory, judgmental tone dare I say ignorant. For my kids, I want them to develop an open mind to discuss things they don’t understand - not close minded and derogatory in attacking things they don’t.

I have 3 kids - one in a SLAC mentioned in this thread, one at a State Flagship, and one applying this year.

My DS at the SLAC has benefited from a small, tight knit college environment. It is the right environment for him. And he a legitimate interest in learning, is very aware of world affairs, the political environment, and some of the underlying causes. He spends his time reading. He is growing into an informed young adult.

He is not primarily focused on securing employment. He has spend four years learning. And throughout history that has been the true luxury of the wealthy. And he gets it.

My DD at a state university is potentially pre-med. it’s a large school. Digesting material - not for the sake of learning - but to get through it while ensuring she maintains her 4.0. The goal is not an education - the education is a means to the end - med school admission. The level of intellectual curiosity is clearly different. Career paths are more pragmatic. Engineering, nursing, business. Grinding to get a degree to get employment. I realize that these students exist at a SLACs and there are gunners everywhere. And ironically I think the competition at the flagship is greater because the student body doesn’t have the luxury of assuming life is opportunity rich. But you can feel the difference. For my DD the flagship is the right environment - it fits her personality. But for my other two children, the SLACs are the way to go.

That all said I would say that the reason DCUM folks are obsessed with SLACs is that it is inherently a luxury product - high touch education - while socially signialling to peers, employers, etc. Want to go into Investment banking, Williams, Middlebury, Amherst are goin to signal that you went to the right day school an$ have the right family connections. U Pitt, Penn State, UVA, etc.not so much.

And last yes the SLACs like Denison, Hobart, etc.were historically were the gentlemen ‘c’ students went from prep school. They would not have survived at the flagships so their parents had the money to send them to a nurturing environment.

But that all said, folks are obsessed with SLACs because they are from a SES that understands the value.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ll bite.

And will use this thread as an example.

I saw title and looked forward to reading it this quiet morning.

It is not an engaging discussion regarding the merits of differing educational models.

It has a derogatory, judgmental tone dare I say ignorant. For my kids, I want them to develop an open mind to discuss things they don’t understand - not close minded and derogatory in attacking things they don’t.

I have 3 kids - one in a SLAC mentioned in this thread, one at a State Flagship, and one applying this year.

My DS at the SLAC has benefited from a small, tight knit college environment. It is the right environment for him. And he a legitimate interest in learning, is very aware of world affairs, the political environment, and some of the underlying causes. He spends his time reading. He is growing into an informed young adult.

He is not primarily focused on securing employment. He has spend four years learning. And throughout history that has been the true luxury of the wealthy. And he gets it.

My DD at a state university is potentially pre-med. it’s a large school. Digesting material - not for the sake of learning - but to get through it while ensuring she maintains her 4.0. The goal is not an education - the education is a means to the end - med school admission. The level of intellectual curiosity is clearly different. Career paths are more pragmatic. Engineering, nursing, business. Grinding to get a degree to get employment. I realize that these students exist at a SLACs and there are gunners everywhere. And ironically I think the competition at the flagship is greater because the student body doesn’t have the luxury of assuming life is opportunity rich. But you can feel the difference. For my DD the flagship is the right environment - it fits her personality. But for my other two children, the SLACs are the way to go.

That all said I would say that the reason DCUM folks are obsessed with SLACs is that it is inherently a luxury product - high touch education - while socially signialling to peers, employers, etc. Want to go into Investment banking, Williams, Middlebury, Amherst are goin to signal that you went to the right day school an$ have the right family connections. U Pitt, Penn State, UVA, etc.not so much.

And last yes the SLACs like Denison, Hobart, etc.were historically were the gentlemen ‘c’ students went from prep school. They would not have survived at the flagships so their parents had the money to send them to a nurturing environment.

But that all said, folks are obsessed with SLACs because they are from a SES that understands the value.

NP. Thanks for the thoughtful post, PP. I have one child who is applying now and most likely will wind up at a SLAC. I think my younger teen is more like your daughter and could succeed at a flagship or other national university.

[Anonymous]

The PP has explained that well.

If you are sitting there with your calculator trying to get SLAC's to add up...you are missing the point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The earnings in that link don't look dismal. What are you seeing?

OP here, Grinnell’s average salary ten years out from graduation is around $77K which is quite concerning. Same thing with Skidmore and other selective, but not too selective, LACs.

I'm a teacher. That is close to my salary 10 years after starting (mine is $71K). Is that "quite concerning" to you? No? I didn't think so.

If my kid was smart enough to get into Grinnell and choose to become a teacher, yes, that is quite concerning

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ll bite.

And will use this thread as an example.

I saw title and looked forward to reading it this quiet morning.

It is not an engaging discussion regarding the merits of differing educational models.

It has a derogatory, judgmental tone dare I say ignorant. For my kids, I want them to develop an open mind to discuss things they don’t understand - not close minded and derogatory in attacking things they don’t.

I have 3 kids - one in a SLAC mentioned in this thread, one at a State Flagship, and one applying this year.

My DS at the SLAC has benefited from a small, tight knit college environment. It is the right environment for him. And he a legitimate interest in learning, is very aware of world affairs, the political environment, and some of the underlying causes. He spends his time reading. He is growing into an informed young adult.

He is not primarily focused on securing employment. He has spend four years learning. And throughout history that has been the true luxury of the wealthy. And he gets it.

My DD at a state university is potentially pre-med. it’s a large school. Digesting material - not for the sake of learning - but to get through it while ensuring she maintains her 4.0. The goal is not an education - the education is a means to the end - med school admission. The level of intellectual curiosity is clearly different. Career paths are more pragmatic. Engineering, nursing, business. Grinding to get a degree to get employment. I realize that these students exist at a SLACs and there are gunners everywhere. And ironically I think the competition at the flagship is greater because the student body doesn’t have the luxury of assuming life is opportunity rich. But you can feel the difference. For my DD the flagship is the right environment - it fits her personality. But for my other two children, the SLACs are the way to go.

That all said I would say that the reason DCUM folks are obsessed with SLACs is that it is inherently a luxury product - high touch education - while socially signialling to peers, employers, etc. Want to go into Investment banking, Williams, Middlebury, Amherst are goin to signal that you went to the right day school an$ have the right family connections. U Pitt, Penn State, UVA, etc.not so much.

And last yes the SLACs like Denison, Hobart, etc.were historically were the gentlemen ‘c’ students went from prep school. They would not have survived at the flagships so their parents had the money to send them to a nurturing environment.

But that all said, folks are obsessed with SLACs because they are from a SES that understands the value.

OP here, thank you for this write-up. Makes sense. But then my question would be: why do typical “upper-middle” class folks (i.e. mom is a lawyer, dad is an MD) send their kids to these SLACs? Because then the parents probably don’t have the connections to secure a decent job for their kids after graduation (since most UMC folks are in merit-based careers) and their kids probably aren’t well-connected enough to get into banking? Also just an FYI: I wasn’t referring to the Amherst or Williams of the SLAC world when I started this thread. More like the Denisons and Hobarts. And ironic you mention UVA and Penn State as bad for investment banking, as they both place pretty well in that field (no, for the record, I have no connection to either school)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The earnings in that link don't look dismal. What are you seeing?

OP here, Grinnell’s average salary ten years out from graduation is around $77K which is quite concerning. Same thing with Skidmore and other selective, but not too selective, LACs.

I'm a teacher. That is close to my salary 10 years after starting (mine is $71K). Is that "quite concerning" to you? No? I didn't think so.

If my kid was smart enough to get into Grinnell and choose to become a teacher, yes, that is quite concerning

Don’t give this troll a second thought. I love it when people hide behind their anonymity on DCUM to say things they would never dare to in public -- because they are cowards, or people would think they are a degenerate, or both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The earnings in that link don't look dismal. What are you seeing?

OP here, Grinnell’s average salary ten years out from graduation is around $77K which is quite concerning. Same thing with Skidmore and other selective, but not too selective, LACs.

I'm a teacher. That is close to my salary 10 years after starting (mine is $71K). Is that "quite concerning" to you? No? I didn't think so.

If my kid was smart enough to get into Grinnell and choose to become a teacher, yes, that is quite concerning

Don’t give this troll a second thought. I love it when people hide behind their anonymity on DCUM to say things they would never dare to in public -- because they are cowards, or people would think they are a degenerate, or both.

I don’t understand why you think I’m a troll. Maybe it’s because I live in California, but teachers in my area frequently go on strike because they can’t afford to live anywhere near the school district they teach. They are lower-middle class (obviously higher if their spouse has a higher paying job). The teachers union is constantly at war with the school district. Turnover is pretty high. Seems pretty scary to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A better question might be “Why are some people so obsessed with what others choose to do with their money”?

No clue. Ask OP.

If OP must know about my expenses, the small private college my kid is likely to end up at costs the same, after merit aid, as a popular in-state option. Yes it’s still a bit more than the flagship, but DCs stats are just under the typical accepted student from our area so that’s not likely to be an option anyway (plus it’s not really a good fit for my kid and price is the ONLY reason DC even applied, which when you have other affordable options is, IMO, almost as dumb as picking a school solely for the campus).

These LAC offer merit aids to students not accepted to in-state flagship?

[Anonymous]

I thought it was fairly well known that SLACs, particularly the tippy top ones, result in high salaries over the long run? The reason why salaries are deflated for SLACs immediately out of college is because so many SLAC graduates end up going to graduate school or doing things like working for the Peace Corps, working for not-for-profits, gov't (e.g., working for a congress person), teaching in foreign countries, etc. However, these students at a much higher rate end up going to graduate school and then out-perform their large university peers.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereknewton/2020/01/28/if-you-go-to-a-liberal-arts-college-youll-make-more-money/?sh=7b2e16f04fc5

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/01/14/long-term-look-return-investment-reveals-positive-indicators-liberal-arts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ll bite.

And will use this thread as an example.

I saw title and looked forward to reading it this quiet morning.

It is not an engaging discussion regarding the merits of differing educational models.

It has a derogatory, judgmental tone dare I say ignorant. For my kids, I want them to develop an open mind to discuss things they don’t understand - not close minded and derogatory in attacking things they don’t.

I have 3 kids - one in a SLAC mentioned in this thread, one at a State Flagship, and one applying this year.

My DS at the SLAC has benefited from a small, tight knit college environment. It is the right environment for him. And he a legitimate interest in learning, is very aware of world affairs, the political environment, and some of the underlying causes. He spends his time reading. He is growing into an informed young adult.

He is not primarily focused on securing employment. He has spend four years learning. And throughout history that has been the true luxury of the wealthy. And he gets it.

My DD at a state university is potentially pre-med. it’s a large school. Digesting material - not for the sake of learning - but to get through it while ensuring she maintains her 4.0. The goal is not an education - the education is a means to the end - med school admission. The level of intellectual curiosity is clearly different. Career paths are more pragmatic. Engineering, nursing, business. Grinding to get a degree to get employment. I realize that these students exist at a SLACs and there are gunners everywhere. And ironically I think the competition at the flagship is greater because the student body doesn’t have the luxury of assuming life is opportunity rich. But you can feel the difference. For my DD the flagship is the right environment - it fits her personality. But for my other two children, the SLACs are the way to go.

That all said I would say that the reason DCUM folks are obsessed with SLACs is that it is inherently a luxury product - high touch education - while socially signialling to peers, employers, etc. Want to go into Investment banking, Williams, Middlebury, Amherst are goin to signal that you went to the right day school an$ have the right family connections. U Pitt, Penn State, UVA, etc.not so much.

And last yes the SLACs like Denison, Hobart, etc.were historically were the gentlemen ‘c’ students went from prep school. They would not have survived at the flagships so their parents had the money to send them to a nurturing environment.

But that all said, folks are obsessed with SLACs because they are from a SES that understands the value.

Agree this is a good post, and I’ll add another thought to the mix. Both my kids had the luxury prep school experience. My oldest wanted something entirely different for college and is at a huge school. She finds the less-precious student body refreshing and has benefited from having to make her own way and fend for herself. I might not have chosen that for her (and I did in fact encourage her to apply to SLACs.) But she chose well for herself. My younger child is graduating this year and also didn’t choose the SLAC I might have preferred—his choice is a mid sized university...and we’re hoping he’ll find the best of both worlds there. Time will tell.