Most over-ranked/under-ranked LACS on USNWR?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

I think the Northwestern LACs in general are very underrated. I am convinced it’s because of continued antagonism towards Reed.

Whitman offers merit aid, btw. I guess they are "still in that phase" LOL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do think that the focus of popular universities is moving west and south.

A lot of factors here but the fact that the northeastern schools have become irredeemably woke is a major one. Parents know garbage when they see it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

I think the Northwestern LACs in general are very underrated. I am convinced it’s because of continued antagonism towards Reed.

Whitman offers merit aid, btw. I guess they are "still in that phase" LOL.

So do L&C and Willamette.

I think the “still in that phase” idea is dumb, FWIW.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

I think the Northwestern LACs in general are very underrated. I am convinced it’s because of continued antagonism towards Reed.

Whitman offers merit aid, btw. I guess they are "still in that phase" LOL.

So do L&C and Willamette.

I think the “still in that phase” idea is dumb, FWIW.

Yes, ridiculous snottiness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.

Merit aid is not based on the price of tuition. Merit aid offered by colleges is used to game the rankings. Reed is wholly uninterested in giving money to wealthy, high stats kids to up its rankings on USNews. Also, many, many highly regarded colleges and universities are now charging around $80K for tuition, room, and board--regardless of whether they offer merit aid or not.

That is an unfair assessment of merit aid. All colleges want to attract the best students they can (and climb the rankings). Need blind financial aid is also a tool to attract students who might otherwise feel disadvantaged in the application process. Does merit aid really target the wealthy? All things being equal, a wealthy kid would go to the most prestigious school he gets into, not the one that is providing the largest discount. Merit aid therefore really targets the middle class or upper middle class kid who qualifies for little or no financial aid. In the context of LACs, a family that is borderline for need based aid would probably hesitate to shell out 80k a year (versus much cheaper in state alternatives, for example) and would be wise to do so. So if such a kid wants the LAC experience, merit aid may be the only possibility. Should this kid be denied that opportunity? Only lower middle class and wealthy kids should have access to it?

Your attitude is very snotty. Schools that provide merit aid are doing a tremendous service to families in the middle and appropriately rewarding some of our country's best, hardest working kids.

DP - it they are correct. This is what kowtowing to USNWR has done to our nation’s colleges and universities. Any college counselor will tell you tgst the very top schools don’t offer merit aid any more because they don’t have to. You must drop to second or third tier schools to get any sort of substantial award and that almost always us in exchange for something tge schools want that is reportable to USNWR. Top GpA, top SAT. Top ACT. Two small SLACs you’ve never heard offered my kid a full ride because if his ACT score.

It is the practice of east coast schools to avoid merit aid, largely mirroring long established Ivy League practices, which were rooted in collusion. Many great schools outside the east coast provide merit aid and various other scholarships. Vandy. Duke. W&L (ten percent of the school gets a merit based full ride). Davidson has merit based full rides. Every school wants the best students- and providing generous financial aid in general is a way to get students in the door. You are just framing this as kowtowing to USNWR for merit aid schools. Yes, lower ranked schools need to be more aggressive with merit aid to attract top students. It's only natural and there is nothing wrong with it. Everyone at these schools is better off if they can attract a nice group of very strong students. Duke proivdes merit aid while Bates does not- does that make Bates better than Duke? LOL

My son is a 2nd year at Davidson and loves it. His roommate turned down both Dartmouth and Amherst to attend Davidson because of a merit scholarship, and the roomie says knowing what he knows now he would would choose Davidson even without the $$$.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.

Merit aid is not based on the price of tuition. Merit aid offered by colleges is used to game the rankings. Reed is wholly uninterested in giving money to wealthy, high stats kids to up its rankings on USNews. Also, many, many highly regarded colleges and universities are now charging around $80K for tuition, room, and board--regardless of whether they offer merit aid or not.

That is an unfair assessment of merit aid. All colleges want to attract the best students they can (and climb the rankings). Need blind financial aid is also a tool to attract students who might otherwise feel disadvantaged in the application process. Does merit aid really target the wealthy? All things being equal, a wealthy kid would go to the most prestigious school he gets into, not the one that is providing the largest discount. Merit aid therefore really targets the middle class or upper middle class kid who qualifies for little or no financial aid. In the context of LACs, a family that is borderline for need based aid would probably hesitate to shell out 80k a year (versus much cheaper in state alternatives, for example) and would be wise to do so. So if such a kid wants the LAC experience, merit aid may be the only possibility. Should this kid be denied that opportunity? Only lower middle class and wealthy kids should have access to it?

Your attitude is very snotty. Schools that provide merit aid are doing a tremendous service to families in the middle and appropriately rewarding some of our country's best, hardest working kids.

DP. You're talking about how you'd like the world to work to benefit you. Ideally merit aid should be unrelated to need, meaning it's given to any applicant the school wants to attract. That includes many wealthy applicants, and yes some some schools specifically target wealthy families, why wouldn't they? Coupons often encourage people to spend more, they often are handed out selectively, this isn't unique to colleges.

Not really. My DC is headed off to a school that provides merit aid but we will not be getting any. I am happy this school provides merit aid because it means DC will be surrounded by many strong students from middle class/upper middle class backgrounds, some of whom probably got into very top ranked schools. The school provides both need based aid and merit aid. Again, wealthy people don't really care about 10-30k discounts. Perhaps some of the merit aid does go to what you might consider a "very wealthy" kid - so be it. He or she earned it. The savings can be spent on grad school.

That's wishful thinking. Merit aid is not tied to income, so nothing saying it brings more MC families in. Merit aid is something schools offer when they are trying to grow their applications, but by design it's a limited time offer (at least they'd like it to be). A school like Reed has exited that phase, and can focus all their aid into need. The next level is to offer even more need based aid, like packages with zero loans, and to more income levels.

Nothing saying it will bring more middle class families in but... logic! If someone is a mega-millionaire, do you think they care about saving $20k a year on their kid's education? Do you think they would turn down Williams because they got $35k from Dickinson? of course not. Merit aid appeals to families for whom $50-100K is a lot of money and for whom that kind of money is so important they are willing to accept a lower "prestige" degree. Rich people apply ED and that is half the class. They are price insensitive and just want their kid to go to the best school possible. Not so rich people evaluate offers RD. There are some exceptions where rich people are swayed by the merit award, but I think it's odd to argue that these sums of money matter more to people who have a lot of money as opposed to people who don't have a lot of money.

LOL that "Reed has exited that phase." Reed is dog poop compared with the list of schools that offer merit aid provided above. Reed's test score profile is inferior to all of them.

The merit aid schools will win long-term because there will be no reason for top students to pay a premium for what will be a non-premium product.

They've exited because they don't do it, and yet still stay afloat, that's an observation. Logic is fine, but how about comparing enrolment demographics? Sounds like, for whatever reason, you're interested in schools where family incomes over 110K but under maybe 500K are well represented (top 20% but not top 1%-ish)? That's Reed. By the numbers, the families you want to be around are willing to full pay at Reed, while much wealthier families end up at Dickinson. This is even more pronounced at a school like Kenyon, which is also known for merit. Offering coupons to wealthy families is very much a thing, maybe they're amused, but they take them.

[Anonymous]

I think the problem is that the schools that don’t give out merit aid are also the schools with serious mental health problems in the student body and have become peculiarities joyless places. Kids look at the trade offs, and they aren’t dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.

Merit aid is not based on the price of tuition. Merit aid offered by colleges is used to game the rankings. Reed is wholly uninterested in giving money to wealthy, high stats kids to up its rankings on USNews. Also, many, many highly regarded colleges and universities are now charging around $80K for tuition, room, and board--regardless of whether they offer merit aid or not.

That is an unfair assessment of merit aid. All colleges want to attract the best students they can (and climb the rankings). Need blind financial aid is also a tool to attract students who might otherwise feel disadvantaged in the application process. Does merit aid really target the wealthy? All things being equal, a wealthy kid would go to the most prestigious school he gets into, not the one that is providing the largest discount. Merit aid therefore really targets the middle class or upper middle class kid who qualifies for little or no financial aid. In the context of LACs, a family that is borderline for need based aid would probably hesitate to shell out 80k a year (versus much cheaper in state alternatives, for example) and would be wise to do so. So if such a kid wants the LAC experience, merit aid may be the only possibility. Should this kid be denied that opportunity? Only lower middle class and wealthy kids should have access to it?

Your attitude is very snotty. Schools that provide merit aid are doing a tremendous service to families in the middle and appropriately rewarding some of our country's best, hardest working kids.

DP. You're talking about how you'd like the world to work to benefit you. Ideally merit aid should be unrelated to need, meaning it's given to any applicant the school wants to attract. That includes many wealthy applicants, and yes some some schools specifically target wealthy families, why wouldn't they? Coupons often encourage people to spend more, they often are handed out selectively, this isn't unique to colleges.

Not really. My DC is headed off to a school that provides merit aid but we will not be getting any. I am happy this school provides merit aid because it means DC will be surrounded by many strong students from middle class/upper middle class backgrounds, some of whom probably got into very top ranked schools. The school provides both need based aid and merit aid. Again, wealthy people don't really care about 10-30k discounts. Perhaps some of the merit aid does go to what you might consider a "very wealthy" kid - so be it. He or she earned it. The savings can be spent on grad school.

That's wishful thinking. Merit aid is not tied to income, so nothing saying it brings more MC families in. Merit aid is something schools offer when they are trying to grow their applications, but by design it's a limited time offer (at least they'd like it to be). A school like Reed has exited that phase, and can focus all their aid into need. The next level is to offer even more need based aid, like packages with zero loans, and to more income levels.

Nothing saying it will bring more middle class families in but... logic! If someone is a mega-millionaire, do you think they care about saving $20k a year on their kid's education? Do you think they would turn down Williams because they got $35k from Dickinson? of course not. Merit aid appeals to families for whom $50-100K is a lot of money and for whom that kind of money is so important they are willing to accept a lower "prestige" degree. Rich people apply ED and that is half the class. They are price insensitive and just want their kid to go to the best school possible. Not so rich people evaluate offers RD. There are some exceptions where rich people are swayed by the merit award, but I think it's odd to argue that these sums of money matter more to people who have a lot of money as opposed to people who don't have a lot of money.

LOL that "Reed has exited that phase." Reed is dog poop compared with the list of schools that offer merit aid provided above. Reed's test score profile is inferior to all of them.

The merit aid schools will win long-term because there will be no reason for top students to pay a premium for what will be a non-premium product.

They've exited because they don't do it, and yet still stay afloat, that's an observation. Logic is fine, but how about comparing enrolment demographics? Sounds like, for whatever reason, you're interested in schools where family incomes over 110K but under maybe 500K are well represented (top 20% but not top 1%-ish)? That's Reed. By the numbers, the families you want to be around are willing to full pay at Reed, while much wealthier families end up at Dickinson. This is even more pronounced at a school like Kenyon, which is also known for merit. Offering coupons to wealthy families is very much a thing, maybe they're amused, but they take them.

You cannot possibly have access to any data that show there is a greater proportion of 100k to 500k kids at Reed versus Dickinson and Kenyon. It is beyond irrational to speculate that middle class plus families are happy to go into debt for a Reed degree (not particularly known for having a lot of commercial value) while the families drawn to merit awards at Dickinson or Kenyon are fat cats who just love a good bargain when it comes their way (and will turn down higher ranked schools for that amusing coupon). You are just making completely unsubstantiated statements that defy common sense.

I'm interested in schools that find the most talented interesting kids across the income spectrum. Merit aid schools do a good job of that. They do offer significant need based aid. They offer ED to wealthier families who are willing to pay full price if they get in. And they offer merit aid to appeal to kids of all economic backgrounds who will lift up the academic profile of the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wesleyan seems pretty underrated. I went to Amherst 30+ years ago, and I felt Wesleyan was a near peer. What happened?

Exactly. Like Vassar, it was once a strong institution, among the very best LACs, but has deteriorated due to a lopsided culture that fails to attract a broad base of potential students and drives significant student dissatisfaction. It should probably be ranked even lower than it is. It is not underrated- it has declined.

I went to Williams 12+ years ago and I always saw Wesleyan as a peer - probably because of Little 3's. That said, I feel like a PP's point about in attracting one type of student is accurate. Not to make a blanket statement, but EVERYONE who I know who went to Wesleyan was super relaxed, very smart, and smoked a ton of pot. A huge generalization, but when you know so many people with the same profile who go there is says something. All of my friends went to the admissions weekend or went back for overnights and got high and then had stories of being afraid a squirrel was chasing them around campus or something similar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the problem is that the schools that don’t give out merit aid are also the schools with serious mental health problems in the student body and have become peculiarities joyless places. Kids look at the trade offs, and they aren’t dumb.

I'm not sure there is a direct link between lack of merit aid and mental health problems, but it happens to be the woke east coast schools that are fostering this mentally harmful environment. Perhaps one indirect link is that need based schools are populated often 50% or more by kids whose parents are paying full price, which means there is a stronger rich kid drug scene at these schools (Vassar, Wesleyan, etc). Drugs and a politically progressive mentality that shuts down free thought are a toxic combo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wesleyan seems pretty underrated. I went to Amherst 30+ years ago, and I felt Wesleyan was a near peer. What happened?

Exactly. Like Vassar, it was once a strong institution, among the very best LACs, but has deteriorated due to a lopsided culture that fails to attract a broad base of potential students and drives significant student dissatisfaction. It should probably be ranked even lower than it is. It is not underrated- it has declined.

I went to Williams 12+ years ago and I always saw Wesleyan as a peer - probably because of Little 3's. That said, I feel like a PP's point about in attracting one type of student is accurate. Not to make a blanket statement, but EVERYONE who I know who went to Wesleyan was super relaxed, very smart, and smoked a ton of pot. A huge generalization, but when you know so many people with the same profile who go there is says something. All of my friends went to the admissions weekend or went back for overnights and got high and then had stories of being afraid a squirrel was chasing them around campus or something similar.

Funny but not so funny- the only Wesleyan grad I know was super relaxed, super smart and died unexpectedly of a drug related health event. Very tragic.

[Anonymous]

Amherst, Swarthmore, and Pomona should be above, or at least with, Williams at this point. Williams and Princeton have been USNWR darlings for a decade+ but people are still choosing to go to Harvard and Stanford instead for national universities and to Amherst and Swarthmore for SLACs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Amherst, Swarthmore, and Pomona should be above, or at least with, Williams at this point. Williams and Princeton have been USNWR darlings for a decade+ but people are still choosing to go to Harvard and Stanford instead for national universities and to Amherst and Swarthmore for SLACs.

How can you substantiate this?

[Anonymous]

I'd argue that Haverford has been underranked over the last few years. Haverford has been a top 10 school according to USNWR for most of the time USNWR has ranked schools and they've only been ranked below #12 a total of 5 times in 35+ years.
https://andyreiter.com/datasets/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.

Merit aid is not based on the price of tuition. Merit aid offered by colleges is used to game the rankings. Reed is wholly uninterested in giving money to wealthy, high stats kids to up its rankings on USNews. Also, many, many highly regarded colleges and universities are now charging around $80K for tuition, room, and board--regardless of whether they offer merit aid or not.

That is an unfair assessment of merit aid. All colleges want to attract the best students they can (and climb the rankings). Need blind financial aid is also a tool to attract students who might otherwise feel disadvantaged in the application process. Does merit aid really target the wealthy? All things being equal, a wealthy kid would go to the most prestigious school he gets into, not the one that is providing the largest discount. Merit aid therefore really targets the middle class or upper middle class kid who qualifies for little or no financial aid. In the context of LACs, a family that is borderline for need based aid would probably hesitate to shell out 80k a year (versus much cheaper in state alternatives, for example) and would be wise to do so. So if such a kid wants the LAC experience, merit aid may be the only possibility. Should this kid be denied that opportunity? Only lower middle class and wealthy kids should have access to it?

Your attitude is very snotty. Schools that provide merit aid are doing a tremendous service to families in the middle and appropriately rewarding some of our country's best, hardest working kids.

DP. You're talking about how you'd like the world to work to benefit you. Ideally merit aid should be unrelated to need, meaning it's given to any applicant the school wants to attract. That includes many wealthy applicants, and yes some some schools specifically target wealthy families, why wouldn't they? Coupons often encourage people to spend more, they often are handed out selectively, this isn't unique to colleges.

Not really. My DC is headed off to a school that provides merit aid but we will not be getting any. I am happy this school provides merit aid because it means DC will be surrounded by many strong students from middle class/upper middle class backgrounds, some of whom probably got into very top ranked schools. The school provides both need based aid and merit aid. Again, wealthy people don't really care about 10-30k discounts. Perhaps some of the merit aid does go to what you might consider a "very wealthy" kid - so be it. He or she earned it. The savings can be spent on grad school.

That's wishful thinking. Merit aid is not tied to income, so nothing saying it brings more MC families in. Merit aid is something schools offer when they are trying to grow their applications, but by design it's a limited time offer (at least they'd like it to be). A school like Reed has exited that phase, and can focus all their aid into need. The next level is to offer even more need based aid, like packages with zero loans, and to more income levels.

Nothing saying it will bring more middle class families in but... logic! If someone is a mega-millionaire, do you think they care about saving $20k a year on their kid's education? Do you think they would turn down Williams because they got $35k from Dickinson? of course not. Merit aid appeals to families for whom $50-100K is a lot of money and for whom that kind of money is so important they are willing to accept a lower "prestige" degree. Rich people apply ED and that is half the class. They are price insensitive and just want their kid to go to the best school possible. Not so rich people evaluate offers RD. There are some exceptions where rich people are swayed by the merit award, but I think it's odd to argue that these sums of money matter more to people who have a lot of money as opposed to people who don't have a lot of money.

LOL that "Reed has exited that phase." Reed is dog poop compared with the list of schools that offer merit aid provided above. Reed's test score profile is inferior to all of them.

The merit aid schools will win long-term because there will be no reason for top students to pay a premium for what will be a non-premium product.

They've exited because they don't do it, and yet still stay afloat, that's an observation. Logic is fine, but how about comparing enrolment demographics? Sounds like, for whatever reason, you're interested in schools where family incomes over 110K but under maybe 500K are well represented (top 20% but not top 1%-ish)? That's Reed. By the numbers, the families you want to be around are willing to full pay at Reed, while much wealthier families end up at Dickinson. This is even more pronounced at a school like Kenyon, which is also known for merit. Offering coupons to wealthy families is very much a thing, maybe they're amused, but they take them.

You cannot possibly have access to any data that show there is a greater proportion of 100k to 500k kids at Reed versus Dickinson and Kenyon. It is beyond irrational to speculate that middle class plus families are happy to go into debt for a Reed degree (not particularly known for having a lot of commercial value) while the families drawn to merit awards at Dickinson or Kenyon are fat cats who just love a good bargain when it comes their way (and will turn down higher ranked schools for that amusing coupon). You are just making completely unsubstantiated statements that defy common sense.

I'm interested in schools that find the most talented interesting kids across the income spectrum. Merit aid schools do a good job of that. They do offer significant need based aid. They offer ED to wealthier families who are willing to pay full price if they get in. And they offer merit aid to appeal to kids of all economic backgrounds who will lift up the academic profile of the school.

Google broken? Check the access numbers here, for example. Doesn't check with your *logic*. Maybe the families that pay for Reed are chumps, but they're the demographic you're looking for, yet they weren't baited with merit aid:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobility/reed-college
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobility/dickinson-college
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobility/kenyon-college