Surprised at Claremont Mckenna

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC has shown interest in Claremont Mckenna, which I 100% wrote off as a mediocre LAC. Then reading through their Roberts Campus and massive alum donation campaign, I am shocked this tiny place hasn't shot to the top of students' lists. They're doubling campus footprint, investing hundreds of thousands to improve research opportunities and internship opportunities, and building a fancy new science department. What is the catch?

Claremont McKenna has always been regarded as one of the top SLACs. It's just in California and the DCUM (emphasis on "DC" area) don't discuss such schools much.

Is it? I feel like the LAC quality drops fast after Bowdoin and Middlebury. Would never send my kids to Hamilton or Colby or...Claremont Mckenna. Sure, they're ranked well, but there's no advantage to paying for it over UMD.

Eh, you might consider consulting something more objective than your feelings on the matter. If your kid wants to go to law school or business school or get a high-paying job in finance, CMC is extremely strong:
#3 for MBA placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-business-school
#12 for Wall Street/IB placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-business-school
#17 for law school placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-law-school

Okay, doesn't necessitate dropping $360k so that my daughter can go to the 17th best school at something. All of this is achievable easily with a state school.

I don’t see any comparably ranked “cheap state schools” on any of those three lists. The state schools are, as you would expect, Berkeley Michigan UCLA etc which are not easy to get into and are not cheap OOS.

UVA does just fine for me. Excellent quality in fact.

Did for us as well. and Claremont McKenna is now $91,414 a year. No thank you! Both of my kids went in-state Va and have done very well according to their respective gifts.

DC chose it over Uchicago, so far serving him well, almost making as much as me (ahem $400k) 2 years out of college. Guess the "$360k" was worth it.

Jumping in here to ask about CMC. Would it fit a kid who really wants California? UCLA is top choice at the moment. Liked USC as well. Price is not relevant. Undecided for major, somewhere between international things and poli sci on the one hand and engineering on the other. Aside from the obvious issue with engineering, I'm wondering if he should add a school like CMC to the list. Is the 5 college consortium enough to make it feel like a bigger school than it is? Is the area vibe similar to west LA or substantially different?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC has shown interest in Claremont Mckenna, which I 100% wrote off as a mediocre LAC. Then reading through their Roberts Campus and massive alum donation campaign, I am shocked this tiny place hasn't shot to the top of students' lists. They're doubling campus footprint, investing hundreds of thousands to improve research opportunities and internship opportunities, and building a fancy new science department. What is the catch?

Claremont McKenna has always been regarded as one of the top SLACs. It's just in California and the DCUM (emphasis on "DC" area) don't discuss such schools much.

Is it? I feel like the LAC quality drops fast after Bowdoin and Middlebury. Would never send my kids to Hamilton or Colby or...Claremont Mckenna. Sure, they're ranked well, but there's no advantage to paying for it over UMD.

Eh, you might consider consulting something more objective than your feelings on the matter. If your kid wants to go to law school or business school or get a high-paying job in finance, CMC is extremely strong:
#3 for MBA placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-business-school
#12 for Wall Street/IB placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-business-school
#17 for law school placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-law-school

Okay, doesn't necessitate dropping $360k so that my daughter can go to the 17th best school at something. All of this is achievable easily with a state school.

I don’t see any comparably ranked “cheap state schools” on any of those three lists. The state schools are, as you would expect, Berkeley Michigan UCLA etc which are not easy to get into and are not cheap OOS.

UVA does just fine for me. Excellent quality in fact.

Did for us as well. and Claremont McKenna is now $91,414 a year. No thank you! Both of my kids went in-state Va and have done very well according to their respective gifts.

DC chose it over Uchicago, so far serving him well, almost making as much as me (ahem $400k) 2 years out of college. Guess the "$360k" was worth it.

Jumping in here to ask about CMC. Would it fit a kid who really wants California? UCLA is top choice at the moment. Liked USC as well. Price is not relevant. Undecided for major, somewhere between international things and poli sci on the one hand and engineering on the other. Aside from the obvious issue with engineering, I'm wondering if he should add a school like CMC to the list. Is the 5 college consortium enough to make it feel like a bigger school than it is? Is the area vibe similar to west LA or substantially different?

It's not a perfect match. Does your kid want California or Westwood? Claremont is a nice bubble from California that allows a lot of opportunity to go to Baldy, Joshua Tree, Disneyland,and any hiking needs for your son. The surrounding area of the Inland Empire isn't amazing, but students tend to drive the opposite way. The colleges' have a great outing program, so you can spend a lot of the semester on the beach. But none of this is Westwood, which really isn't even LA-it's a very small uber wealthy part of LA that is very isolated, hilly and idyllic. Most of LA is trashy but great fun.

It will be a lot easier to test out what he wants at CMC than at UCLA, where he'll have to do a long school transfer process. You can take engineering at Harvey Mudd relatively easily in the fall of sophomore year as long as you take the intro physics classes as a freshman. Then, you qualify for most of the other engineering courses. The consortium is amazing and does feel like a bigger school, but it's not going to be 30,000 undergrads big. DC met a lot of people who wanted to go to massive state schools, and they all ended up loving their CMC experience. The government major is amazing, and he'll get way better career/academic opportunities at CMC for sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC has shown interest in Claremont Mckenna, which I 100% wrote off as a mediocre LAC. Then reading through their Roberts Campus and massive alum donation campaign, I am shocked this tiny place hasn't shot to the top of students' lists. They're doubling campus footprint, investing hundreds of thousands to improve research opportunities and internship opportunities, and building a fancy new science department. What is the catch?

Claremont McKenna has always been regarded as one of the top SLACs. It's just in California and the DCUM (emphasis on "DC" area) don't discuss such schools much.

Is it? I feel like the LAC quality drops fast after Bowdoin and Middlebury. Would never send my kids to Hamilton or Colby or...Claremont Mckenna. Sure, they're ranked well, but there's no advantage to paying for it over UMD.

Eh, you might consider consulting something more objective than your feelings on the matter. If your kid wants to go to law school or business school or get a high-paying job in finance, CMC is extremely strong:
#3 for MBA placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-business-school
#12 for Wall Street/IB placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-business-school
#17 for law school placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-law-school

Okay, doesn't necessitate dropping $360k so that my daughter can go to the 17th best school at something. All of this is achievable easily with a state school.

I don’t see any comparably ranked “cheap state schools” on any of those three lists. The state schools are, as you would expect, Berkeley Michigan UCLA etc which are not easy to get into and are not cheap OOS.

UVA does just fine for me. Excellent quality in fact.

Did for us as well. and Claremont McKenna is now $91,414 a year. No thank you! Both of my kids went in-state Va and have done very well according to their respective gifts.

DC chose it over Uchicago, so far serving him well, almost making as much as me (ahem $400k) 2 years out of college. Guess the "$360k" was worth it.

NP. What does he do?? Just curious!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC has shown interest in Claremont Mckenna, which I 100% wrote off as a mediocre LAC. Then reading through their Roberts Campus and massive alum donation campaign, I am shocked this tiny place hasn't shot to the top of students' lists. They're doubling campus footprint, investing hundreds of thousands to improve research opportunities and internship opportunities, and building a fancy new science department. What is the catch?

Claremont McKenna has always been regarded as one of the top SLACs. It's just in California and the DCUM (emphasis on "DC" area) don't discuss such schools much.

Is it? I feel like the LAC quality drops fast after Bowdoin and Middlebury. Would never send my kids to Hamilton or Colby or...Claremont Mckenna. Sure, they're ranked well, but there's no advantage to paying for it over UMD.

Eh, you might consider consulting something more objective than your feelings on the matter. If your kid wants to go to law school or business school or get a high-paying job in finance, CMC is extremely strong:
#3 for MBA placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-business-school
#12 for Wall Street/IB placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-business-school
#17 for law school placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-law-school

Okay, doesn't necessitate dropping $360k so that my daughter can go to the 17th best school at something. All of this is achievable easily with a state school.

I don’t see any comparably ranked “cheap state schools” on any of those three lists. The state schools are, as you would expect, Berkeley Michigan UCLA etc which are not easy to get into and are not cheap OOS.

UVA does just fine for me. Excellent quality in fact.

Did for us as well. and Claremont McKenna is now $91,414 a year. No thank you! Both of my kids went in-state Va and have done very well according to their respective gifts.

DC chose it over Uchicago, so far serving him well, almost making as much as me (ahem $400k) 2 years out of college. Guess the "$360k" was worth it.

NP. What does he do?? Just curious!

Makes another guy richer through a hedge fund.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've heard there are lots of super-rich kids and ostentatious displays of wealth there.

This is any and every top private school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC has shown interest in Claremont Mckenna, which I 100% wrote off as a mediocre LAC. Then reading through their Roberts Campus and massive alum donation campaign, I am shocked this tiny place hasn't shot to the top of students' lists. They're doubling campus footprint, investing hundreds of thousands to improve research opportunities and internship opportunities, and building a fancy new science department. What is the catch?

Claremont McKenna has always been regarded as one of the top SLACs. It's just in California and the DCUM (emphasis on "DC" area) don't discuss such schools much.

Is it? I feel like the LAC quality drops fast after Bowdoin and Middlebury. Would never send my kids to Hamilton or Colby or...Claremont Mckenna. Sure, they're ranked well, but there's no advantage to paying for it over UMD.

Eh, you might consider consulting something more objective than your feelings on the matter. If your kid wants to go to law school or business school or get a high-paying job in finance, CMC is extremely strong:
#3 for MBA placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-business-school
#12 for Wall Street/IB placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-business-school
#17 for law school placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-law-school

Okay, doesn't necessitate dropping $360k so that my daughter can go to the 17th best school at something. All of this is achievable easily with a state school.

Please take out the work easily. All achievable at a state school. Not easy but not impossible. Easier at a top private.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There are so many colleges, OP. Your little favorite is not the only one to invest in its facilities, by far. It's just that you happened to get to know this one.

Seriously. There's no reason to hype up an overpriced California school. Next they'll tell us the wonders of Washington&Lee

Great school! Not as good as CMC but great school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I always look at location to be sure there is an airport and medical access. But the reality is most kids spend time on campus. It is the campus that matters. Semesters fly by so quickly—soak up all you can on campus. During the long summer and winter breaks, travel and play and intern (the school pays them to do this) somewhere that excites them.

My son will definitely apply. It’s a tough admit. But if he gets in, it has all the educational features of a top SLAC, within a “Goldilocks” setting of 8,000 competitive kids with amazing dining options across the contiguous campuses. His major is very well-served. The club and intramural sports across the colleges create a greater recreational vibe, and people can stay fit and social. It doesn’t have a typical SLAC athlete divide. They don’t need to give 50% of their seats to athletes, because the 5C pool students for teams.

The expansion plan of CMC is ambitious. Brass set, future focused ambitious. I’m surprised it took this long for someone at DCUM to notice.

Not sure mine will get in. But he is definitely a contender. I’d love it if anyone reading might mention other schools that a CMC kid would like. I don’t think there is anything similar out there?

How sure are you about the bolded bit? The 5Cs field two teams (not just one), with CMC joining forces with Mudd and Scripps. So, for men's sports, it's really just two relatively small LACs hooking up. And they field a bunch of high-participant teams, including football. I don't see any reason to think, without additional information (which is why I ask if you have any), that athletics are less of an admissions or social factor at CMC than at Middlebury or Bowdoin or wherever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always look at location to be sure there is an airport and medical access. But the reality is most kids spend time on campus. It is the campus that matters. Semesters fly by so quickly—soak up all you can on campus. During the long summer and winter breaks, travel and play and intern (the school pays them to do this) somewhere that excites them.

My son will definitely apply. It’s a tough admit. But if he gets in, it has all the educational features of a top SLAC, within a “Goldilocks” setting of 8,000 competitive kids with amazing dining options across the contiguous campuses. His major is very well-served. The club and intramural sports across the colleges create a greater recreational vibe, and people can stay fit and social. It doesn’t have a typical SLAC athlete divide. They don’t need to give 50% of their seats to athletes, because the 5C pool students for teams.

The expansion plan of CMC is ambitious. Brass set, future focused ambitious. I’m surprised it took this long for someone at DCUM to notice.

Not sure mine will get in. But he is definitely a contender. I’d love it if anyone reading might mention other schools that a CMC kid would like. I don’t think there is anything similar out there?

How sure are you about the bolded bit? The 5Cs field two teams (not just one), with CMC joining forces with Mudd and Scripps. So, for men's sports, it's really just two relatively small LACs hooking up. And they field a bunch of high-participant teams, including football. I don't see any reason to think, without additional information (which is why I ask if you have any), that athletics are less of an admissions or social factor at CMC than at Middlebury or Bowdoin or wherever.

I attended, and it is a miniscule part of the culture. The first time I even really thought about going to a game was when my friend invited me to SCIAC championships senior year. It has very little role on campus. All the 5Cs have much lower percentages of athletes (25-30% compared to New England 50%) due to sharing teams and there's 6000 undergrads on campus as opposed to most LACs 2000, so they can't make as large of a footprint.

[Anonymous]

Niche puts CMC’s varsity athlete percentage at 45%. I don’t know their data source, but that doesn’t seem crazy based on student population and sports fielded. Pomona and Pitzer form separate teams from CMC/Mudd/Scripps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Niche puts CMC’s varsity athlete percentage at 45%. I don’t know their data source, but that doesn’t seem crazy based on student population and sports fielded. Pomona and Pitzer form separate teams from CMC/Mudd/Scripps.

I'm not sure that's correct. Only 20% of Pomona plays on an athletics team. Then again, CMC is small, but when you're at the 5Cs, you're looking at your friends from more than one college. Here's a source I found on it: https://xfactoradmissions.com/basic-guide-to-college-admissions/total-ncaa-athletes-at-the-top-colleges

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC has shown interest in Claremont Mckenna, which I 100% wrote off as a mediocre LAC. Then reading through their Roberts Campus and massive alum donation campaign, I am shocked this tiny place hasn't shot to the top of students' lists. They're doubling campus footprint, investing hundreds of thousands to improve research opportunities and internship opportunities, and building a fancy new science department. What is the catch?

Claremont McKenna has always been regarded as one of the top SLACs. It's just in California and the DCUM (emphasis on "DC" area) don't discuss such schools much.

Is it? I feel like the LAC quality drops fast after Bowdoin and Middlebury. Would never send my kids to Hamilton or Colby or...Claremont Mckenna. Sure, they're ranked well, but there's no advantage to paying for it over UMD.

Eh, you might consider consulting something more objective than your feelings on the matter. If your kid wants to go to law school or business school or get a high-paying job in finance, CMC is extremely strong:
#3 for MBA placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-business-school
#12 for Wall Street/IB placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-business-school
#17 for law school placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-law-school

Okay, doesn't necessitate dropping $360k so that my daughter can go to the 17th best school at something. All of this is achievable easily with a state school.

I don’t see any comparably ranked “cheap state schools” on any of those three lists. The state schools are, as you would expect, Berkeley Michigan UCLA etc which are not easy to get into and are not cheap OOS.

UVA does just fine for me. Excellent quality in fact.

Did for us as well. and Claremont McKenna is now $91,414 a year. No thank you! Both of my kids went in-state Va and have done very well according to their respective gifts.

DC chose it over Uchicago, so far serving him well, almost making as much as me (ahem $400k) 2 years out of college. Guess the "$360k" was worth it.

Jumping in here to ask about CMC. Would it fit a kid who really wants California? UCLA is top choice at the moment. Liked USC as well. Price is not relevant. Undecided for major, somewhere between international things and poli sci on the one hand and engineering on the other. Aside from the obvious issue with engineering, I'm wondering if he should add a school like CMC to the list. Is the 5 college consortium enough to make it feel like a bigger school than it is? Is the area vibe similar to west LA or substantially different?

It's not a perfect match. Does your kid want California or Westwood? Claremont is a nice bubble from California that allows a lot of opportunity to go to Baldy, Joshua Tree, Disneyland,and any hiking needs for your son. The surrounding area of the Inland Empire isn't amazing, but students tend to drive the opposite way. The colleges' have a great outing program, so you can spend a lot of the semester on the beach. But none of this is Westwood, which really isn't even LA-it's a very small uber wealthy part of LA that is very isolated, hilly and idyllic. Most of LA is trashy but great fun.

It will be a lot easier to test out what he wants at CMC than at UCLA, where he'll have to do a long school transfer process. You can take engineering at Harvey Mudd relatively easily in the fall of sophomore year as long as you take the intro physics classes as a freshman. Then, you qualify for most of the other engineering courses. The consortium is amazing and does feel like a bigger school, but it's not going to be 30,000 undergrads big. DC met a lot of people who wanted to go to massive state schools, and they all ended up loving their CMC experience. The government major is amazing, and he'll get way better career/academic opportunities at CMC for sure.

Spend a lot of semester on the beach? Only by spending a lot of hours on the highway.

A kiid looking at UCLA and USC likely would not like the 5C consortium — much smaller even combined, none of the benefits of having the city directly out your door and not very good d3 sports. It’s for kids who want a slac.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC has shown interest in Claremont Mckenna, which I 100% wrote off as a mediocre LAC. Then reading through their Roberts Campus and massive alum donation campaign, I am shocked this tiny place hasn't shot to the top of students' lists. They're doubling campus footprint, investing hundreds of thousands to improve research opportunities and internship opportunities, and building a fancy new science department. What is the catch?

Claremont McKenna has always been regarded as one of the top SLACs. It's just in California and the DCUM (emphasis on "DC" area) don't discuss such schools much.

Is it? I feel like the LAC quality drops fast after Bowdoin and Middlebury. Would never send my kids to Hamilton or Colby or...Claremont Mckenna. Sure, they're ranked well, but there's no advantage to paying for it over UMD.

Eh, you might consider consulting something more objective than your feelings on the matter. If your kid wants to go to law school or business school or get a high-paying job in finance, CMC is extremely strong:
#3 for MBA placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-business-school
#12 for Wall Street/IB placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-business-school
#17 for law school placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-law-school

Okay, doesn't necessitate dropping $360k so that my daughter can go to the 17th best school at something. All of this is achievable easily with a state school.

I don’t see any comparably ranked “cheap state schools” on any of those three lists. The state schools are, as you would expect, Berkeley Michigan UCLA etc which are not easy to get into and are not cheap OOS.

UVA does just fine for me. Excellent quality in fact.

Did for us as well. and Claremont McKenna is now $91,414 a year. No thank you! Both of my kids went in-state Va and have done very well according to their respective gifts.

DC chose it over Uchicago, so far serving him well, almost making as much as me (ahem $400k) 2 years out of college. Guess the "$360k" was worth it.

Jumping in here to ask about CMC. Would it fit a kid who really wants California? UCLA is top choice at the moment. Liked USC as well. Price is not relevant. Undecided for major, somewhere between international things and poli sci on the one hand and engineering on the other. Aside from the obvious issue with engineering, I'm wondering if he should add a school like CMC to the list. Is the 5 college consortium enough to make it feel like a bigger school than it is? Is the area vibe similar to west LA or substantially different?

It's not a perfect match. Does your kid want California or Westwood? Claremont is a nice bubble from California that allows a lot of opportunity to go to Baldy, Joshua Tree, Disneyland,and any hiking needs for your son. The surrounding area of the Inland Empire isn't amazing, but students tend to drive the opposite way. The colleges' have a great outing program, so you can spend a lot of the semester on the beach. But none of this is Westwood, which really isn't even LA-it's a very small uber wealthy part of LA that is very isolated, hilly and idyllic. Most of LA is trashy but great fun.

It will be a lot easier to test out what he wants at CMC than at UCLA, where he'll have to do a long school transfer process. You can take engineering at Harvey Mudd relatively easily in the fall of sophomore year as long as you take the intro physics classes as a freshman. Then, you qualify for most of the other engineering courses. The consortium is amazing and does feel like a bigger school, but it's not going to be 30,000 undergrads big. DC met a lot of people who wanted to go to massive state schools, and they all ended up loving their CMC experience. The government major is amazing, and he'll get way better career/academic opportunities at CMC for sure.

Spend a lot of semester on the beach? Only by spending a lot of hours on the highway.

A kiid looking at UCLA and USC likely would not like the 5C consortium — much smaller even combined, none of the benefits of having the city directly out your door and not very good d3 sports. It’s for kids who want a slac.

It is pretty easy to take the time off on fridays and just sleep in the car. No different than UCLA/USC kids who like the outdoors, they also drive a lot. Driving is a natural part of living in LA, and you either learn to get over it or hate California.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC has shown interest in Claremont Mckenna, which I 100% wrote off as a mediocre LAC. Then reading through their Roberts Campus and massive alum donation campaign, I am shocked this tiny place hasn't shot to the top of students' lists. They're doubling campus footprint, investing hundreds of thousands to improve research opportunities and internship opportunities, and building a fancy new science department. What is the catch?

Claremont McKenna has always been regarded as one of the top SLACs. It's just in California and the DCUM (emphasis on "DC" area) don't discuss such schools much.

Is it? I feel like the LAC quality drops fast after Bowdoin and Middlebury. Would never send my kids to Hamilton or Colby or...Claremont Mckenna. Sure, they're ranked well, but there's no advantage to paying for it over UMD.

Eh, you might consider consulting something more objective than your feelings on the matter. If your kid wants to go to law school or business school or get a high-paying job in finance, CMC is extremely strong:
#3 for MBA placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-business-school
#12 for Wall Street/IB placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-business-school
#17 for law school placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-law-school

Okay, doesn't necessitate dropping $360k so that my daughter can go to the 17th best school at something. All of this is achievable easily with a state school.

I don’t see any comparably ranked “cheap state schools” on any of those three lists. The state schools are, as you would expect, Berkeley Michigan UCLA etc which are not easy to get into and are not cheap OOS.

UVA does just fine for me. Excellent quality in fact.

Did for us as well. and Claremont McKenna is now $91,414 a year. No thank you! Both of my kids went in-state Va and have done very well according to their respective gifts.

DC chose it over Uchicago, so far serving him well, almost making as much as me (ahem $400k) 2 years out of college. Guess the "$360k" was worth it.

Jumping in here to ask about CMC. Would it fit a kid who really wants California? UCLA is top choice at the moment. Liked USC as well. Price is not relevant. Undecided for major, somewhere between international things and poli sci on the one hand and engineering on the other. Aside from the obvious issue with engineering, I'm wondering if he should add a school like CMC to the list. Is the 5 college consortium enough to make it feel like a bigger school than it is? Is the area vibe similar to west LA or substantially different?

It's not a perfect match. Does your kid want California or Westwood? Claremont is a nice bubble from California that allows a lot of opportunity to go to Baldy, Joshua Tree, Disneyland,and any hiking needs for your son. The surrounding area of the Inland Empire isn't amazing, but students tend to drive the opposite way. The colleges' have a great outing program, so you can spend a lot of the semester on the beach. But none of this is Westwood, which really isn't even LA-it's a very small uber wealthy part of LA that is very isolated, hilly and idyllic. Most of LA is trashy but great fun.

It will be a lot easier to test out what he wants at CMC than at UCLA, where he'll have to do a long school transfer process. You can take engineering at Harvey Mudd relatively easily in the fall of sophomore year as long as you take the intro physics classes as a freshman. Then, you qualify for most of the other engineering courses. The consortium is amazing and does feel like a bigger school, but it's not going to be 30,000 undergrads big. DC met a lot of people who wanted to go to massive state schools, and they all ended up loving their CMC experience. The government major is amazing, and he'll get way better career/academic opportunities at CMC for sure.

Spend a lot of semester on the beach? Only by spending a lot of hours on the highway.

A kiid looking at UCLA and USC likely would not like the 5C consortium — much smaller even combined, none of the benefits of having the city directly out your door and not very good d3 sports. It’s for kids who want a slac.

It is pretty easy to take the time off on fridays and just sleep in the car. No different than UCLA/USC kids who like the outdoors, they also drive a lot. Driving is a natural part of living in LA, and you either learn to get over it or hate California.

That isn’t true. There is plenty of outdoorsy stuff to do in hills and Malibu, maybe 15 minute drive for kids in LA. And about an hour closer to the beach, which makes every trip two hours shorter. Claremont does have a monopoly in the strip malls of the Inland Empire.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC has shown interest in Claremont Mckenna, which I 100% wrote off as a mediocre LAC. Then reading through their Roberts Campus and massive alum donation campaign, I am shocked this tiny place hasn't shot to the top of students' lists. They're doubling campus footprint, investing hundreds of thousands to improve research opportunities and internship opportunities, and building a fancy new science department. What is the catch?

Claremont McKenna has always been regarded as one of the top SLACs. It's just in California and the DCUM (emphasis on "DC" area) don't discuss such schools much.

Is it? I feel like the LAC quality drops fast after Bowdoin and Middlebury. Would never send my kids to Hamilton or Colby or...Claremont Mckenna. Sure, they're ranked well, but there's no advantage to paying for it over UMD.

Eh, you might consider consulting something more objective than your feelings on the matter. If your kid wants to go to law school or business school or get a high-paying job in finance, CMC is extremely strong:
#3 for MBA placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-business-school
#12 for Wall Street/IB placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-business-school
#17 for law school placement: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-law-school

Okay, doesn't necessitate dropping $360k so that my daughter can go to the 17th best school at something. All of this is achievable easily with a state school.

I don’t see any comparably ranked “cheap state schools” on any of those three lists. The state schools are, as you would expect, Berkeley Michigan UCLA etc which are not easy to get into and are not cheap OOS.

UVA does just fine for me. Excellent quality in fact.

Did for us as well. and Claremont McKenna is now $91,414 a year. No thank you! Both of my kids went in-state Va and have done very well according to their respective gifts.

DC chose it over Uchicago, so far serving him well, almost making as much as me (ahem $400k) 2 years out of college. Guess the "$360k" was worth it.

Jumping in here to ask about CMC. Would it fit a kid who really wants California? UCLA is top choice at the moment. Liked USC as well. Price is not relevant. Undecided for major, somewhere between international things and poli sci on the one hand and engineering on the other. Aside from the obvious issue with engineering, I'm wondering if he should add a school like CMC to the list. Is the 5 college consortium enough to make it feel like a bigger school than it is? Is the area vibe similar to west LA or substantially different?

It's not a perfect match. Does your kid want California or Westwood? Claremont is a nice bubble from California that allows a lot of opportunity to go to Baldy, Joshua Tree, Disneyland,and any hiking needs for your son. The surrounding area of the Inland Empire isn't amazing, but students tend to drive the opposite way. The colleges' have a great outing program, so you can spend a lot of the semester on the beach. But none of this is Westwood, which really isn't even LA-it's a very small uber wealthy part of LA that is very isolated, hilly and idyllic. Most of LA is trashy but great fun.

It will be a lot easier to test out what he wants at CMC than at UCLA, where he'll have to do a long school transfer process. You can take engineering at Harvey Mudd relatively easily in the fall of sophomore year as long as you take the intro physics classes as a freshman. Then, you qualify for most of the other engineering courses. The consortium is amazing and does feel like a bigger school, but it's not going to be 30,000 undergrads big. DC met a lot of people who wanted to go to massive state schools, and they all ended up loving their CMC experience. The government major is amazing, and he'll get way better career/academic opportunities at CMC for sure.

Spend a lot of semester on the beach? Only by spending a lot of hours on the highway.

A kiid looking at UCLA and USC likely would not like the 5C consortium — much smaller even combined, none of the benefits of having the city directly out your door and not very good d3 sports. It’s for kids who want a slac.

It is pretty easy to take the time off on fridays and just sleep in the car. No different than UCLA/USC kids who like the outdoors, they also drive a lot. Driving is a natural part of living in LA, and you either learn to get over it or hate California.

That isn’t true. There is plenty of outdoorsy stuff to do in hills and Malibu, maybe 15 minute drive for kids in LA. And about an hour closer to the beach, which makes every trip two hours shorter. Claremont does have a monopoly in the strip malls of the Inland Empire.

There is, but it's not gonna be 15 minutes. 15 minutes can't get you off the main street that cuts through UCLA. Traffic is unbearable in LA, who would've thought. Venice BLVD is a personal enemy, especially through Culver City. This gives the energy of someone who isn't from the area but has visited. I live in LA, and you just learn to live on. My UCLA friends never get 15 minute drives unless its to the in n out half a mile away at like 8 pm. Westwood is incredibly congested from Santa Monica traffic and, you know, millions of people moving around the city.

Anyway, none of this is that big of a problem. I have friends who spend weekends in Malibu, Santa Barbara, etc. It's normal to drive a lot in LA.