What makes an LAC "good"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accessibility of professors, academic rigor, and commitment to undergraduate teaching. Amherst, Pomona, and Carleton are highly ranked in these areas—hard to beat them.

All small LACs are highly rated in these areas. That's what makes them SLACs.

DP. LACs are usually strong in those areas, but certainly all are not strong to the same degree. The three mentioned are excellent, as are others in the top 30 or so, but even within that group there’s variation on reputations for instruction quality and rigor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accessibility of professors, academic rigor, and commitment to undergraduate teaching. Amherst, Pomona, and Carleton are highly ranked in these areas—hard to beat them.

All small LACs are highly rated in these areas. That's what makes them SLACs.

DP. LACs are usually strong in those areas, but certainly all are not strong to the same degree. The three mentioned are excellent, as are others in the top 30 or so, but even within that group there’s variation on reputations for instruction quality and rigor.

Name a top 30 lac with lower quality instruction and rigor

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For perspective on Pomona's difficulty of admission, this site places it as the 16th most selective school in the nation:

https://wallethub.com/edu/e/college-rankings/40750

It's not that difficult to get into. A lot of under qualified students apply. The academic background of most students is poor.

Umm, no. Pomona is extremely difficult to get admitted to. And LAC students are more likely, not less, to self-select. Proportionally more are serious students intending to go to grad school and not viewing college as simply a place to get recruited or network.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accessibility of professors, academic rigor, and commitment to undergraduate teaching. Amherst, Pomona, and Carleton are highly ranked in these areas—hard to beat them.

All small LACs are highly rated in these areas. That's what makes them SLACs.

DP. LACs are usually strong in those areas, but certainly all are not strong to the same degree. The three mentioned are excellent, as are others in the top 30 or so, but even within that group there’s variation on reputations for instruction quality and rigor.

Name a top 30 lac with lower quality instruction and rigor

USNWR does not have a 30 way tie for undergrad teaching.

For rigor, look at percentages of STEM majors and grad school matriculation rates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accessibility of professors, academic rigor, and commitment to undergraduate teaching. Amherst, Pomona, and Carleton are highly ranked in these areas—hard to beat them.

All small LACs are highly rated in these areas. That's what makes them SLACs.

DP. LACs are usually strong in those areas, but certainly all are not strong to the same degree. The three mentioned are excellent, as are others in the top 30 or so, but even within that group there’s variation on reputations for instruction quality and rigor.

Name a top 30 lac with lower quality instruction and rigor

USNWR does not have a 30 way tie for undergrad teaching.

For rigor, look at percentages of STEM majors and grad school matriculation rates.

What a bunch of bs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accessibility of professors, academic rigor, and commitment to undergraduate teaching. Amherst, Pomona, and Carleton are highly ranked in these areas—hard to beat them.

All small LACs are highly rated in these areas. That's what makes them SLACs.

DP. LACs are usually strong in those areas, but certainly all are not strong to the same degree. The three mentioned are excellent, as are others in the top 30 or so, but even within that group there’s variation on reputations for instruction quality and rigor.

Name a top 30 lac with lower quality instruction and rigor

USNWR does not have a 30 way tie for undergrad teaching.

For rigor, look at percentages of STEM majors and grad school matriculation rates.

What a bunch of bs.

Cause all majors are equally rigorous? Maybe you have a different idea of rigor, but fine, look at grad school matriculation or acceptance rates for what you consider rigorous then.

Also look at graduation requirements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accessibility of professors, academic rigor, and commitment to undergraduate teaching. Amherst, Pomona, and Carleton are highly ranked in these areas—hard to beat them.

All small LACs are highly rated in these areas. That's what makes them SLACs.

DP. LACs are usually strong in those areas, but certainly all are not strong to the same degree. The three mentioned are excellent, as are others in the top 30 or so, but even within that group there’s variation on reputations for instruction quality and rigor.

Name a top 30 lac with lower quality instruction and rigor

USNWR does not have a 30 way tie for undergrad teaching.

For rigor, look at percentages of STEM majors and grad school matriculation rates.

What a bunch of bs.

Cause all majors are equally rigorous? Maybe you have a different idea of rigor, but fine, look at grad school matriculation or acceptance rates for what you consider rigorous then.

Also look at graduation requirements.

If your humanities majors aren't rigorous, you aren't as rigorous as you think you are. True rigor is in institutions like Reed and UChicago, where, across the subjects, you will undergo intense academic rigor, akin to academic hazing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accessibility of professors, academic rigor, and commitment to undergraduate teaching. Amherst, Pomona, and Carleton are highly ranked in these areas—hard to beat them.

All small LACs are highly rated in these areas. That's what makes them SLACs.

DP. LACs are usually strong in those areas, but certainly all are not strong to the same degree. The three mentioned are excellent, as are others in the top 30 or so, but even within that group there’s variation on reputations for instruction quality and rigor.

Name a top 30 lac with lower quality instruction and rigor

USNWR does not have a 30 way tie for undergrad teaching.

For rigor, look at percentages of STEM majors and grad school matriculation rates.

What a bunch of bs.

Cause all majors are equally rigorous? Maybe you have a different idea of rigor, but fine, look at grad school matriculation or acceptance rates for what you consider rigorous then.

Also look at graduation requirements.

If your humanities majors aren't rigorous, you aren't as rigorous as you think you are. True rigor is in institutions like Reed and UChicago, where, across the subjects, you will undergo intense academic rigor, akin to academic hazing.

The STEM majors at those schools may have a different opinion on whether their humanities majors are undergoing a comparably rigorous experience. It’s not that I haven’t known some, there and at similar institutions. Even pre-ChatGTP one could get As without doing the reading at some of our finest English programs. BSing to an A isn’t really a thing in STEM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accessibility of professors, academic rigor, and commitment to undergraduate teaching. Amherst, Pomona, and Carleton are highly ranked in these areas—hard to beat them.

All small LACs are highly rated in these areas. That's what makes them SLACs.

DP. LACs are usually strong in those areas, but certainly all are not strong to the same degree. The three mentioned are excellent, as are others in the top 30 or so, but even within that group there’s variation on reputations for instruction quality and rigor.

Name a top 30 lac with lower quality instruction and rigor

USNWR does not have a 30 way tie for undergrad teaching.

For rigor, look at percentages of STEM majors and grad school matriculation rates.

What a bunch of bs.

Cause all majors are equally rigorous? Maybe you have a different idea of rigor, but fine, look at grad school matriculation or acceptance rates for what you consider rigorous then.

Also look at graduation requirements.

If your humanities majors aren't rigorous, you aren't as rigorous as you think you are. True rigor is in institutions like Reed and UChicago, where, across the subjects, you will undergo intense academic rigor, akin to academic hazing.

The STEM majors at those schools may have a different opinion on whether their humanities majors are undergoing a comparably rigorous experience. It’s not that I haven’t known some, there and at similar institutions. Even pre-ChatGTP one could get As without doing the reading at some of our finest English programs. BSing to an A isn’t really a thing in STEM.

You’re talking to a physics B.S. and bioinformatics M.S. BSing to an A is 100% a thing in stem, if you’re any good. This crap take is said by stem grads who wouldn’t be able to get into a grad program or even get grant funding, because they eschew any exercise in writing/the humanities. We get it: you think you’re better than others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accessibility of professors, academic rigor, and commitment to undergraduate teaching. Amherst, Pomona, and Carleton are highly ranked in these areas—hard to beat them.

All small LACs are highly rated in these areas. That's what makes them SLACs.

DP. LACs are usually strong in those areas, but certainly all are not strong to the same degree. The three mentioned are excellent, as are others in the top 30 or so, but even within that group there’s variation on reputations for instruction quality and rigor.

Name a top 30 lac with lower quality instruction and rigor

USNWR does not have a 30 way tie for undergrad teaching.

For rigor, look at percentages of STEM majors and grad school matriculation rates.

What a bunch of bs.

Cause all majors are equally rigorous? Maybe you have a different idea of rigor, but fine, look at grad school matriculation or acceptance rates for what you consider rigorous then.

Also look at graduation requirements.

If your humanities majors aren't rigorous, you aren't as rigorous as you think you are. True rigor is in institutions like Reed and UChicago, where, across the subjects, you will undergo intense academic rigor, akin to academic hazing.

The STEM majors at those schools may have a different opinion on whether their humanities majors are undergoing a comparably rigorous experience. It’s not that I haven’t known some, there and at similar institutions. Even pre-ChatGTP one could get As without doing the reading at some of our finest English programs. BSing to an A isn’t really a thing in STEM.

What?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accessibility of professors, academic rigor, and commitment to undergraduate teaching. Amherst, Pomona, and Carleton are highly ranked in these areas—hard to beat them.

All small LACs are highly rated in these areas. That's what makes them SLACs.

DP. LACs are usually strong in those areas, but certainly all are not strong to the same degree. The three mentioned are excellent, as are others in the top 30 or so, but even within that group there’s variation on reputations for instruction quality and rigor.

Name a top 30 lac with lower quality instruction and rigor

USNWR does not have a 30 way tie for undergrad teaching.

For rigor, look at percentages of STEM majors and grad school matriculation rates.

What a bunch of bs.

Cause all majors are equally rigorous? Maybe you have a different idea of rigor, but fine, look at grad school matriculation or acceptance rates for what you consider rigorous then.

Also look at graduation requirements.

If your humanities majors aren't rigorous, you aren't as rigorous as you think you are. True rigor is in institutions like Reed and UChicago, where, across the subjects, you will undergo intense academic rigor, akin to academic hazing.

The STEM majors at those schools may have a different opinion on whether their humanities majors are undergoing a comparably rigorous experience. It’s not that I haven’t known some, there and at similar institutions. Even pre-ChatGTP one could get As without doing the reading at some of our finest English programs. BSing to an A isn’t really a thing in STEM.

You’re talking to a physics B.S. and bioinformatics M.S. BSing to an A is 100% a thing in stem, if you’re any good. This crap take is said by stem grads who wouldn’t be able to get into a grad program or even get grant funding, because they eschew any exercise in writing/the humanities. We get it: you think you’re better than others.

I’m going to trust the most recent Chicago alums I know over someone boasting about a bioinformatics degree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accessibility of professors, academic rigor, and commitment to undergraduate teaching. Amherst, Pomona, and Carleton are highly ranked in these areas—hard to beat them.

All small LACs are highly rated in these areas. That's what makes them SLACs.

DP. LACs are usually strong in those areas, but certainly all are not strong to the same degree. The three mentioned are excellent, as are others in the top 30 or so, but even within that group there’s variation on reputations for instruction quality and rigor.

Name a top 30 lac with lower quality instruction and rigor

USNWR does not have a 30 way tie for undergrad teaching.

For rigor, look at percentages of STEM majors and grad school matriculation rates.

What a bunch of bs.

Cause all majors are equally rigorous? Maybe you have a different idea of rigor, but fine, look at grad school matriculation or acceptance rates for what you consider rigorous then.

Also look at graduation requirements.

If your humanities majors aren't rigorous, you aren't as rigorous as you think you are. True rigor is in institutions like Reed and UChicago, where, across the subjects, you will undergo intense academic rigor, akin to academic hazing.

The STEM majors at those schools may have a different opinion on whether their humanities majors are undergoing a comparably rigorous experience. It’s not that I haven’t known some, there and at similar institutions. Even pre-ChatGTP one could get As without doing the reading at some of our finest English programs. BSing to an A isn’t really a thing in STEM.

You’re talking to a physics B.S. and bioinformatics M.S. BSing to an A is 100% a thing in stem, if you’re any good. This crap take is said by stem grads who wouldn’t be able to get into a grad program or even get grant funding, because they eschew any exercise in writing/the humanities. We get it: you think you’re better than others.

I’m going to trust the most recent Chicago alums I know over someone boasting about a bioinformatics degree.

You’re talking to a Chicago grad…
Anyway, it’s always interesting meeting people who think stem is the end-all, be-all, because they’re undoubtedly stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accessibility of professors, academic rigor, and commitment to undergraduate teaching. Amherst, Pomona, and Carleton are highly ranked in these areas—hard to beat them.

All small LACs are highly rated in these areas. That's what makes them SLACs.

DP. LACs are usually strong in those areas, but certainly all are not strong to the same degree. The three mentioned are excellent, as are others in the top 30 or so, but even within that group there’s variation on reputations for instruction quality and rigor.

Name a top 30 lac with lower quality instruction and rigor

USNWR does not have a 30 way tie for undergrad teaching.

For rigor, look at percentages of STEM majors and grad school matriculation rates.

What a bunch of bs.

Cause all majors are equally rigorous? Maybe you have a different idea of rigor, but fine, look at grad school matriculation or acceptance rates for what you consider rigorous then.

Also look at graduation requirements.

If your humanities majors aren't rigorous, you aren't as rigorous as you think you are. True rigor is in institutions like Reed and UChicago, where, across the subjects, you will undergo intense academic rigor, akin to academic hazing.

The STEM majors at those schools may have a different opinion on whether their humanities majors are undergoing a comparably rigorous experience. It’s not that I haven’t known some, there and at similar institutions. Even pre-ChatGTP one could get As without doing the reading at some of our finest English programs. BSing to an A isn’t really a thing in STEM.

What does this wall of babble even mean?

[Anonymous]

BSing is certainly a thing in bioinformatics. Not a degree option at the LACs I know, however.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accessibility of professors, academic rigor, and commitment to undergraduate teaching. Amherst, Pomona, and Carleton are highly ranked in these areas—hard to beat them.

All small LACs are highly rated in these areas. That's what makes them SLACs.

DP. LACs are usually strong in those areas, but certainly all are not strong to the same degree. The three mentioned are excellent, as are others in the top 30 or so, but even within that group there’s variation on reputations for instruction quality and rigor.

Name a top 30 lac with lower quality instruction and rigor

USNWR does not have a 30 way tie for undergrad teaching.

For rigor, look at percentages of STEM majors and grad school matriculation rates.

What a bunch of bs.

Cause all majors are equally rigorous? Maybe you have a different idea of rigor, but fine, look at grad school matriculation or acceptance rates for what you consider rigorous then.

Also look at graduation requirements.

If your humanities majors aren't rigorous, you aren't as rigorous as you think you are. True rigor is in institutions like Reed and UChicago, where, across the subjects, you will undergo intense academic rigor, akin to academic hazing.

The STEM majors at those schools may have a different opinion on whether their humanities majors are undergoing a comparably rigorous experience. It’s not that I haven’t known some, there and at similar institutions. Even pre-ChatGTP one could get As without doing the reading at some of our finest English programs. BSing to an A isn’t really a thing in STEM.

What does this wall of babble even mean?

Run it through ChatGTP.