Changes in LACs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Maine LACs are all on the rise - Colby, Bates, Bowdoin, Midd.

Also, Hamilton is becoming the new Amherst.

Midd is in Vermont and none of those schools are “rising” any different than years prior, other than maybe Colby.

Hamilton is completely different than Amherst and wants its future to be in tech and AI.

Also, can any of the NESCACs really be described as “on the rise?” Are any of them lacking in respect? Top to bottom, they are the standard on which all other SLACs are judged/compared. Obviously not saying those are the “best” schools, but people take shots at Amherst, Williams, Wes, Hamilton, Mid, Colby, etc. on this board for a reason. I don’t see many Bowdoin people, for example, puffing their chests about how they’re better than W&L.
-NESCAC alum, parent & spouse

I wouldn't say the NESCAC are the standard at all... WASP are. I can see an argument to include Wellesley or Harvey Mudd, but Wesleyan? Hardly even discussed on this forum, same with Hamilton. Middlebury is often talked about with the context of it falling from a top 4 lac and Colby...meh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Maine LACs are all on the rise - Colby, Bates, Bowdoin, Midd.

Also, Hamilton is becoming the new Amherst.

Midd is in Vermont and none of those schools are “rising” any different than years prior, other than maybe Colby.

Hamilton is completely different than Amherst and wants its future to be in tech and AI.

Also, can any of the NESCACs really be described as “on the rise?” Are any of them lacking in respect? Top to bottom, they are the standard on which all other SLACs are judged/compared. Obviously not saying those are the “best” schools, but people take shots at Amherst, Williams, Wes, Hamilton, Mid, Colby, etc. on this board for a reason. I don’t see many Bowdoin people, for example, puffing their chests about how they’re better than W&L.
-NESCAC alum, parent & spouse

Please, no one is using Connecticut College, Trinity, Bates, Hamilton, Wesleyan, or Tufts as "the standard."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I expect a notable rise in Washington & Lee, Davidson and the 5Cs. I don’t see it at Wesleyan — it’s too far left for a lot of kids but a great school.

Wesleyan is way too left compared to the 5Cs? People with no real connection to the school regurgitate this stereotype but this hasn’t been my family’s experience. I don’t find it to be far to the left of many of its NESCAC peers, save maybe Williams. And the presence of CMC does not turn the 5Cs into U Chicago. Many of the other schools are just as if not more left leaning than Wes.

my kid was a 24 graduate of Wes and it was a god awful experience for him - from covid mismanagement to ultra left raging crazies treating every athlete like they are staunch MAGA supporters, to the hipster try-hard pot smoking film majors from brooklyn, it was the most divisive, insular, siloed and myopic place on earth to spend 4 years. Athletes beware

I personally know at least half a dozen athletes who are currently at Wes or recent graduates. They would all laugh at your description.

[Anonymous]

I think Occidental and Whitman are so underrated for absolutely no reason. Oxy gives you easy access to LA, a strong environmental/political science/biology/IR program, and does great for fellowship attainment and med school acceptance; wrap all of that with an amazing campus, yet somehow it has a 40% acceptance rate, while giving out full financial aid.

Whitman is the top college in the Pacific Northwest but gets very little attraction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I expect a notable rise in Washington & Lee, Davidson and the 5Cs. I don’t see it at Wesleyan — it’s too far left for a lot of kids but a great school.

Wesleyan is way too left compared to the 5Cs? People with no real connection to the school regurgitate this stereotype but this hasn’t been my family’s experience. I don’t find it to be far to the left of many of its NESCAC peers, save maybe Williams. And the presence of CMC does not turn the 5Cs into U Chicago. Many of the other schools are just as if not more left leaning than Wes.

my kid was a 24 graduate of wes and it was a god awful experience for him - from covid mismanagement to ultra left raging crazies treating every athlete like they are staunch MAGA supporters, to the hipster try-hard pot smoking film majors from brooklyn, it was the most divisive, insular, siloed and myopic place on earth to spend 4 years. Athletes beware

Sounds like your conservative lax bro chose wrong.

I think that you nailed it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think Occidental and Whitman are so underrated for absolutely no reason. Oxy gives you easy access to LA, a strong environmental/political science/biology/IR program, and does great for fellowship attainment and med school acceptance; wrap all of that with an amazing campus, yet somehow it has a 40% acceptance rate, while giving out full financial aid.

Whitman is the top college in the Pacific Northwest but gets very little attraction.

My eldest DD is studying Biology at Oxy and having a terrific time! She's had an internship since her 1st year and great access to her profs. Oxy has been great for STEM. Her boyfriend had an internship at NASA JBL (jet propulsion lab) near Oxy/Caltech campuses.

[Anonymous]

Honestly this is one of the weirdest and stupidest threads I’ve seen on the DCUM college forum in a looong time. And that’s saying a lot. All that you are accomplishing is confirming for others that liberal arts college parents are complete nut jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think more LACs need to strengthen in engineering and CS in order to rise in popularity.

Harvey Mudd is well positioned to rise. And other STEM-oriented LACs like Carleton. Swarthmore too. Wes is also strong in STEM.

Both mudd and swarthmore hardly have that many engineering majors compared to cs or math.

At Swarthmore, Engineering was the most popular major last year.

I seriously doubt this when just 3 years ago economics had 3 times the amount of grads as engineering: https://www.swarthmore.edu/sites/default/files/assets/documents/institutional-research/Swarthmore%20Gradstats%202022.pdf

https://www.swarthmore.edu/news-events/1023-admitted-to-swarthmore-class-2024

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly this is one of the weirdest and stupidest threads I’ve seen on the DCUM college forum in a looong time. And that’s saying a lot. All that you are accomplishing is confirming for others that liberal arts college parents are complete nut jobs.

This is weirdly dramatic. People are just having lax LAC discussion. This is much more normal to me than "Full Pay Matters," "what Really differentiates HPYSM," and all the race baiting university posts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly this is one of the weirdest and stupidest threads I’ve seen on the DCUM college forum in a looong time. And that’s saying a lot. All that you are accomplishing is confirming for others that liberal arts college parents are complete nut jobs.

This is weirdly dramatic. People are just having lax LAC discussion. This is much more normal to me than "Full Pay Matters," "what Really differentiates HPYSM," and all the race baiting university posts.

Except nothing of any substance is being said here. Literally nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think more LACs need to strengthen in engineering and CS in order to rise in popularity.

Harvey Mudd is well positioned to rise. And other STEM-oriented LACs like Carleton. Swarthmore too. Wes is also strong in STEM.

Both mudd and swarthmore hardly have that many engineering majors compared to cs or math.

At Swarthmore, Engineering was the most popular major last year.

I seriously doubt this when just 3 years ago economics had 3 times the amount of grads as engineering: https://www.swarthmore.edu/sites/default/files/assets/documents/institutional-research/Swarthmore%20Gradstats%202022.pdf

https://www.swarthmore.edu/news-events/1023-admitted-to-swarthmore-class-2024

Oh, so engineering isn't actually the most popular major—it's just one that many freshmen express interest in when they start. As shown by institutional research, far fewer students end up graduating with an engineering degree, and it's not even among the top five most common majors for Swarthmore graduates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly this is one of the weirdest and stupidest threads I’ve seen on the DCUM college forum in a looong time. And that’s saying a lot. All that you are accomplishing is confirming for others that liberal arts college parents are complete nut jobs.

This is weirdly dramatic. People are just having lax LAC discussion. This is much more normal to me than "Full Pay Matters," "what Really differentiates HPYSM," and all the race baiting university posts.

Except nothing of any substance is being said here. Literally nothing.

Okay? Then leave. You are welcome to go talk about Asian people admissions or how hard it is being upper middle class and applying to a top university on the various threads surrounding these.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Maine LACs are all on the rise - Colby, Bates, Bowdoin, Midd.

Also, Hamilton is becoming the new Amherst.

Midd is in Vermont and none of those schools are “rising” any different than years prior, other than maybe Colby.

Hamilton is completely different than Amherst and wants its future to be in tech and AI.

Also, can any of the NESCACs really be described as “on the rise?” Are any of them lacking in respect? Top to bottom, they are the standard on which all other SLACs are judged/compared. Obviously not saying those are the “best” schools, but people take shots at Amherst, Williams, Wes, Hamilton, Mid, Colby, etc. on this board for a reason. I don’t see many Bowdoin people, for example, puffing their chests about how they’re better than W&L.
-NESCAC alum, parent & spouse

I wouldn't say the NESCAC are the standard at all... WASP are. I can see an argument to include Wellesley or Harvey Mudd, but Wesleyan? Hardly even discussed on this forum, same with Hamilton. Middlebury is often talked about with the context of it falling from a top 4 lac and Colby...meh.

OMG. This is a very typical DCUM response in that it acknowledges the existence of only 4 liberal arts colleges. My point is that the NEACACs are the standards at their relative tiers. They are the known names. Even poor Trin and Conn College who are only pariahs in the context of this hyper elitist, striver obsessed, Ivy Plus or nothing board. The point remains that they are known brands and frequent comparators to lesser known lacs in vibe or experience if not “prestige.” And all that said, I’m sorry to break it to you, but you can get an elite education at Wes, Hamilton, Midd, etc. Those schools are far more similar to Amherst and Williams than they are different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Maine LACs are all on the rise - Colby, Bates, Bowdoin, Midd.

Also, Hamilton is becoming the new Amherst.

Midd is in Vermont and none of those schools are “rising” any different than years prior, other than maybe Colby.

Hamilton is completely different than Amherst and wants its future to be in tech and AI.

Also, can any of the NESCACs really be described as “on the rise?” Are any of them lacking in respect? Top to bottom, they are the standard on which all other SLACs are judged/compared. Obviously not saying those are the “best” schools, but people take shots at Amherst, Williams, Wes, Hamilton, Mid, Colby, etc. on this board for a reason. I don’t see many Bowdoin people, for example, puffing their chests about how they’re better than W&L.
-NESCAC alum, parent & spouse

What a bunch of New England garbage. NESCAC is the standard for mediocrity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Maine LACs are all on the rise - Colby, Bates, Bowdoin, Midd.

Also, Hamilton is becoming the new Amherst.

Midd is in Vermont and none of those schools are “rising” any different than years prior, other than maybe Colby.

Hamilton is completely different than Amherst and wants its future to be in tech and AI.

Also, can any of the NESCACs really be described as “on the rise?” Are any of them lacking in respect? Top to bottom, they are the standard on which all other SLACs are judged/compared. Obviously not saying those are the “best” schools, but people take shots at Amherst, Williams, Wes, Hamilton, Mid, Colby, etc. on this board for a reason. I don’t see many Bowdoin people, for example, puffing their chests about how they’re better than W&L.
-NESCAC alum, parent & spouse

I wouldn't say the NESCAC are the standard at all... WASP are. I can see an argument to include Wellesley or Harvey Mudd, but Wesleyan? Hardly even discussed on this forum, same with Hamilton. Middlebury is often talked about with the context of it falling from a top 4 lac and Colby...meh.

Obviously the Mudd booster chiming in which is pretty ironic.

Mudd is a very new school which was literally started as a school to train, (yes train) entry level engineers for the defense industry. It was basically a trade school. It has evolved into a unique and special place but it is very niche like Olin on the East Coast.

Wesleyan on the other hand has a long history and is one of the 'little three' which is considered to be one of the top 10 sports rivalries in college sports.

There is no argument about including Wellesley, they have always been part of the top group. There are 9 SLACS with average test scores at 1500+ 4 are NESCAC (Amherst, Bowdoin, Middlebury, and Williams), , 3 are 5C (CMC, Mudd, and Pomona), and the other 2 are Wellesley and Swat. That is your group and you should probably add Carleton, Hamilton, and Haverford to it as well.

WASP has as much meaning or usefulness as HYPSM which means it has nothing of value. The NESCAC along with a few other schools has long been the standard and that isn't changing in your lifetime.

When Midd is talked about in terms of having fallen people point out:

That the rankings drops were driven by methodology changes at USNWR which didn't align well to Midds SES profile and by reporting changes which caused a major drop (only on paper) in how some spending per student numbers are reported.
Negative comments seem to be by a singular person on this thread who is obsessed bout them (not in a positive way) who periodically tries to create controversy yet inevitably gets batted around like a cat toy.