LAC prestige analysis and reputation?

[Anonymous]

Are LAC parents always this insecure? My god.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are LAC parents always this insecure? My god.

They aren’t insecure, they aren’t willing to put up with peanut gallery nonsense so they smack people down when they blither.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
No one in the UK knows these schools. This is pure fantasy.

No one cares what the failing UK think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WWASP (Williams, Wellesley, Amherst, Swarthmore, Pomona) are equal to schools ranked 11-25. So some ivys but not HYP. Looking at parchment data and also the WSJ rankings from 2021 indicate this. The other LACs like Haverford, CMC, Vassar etc are at the BC, Georgia Tech, NYU level.

Nonsense. The student profiles at the top 25 schools and the top 15 or so SLACs are identical. None of them are better than any of the others even if some wish it were so. The foolishness which exists around the Ivy+, WASP. NESCAC, etc. is just over the top and absurd blithering by desperate wannabe social climbers.

Student profiles are not the only thing that makes an undergraduate, students outcomes are not equal at the non top 5 LACs. Also students prefer T25s over LACs according to parchment.
https://www.parchment.com/c/college/tools/college-cross-admit-comparison.php?compare=Emory+University&with=Vassar+College

Because lacs have different educational emphasis. If all you care about is ROI, CMC is right there waiting for you- but some people don’t give a crap about going into finance and don’t make money the center of their lives- all of the top 20 lacs have amazing outcomes, probably just not the ones you personally want.

It's the Emory booster whop has found a bone to worry. Parchment is nonsense as it relies on self reported data. Nobody pays any attention to it.

No parchment actually is final high-school transcript data

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LACs are not prestigious at all. Below the T30 universities for sure.

Wouldn't say a school like Emory or WashU is more prestigious than a school like Swarthmore or Harvey Mudd.

Yes they are more prestigious than Harvey Mudd. Swarthmore is debatable. But LACs likw harvey mudd are not more prestigious than BC let alone Emory/WashU.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LACs are not prestigious at all. Below the T30 universities for sure.

Wouldn't say a school like Emory or WashU is more prestigious than a school like Swarthmore or Harvey Mudd.

Yes they are more prestigious than Harvey Mudd. Swarthmore is debatable. But LACs likw harvey mudd are not more prestigious than BC let alone Emory/WashU.

This is a very strange take. Are you in the humanities?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LACs are not prestigious at all. Below the T30 universities for sure.

Wouldn't say a school like Emory or WashU is more prestigious than a school like Swarthmore or Harvey Mudd.

Yes they are more prestigious than Harvey Mudd. Swarthmore is debatable. But LACs likw harvey mudd are not more prestigious than BC let alone Emory/WashU.

This is a very strange take. Are you in the humanities?

This is very normal. Consensus would place the LACs below T30 universities and majority would be well below T50.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LACs are not prestigious at all. Below the T30 universities for sure.

Wouldn't say a school like Emory or WashU is more prestigious than a school like Swarthmore or Harvey Mudd.

Yes they are more prestigious than Harvey Mudd. Swarthmore is debatable. But LACs likw harvey mudd are not more prestigious than BC let alone Emory/WashU.

This is a very strange take. Are you in the humanities?

This is very normal. Consensus would place the LACs below T30 universities and majority would be well below T50.

[Anonymous]

this has to be a troll post - no mention of W&L. Pipeline to the street rivaling Bucknell and A&W. Bucknell may place more kids in front office roles, but on a percentage basis W&L more than holds it’s own

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My spouse and I are also Ivy undergrad as well as med school. Our kid is really excited about LAC's. Intellectually, we completely get it and we are committed to supporting whatever he wants to do.

Emotionally, however, I have this fear that I am going to be patrolling DCUM for decades defending any slight to LAC's, explaining that there are folks who turn Ivies down to go to LAC's, etc. It's embarrassing to admit this, but it's real. Maybe the shame will fade one day. Or maybe the kid will change their mind.

Please do not project your deficiencies on to the wider group. Those who know know, those who don't really aren't of consequence.

This. If someone looks down on liberal arts colleges, they’re uninformed and I am not concerned with their opinion.

[Anonymous]

No body knows them outside NE USA

[Anonymous]

honestly from a pure prestige perspective - and I have no dog in this fight - the only two that are stand outs are Amherst and Williams. Every other SLAC is just one of the bunch

[Anonymous]

and the Williams grads I have met over my lifetime are all weird - Amherst kids more normal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is this necessary? Honestly…

You are well educated and obviously have intelligent children. Do your research and find schools that are the best fit for his educational, personal, social needs.

Why do these groupings and designations matter so much?

+1. Isn't there a point in life where you quit trying to impress others?

It is less about impressing and more about the reputation of college's ability to educate on a deep level. Reputation matters in a tight jobs market. It is no longer 2022 when any tech degree from any school was snapped up. High level thinking is in demand, in all fields including stem. Humanities majors from top unis and top lacs are doing much better the past two hiring cycles('24, 25) than CS and stem majors outside the T20ish.
Soft skills, adaptability and problem solving are important: not all colleges teach these skills well. There OP is right to be concerned and gather opinions. hopefully they are analyzing data on all of these schools as well. Top schools with the highest proportions of top students can push the classroom far past the basics(memorization, understanding, basic application) toward analysis, evaluation, and creation: high-level application of learning to new problems.
Look at various curricula, pull up course syllabi, or better yet talk to professors. Professors understand the value of LACs but also understand they are not created equal, just as T50-75 universities are not at all on par with T15/ivy level.

Education doesn’t matter for prestige jobs. The schools don’t train for those jobs. What matters is the class marker of family wealth and social connections.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:honestly from a pure prestige perspective - and I have no dog in this fight - the only two that are stand outs are Amherst and Williams. Every other SLAC is just one of the bunch

Would add Harvey Mudd for STEM.