College acceptances - small liberal arts colleges?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing that these small schools offer that a big state flagship won’t have at half the price.

They are apples and oranges. I'm not saying either is better but to say the education is the same is simply not true.

Totally agree. The big state flagships have way more resources and can attract a more talented professor pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is much more rigorous than at big flagships, I agree - I think people making those statements don’t have any experience at SLACs?

I think it’s that very few people go to both. But in my experience, I find that people who went to big state flagships were far more motivated than those who went to smaller schools. My kid is young still but wonder if a SLAC might be a better fit for him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is so off the mark. The top students in my kid's school attend SLACs. They are intellectually curious and are very hardworking. They are willing to develop their critical thinking skills and not get stuck in pre-professional paths too early in their academic careers.

I don't see the privilege and I agree with PP that the education is not the same (in fact, it's more rigorous) than what is offered at big flagships.

You don’t see the privilege in selective schools that cost 2x as much as public schools but which have names that only “the right people” recognize? Tell me again about your rigorous critical thinking skills.

Clearly, you have no critical thinking skills of your own. If you can read, the point was that people in SLAC are there to learn broadly and not get stuck in vocational training. The students are not there for the school names, DUH.

I disagree that SLAC are 2X more expensive than state schools across the board, especially with generous financial aid.
Then again, I'm sure you realize "you get what you pay for" may be a factor if big public schools are sooooo much cheaper.

Big state schools are so much cheaper because they’re subsidized by the state. Also I think kids today would find them more appealing if they were more affordable and had similar resources to the big state flagships. I know name recognition is a big deal as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is much more rigorous than at big flagships, I agree - I think people making those statements don’t have any experience at SLACs?

I did undergrad at a SLAC, grad (and taught) at an Ivy, teach at an R1 state school now… and the thing is in terms of rigor and access the offerings at the state school for the absolute top students are on par with the Ivy, especially since SLACs just don’t have much in the way of serious research going (yes they have undergrad research opportunities, they’re very cute, and it is a leg up in grad school but it’s rarely hitting journals that would count for my tenure).

The problem is you can only offer those things to so many kids- about as many as go to a SLAC. If you’re not in the top 50 or so in a major or school you’ll be locked out (and heaven forbid you don’t know you need to apply into a lab the day you get on campus, otherwise you’ll be locked out)- I can only hire a couple RAs. Honors colleges have done a good job of raising the floor for the kids that qualify, but it’s not on the same level of attention for kids who are strong but not the absolute elite. Those kids get challenged and a lot of focus at SLACs.

I do think anything outside of the top 20 or so for SLACs is a waste of money. I feel that way about large private schools too- it boggles my mind anyone goes to GW or BC- and state schools dominate those on basically every axis. But a top SLAC is “worth it” for the rigor and resources spent on smart but not, like, IMO level kids.

You must be in the sciences though. I think the calculus is different for other fields.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is much more rigorous than at big flagships, I agree - I think people making those statements don’t have any experience at SLACs?

I did undergrad at a SLAC, grad (and taught) at an Ivy, teach at an R1 state school now… and the thing is in terms of rigor and access the offerings at the state school for the absolute top students are on par with the Ivy, especially since SLACs just don’t have much in the way of serious research going (yes they have undergrad research opportunities, they’re very cute, and it is a leg up in grad school but it’s rarely hitting journals that would count for my tenure).

The problem is you can only offer those things to so many kids- about as many as go to a SLAC. If you’re not in the top 50 or so in a major or school you’ll be locked out (and heaven forbid you don’t know you need to apply into a lab the day you get on campus, otherwise you’ll be locked out)- I can only hire a couple RAs. Honors colleges have done a good job of raising the floor for the kids that qualify, but it’s not on the same level of attention for kids who are strong but not the absolute elite. Those kids get challenged and a lot of focus at SLACs.

I do think anything outside of the top 20 or so for SLACs is a waste of money. I feel that way about large private schools too- it boggles my mind anyone goes to GW or BC- and state schools dominate those on basically every axis. But a top SLAC is “worth it” for the rigor and resources spent on smart but not, like, IMO level kids.

You must be in the sciences though. I think the calculus is different for other fields.

PP here- yes I agree. Anything with pretty low overhead (like math) a small set of SLACs have faculty on par with any school in the country (Amherst math is incredibly strong, same with their economics, but they just can’t pay for “real” data collection or compute so even there there is a bias towards what they are good at)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing that these small schools offer that a big state flagship won’t have at half the price.

They are apples and oranges. I'm not saying either is better but to say the education is the same is simply not true.

Totally agree. The big state flagships have way more resources and can attract a more talented professor pool.

But they'll be in huge lecture halls not in ten person seminars like at Liberal Arts Colleges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your post just reveals the world you grew up in, which is not generally applicable.

Where I "came from" (UMC suburb public school) everyone aimed for top 10 universities or state schools. I think we had one person in our top 10 percent who went to a SLAC.

When I see a SLAC on a resume I immediately assume you came from a privileged background and won’t try very hard. Sorry!

That makes no sense at all. They are small schools, so you can't hide or skip classes; you have to work hard and be accountable.

This is super hilarious. In a big school you sink or swim- no one cares if you show up or not. You’re only accountable to yourself.

At a big school, you're going to be taught in an auditorium with hundreds of other students and most of your contact will be with teaching assistants, i.e. grad students who aren't much older than undergrads and may not even speak much English. At a small school, you might have a class where it's just you, one other student and the professor. Seems kinda obvious where the kid is going to learn more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your post just reveals the world you grew up in, which is not generally applicable.

Where I "came from" (UMC suburb public school) everyone aimed for top 10 universities or state schools. I think we had one person in our top 10 percent who went to a SLAC.

When I see a SLAC on a resume I immediately assume you came from a privileged background and won’t try very hard. Sorry!

That makes no sense at all. They are small schools, so you can't hide or skip classes; you have to work hard and be accountable.

This is super hilarious. In a big school you sink or swim- no one cares if you show up or not. You’re only accountable to yourself.

At a big school, you're going to be taught in an auditorium with hundreds of other students and most of your contact will be with teaching assistants, i.e. grad students who aren't much older than undergrads and may not even speak much English. At a small school, you might have a class where it's just you, one other student and the professor. Seems kinda obvious where the kid is going to learn more.

For a very small set of kids, in a small set of majors, state schools are like this.

Like a math major at Indiana, Maryland, or Wisconsin is going to be in 10 person classes by sophomore year. Freshman if they’re taking the “real” multivariate calculus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your post just reveals the world you grew up in, which is not generally applicable.

Where I "came from" (UMC suburb public school) everyone aimed for top 10 universities or state schools. I think we had one person in our top 10 percent who went to a SLAC.

When I see a SLAC on a resume I immediately assume you came from a privileged background and won’t try very hard. Sorry!

That makes no sense at all. They are small schools, so you can't hide or skip classes; you have to work hard and be accountable.

This is super hilarious. In a big school you sink or swim- no one cares if you show up or not. You’re only accountable to yourself.

At a big school, you're going to be taught in an auditorium with hundreds of other students and most of your contact will be with teaching assistants, i.e. grad students who aren't much older than undergrads and may not even speak much English. At a small school, you might have a class where it's just you, one other student and the professor. Seems kinda obvious where the kid is going to learn more.

For a very small set of kids, in a small set of majors, state schools are like this.

Like a math major at Indiana, Maryland, or Wisconsin is going to be in 10 person classes by sophomore year. Freshman if they’re taking the “real” multivariate calculus.

Yeah this. I went to a huge school (unc chapel hill) and had intro classes that met this description, but not science labs and higher level classes in my major. And the honors school has small seminars from the very beginning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing that these small schools offer that a big state flagship won’t have at half the price.

They are apples and oranges. I'm not saying either is better but to say the education is the same is simply not true.

Totally agree. The big state flagships have way more resources and can attract a more talented professor pool.

False. Resouces are funneled to grad students not undergrads. Academia jobs are so scarce, professors go where the jobs are. Public universities do not have more resources than top privates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Davidson would love more DCPS and DCPCS but preferences matter, and they just don’t apply. Plenty of private applicants, plenty of athletes. Not a lot of kids from JR, Walls, or Banneker let alone DCI or BASIS. Honestly Dartmouth and Brown feel the same way.

I’ve never heard of Davidson.

Steph Curry went there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your post just reveals the world you grew up in, which is not generally applicable.

Where I "came from" (UMC suburb public school) everyone aimed for top 10 universities or state schools. I think we had one person in our top 10 percent who went to a SLAC.

When I see a SLAC on a resume I immediately assume you came from a privileged background and won’t try very hard. Sorry!

That makes no sense at all. They are small schools, so you can't hide or skip classes; you have to work hard and be accountable.

This is super hilarious. In a big school you sink or swim- no one cares if you show up or not. You’re only accountable to yourself.

At a big school, you're going to be taught in an auditorium with hundreds of other students and most of your contact will be with teaching assistants, i.e. grad students who aren't much older than undergrads and may not even speak much English. At a small school, you might have a class where it's just you, one other student and the professor. Seems kinda obvious where the kid is going to learn more.

For a very small set of kids, in a small set of majors, state schools are like this.

Like a math major at Indiana, Maryland, or Wisconsin is going to be in 10 person classes by sophomore year. Freshman if they’re taking the “real” multivariate calculus.

Yeah this. I went to a huge school (unc chapel hill) and had intro classes that met this description, but not science labs and higher level classes in my major. And the honors school has small seminars from the very beginning.

Great school, harder to get into than most ivies OOS (also the split on departments with State makes for some interesting small STEM majors- like physics is at UNC for some reason, and it’s a great major with almost no one in it , or used to be)