What is the appeal of SLACs for non-1%ers?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
It's not about needing "hand holding". It's about being more than just a number in your educational experience. I've seen "go getters/highly motivated" at large State U struggle because it is really hard to get to know profs who don't care about undergrads (and fact is that is most large state U). Having professors who give a damn and actually want to teach undergrads and have them do meaningful research with them and help a struggling student is not "hand holding"---it's doing their job. My kid started research during their freshman year and will have excellent references for Grad school or industry when they graduate. Their professors know them by name, they have meaningful discussions about the research, the coursework, and students futures. College is about much more than just going to a lecture, studying and taking a test. Knowing multiple professors in their major who they can discuss anything with is important. Don't kid yourself, very few kids get that at the large state U. It can happen but it is much harder to do, there are not research positions available for most undergrads, those are reserved for PHD students. |
Anonymous
Agree. There are differences. No need to exaggerate, however. There is a big difference between accepting challenges and adopting a willingness to grow both academically and as an individual versus repeating high school in a tiny suffocating environment. |
Anonymous
This is an opinion; not a fact. |
Anonymous
300? Try 700 for many of my intro courses at Big State U. And the sections taught by TA's with really poor English. As a 19 year old literally did not know waht some of them were saying. Now my kid is at a SLAC and the classes are taught by a professor |
Anonymous
A number of states HAVE reduced inflation-adjusted funding for their public universities. And the fact remains that giving $ to one's alma mater is a good indicator of a strong connection with the schools, whether the school "needs" the money or not to remain in existence. Harvard doesn't need a red cent, but alumni donate to it all the time. And many public universities are indeed aggressively reaching out to alumni for money to expand course offerings, fund more scholarships, help build new facilities -- things they want but can't do with state funding alone. |
Anonymous
Seems like PP hit a sore spot! |
Anonymous
Wow, you have a LOT of biases built into one response. Maybe look at the ROI data with a more careful lens (e.g., what majors are kids attracted to/capable in, what is your particular funding situation--for many MC folks SLACS are as cheap as in-state, but the level of ROI data provided masks that) and impose fewer biases and maybe you'll get some insight into why people might reasonably make this choice. |
).
Anonymous
Most decent SLACs only give out a small amount of merit aid. Getting the total CoA below $30k/year is very difficult unless you’re low-income. And no doubt about it — being a CS major at UMD is better than being a CS major at Bates, for example. |
Anonymous
+1. Clearly they have had an issue with a SLAC. anyhow, mine taught me to write well and got me into a top 3 law school so I'm perfectly fine with it |
Anonymous
And if a student doesn't want to be called upon to participate in class discussions because of apathy or fear that they will be unmasked as an imposter, wants to be able to skip class or go to class without even skimming the reading without worry that they'll even fall behind since the lectures will be dumbed down by grad students in recitation sections, and wants to have a curriculum that allows them to avoid having to do any meaningful research or writing over their four years if they plan it right, a big school might be a better option for them. (see, both sides can damn with faint praise) As it turns out, there are pros and cons to both types of schools. Some folks won't admit that because they are oddly jealous of SLACs, which I think they associate with wealth (and the associated benefits of privilege/elitism etc). Whether that is accurate for the type of school as a group is highly questionable, but these critics view wealth/privilege/elitism negatively. That's kind of ironic, though, because these are the same posters whose whole college search for their kids is focused on what will make their kids the most money so their kids get to access the privilege/elitism they associate with that money (and maybe never had themselves). |
Anonymous
There are 26 in Ohio alone. |
Anonymous
| OP's (and society's) devaluation of the humanities is sad and, in large part, why we have the society we have today. The humanities are nuclear subjects that give us direct access to knowledge on what is fundamentally human. Studying the humanities gives us comprehensive knowledge, skills and mindsets that come with studying the field, which are not easily outdated. The study of humanities allows us to question and reflect, maintain a global vision, acknowledge differences, communicate effectively, etc. These mindsets and skillsets are not emphasized in the study of science and math. |
Anonymous
+1. Also, some students find the smaller scale much better for social/happiness reasons. I loved my big State U but my kids both ended up at SLACS and were very happy with their choices. At the risk of being flamed by the SLAC haters, I recommend reading "Colleges that Change Lives." |
Anonymous
|
A SLAC is a college version of private high school. A school with teachers who have time to teach the student.
The SLAC hate is from the same people who were jealous of people who paid for private high school. |
Anonymous
OMG that's hilarious. |