Williams vs Princeton, please help

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Educated people know Williams. It’s a nonissue.

I’m educated. Advanced degrees. Mid- 6 figure income. Never heard of Williams. Yes I’ve heard of W&M but couldn’t tell you what state it’s in. Yes, I’ve heard of Princeton and know a few folks in my field who went there and I could tell you where it is located.

Have employed hundreds of people. And worked with thousands. Never heard of Williams.

I’m Not from the east coast.

Perhaps not well educated?

New poster. Just to be brutally honest here, while I have heard of Williams, I do not have a positive opinion of their graduates based on working with multiple spanning their late career to early career. Of course this probably just reflects the individuals and says nothing about the institution.

However, most universities are well known for their graduate programs in medicine, business, law, PhD programs, etc. Even Princeton offers PhD programs. This benefits the undergraduates because of the faculty, postdocs, and graduate students can contribute to undergraduate coursework or undergraduate research experiences. Also, most top faculty would only work somewhere with access to graduate students and postdocs.

That being said, while an undergraduate teaching emphasis is nice at the LACs, the tradeoff is you cannot have top faculty and will only get teaching focused faculty. The LACs do not get any of the benefits of having the paired graduate programs and higher level trainees.

You cannot expect a LAC to be prestigious or well known when it only has college students.

Honestly, why should people be familiar with LACs that have very little going on? Just college students and teaching focused faculty. While universities are developing new therapies to target disease, training physicians, business leaders, and powerful lawyers. It just seems not worth knowing the LACs.

By this impeccable logic, University of Wisconsin is preferable to both Williams and Princeton. It takes all kinds…

It is certainly much better known than Williams. For the reasons stated above.

As is the University of Alabama. Roll Tide!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Educated people know Williams. It’s a nonissue.

I’m educated. Advanced degrees. Mid- 6 figure income. Never heard of Williams. Yes I’ve heard of W&M but couldn’t tell you what state it’s in. Yes, I’ve heard of Princeton and know a few folks in my field who went there and I could tell you where it is located.

Have employed hundreds of people. And worked with thousands. Never heard of Williams.

I’m Not from the east coast.

Perhaps not well educated?

New poster. Just to be brutally honest here, while I have heard of Williams, I do not have a positive opinion of their graduates based on working with multiple spanning their late career to early career. Of course this probably just reflects the individuals and says nothing about the institution.

However, most universities are well known for their graduate programs in medicine, business, law, PhD programs, etc. Even Princeton offers PhD programs. This benefits the undergraduates because of the faculty, postdocs, and graduate students can contribute to undergraduate coursework or undergraduate research experiences. Also, most top faculty would only work somewhere with access to graduate students and postdocs.

That being said, while an undergraduate teaching emphasis is nice at the LACs, the tradeoff is you cannot have top faculty and will only get teaching focused faculty. The LACs do not get any of the benefits of having the paired graduate programs and higher level trainees.

You cannot expect a LAC to be prestigious or well known when it only has college students.

Honestly, why should people be familiar with LACs that have very little going on? Just college students and teaching focused faculty. While universities are developing new therapies to target disease, training physicians, business leaders, and powerful lawyers. It just seems not worth knowing the LACs.

You kind of are right but are still wrong. Grad students just teach intro classes you need anyway. Williams has an issue of location more than anything. Getting a tenure track post there is an elite outcome and you get a lot benefit including extensive research funding. Unlike most PUIs, Williams and other top lacs have very light teaching loads and expect publications for tenure promotion. They do have top faculty, because academia isn’t a meritocracy and is a combination of luck and time. Some sub areas get 10 or fewer openings a year. It is not a given that a Princeton professor is better than a Williams faculty member. You can be very productive as a researcher at these top lacs, and some faculty members who are good grant writers will get postdocs.

Sure, but the research output of a top LAC is still dismal compared to a major university.

Gosh, then why are these SLAC grads more likely, per capita, to obtain Ph.Ds at top research universities? You really don’t know what you are talking about.

False.

No that’s a true fact.

False statistic. Which schools exactly are you comparing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Educated people know Williams. It’s a nonissue.

I’m educated. Advanced degrees. Mid- 6 figure income. Never heard of Williams. Yes I’ve heard of W&M but couldn’t tell you what state it’s in. Yes, I’ve heard of Princeton and know a few folks in my field who went there and I could tell you where it is located.

Have employed hundreds of people. And worked with thousands. Never heard of Williams.

I’m Not from the east coast.

Perhaps not well educated?

New poster. Just to be brutally honest here, while I have heard of Williams, I do not have a positive opinion of their graduates based on working with multiple spanning their late career to early career. Of course this probably just reflects the individuals and says nothing about the institution.

However, most universities are well known for their graduate programs in medicine, business, law, PhD programs, etc. Even Princeton offers PhD programs. This benefits the undergraduates because of the faculty, postdocs, and graduate students can contribute to undergraduate coursework or undergraduate research experiences. Also, most top faculty would only work somewhere with access to graduate students and postdocs.

That being said, while an undergraduate teaching emphasis is nice at the LACs, the tradeoff is you cannot have top faculty and will only get teaching focused faculty. The LACs do not get any of the benefits of having the paired graduate programs and higher level trainees.

You cannot expect a LAC to be prestigious or well known when it only has college students.

Honestly, why should people be familiar with LACs that have very little going on? Just college students and teaching focused faculty. While universities are developing new therapies to target disease, training physicians, business leaders, and powerful lawyers. It just seems not worth knowing the LACs.

You kind of are right but are still wrong. Grad students just teach intro classes you need anyway. Williams has an issue of location more than anything. Getting a tenure track post there is an elite outcome and you get a lot benefit including extensive research funding. Unlike most PUIs, Williams and other top lacs have very light teaching loads and expect publications for tenure promotion. They do have top faculty, because academia isn’t a meritocracy and is a combination of luck and time. Some sub areas get 10 or fewer openings a year. It is not a given that a Princeton professor is better than a Williams faculty member. You can be very productive as a researcher at these top lacs, and some faculty members who are good grant writers will get postdocs.

Sure, but the research output of a top LAC is still dismal compared to a major university.

Gosh, then why are these SLAC grads more likely, per capita, to obtain Ph.Ds at top research universities? You really don’t know what you are talking about.

False.

No that’s a true fact.

False statistic. Which schools exactly are you comparing?

Read their comment. I’m not comparing anything, but it’s factual that the SLAC grads place better per capita.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Educated people know Williams. It’s a nonissue.

I’m educated. Advanced degrees. Mid- 6 figure income. Never heard of Williams. Yes I’ve heard of W&M but couldn’t tell you what state it’s in. Yes, I’ve heard of Princeton and know a few folks in my field who went there and I could tell you where it is located.

Have employed hundreds of people. And worked with thousands. Never heard of Williams.

I’m Not from the east coast.

Perhaps not well educated?

New poster. Just to be brutally honest here, while I have heard of Williams, I do not have a positive opinion of their graduates based on working with multiple spanning their late career to early career. Of course this probably just reflects the individuals and says nothing about the institution.

However, most universities are well known for their graduate programs in medicine, business, law, PhD programs, etc. Even Princeton offers PhD programs. This benefits the undergraduates because of the faculty, postdocs, and graduate students can contribute to undergraduate coursework or undergraduate research experiences. Also, most top faculty would only work somewhere with access to graduate students and postdocs.

That being said, while an undergraduate teaching emphasis is nice at the LACs, the tradeoff is you cannot have top faculty and will only get teaching focused faculty. The LACs do not get any of the benefits of having the paired graduate programs and higher level trainees.

You cannot expect a LAC to be prestigious or well known when it only has college students.

Honestly, why should people be familiar with LACs that have very little going on? Just college students and teaching focused faculty. While universities are developing new therapies to target disease, training physicians, business leaders, and powerful lawyers. It just seems not worth knowing the LACs.

By this impeccable logic, University of Wisconsin is preferable to both Williams and Princeton. It takes all kinds…

Would rather attend Wisconsin over Williams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Educated people know Williams. It’s a nonissue.

I’m educated. Advanced degrees. Mid- 6 figure income. Never heard of Williams. Yes I’ve heard of W&M but couldn’t tell you what state it’s in. Yes, I’ve heard of Princeton and know a few folks in my field who went there and I could tell you where it is located.

Have employed hundreds of people. And worked with thousands. Never heard of Williams.

I’m Not from the east coast.

Perhaps not well educated?

New poster. Just to be brutally honest here, while I have heard of Williams, I do not have a positive opinion of their graduates based on working with multiple spanning their late career to early career. Of course this probably just reflects the individuals and says nothing about the institution.

However, most universities are well known for their graduate programs in medicine, business, law, PhD programs, etc. Even Princeton offers PhD programs. This benefits the undergraduates because of the faculty, postdocs, and graduate students can contribute to undergraduate coursework or undergraduate research experiences. Also, most top faculty would only work somewhere with access to graduate students and postdocs.

That being said, while an undergraduate teaching emphasis is nice at the LACs, the tradeoff is you cannot have top faculty and will only get teaching focused faculty. The LACs do not get any of the benefits of having the paired graduate programs and higher level trainees.

You cannot expect a LAC to be prestigious or well known when it only has college students.

Honestly, why should people be familiar with LACs that have very little going on? Just college students and teaching focused faculty. While universities are developing new therapies to target disease, training physicians, business leaders, and powerful lawyers. It just seems not worth knowing the LACs.

You kind of are right but are still wrong. Grad students just teach intro classes you need anyway. Williams has an issue of location more than anything. Getting a tenure track post there is an elite outcome and you get a lot benefit including extensive research funding. Unlike most PUIs, Williams and other top lacs have very light teaching loads and expect publications for tenure promotion. They do have top faculty, because academia isn’t a meritocracy and is a combination of luck and time. Some sub areas get 10 or fewer openings a year. It is not a given that a Princeton professor is better than a Williams faculty member. You can be very productive as a researcher at these top lacs, and some faculty members who are good grant writers will get postdocs.

Sure, but the research output of a top LAC is still dismal compared to a major university.

Gosh, then why are these SLAC grads more likely, per capita, to obtain Ph.Ds at top research universities? You really don’t know what you are talking about.

False.

No that’s a true fact.

False statistic. Which schools exactly are you comparing?

Read their comment. I’m not comparing anything, but it’s factual that the SLAC grads place better per capita.

No it isn’t. You are not making a fair comparison. Which students exactly are you comparing? Be specific. Control for student debt and other factors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Educated people know Williams. It’s a nonissue.

I’m educated. Advanced degrees. Mid- 6 figure income. Never heard of Williams. Yes I’ve heard of W&M but couldn’t tell you what state it’s in. Yes, I’ve heard of Princeton and know a few folks in my field who went there and I could tell you where it is located.

Have employed hundreds of people. And worked with thousands. Never heard of Williams.

I’m Not from the east coast.

Perhaps not well educated?

New poster. Just to be brutally honest here, while I have heard of Williams, I do not have a positive opinion of their graduates based on working with multiple spanning their late career to early career. Of course this probably just reflects the individuals and says nothing about the institution.

However, most universities are well known for their graduate programs in medicine, business, law, PhD programs, etc. Even Princeton offers PhD programs. This benefits the undergraduates because of the faculty, postdocs, and graduate students can contribute to undergraduate coursework or undergraduate research experiences. Also, most top faculty would only work somewhere with access to graduate students and postdocs.

That being said, while an undergraduate teaching emphasis is nice at the LACs, the tradeoff is you cannot have top faculty and will only get teaching focused faculty. The LACs do not get any of the benefits of having the paired graduate programs and higher level trainees.

You cannot expect a LAC to be prestigious or well known when it only has college students.

Honestly, why should people be familiar with LACs that have very little going on? Just college students and teaching focused faculty. While universities are developing new therapies to target disease, training physicians, business leaders, and powerful lawyers. It just seems not worth knowing the LACs.

You kind of are right but are still wrong. Grad students just teach intro classes you need anyway. Williams has an issue of location more than anything. Getting a tenure track post there is an elite outcome and you get a lot benefit including extensive research funding. Unlike most PUIs, Williams and other top lacs have very light teaching loads and expect publications for tenure promotion. They do have top faculty, because academia isn’t a meritocracy and is a combination of luck and time. Some sub areas get 10 or fewer openings a year. It is not a given that a Princeton professor is better than a Williams faculty member. You can be very productive as a researcher at these top lacs, and some faculty members who are good grant writers will get postdocs.

Sure, but the research output of a top LAC is still dismal compared to a major university.

Gosh, then why are these SLAC grads more likely, per capita, to obtain Ph.Ds at top research universities? You really don’t know what you are talking about.

False.

No that’s a true fact.

False statistic. Which schools exactly are you comparing?

Read their comment. I’m not comparing anything, but it’s factual that the SLAC grads place better per capita.

Bogus.

[Anonymous]

Apply to both. Let's see where she gets in along with FA. She need to visit both and see other schools too. Kids change their mind all the time. Remember princeton is a lottery school. It has 4% acceptance rate so 1600 may not even get a seat. I hope this helps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Apply to both. Let's see where she gets in along with FA. She need to visit both and see other schools too. Kids change their mind all the time. Remember princeton is a lottery school. It has 4% acceptance rate so 1600 may not even get a seat. I hope this helps.

Williams is also about 4% for non athletes

[Anonymous]

Princeton is one of the few universities to approach the focus on undergraduates of the NESCAC LACs, which makes this less of a lopsided comparison than might otherwise be the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Educated people know Williams. It’s a nonissue.

I’m educated. Advanced degrees. Mid- 6 figure income. Never heard of Williams. Yes I’ve heard of W&M but couldn’t tell you what state it’s in. Yes, I’ve heard of Princeton and know a few folks in my field who went there and I could tell you where it is located.

Have employed hundreds of people. And worked with thousands. Never heard of Williams.

I’m Not from the east coast.

Perhaps not well educated?

New poster. Just to be brutally honest here, while I have heard of Williams, I do not have a positive opinion of their graduates based on working with multiple spanning their late career to early career. Of course this probably just reflects the individuals and says nothing about the institution.

However, most universities are well known for their graduate programs in medicine, business, law, PhD programs, etc. Even Princeton offers PhD programs. This benefits the undergraduates because of the faculty, postdocs, and graduate students can contribute to undergraduate coursework or undergraduate research experiences. Also, most top faculty would only work somewhere with access to graduate students and postdocs.

That being said, while an undergraduate teaching emphasis is nice at the LACs, the tradeoff is you cannot have top faculty and will only get teaching focused faculty. The LACs do not get any of the benefits of having the paired graduate programs and higher level trainees.

You cannot expect a LAC to be prestigious or well known when it only has college students.

Honestly, why should people be familiar with LACs that have very little going on? Just college students and teaching focused faculty. While universities are developing new therapies to target disease, training physicians, business leaders, and powerful lawyers. It just seems not worth knowing the LACs.

You kind of are right but are still wrong. Grad students just teach intro classes you need anyway. Williams has an issue of location more than anything. Getting a tenure track post there is an elite outcome and you get a lot benefit including extensive research funding. Unlike most PUIs, Williams and other top lacs have very light teaching loads and expect publications for tenure promotion. They do have top faculty, because academia isn’t a meritocracy and is a combination of luck and time. Some sub areas get 10 or fewer openings a year. It is not a given that a Princeton professor is better than a Williams faculty member. You can be very productive as a researcher at these top lacs, and some faculty members who are good grant writers will get postdocs.

Sure, but the research output of a top LAC is still dismal compared to a major university.

Gosh, then why are these SLAC grads more likely, per capita, to obtain Ph.Ds at top research universities? You really don’t know what you are talking about.

False.

No that’s a true fact.

False statistic. Which schools exactly are you comparing?

Read their comment. I’m not comparing anything, but it’s factual that the SLAC grads place better per capita.

Bogus.

Prove it then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Educated people know Williams. It’s a nonissue.

I’m educated. Advanced degrees. Mid- 6 figure income. Never heard of Williams. Yes I’ve heard of W&M but couldn’t tell you what state it’s in. Yes, I’ve heard of Princeton and know a few folks in my field who went there and I could tell you where it is located.

Have employed hundreds of people. And worked with thousands. Never heard of Williams.

I’m Not from the east coast.

Perhaps not well educated?

New poster. Just to be brutally honest here, while I have heard of Williams, I do not have a positive opinion of their graduates based on working with multiple spanning their late career to early career. Of course this probably just reflects the individuals and says nothing about the institution.

However, most universities are well known for their graduate programs in medicine, business, law, PhD programs, etc. Even Princeton offers PhD programs. This benefits the undergraduates because of the faculty, postdocs, and graduate students can contribute to undergraduate coursework or undergraduate research experiences. Also, most top faculty would only work somewhere with access to graduate students and postdocs.

That being said, while an undergraduate teaching emphasis is nice at the LACs, the tradeoff is you cannot have top faculty and will only get teaching focused faculty. The LACs do not get any of the benefits of having the paired graduate programs and higher level trainees.

You cannot expect a LAC to be prestigious or well known when it only has college students.

Honestly, why should people be familiar with LACs that have very little going on? Just college students and teaching focused faculty. While universities are developing new therapies to target disease, training physicians, business leaders, and powerful lawyers. It just seems not worth knowing the LACs.

You kind of are right but are still wrong. Grad students just teach intro classes you need anyway. Williams has an issue of location more than anything. Getting a tenure track post there is an elite outcome and you get a lot benefit including extensive research funding. Unlike most PUIs, Williams and other top lacs have very light teaching loads and expect publications for tenure promotion. They do have top faculty, because academia isn’t a meritocracy and is a combination of luck and time. Some sub areas get 10 or fewer openings a year. It is not a given that a Princeton professor is better than a Williams faculty member. You can be very productive as a researcher at these top lacs, and some faculty members who are good grant writers will get postdocs.

Sure, but the research output of a top LAC is still dismal compared to a major university.

Gosh, then why are these SLAC grads more likely, per capita, to obtain Ph.Ds at top research universities? You really don’t know what you are talking about.

False.

No that’s a true fact.

False statistic. Which schools exactly are you comparing?

Read their comment. I’m not comparing anything, but it’s factual that the SLAC grads place better per capita.

Bogus.

Prove it then.

If you make a claim without any evidence, it can be dismissed without evidence. There is nothing to prove. The claim was bogus.

[Anonymous]

“ That brings me to the other option my daughter is considering”

Here lies the problem with this post: she doesn’t have these options yet, and likely won’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Educated people know Williams. It’s a nonissue.

I’m educated. Advanced degrees. Mid- 6 figure income. Never heard of Williams. Yes I’ve heard of W&M but couldn’t tell you what state it’s in. Yes, I’ve heard of Princeton and know a few folks in my field who went there and I could tell you where it is located.

Have employed hundreds of people. And worked with thousands. Never heard of Williams.

I’m Not from the east coast.

Perhaps not well educated?

New poster. Just to be brutally honest here, while I have heard of Williams, I do not have a positive opinion of their graduates based on working with multiple spanning their late career to early career. Of course this probably just reflects the individuals and says nothing about the institution.

However, most universities are well known for their graduate programs in medicine, business, law, PhD programs, etc. Even Princeton offers PhD programs. This benefits the undergraduates because of the faculty, postdocs, and graduate students can contribute to undergraduate coursework or undergraduate research experiences. Also, most top faculty would only work somewhere with access to graduate students and postdocs.

That being said, while an undergraduate teaching emphasis is nice at the LACs, the tradeoff is you cannot have top faculty and will only get teaching focused faculty. The LACs do not get any of the benefits of having the paired graduate programs and higher level trainees.

You cannot expect a LAC to be prestigious or well known when it only has college students.

Honestly, why should people be familiar with LACs that have very little going on? Just college students and teaching focused faculty. While universities are developing new therapies to target disease, training physicians, business leaders, and powerful lawyers. It just seems not worth knowing the LACs.

You kind of are right but are still wrong. Grad students just teach intro classes you need anyway. Williams has an issue of location more than anything. Getting a tenure track post there is an elite outcome and you get a lot benefit including extensive research funding. Unlike most PUIs, Williams and other top lacs have very light teaching loads and expect publications for tenure promotion. They do have top faculty, because academia isn’t a meritocracy and is a combination of luck and time. Some sub areas get 10 or fewer openings a year. It is not a given that a Princeton professor is better than a Williams faculty member. You can be very productive as a researcher at these top lacs, and some faculty members who are good grant writers will get postdocs.

Sure, but the research output of a top LAC is still dismal compared to a major university.

Gosh, then why are these SLAC grads more likely, per capita, to obtain Ph.Ds at top research universities? You really don’t know what you are talking about.

False.

No that’s a true fact.

False statistic. Which schools exactly are you comparing?

Read their comment. I’m not comparing anything, but it’s factual that the SLAC grads place better per capita.

Bogus.

Prove it then.

If you make a claim without any evidence, it can be dismissed without evidence. There is nothing to prove. The claim was bogus.

I think the issue is that some people aren’t worth the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Educated people know Williams. It’s a nonissue.

I’m educated. Advanced degrees. Mid- 6 figure income. Never heard of Williams. Yes I’ve heard of W&M but couldn’t tell you what state it’s in. Yes, I’ve heard of Princeton and know a few folks in my field who went there and I could tell you where it is located.

Have employed hundreds of people. And worked with thousands. Never heard of Williams.

I’m Not from the east coast.

Perhaps not well educated?

New poster. Just to be brutally honest here, while I have heard of Williams, I do not have a positive opinion of their graduates based on working with multiple spanning their late career to early career. Of course this probably just reflects the individuals and says nothing about the institution.

However, most universities are well known for their graduate programs in medicine, business, law, PhD programs, etc. Even Princeton offers PhD programs. This benefits the undergraduates because of the faculty, postdocs, and graduate students can contribute to undergraduate coursework or undergraduate research experiences. Also, most top faculty would only work somewhere with access to graduate students and postdocs.

That being said, while an undergraduate teaching emphasis is nice at the LACs, the tradeoff is you cannot have top faculty and will only get teaching focused faculty. The LACs do not get any of the benefits of having the paired graduate programs and higher level trainees.

You cannot expect a LAC to be prestigious or well known when it only has college students.

Honestly, why should people be familiar with LACs that have very little going on? Just college students and teaching focused faculty. While universities are developing new therapies to target disease, training physicians, business leaders, and powerful lawyers. It just seems not worth knowing the LACs.

You kind of are right but are still wrong. Grad students just teach intro classes you need anyway. Williams has an issue of location more than anything. Getting a tenure track post there is an elite outcome and you get a lot benefit including extensive research funding. Unlike most PUIs, Williams and other top lacs have very light teaching loads and expect publications for tenure promotion. They do have top faculty, because academia isn’t a meritocracy and is a combination of luck and time. Some sub areas get 10 or fewer openings a year. It is not a given that a Princeton professor is better than a Williams faculty member. You can be very productive as a researcher at these top lacs, and some faculty members who are good grant writers will get postdocs.

Sure, but the research output of a top LAC is still dismal compared to a major university.

Gosh, then why are these SLAC grads more likely, per capita, to obtain Ph.Ds at top research universities? You really don’t know what you are talking about.

False.

No that’s a true fact.

False statistic. Which schools exactly are you comparing?

Read their comment. I’m not comparing anything, but it’s factual that the SLAC grads place better per capita.

Bogus.

Prove it then.

If you make a claim without any evidence, it can be dismissed without evidence. There is nothing to prove. The claim was bogus.

I think the issue is that some people aren’t worth the time.

You can’t just say something is a fact and then not be able to provide any explanation or proof. The persistence on this is absurd. Behavior you expect from someone who eats crayons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a parent, all I want is the best for my daughter. She’s bright, articulate, and passionate about literature—an aspiring English major who lights up when she talks about Shakespeare, Toni Morrison, and George Eliot. I’m proud of her intellectual curiosity and her drive, and as college application season ramps up, I find myself facing a surprising dilemma: prestige versus fit.
Recently, she’s been talking a lot about Williams College. Her college counselor raves about it, calling it one of the best liberal arts colleges in the country. Small class sizes, amazing faculty attention, a rigorous academic environment—it checks all the boxes on paper. She loves the idea of a tight-knit academic community where she can really dig into her studies.
But here’s the thing that keeps nagging at me: no one I know has heard of Williams.
I don’t mean this to sound dismissive or elitist. I’ve done my research. I know that Williams consistently ranks at the top of liberal arts college lists, often ahead of places like Amherst. But when I bring it up to friends, colleagues, or even extended family, the reaction is almost always the same: “Where’s that?” or “Is that William and Mary?” or, worse, “Oh, is that a state school?”
It feels strange—and frankly a little frustrating—that such a highly ranked school doesn’t carry the same name recognition as, say, Princeton or Yale. In a world where connections matter, where first impressions are formed in seconds, I can’t help but wonder: Will people take her degree seriously if they’ve never heard of the school?
That brings me to the other option my daughter is considering: Princeton. She’s academically competitive enough to be a real contender there, and of course, the English department is world-renowned. If you tell someone you went to Princeton, you don’t need to explain. The name opens doors—whether you're applying for a job, a fellowship, or grad school. It’s just understood.
I’m torn. I don’t want to push her toward a decision based purely on prestige. I know that real learning happens when a student feels seen, challenged, and supported—and from everything we’ve heard, Williams offers that in spades. But I also can’t ignore the reality that in many circles, name recognition matters. She might thrive at Williams, but I worry she’ll have to constantly explain or defend her choice to people who simply don’t know better.

I would steer her towards Williams or Brown (not Princeton).