Reply to Pros and Cons of Top 10 SLAC vs State Flagship Honors Program

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Pros and Cons of Top 10 SLAC vs State Flagship Honors Program"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]i have a phd from a top (ivy league) phd program and i nobody i know wanted to be a professor at a slac. this is considered an acceptable option but is nobody's first choice. [b]the best researchers/scientists do not teach at SLACs[/b].[/quote]

This is a true by definition. Researchers will not teach at SLACs simply because SLACs are not research universities. This is not a reflection of the quality of SLACs. [/quote]

in my mind this is the actual brainpower of people teaching is the most important factor in a school quality. ymmv, obviously.[/quote]

For graduate studies, sure. But for undergrad, ability to teach and connect with students, mentorship, inclusivity, care, and the ability to draw out the best potential from budding students is the most important trait in my view. And LACs are excellent in doing so. Once students have found the confidence and direction to figure out where they want to go, they can seek out the specialized experiences at top graduate programs (80% or so of grads at places like Williams or Swarthmore end up doing so).

It is well documented that LAC graduates participate more in high impact practices such as research or internships than students of any other institutional classification, that they are (at times, far) more satisfied with teaching and professor accessibility than just about any other institution, and that they are overly represented not just in academia but just about any elite destination relative to their tiny size. [/quote]

[b]I totally disagree with this; so few students are smart enough to benefit from top faculty that, if you are one of those, you will be lavished with attention everywhere. [/b][/quote]

That’s my experience too (from a variety of different perspectives — student, faculty, parent).  But that means we’re thinking this through from the perspective of extreme outliers.  Most kids — even most bright kids — are going to college to have a good time and to get their ticket punched for the next stage of life.  They’ll learn stuff along the way — some of which will be interesting, some of which might prove useful later — but they (and their future employers) aren’t relying on that.  College just functions as a preliminary way of identifying who will show up, present well, and submit acceptable work on time.  And it creates networks and peer groups.

So if we stripped away all these claims about intellectual development and said LACs are happy-making places for smarter-than-the-average-bear UMC kids to produce the transcripts/GPAs necessary to get them into law or med school or finance, then, ok, it’s a fine investment if you have the $ and that’s what your kid wants.  It’s a more expensive but easier/more reliable path than an excellent public flagship where, frankly, there is a lot more competition at the top, less grade inflation, and more gatekeepers.
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics