Reply to How would you rank NESCACS academically?

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "How would you rank NESCACS academically?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]How do these LACs compare to national universities? Is Williams HYPSM level? Are Bowdoin and Middlebury comperable to Duke and Northwestern? Or are they lower[/quote]

No, schools like Duke and Northwestern are simply on another tier above Bowdoin/Middlebury. Even Williams/Amherst would be right below Duke/Northwestern.[/quote]

Agree. More diversity, more options academically and socially. Great academic atmosphere due to presence of very serious graduate & professional students.

I cannot imagine anyone equating Middlebury or Bowdoin to National Universities ranked in the top 15 or 20. And the Wall street Journal/Times higher Education rating & ranking system appears to agree that the top ranked LACs (Amherst & Williams) rank at #22 and #23 when rated in a combined ranking of LACs and National Universities.

I am very familiar with all of the schools mentioned by the above quoted poster and know students at all of these schools currently and in the past. They are in two different leagues. 
[/quote]
+1.[/quote]
-1 I am a tenured professor at an R1, and would rank the academic ability of graduates of SLACs like Amherst and Williams (and Swarthmore and Pomona) above Duke and Northwestern. There's a reason why those of us who actually teach and research at universities overwhelmingly send our children to SLACs. [/quote]

I wouldn't necessarily say students' academic "ability" is greater, but the academic benefits of a Duke or Northwestern are really at the grad school level more than the undergrad level.  What you're getting by going undergrad to Duke or Northwestern is more social opportunities, DI athletics and school spirit, and a greater range of majors, classes, and professors (although that doesn't mean it's easier to get into those classes or to get the times/professors you want).  The SLACs' clear focus is on teaching undergrads.  For major research universities, grad students and research are the focus and undergrads are part of the business model of paying for that research focus.  It's not wrong to go to one over the other, but there are tradeoffs to each academically/socially, which is why they typically aren't considered in the same categories by rankings.

But if you put aside academic strength and focus on credentialing, then going to schools with the most name brand recognition, the most graduates with whom you can network, and, for certain career paths, the most practical training and industry ties, is going to be better, none of which is really about[b] superior "academics." [/b]   [/quote]

Some of us want superior academics and undergraduate teaching, especially if we know there is a very high likelihood our kids will go on to grad school.[/quote]

As the person who wrote the quoted post, I agree.  I was merely pointing out why someone might choose one over the other for undergrad.  From my perspective, if you think it's likely your kid is going to go to grad school or professional school (which is a much higher percentage of kids nowadays than it used to be), a SLAC for undergrad and a bigger research university for grad school/professional school can be an ideal combination. [/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