Reply to Why is DCUM so obsessed with small liberal arts colleges?

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Why is DCUM so obsessed with small liberal arts colleges? "

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][quote=Anonymous]I have no problem with attending a top 20 liberal arts college.  They’re clearly very strong schools.  It’s the silly CTCL schools that are a rip off and a con job.  [/quote]

How is a CTCL school any worse than a lower ranking State U?  Not everyone has the same capabilities and same needs.  CTCL is good for some folks and not fair to compare the T20.  They don’t claim to be T20.[/quote]

They claim to be special, but they’re not.  They’re average schools at best, at an above average price.  [/quote]

So what?  If people like them and can afford them (many give good merit aid), why do you care?  It seems you think there is only one path.[/quote]

So we agree then.  They’re not special.  [/quote]

NP. I don’t think there anything special about HYS and I went there. [/quote]

Job prospects. [/quote]

Ah, so we get to the heart of the matter. The obsessed anti-SLAC poster is a parent who is just now figuring out that paying for a big college doesn’t give her child the ticket into wealth that she had assumed she’d get. And she is freaking out, so rather pathetically hopes that denigrating SLACs in an anonymous forum will stop hiring managers from valuing SLAC degrees because she correctly understands that hiring managers don’t value big name degrees the same way any more. She also doesn’t understand that SLAC alumni networks are much, much tighter than what I had from HYS.

I have to say that I adore how petty she is in that she continually drops the S from SLAC in her posts because sometimes it stands for “selective” and that makes her blood pressure skyrocket. Very entertaining. [/quote]

Some are just way too obsessed with "Top schools" as defined by USNWR.  For decades, many SLAC have sent very high percentages of their students to Med school (on the first try) and on to top grad programs (where "rankings" actually matter a bit more----getting your PHD somewhere is important to have it top ranked/top research much more than undergrad rankings).  And most of those SLAC are not considered "elite".  But they achieve this with smart kids, small classes and encouraging learning (not just checking boxes for graduation).  For example: St Olaf sends 84% of competitive applicants to medical school (Defined as 3.7+ GPA and 510+ MCAT). FYI--they send 67% of the rest who apply to medical school---still fairly high for kids with less than 3.7 gpa.   They rank 8th in number of grads who go onto earn doctoral degrees.    Yet, the avg SAT is only 1300 and GPA 3.67 for admission.  So smart kids, but not "elite" standards.  These are smart kids who put in the effort to actually learn in college and the learning is made easier by small classes that encourage critical thinking and actual learning, not just passing the class. The professors tend to be better at teaching when teaching is their Core job, not research.  They also will have amazing recommendations from professors because it's much easier to cultivate that in a small environment, especially with professors who love to actually teach.[/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