Reply to Changes in LACs

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Changes in LACs "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I think more LACs need to strengthen in engineering and CS in order to rise in popularity.

Harvey Mudd is well positioned to rise. And other STEM-oriented LACs like Carleton. Swarthmore too. Wes is also strong in STEM.[/quote]
Way too behind. Starting a school in engineering right now is completely useless- you can never have enough faculty for specialities nor get the research funding/grants that top universities and state schools have. Both mudd and swarthmore hardly have that many engineering majors compared to cs or math. LACs have a niche, and that niche is served well. For every lac, you run the issue that there a finite amount of lab space and research funding you can spend on STEM. [/quote]
I don’t get people on dcum. They’re hellbent on every lac just becoming a research university. It’s okay to decide against an LAC and go on with life.[/quote]

It’s funny. I was going to say that I don’t get the people on DCUM who jump on threads about LACs to tell people the LACs are inferior. Not everyone wants to go to Purdue or whatever, and kids do choose LACs to pursue stem fields. To your point it is their choice and there’s no need to “well actually” them. Feel free to start another thread about how awesome R1 engineering programs are. [/quote]

I think it's great that some LACs do have engineering. There are kids who want engineering at a smaller school. [/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