Two Kinds of LACs
The thriving LACs share several common features. They tend to be the wealthiest (by endowment per student), the most selective, and the most nationally branded. Colby’s application surge followed a multi-billion-dollar campus investment and a deliberate strategy to raise its national profile. Williams, Amherst, and Bowdoin—the so-called “Little Ivies”—maintained their high yields and saw strong application growth (124 percent for Williams, 95 percent for Bowdoin, 60 percent for Amherst). Pomona, Middlebury, and Davidson also held or gained ground. These schools are running the same prestige flywheel that benefits Harvard and Stanford: lower acceptance rates generate more media attention, which drives more applications, which pushes acceptance rates lower still.
The struggling LACs form a larger and more diverse group. Oberlin, Kenyon, Reed, Union, Connecticut College, Dickinson, Colorado College, and Scripps all saw their yields decline—in some cases dramatically. Their application growth, while positive, lagged far behind the category average. Several saw their acceptance rates rise, the opposite direction from the broader trend at selective schools. These institutions are not in crisis—their academic programs remain strong, their campuses are well-maintained, and their graduates do well. But they are losing the enrollment competition for the students they most want.
The pattern is almost perfectly correlated with endowment wealth. The five LACs with the largest endowments per student—Amherst ($1.75 million), Swarthmore ($1.65 million), Pomona ($1.59 million), Williams ($1.58 million), and Grinnell ($1.41 million)—all maintained or gained yield. Schools with smaller endowments per student, despite comparable academic reputations, disproportionately populate the declining group. Money, it turns out, buys not just financial aid but also the campus investments, marketing capacity, and brand-building that drive enrollment success.