Anonymous wrote:No, we are supposed to take the word of Forbes that there is still a great return on investment over your illogical leap that because the graduates profiled are older than you the schools must have declined.

Huh? You're responding to me, the person who first posted the Forbes link. I think we agree and your snark might be better directed to OP.

I think it's silly to think that the most valuable thing in the job market is going to be any subject that can be taught in a semester or two at college. A engineer's knowledge has a half life of what, 4 years maybe? You need to learn to learn skills-- writing, working with people, creative thinking, analysis.

No, we are supposed to take the word of Forbes that there is still a great return on investment over your illogical leap that because the graduates profiled are older than you the schools must have declined.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's no secret that the job market is rough for college grads in general, but the market for grads of small liberal arts colleges seems almost nonexistent. Every grad I know is either eyeing grad school or working a low end job that does not require a college degree.

I'm afraid that these SLACS just aren't preparing students for the real world of the 21st century.

This is simply not true. You'll find plenty of SLACs in this Forbes list of the "top 50 return on investment colleges": http://www.forbes.com/pictures/fkmm45ehgi/18-university-of-chicago/ . Williams, Amherst, Berea, Welllesley, Smith, and tones more.

too funny - when the "notable grads" are older than your grandparents you know that change has not been kind to some of these schools. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but it is a BIG mistake to assume that schools at static - reputations can change when schools change - but there is a lag before the general population understands what has happened.

So we're supposed to take your word for it, over the word of Forbes, that the SLACs' reputations plummeted in the last ten years and/or will plummet in the future?

Anonymous wrote:It's no secret that the job market is rough for college grads in general, but the market for grads of small liberal arts colleges seems almost nonexistent. Every grad I know is either eyeing grad school or working a low end job that does not require a college degree.

I'm afraid that these SLACS just aren't preparing students for the real world of the 21st century.

this is BS. My youngest sister is graduating from one of the AWS schools and has an amazing 6 figure job lined up in silicon valley (with a pretty shitty gpa I might add).

Her friends all have full time offers lined up as well. Amazon, Microsoft, Goldman Sachs, McKinsey, Google, Morgan Stanley, Bain, BCG, Fidelity. some technical, some econ, some English majors doing marketing stuff, etc.

Don't underestimate the tightness of the lac network. When my sister was a freshman, she cold called and emailed alums 10-15 years older than her at some very top places and landed interviews as a freshman! for meaning internships (i.e. not coffee making, filing).

the very top lac's have zero problems placing students in great jobs at great companies at very competitive pay levels.

yeah, something tells me Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, and Pomona are NOT going to be hurting for very top applicants...for a long long time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's no secret that the job market is rough for college grads in general, but the market for grads of small liberal arts colleges seems almost nonexistent. Every grad I know is either eyeing grad school or working a low end job that does not require a college degree.

I'm afraid that these SLACS just aren't preparing students for the real world of the 21st century.

This is simply not true. You'll find plenty of SLACs in this Forbes list of the "top 50 return on investment colleges": http://www.forbes.com/pictures/fkmm45ehgi/18-university-of-chicago/ . Williams, Amherst, Berea, Welllesley, Smith, and tones more.

too funny - when the "notable grads" are older than your grandparents you know that change has not been kind to some of these schools. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but it is a BIG mistake to assume that schools at static - reputations can change when schools change - but there is a lag before the general population understands what has happened.

Eh, I went to a SLAC and graduated in the 2000s. Most of my peers are faring no better or worse than my friends went to larger universities. The alumni network is small, but loyal and I have plenty of friends who are either in graduated from/in graduate school or who have jobs in a variety of sectors not necessarily related to their major (publishing, journalism, consulting, copy editing, working as analysts for a bank, IT work, software engineering, nursing, various lab technician jobs, working for consulting firms, doing marketing, K-12 teaching, etc.) Of the peers of mine who majored in Classics (one of those "useless liberal arts majors) and did not go on to graduate school, I believe one is working for an independent book company as a marketing director, one is in a top 10 law school, and is a librarian. Of my friends who majored in English, one is a journalist, one is doing marketing for a software company, and another is working for a healthcare firm. Of those who majored in music, one works for a classical music radio station doing fundraising. Some of these are not the world's most lucrative jobs, but they are all pretty much white collar jobs.

Anonymous wrote:It's no secret that the job market is rough for college grads in general, but the market for grads of small liberal arts colleges seems almost nonexistent. Every grad I know is either eyeing grad school or working a low end job that does not require a college degree.

I'm afraid that these SLACS just aren't preparing students for the real world of the 21st century.

This is simply not true. You'll find plenty of SLACs in this Forbes list of the "top 50 return on investment colleges": http://www.forbes.com/pictures/fkmm45ehgi/18-university-of-chicago/ . Williams, Amherst, Berea, Welllesley, Smith, and tones more.

Most of my classmates at a top SLAC went on to graduate or professional school.

What's wrong with going to grad school? I went to a SLAC and then went to grad school for an MBA. I've been very successful.

Why so many posts recently on the evils of a liberal arts education? SLACS are plenty difficult to get into so I don't think they've lost their luster. You seem to be picking a fight (or justifying a decision?).

Well why are they so hard to get into, then?

Anonymous wrote:It's no secret that the job market is rough for college grads in general, but the market for grads of small liberal arts colleges seems almost nonexistent. Every grad I know is either eyeing grad school or working a low end job that does not require a college degree.

I'm afraid that these SLACS just aren't preparing students for the real world of the 21st century.

The problem is that many (most?) liberal arts college campuses, actual studies in the humanities has been replaced by indoctrination in Obscurantist Post-Modernism. Far from building critical thinking skills or the ability to make cross disciplinary connections they graduate as members of a dogmatic cult. These unfortunates have no actual job skills apart from further propagating the Cult.

It's no secret that the job market is rough for college grads in general, but the market for grads of small liberal arts colleges seems almost nonexistent. Every grad I know is either eyeing grad school or working a low end job that does not require a college degree.

I'm afraid that these SLACS just aren't preparing students for the real world of the 21st century.