Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since Grinnell has bee n singled out as white and high income, I thought I would provide some data. Grinnell offers great financial and merit aid, 18% of student body is international and 26% are domestic students of color. Only 13% of Grinnell students pay full tuition, 17 million a year is spent of low income students.

In terms of income after 10 years, two issues are at play. A significant percentage of grads want to improve the world, become teachers, activists, social workers and share their passion for education. Also, 20% of grads go straight to grad school and are usually fully funded because of the excellent education / reputation of Grinnell. Also, CS major is growing and students end up at high paying jobs every year so there is a place for all types of students.

This just goes to show how absurd LACs are, and the fact that you don’t know it is a sign of the weakness of their graduates. 26% students of color means the school is overwhelmingly (3/4ths) white. And if LACs encourage graduates to pursue low-paying SJW careers, that’s a blight on the school. And CS majors make a lot everywhere.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who wants to pay to have their kid be a number in giant lecture halls?

It takes a somewhat smart & mature kid to make it through large lecture halls. You are not doing your young adult any favors by trying to shelter them. They will fail in real life if you do.

Because sitting in a lecture hall and not asking questions or venturing your opinion is good preparation for the work world? Hmmm . . .

Because being in a ridiculously coddled environment with everything handed to you is good preparation for the work world? Hmmm....

The standards are quite high at SLACs. . You can’t sit in the back row and be anonymous. BUT if you have trouble with a concept, there will likely be a highly educated adult there to work with you more. Not a grad student who barely knows more than you and is only tutoring you for the money. Nothing is handed to SLAC students but actual people care how they do. They are not at the mercy of a huge state administered machine that has no time or money to look into their issue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who wants to pay to have their kid be a number in giant lecture halls?

It takes a somewhat smart & mature kid to make it through large lecture halls. You are not doing your young adult any favors by trying to shelter them. They will fail in real life if you do.

Because sitting in a lecture hall and not asking questions or venturing your opinion is good preparation for the work world? Hmmm . . .

Because being in a ridiculously coddled environment with everything handed to you is good preparation for the work world? Hmmm....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

OP here, that’s exactly what baffles me about the response on this thread. Individual this, personalized attention that; you can find these at state schools too if you seek them out, but no one serves them to you on a silver spoon. You have to be a go-getter. And being a go-getter is much more emotionally healthy for kids in the long run than coddling them from 18-22. How do these graduates even function in companies? No wonder so many of them are shoehorned into the ivory tower as adjunct lecturers are what not. Honestly sad that their parents would *encourage* that sort of decision. Listen up SLAC parents: if your kids don’t have the executive function skills to cut it at a state school or a large/medium-sized private (like an Ivy), they’re probably not ready for college at all.

So, there are many excellent large universities...in other states. My own state, well, not so much. I attended a top 10 SLAC and then went to graduate school at my state’s ‘flagship’ university. I had an on campus job during grad school that put me in close contact with lots of undergraduates of said university. They were perfectly pleasant people with not an ounce of intellectual curiosity. I suppose they could navigate the campus to get to their lectures taught by TAs when they weren’t too hungover from the latest frat or sorority party but that was the extent of their ability to navigate the real world at the time. In the spirit of fairness my own focus at the university was purely to get a piece of paper degree necessary for my chosen profession.

Given that my SLAC did equip me to make enough money to allow my children to have complete choice in their college and grad school selection, they are looking at SLACs. If they wanted to be veterinarians or journalists, our main state school would be an excellent choice. Given that that is not their likely path, they will look elsewhere. I would certainly have no concerns of they wanted to attend a large university in another state provided they had specific goals in mind, but that would have similar costs as a SLAC and based on my own experience, would likely not provide a particularly stimulating or challenging undergraduate experience. Just as likely to be a waste of money as the critic so cleverly noted above.

I absolutely believe that kids can get excellent educations in a variety of settings and that if your DC goes to college with an advance plan for preferred career, the set of choices may be specific and very practical. I don’t understand why any poster would be blindly critical of another family’s choices without having any background on why they made those choices or even the wealth of options available. The only thing such condemnation illustrates is a lack of critical thinking skills.