Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh, my child that graduated a NESCAC received a far better education than my child that graduated an ivy.

How do you know? Did you go to class with them?

New poster here. I went to a SLAC. A couple years after graduating, I went to Harvard Law School. As a 3L, I took an undergrad class I was interested in. (Classic SLAC grad behavior--being interested in learning for its own sake.) I can directly compare my experience in classes at my SLAC to my experience in a Harvard undergrad class.

There is no comparison. The Harvard kids undoubtedly were smart, though not as smart as they thought they were. But the class conducted with the professor was almost pure lecture--something I never really experienced in undergrad. Our discussion sections, led by a grad student "TF" (what other schools call TAs), made clear that none of my classmates were actually doing the (interesting!) reading assigned to us. There was plenty of "discussion," but it featured these students bloviating on with their takes on something they hadn't read, so it was fairly shallow. My undergrad professors would never have allowed this.

Harvard is undoubtedly superior to my college at giving kids connections (outside of finance, at which my school also does quite well). And its leaps and bounds better at making the students think highly of themselves. But as far as an actual educational experience--learning to critically attack text, back of arguments with evidence, engage in true back and forth discussions with professors--it was not as strong. (And grad school placements are largely equivalent.) I'm definitely not saying that Harvard undergrads get a bad education, but I got a better one. If you value education for its own sake, strongly consider a SLAC.

I think I went to the same SLAC and would have totally taken a class for learning sake, so you have a kindred spirit here.
To bolster your argument, a few things:1) out of my class of 450, two went on to become Supreme Court clerks. 2) I visited friends at Harvard when I was an undergrad. We compared work loads and I definitely worked harder than they did. Sure, they had access to famous profs but they had to apply to get into those classes. I wouldn’t have traded my experience for theirs in a million years.

It’s time that you got over being rejected from Harvard already. Really. It’s ok.

NP. What is wrong with you? Are all Ivy students like this these days? You are doing an excellent if unintentional job advertising for SLACs.

I’m not an Ivy League graduate. I don’t think you need to go to an Ivy League school to get a good education or be successful either. But unlike you, I’m honest enough to admit that if my kid could get into an Ivy I’d sure as hell want them to go. You’re lying to yourself.

What a sad and unimaginative person you are. Your education clearly failed you at some point. (I am the PP who turned down a top ten school.)

Sure you did. And sure you’d send your kid to a CTCL school over a top ten. Right. Sure. I believe you.

Well, seeing as I went to a school you’d probably classify as a CTCL school over a top ten school, yes, of course I’d let my kid make the same choice. It would be rather hypocritical not to do that. My kid would probably end up doing what I did and land at a top-five PhD program for grad school anyhow.

Why are you so insane? What is wrong with you?

The person/bot to which you're responding has a hate boner for CTCL schools. They post frequently, which I assume means they went to a large state school and have failed to launch.

I don’t have a hate boner for CTCL schools. My beef is with parents who send their kids to one and then decree that they’re “special” when everyone knows that they’re not and everyone knows the real reason the kids are going there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh, my child that graduated a NESCAC received a far better education than my child that graduated an ivy.

How do you know? Did you go to class with them?

New poster here. I went to a SLAC. A couple years after graduating, I went to Harvard Law School. As a 3L, I took an undergrad class I was interested in. (Classic SLAC grad behavior--being interested in learning for its own sake.) I can directly compare my experience in classes at my SLAC to my experience in a Harvard undergrad class.

There is no comparison. The Harvard kids undoubtedly were smart, though not as smart as they thought they were. But the class conducted with the professor was almost pure lecture--something I never really experienced in undergrad. Our discussion sections, led by a grad student "TF" (what other schools call TAs), made clear that none of my classmates were actually doing the (interesting!) reading assigned to us. There was plenty of "discussion," but it featured these students bloviating on with their takes on something they hadn't read, so it was fairly shallow. My undergrad professors would never have allowed this.

Harvard is undoubtedly superior to my college at giving kids connections (outside of finance, at which my school also does quite well). And its leaps and bounds better at making the students think highly of themselves. But as far as an actual educational experience--learning to critically attack text, back of arguments with evidence, engage in true back and forth discussions with professors--it was not as strong. (And grad school placements are largely equivalent.) I'm definitely not saying that Harvard undergrads get a bad education, but I got a better one. If you value education for its own sake, strongly consider a SLAC.

I think I went to the same SLAC and would have totally taken a class for learning sake, so you have a kindred spirit here.
To bolster your argument, a few things:1) out of my class of 450, two went on to become Supreme Court clerks. 2) I visited friends at Harvard when I was an undergrad. We compared work loads and I definitely worked harder than they did. Sure, they had access to famous profs but they had to apply to get into those classes. I wouldn’t have traded my experience for theirs in a million years.

It’s time that you got over being rejected from Harvard already. Really. It’s ok.

NP. What is wrong with you? Are all Ivy students like this these days? You are doing an excellent if unintentional job advertising for SLACs.

I’m not an Ivy League graduate. I don’t think you need to go to an Ivy League school to get a good education or be successful either. But unlike you, I’m honest enough to admit that if my kid could get into an Ivy I’d sure as hell want them to go. You’re lying to yourself.

What a sad and unimaginative person you are. Your education clearly failed you at some point. (I am the PP who turned down a top ten school.)

Sure you did. And sure you’d send your kid to a CTCL school over a top ten. Right. Sure. I believe you.

Well, seeing as I went to a school you’d probably classify as a CTCL school over a top ten school, yes, of course I’d let my kid make the same choice. It would be rather hypocritical not to do that. My kid would probably end up doing what I did and land at a top-five PhD program for grad school anyhow.

Why are you so insane? What is wrong with you?

Ha ha ok. You don’t care about rankings but felt compelled to tell us you went to a “top-5” PhD program. Who’s the hypocrite again?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh, my child that graduated a NESCAC received a far better education than my child that graduated an ivy.

How do you know? Did you go to class with them?

New poster here. I went to a SLAC. A couple years after graduating, I went to Harvard Law School. As a 3L, I took an undergrad class I was interested in. (Classic SLAC grad behavior--being interested in learning for its own sake.) I can directly compare my experience in classes at my SLAC to my experience in a Harvard undergrad class.

There is no comparison. The Harvard kids undoubtedly were smart, though not as smart as they thought they were. But the class conducted with the professor was almost pure lecture--something I never really experienced in undergrad. Our discussion sections, led by a grad student "TF" (what other schools call TAs), made clear that none of my classmates were actually doing the (interesting!) reading assigned to us. There was plenty of "discussion," but it featured these students bloviating on with their takes on something they hadn't read, so it was fairly shallow. My undergrad professors would never have allowed this.

Harvard is undoubtedly superior to my college at giving kids connections (outside of finance, at which my school also does quite well). And its leaps and bounds better at making the students think highly of themselves. But as far as an actual educational experience--learning to critically attack text, back of arguments with evidence, engage in true back and forth discussions with professors--it was not as strong. (And grad school placements are largely equivalent.) I'm definitely not saying that Harvard undergrads get a bad education, but I got a better one. If you value education for its own sake, strongly consider a SLAC.

I think I went to the same SLAC and would have totally taken a class for learning sake, so you have a kindred spirit here.
To bolster your argument, a few things:1) out of my class of 450, two went on to become Supreme Court clerks. 2) I visited friends at Harvard when I was an undergrad. We compared work loads and I definitely worked harder than they did. Sure, they had access to famous profs but they had to apply to get into those classes. I wouldn’t have traded my experience for theirs in a million years.

It’s time that you got over being rejected from Harvard already. Really. It’s ok.

NP. What is wrong with you? Are all Ivy students like this these days? You are doing an excellent if unintentional job advertising for SLACs.

I’m not an Ivy League graduate. I don’t think you need to go to an Ivy League school to get a good education or be successful either. But unlike you, I’m honest enough to admit that if my kid could get into an Ivy I’d sure as hell want them to go. You’re lying to yourself.

What a sad and unimaginative person you are. Your education clearly failed you at some point. (I am the PP who turned down a top ten school.)

Sure you did. And sure you’d send your kid to a CTCL school over a top ten. Right. Sure. I believe you.

Well, seeing as I went to a school you’d probably classify as a CTCL school over a top ten school, yes, of course I’d let my kid make the same choice. It would be rather hypocritical not to do that. My kid would probably end up doing what I did and land at a top-five PhD program for grad school anyhow.

Why are you so insane? What is wrong with you?

The person/bot to which you're responding has a hate boner for CTCL schools. They post frequently, which I assume means they went to a large state school and have failed to launch.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh, my child that graduated a NESCAC received a far better education than my child that graduated an ivy.

How do you know? Did you go to class with them?

New poster here. I went to a SLAC. A couple years after graduating, I went to Harvard Law School. As a 3L, I took an undergrad class I was interested in. (Classic SLAC grad behavior--being interested in learning for its own sake.) I can directly compare my experience in classes at my SLAC to my experience in a Harvard undergrad class.

There is no comparison. The Harvard kids undoubtedly were smart, though not as smart as they thought they were. But the class conducted with the professor was almost pure lecture--something I never really experienced in undergrad. Our discussion sections, led by a grad student "TF" (what other schools call TAs), made clear that none of my classmates were actually doing the (interesting!) reading assigned to us. There was plenty of "discussion," but it featured these students bloviating on with their takes on something they hadn't read, so it was fairly shallow. My undergrad professors would never have allowed this.

Harvard is undoubtedly superior to my college at giving kids connections (outside of finance, at which my school also does quite well). And its leaps and bounds better at making the students think highly of themselves. But as far as an actual educational experience--learning to critically attack text, back of arguments with evidence, engage in true back and forth discussions with professors--it was not as strong. (And grad school placements are largely equivalent.) I'm definitely not saying that Harvard undergrads get a bad education, but I got a better one. If you value education for its own sake, strongly consider a SLAC.

I think I went to the same SLAC and would have totally taken a class for learning sake, so you have a kindred spirit here.
To bolster your argument, a few things:1) out of my class of 450, two went on to become Supreme Court clerks. 2) I visited friends at Harvard when I was an undergrad. We compared work loads and I definitely worked harder than they did. Sure, they had access to famous profs but they had to apply to get into those classes. I wouldn’t have traded my experience for theirs in a million years.

It’s time that you got over being rejected from Harvard already. Really. It’s ok.

NP. What is wrong with you? Are all Ivy students like this these days? You are doing an excellent if unintentional job advertising for SLACs.

I’m not an Ivy League graduate. I don’t think you need to go to an Ivy League school to get a good education or be successful either. But unlike you, I’m honest enough to admit that if my kid could get into an Ivy I’d sure as hell want them to go. You’re lying to yourself.

What a sad and unimaginative person you are. Your education clearly failed you at some point. (I am the PP who turned down a top ten school.)

Sure you did. And sure you’d send your kid to a CTCL school over a top ten. Right. Sure. I believe you.

Well, seeing as I went to a school you’d probably classify as a CTCL school over a top ten school, yes, of course I’d let my kid make the same choice. It would be rather hypocritical not to do that. My kid would probably end up doing what I did and land at a top-five PhD program for grad school anyhow.

Why are you so insane? What is wrong with you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh, my child that graduated a NESCAC received a far better education than my child that graduated an ivy.

How do you know? Did you go to class with them?

New poster here. I went to a SLAC. A couple years after graduating, I went to Harvard Law School. As a 3L, I took an undergrad class I was interested in. (Classic SLAC grad behavior--being interested in learning for its own sake.) I can directly compare my experience in classes at my SLAC to my experience in a Harvard undergrad class.

There is no comparison. The Harvard kids undoubtedly were smart, though not as smart as they thought they were. But the class conducted with the professor was almost pure lecture--something I never really experienced in undergrad. Our discussion sections, led by a grad student "TF" (what other schools call TAs), made clear that none of my classmates were actually doing the (interesting!) reading assigned to us. There was plenty of "discussion," but it featured these students bloviating on with their takes on something they hadn't read, so it was fairly shallow. My undergrad professors would never have allowed this.

Harvard is undoubtedly superior to my college at giving kids connections (outside of finance, at which my school also does quite well). And its leaps and bounds better at making the students think highly of themselves. But as far as an actual educational experience--learning to critically attack text, back of arguments with evidence, engage in true back and forth discussions with professors--it was not as strong. (And grad school placements are largely equivalent.) I'm definitely not saying that Harvard undergrads get a bad education, but I got a better one. If you value education for its own sake, strongly consider a SLAC.

I think I went to the same SLAC and would have totally taken a class for learning sake, so you have a kindred spirit here.
To bolster your argument, a few things:1) out of my class of 450, two went on to become Supreme Court clerks. 2) I visited friends at Harvard when I was an undergrad. We compared work loads and I definitely worked harder than they did. Sure, they had access to famous profs but they had to apply to get into those classes. I wouldn’t have traded my experience for theirs in a million years.

It’s time that you got over being rejected from Harvard already. Really. It’s ok.

NP. What is wrong with you? Are all Ivy students like this these days? You are doing an excellent if unintentional job advertising for SLACs.

I’m not an Ivy League graduate. I don’t think you need to go to an Ivy League school to get a good education or be successful either. But unlike you, I’m honest enough to admit that if my kid could get into an Ivy I’d sure as hell want them to go. You’re lying to yourself.

What a sad and unimaginative person you are. Your education clearly failed you at some point. (I am the PP who turned down a top ten school.)

Sure you did. And sure you’d send your kid to a CTCL school over a top ten. Right. Sure. I believe you.

Well, seeing as I went to a school you’d probably classify as a CTCL school over a top ten school, yes, of course I’d let my kid make the same choice. It would be rather hypocritical not to do that. My kid would probably end up doing what I did and land at a top-five PhD program for grad school anyhow.

Why are you so insane? What is wrong with you?

The person/bot to which you're responding has a hate boner for CTCL schools. They post frequently, which I assume means they went to a large state school and have failed to launch.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I attended Harvard and was educated primarily by TAs until senior year. No thanks.

Yet if you could get your kid in you’d send them in a heartbeat. Who are you kidding?

Actually I am a tenured professor who is quite invested in quality education, but thanks for playing. Sorry you didn't attend an Ivy and can't tell the difference between undergraduate vs. graduate.

Yes, one of the interesting features of the ant-SLAC posters is that they don’t seem to have much knowledge of education and particularly undergraduate versus graduate education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh, my child that graduated a NESCAC received a far better education than my child that graduated an ivy.

How do you know? Did you go to class with them?

New poster here. I went to a SLAC. A couple years after graduating, I went to Harvard Law School. As a 3L, I took an undergrad class I was interested in. (Classic SLAC grad behavior--being interested in learning for its own sake.) I can directly compare my experience in classes at my SLAC to my experience in a Harvard undergrad class.

There is no comparison. The Harvard kids undoubtedly were smart, though not as smart as they thought they were. But the class conducted with the professor was almost pure lecture--something I never really experienced in undergrad. Our discussion sections, led by a grad student "TF" (what other schools call TAs), made clear that none of my classmates were actually doing the (interesting!) reading assigned to us. There was plenty of "discussion," but it featured these students bloviating on with their takes on something they hadn't read, so it was fairly shallow. My undergrad professors would never have allowed this.

Harvard is undoubtedly superior to my college at giving kids connections (outside of finance, at which my school also does quite well). And its leaps and bounds better at making the students think highly of themselves. But as far as an actual educational experience--learning to critically attack text, back of arguments with evidence, engage in true back and forth discussions with professors--it was not as strong. (And grad school placements are largely equivalent.) I'm definitely not saying that Harvard undergrads get a bad education, but I got a better one. If you value education for its own sake, strongly consider a SLAC.

I think I went to the same SLAC and would have totally taken a class for learning sake, so you have a kindred spirit here.
To bolster your argument, a few things:1) out of my class of 450, two went on to become Supreme Court clerks. 2) I visited friends at Harvard when I was an undergrad. We compared work loads and I definitely worked harder than they did. Sure, they had access to famous profs but they had to apply to get into those classes. I wouldn’t have traded my experience for theirs in a million years.

It’s time that you got over being rejected from Harvard already. Really. It’s ok.

NP. What is wrong with you? Are all Ivy students like this these days? You are doing an excellent if unintentional job advertising for SLACs.

I’m not an Ivy League graduate. I don’t think you need to go to an Ivy League school to get a good education or be successful either. But unlike you, I’m honest enough to admit that if my kid could get into an Ivy I’d sure as hell want them to go. You’re lying to yourself.

What a sad and unimaginative person you are. Your education clearly failed you at some point. (I am the PP who turned down a top ten school.)

Sure you did. And sure you’d send your kid to a CTCL school over a top ten. Right. Sure. I believe you.

Well, seeing as I went to a school you’d probably classify as a CTCL school over a top ten school, yes, of course I’d let my kid make the same choice. It would be rather hypocritical not to do that. My kid would probably end up doing what I did and land at a top-five PhD program for grad school anyhow.

Why are you so insane? What is wrong with you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I attended Harvard and was educated primarily by TAs until senior year. No thanks.

Yet if you could get your kid in you’d send them in a heartbeat. Who are you kidding?

Actually I am a tenured professor who is quite invested in quality education, but thanks for playing. Sorry you didn't attend an Ivy and can't tell the difference between undergraduate vs. graduate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I attended Harvard and was educated primarily by TAs until senior year. No thanks.

Yet if you could get your kid in you’d send them in a heartbeat. Who are you kidding?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh, my child that graduated a NESCAC received a far better education than my child that graduated an ivy.

How do you know? Did you go to class with them?

New poster here. I went to a SLAC. A couple years after graduating, I went to Harvard Law School. As a 3L, I took an undergrad class I was interested in. (Classic SLAC grad behavior--being interested in learning for its own sake.) I can directly compare my experience in classes at my SLAC to my experience in a Harvard undergrad class.

There is no comparison. The Harvard kids undoubtedly were smart, though not as smart as they thought they were. But the class conducted with the professor was almost pure lecture--something I never really experienced in undergrad. Our discussion sections, led by a grad student "TF" (what other schools call TAs), made clear that none of my classmates were actually doing the (interesting!) reading assigned to us. There was plenty of "discussion," but it featured these students bloviating on with their takes on something they hadn't read, so it was fairly shallow. My undergrad professors would never have allowed this.

Harvard is undoubtedly superior to my college at giving kids connections (outside of finance, at which my school also does quite well). And its leaps and bounds better at making the students think highly of themselves. But as far as an actual educational experience--learning to critically attack text, back of arguments with evidence, engage in true back and forth discussions with professors--it was not as strong. (And grad school placements are largely equivalent.) I'm definitely not saying that Harvard undergrads get a bad education, but I got a better one. If you value education for its own sake, strongly consider a SLAC.

I think I went to the same SLAC and would have totally taken a class for learning sake, so you have a kindred spirit here.
To bolster your argument, a few things:1) out of my class of 450, two went on to become Supreme Court clerks. 2) I visited friends at Harvard when I was an undergrad. We compared work loads and I definitely worked harder than they did. Sure, they had access to famous profs but they had to apply to get into those classes. I wouldn’t have traded my experience for theirs in a million years.

It’s time that you got over being rejected from Harvard already. Really. It’s ok.

NP. What is wrong with you? Are all Ivy students like this these days? You are doing an excellent if unintentional job advertising for SLACs.

I’m not an Ivy League graduate. I don’t think you need to go to an Ivy League school to get a good education or be successful either. But unlike you, I’m honest enough to admit that if my kid could get into an Ivy I’d sure as hell want them to go. You’re lying to yourself.

What a sad and unimaginative person you are. Your education clearly failed you at some point. (I am the PP who turned down a top ten school.)

Sure you did. And sure you’d send your kid to a CTCL school over a top ten. Right. Sure. I believe you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh, my child that graduated a NESCAC received a far better education than my child that graduated an ivy.

How do you know? Did you go to class with them?

New poster here. I went to a SLAC. A couple years after graduating, I went to Harvard Law School. As a 3L, I took an undergrad class I was interested in. (Classic SLAC grad behavior--being interested in learning for its own sake.) I can directly compare my experience in classes at my SLAC to my experience in a Harvard undergrad class.

There is no comparison. The Harvard kids undoubtedly were smart, though not as smart as they thought they were. But the class conducted with the professor was almost pure lecture--something I never really experienced in undergrad. Our discussion sections, led by a grad student "TF" (what other schools call TAs), made clear that none of my classmates were actually doing the (interesting!) reading assigned to us. There was plenty of "discussion," but it featured these students bloviating on with their takes on something they hadn't read, so it was fairly shallow. My undergrad professors would never have allowed this.

Harvard is undoubtedly superior to my college at giving kids connections (outside of finance, at which my school also does quite well). And its leaps and bounds better at making the students think highly of themselves. But as far as an actual educational experience--learning to critically attack text, back of arguments with evidence, engage in true back and forth discussions with professors--it was not as strong. (And grad school placements are largely equivalent.) I'm definitely not saying that Harvard undergrads get a bad education, but I got a better one. If you value education for its own sake, strongly consider a SLAC.

I think I went to the same SLAC and would have totally taken a class for learning sake, so you have a kindred spirit here.
To bolster your argument, a few things:1) out of my class of 450, two went on to become Supreme Court clerks. 2) I visited friends at Harvard when I was an undergrad. We compared work loads and I definitely worked harder than they did. Sure, they had access to famous profs but they had to apply to get into those classes. I wouldn’t have traded my experience for theirs in a million years.

It’s time that you got over being rejected from Harvard already. Really. It’s ok.

NP. What is wrong with you? Are all Ivy students like this these days? You are doing an excellent if unintentional job advertising for SLACs.

I’m not an Ivy League graduate. I don’t think you need to go to an Ivy League school to get a good education or be successful either. But unlike you, I’m honest enough to admit that if my kid could get into an Ivy I’d sure as hell want them to go. You’re lying to yourself.

What a sad and unimaginative person you are. Your education clearly failed you at some point. (I am the PP who turned down a top ten school.)

Anonymous wrote:It would be refreshing to have the parent of a liberal arts college student post on here words to the effect of “I really wanted my kid to get into a top-ranked school, but it wasn’t to be. Having said that, I think they are happy at the school they are attending and seem to be getting a solid education. And that’s all that matters to me.”

That is so much better than “my kid did not get into a top ranked school, but went somewhere else and they’re getting a better education and I wouldn’t trade it for anything.” Because that’s just BS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh, my child that graduated a NESCAC received a far better education than my child that graduated an ivy.

How do you know? Did you go to class with them?

New poster here. I went to a SLAC. A couple years after graduating, I went to Harvard Law School. As a 3L, I took an undergrad class I was interested in. (Classic SLAC grad behavior--being interested in learning for its own sake.) I can directly compare my experience in classes at my SLAC to my experience in a Harvard undergrad class.

There is no comparison. The Harvard kids undoubtedly were smart, though not as smart as they thought they were. But the class conducted with the professor was almost pure lecture--something I never really experienced in undergrad. Our discussion sections, led by a grad student "TF" (what other schools call TAs), made clear that none of my classmates were actually doing the (interesting!) reading assigned to us. There was plenty of "discussion," but it featured these students bloviating on with their takes on something they hadn't read, so it was fairly shallow. My undergrad professors would never have allowed this.

Harvard is undoubtedly superior to my college at giving kids connections (outside of finance, at which my school also does quite well). And its leaps and bounds better at making the students think highly of themselves. But as far as an actual educational experience--learning to critically attack text, back of arguments with evidence, engage in true back and forth discussions with professors--it was not as strong. (And grad school placements are largely equivalent.) I'm definitely not saying that Harvard undergrads get a bad education, but I got a better one. If you value education for its own sake, strongly consider a SLAC.

I think I went to the same SLAC and would have totally taken a class for learning sake, so you have a kindred spirit here.
To bolster your argument, a few things:1) out of my class of 450, two went on to become Supreme Court clerks. 2) I visited friends at Harvard when I was an undergrad. We compared work loads and I definitely worked harder than they did. Sure, they had access to famous profs but they had to apply to get into those classes. I wouldn’t have traded my experience for theirs in a million years.

It’s time that you got over being rejected from Harvard already. Really. It’s ok.

NP. What is wrong with you? Are all Ivy students like this these days? You are doing an excellent if unintentional job advertising for SLACs.

I’m not an Ivy League graduate. I don’t think you need to go to an Ivy League school to get a good education or be successful either. But unlike you, I’m honest enough to admit that if my kid could get into an Ivy I’d sure as hell want them to go. You’re lying to yourself.