Well you sound pretty illiterate.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:HYPSM or bust status chasing.
That's why.
SLACs are considered below top50 national universities
Most combined rankings have at least 10 LACs represented in the top 50 colleges in the USA.
The top 5 LACs (Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, Pomona, and Bowdoin) are as difficult to get into as a top 20 national university.
So what is this based off?
Lol no way. SLACs are just another four years of high school. No seriously competitive students would even consider applying there. They purposely designed them differently from nationally universities -making it hard to directly compare - so that academically mediocre students can find their crushed confidence back. These students have no business with top national universities even if they try.
Are you trolling? The caliber of a students attending the elite LACs is extremely high. Many of them have under a 10% acceptance rate.
Did you go to a SLAC? No wonder you can’t assess things critically. Acceptance rate fat Fromm the golden rule for college selectivity due to self selection bias.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Asians don't like paying inflated prices for no-name products.
They care (sheepishly) about status, so they can impress others.
The appeal of SLAC’s is far too nuanced, and lost on them.
Anonymous wrote:My family has been in CA for six generations, and many of my extended family attended SLACs (Wellesley, Smith, Bryn Mawr, Swarthmore, Pomona, Amherst). The difference has to do with 1) how long your family has been in the US. First generation immigrants are unlikely to send their kids to lesser known schools. 2) level of education of parents. Asian parents, even those who are first generation, who have PhDs or MDs from top US universities understand the value and prestige of top SLACS and are much more likely to encourage their children to apply. 3) Social circles. Asian families that are more firmly ensconced in diverse, well-educated communities are more likely to know about SLACs than Asian families who don't have that kind of knowledge network.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:HYPSM or bust status chasing.
That's why.
SLACs are considered below top50 national universities
Most combined rankings have at least 10 LACs represented in the top 50 colleges in the USA.
The top 5 LACs (Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, Pomona, and Bowdoin) are as difficult to get into as a top 20 national university.
So what is this based off?
Lol no way. SLACs are just another four years of high school. No seriously competitive students would even consider applying there. They purposely designed them differently from nationally universities -making it hard to directly compare - so that academically mediocre students can find their crushed confidence back. These students have no business with top national universities even if they try.
Are you trolling? The caliber of a students attending the elite LACs is extremely high. Many of them have under a 10% acceptance rate.
Anonymous wrote:Asians don't like paying inflated prices for no-name products.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:HYPSM or bust status chasing.
That's why.
SLACs are considered below top50 national universities
Most combined rankings have at least 10 LACs represented in the top 50 colleges in the USA.
The top 5 LACs (Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, Pomona, and Bowdoin) are as difficult to get into as a top 20 national university.
So what is this based off?
Lol no way. SLACs are just another four years of high school. No seriously competitive students would even consider applying there. They purposely designed them differently from nationally universities -making it hard to directly compare - so that academically mediocre students can find their crushed confidence back. These students have no business with top national universities even if they try.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Top SLACs are as hard to get into as Harvard. Asian-Americans lack grades and money to get into them.
This is a joke.
Many people consider all SLACs to be below the top 100 national universities
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Top SLACs are as hard to get into as Harvard. Asian-Americans lack grades and money to get into them.
This is a joke.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Top SLACs are as hard to get into as Harvard. Asian-Americans lack grades and money to get into them.
This is a joke.
Anonymous wrote:My family has been in CA for six generations, and many of my extended family attended SLACs (Wellesley, Smith, Bryn Mawr, Swarthmore, Pomona, Amherst). The difference has to do with 1) how long your family has been in the US. First generation immigrants are unlikely to send their kids to lesser known schools. 2) level of education of parents. Asian parents, even those who are first generation, who have PhDs or MDs from top US universities understand the value and prestige of top SLACS and are much more likely to encourage their children to apply. 3) Social circles. Asian families that are more firmly ensconced in diverse, well-educated communities are more likely to know about SLACs than Asian families who don't have that kind of knowledge network.