If you check out the college matriculation list for many of the top boarding HS in the country, you'll see more of an Ivy AND SLAC cluster before state unis. The state uni preference is definitely demographic specific.

I think you also have to consider the DCUM demographics. I am guessing many of its readership fall into the donut hole. They will be either Ivy League or state uni. This is certainly the case with my D's (public) HS which is located in the 1% area in CA. Its grads fall into either Ivy or state system, with some ivy admittees even choosing the state uni. So, I'd factor that in when reading the mostly pro-public in this thread.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not going to refute your experience, but the reality is that many of the top LACs are producing academics to a high extent. According to NSF data, the top PhD producing schools per capita largely consist of LACs and liberal art emphasizing universities, even in STEM fields: https://www.swarthmore.edu/institutional-research/doctorates-awarded There is absolutely no hand-holding at the PhD level and I know that at the top LACs, the graduate destinations do tend to overwhelmingly be top graduate programs like the Ivies, Stanford, Berkeley, etc. That would seem to suggest that their grads have gotten the analytical and research skills.

I think what you might be referring to is that some LACs are a bit wishy washy with requirements. Hamilton, Vassar, and Amherst have no core requirements at all, and their majors only entail 8-10 courses, so a student could get by with doing the minimum work and not doing the 16-20 courses a state school kid might be doing for their major. I do feel LACs give students more choices to shape their education, and sometimes it can be for the worse. I prefer LACs that have core requirements and heavy major components and required senior exercise, such as Harvey Mudd.

I’m not anti-LAC. I’m just really skeptical of the notion that LACs are inherently or uniquely intellectual places. And I’m probably most dismissive of that claim in contexts where UMC people are talking about “top” LACs as if they were all the same. I have a lot of respect for Mudd. I think Swarthmore avoids the problems I'm pointing out. I know well-educated graduates of a bunch of different Midwestern LACs.

It was in the context of teaching in a top PhD program that I developed some of these impressions of LACs. We consistently admitted their grads but they all had essentially the same credentials and some were great and others were just terrible. Even the great ones had a more narrow/skewed perspective on the field than people who came from major research universities, but they had the skills to fill in the gaps. A kid with the same credentials from a flagship public university would be a much more reliable bet.

I think there's a bit of bias built into this--because the kids who come from a flagship public university to a PhD are a much tinier set of kids from the department than the number who come from a SLAC (since a far higher percentage SLAC kids go on to do PhDs). So when you're at a flagship and have that kind of profile as an undergrad you're more exceptional in your undergrad class and then have greater experiences due to your exceptionality.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids did one of each. One went to a SLAC (as did I) the other to an OOS top flagship in the honors program. Both were great. Full pay at both and they were basically the same price so flagship not a price advantage. Having now been exposed to the state flagship I would choose that over a SLAC. So many more choices of classes and paths and the honors program provided structure and a small environment within a big school. Some say the teaching and focus on undergrads is better at SLACs but that is not always true. My DC at a SLAC had some weak professors and the problem was that if he didn't like them there often wasn't anyone else to take that class, or even the next class from. Some majors had only a couple of professors. Surprisingly even the career center is much better at the flagship - way more companies recruiting on campus, super loyal alumni base all over the country, and having the honors program on the resume IS a differentiator. Some of this may depend on the state flagship of course, and the nature of the honors program.

OP's question is limited to top 10 SLACs vs State Uni. Your experience sounds more like a lower ranking SLAC, of which there are many. Many private schools aren't worth the tuition.

I went to a top 10 SLAC and the DC mentioned above went to one just below that so I think within the range of the OPs question. If you read my post I said both were great and I didn't say the SLAC wasn't worth the tuition, only that DCs experience at a state flagship was excellent for the reasons stated.

My D had a choice among several U of California campuses with full tuition scholarship, including honors. She turned them down for a SLAC. There's just no comparison between top State U, even with honors, and a top SLAC.

You are ignoring a huge point. The problems of the UC system can't be overstated enough, and its impact in your kid's decision. It is an overcrowded, underfunded mess over there. So, yeah. Not sure your kid's experience is the best example.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids did one of each. One went to a SLAC (as did I) the other to an OOS top flagship in the honors program. Both were great. Full pay at both and they were basically the same price so flagship not a price advantage. Having now been exposed to the state flagship I would choose that over a SLAC. So many more choices of classes and paths and the honors program provided structure and a small environment within a big school. Some say the teaching and focus on undergrads is better at SLACs but that is not always true. My DC at a SLAC had some weak professors and the problem was that if he didn't like them there often wasn't anyone else to take that class, or even the next class from. Some majors had only a couple of professors. Surprisingly even the career center is much better at the flagship - way more companies recruiting on campus, super loyal alumni base all over the country, and having the honors program on the resume IS a differentiator. Some of this may depend on the state flagship of course, and the nature of the honors program.

OP's question is limited to top 10 SLACs vs State Uni. Your experience sounds more like a lower ranking SLAC, of which there are many. Many private schools aren't worth the tuition.

I went to a top 10 SLAC and the DC mentioned above went to one just below that so I think within the range of the OPs question. If you read my post I said both were great and I didn't say the SLAC wasn't worth the tuition, only that DCs experience at a state flagship was excellent for the reasons stated.

My D had a choice among several U of California campuses with full tuition scholarship, including honors. She turned them down for a SLAC. There's just no comparison between top State U, even with honors, and a top SLAC.

Anonymous wrote:My kids did one of each. One went to a SLAC (as did I) the other to an OOS top flagship in the honors program. Both were great. Full pay at both and they were basically the same price so flagship not a price advantage. Having now been exposed to the state flagship I would choose that over a SLAC. So many more choices of classes and paths and the honors program provided structure and a small environment within a big school. Some say the teaching and focus on undergrads is better at SLACs but that is not always true. My DC at a SLAC had some weak professors and the problem was that if he didn't like them there often wasn't anyone else to take that class, or even the next class from. Some majors had only a couple of professors. Surprisingly even the career center is much better at the flagship - way more companies recruiting on campus, super loyal alumni base all over the country, and having the honors program on the resume IS a differentiator. Some of this may depend on the state flagship of course, and the nature of the honors program.

OP here.

Thank you for taking the time to respond.

And congrats on your DC's attendance at Michigan - heck of a school.

I do suspect that the Michigan experience may be at the top of the heap given its overall excellent reputation. I will say that this thread has helped as I personally favor the SLAC but I realize for my DC the State Uni is probably the better fit and while I do believe there are some self selecting opportunities offered to the Top 10 SLAC alumni, even if the State Uni Honors alumni has to work a little harder to have those doors opened, I do believe the attributes/qualities likely to be found within those students will also be valued in the marketplace.

Thanks again for sharing your perspective.

Anonymous wrote:My kids did one of each. One went to a SLAC (as did I) the other to an OOS top flagship in the honors program. Both were great. Full pay at both and they were basically the same price so flagship not a price advantage. Having now been exposed to the state flagship I would choose that over a SLAC. So many more choices of classes and paths and the honors program provided structure and a small environment within a big school. Some say the teaching and focus on undergrads is better at SLACs but that is not always true. My DC at a SLAC had some weak professors and the problem was that if he didn't like them there often wasn't anyone else to take that class, or even the next class from. Some majors had only a couple of professors. Surprisingly even the career center is much better at the flagship - way more companies recruiting on campus, super loyal alumni base all over the country, and having the honors program on the resume IS a differentiator. Some of this may depend on the state flagship of course, and the nature of the honors program.

Reading this really helps make a point clear- it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me to lump-sum "top 10 LACs" vs "state flagship honors" as one comparison.

My child was deciding between OOS UCLA Honors and Pomona College. The cost was approximately the same for both. It turned out that UCLA Honors was really just about priority registration and additional distribution requirements. Most students she talked to said that it added almost nothing to the experience- class sizes were large, Honors students didn't have many opportunities to interact with one another, Honors specific courses were usually considered mediocre, and the touted benefits of research opportunities and whatnot were the same as they were for a usual student. We met at least two people who opted to DROP Honors after trying it out because they didn't want to follow the Honors specific sequence.

From the research I've done, the UCs are not regarded as having excellent Honors programs. There's a website which ranks the best ones based on specific perks and opportunites for Honors students relative to non-Honors students: http://publicuniversityhonors.com/new-top-programs-by-category/ It would be worth thoroughly investigating what Honors actually entails- or is it some gimmick for a school to lure its top candidates without translating into anything meaningful? I've heard great things about Barett at ASU, for instance, which is functionally like a Rice or WashU style undergrad college embedded within a leading research university.

Ultimately, my child did pick Pomona. Pomona is different from other top liberal art colleges in that it is within a group of five LACs, all of whom border one another and share resources and course registration together. She has access to 2700 courses a year, so the options are vast. She is a psychology major actually doing research with a professor at Claremont McKenna College, as there are none at Pomona who focus on forensic psychology. That allows her to get the focused liberal arts college experience with the resources of a mid-sized university; her complaint is largely that there are too many interesting professors and courses to take across the colleges, and wonderful new faces across the colleges that she constantly keeps meeting thanks to the joint social life between the colleges. Within her specific major, more than 90 psychology courses are offered each semester. It's not the same experience as your usual stand-alone liberal arts college. It's not a U of M or UCLA either, but it strikes her as the Goldilocks size of giving her enough options while preventing it from being impersonal or hugely overwhelming.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids did one of each. One went to a SLAC (as did I) the other to an OOS top flagship in the honors program. Both were great. Full pay at both and they were basically the same price so flagship not a price advantage. Having now been exposed to the state flagship I would choose that over a SLAC. So many more choices of classes and paths and the honors program provided structure and a small environment within a big school. Some say the teaching and focus on undergrads is better at SLACs but that is not always true. My DC at a SLAC had some weak professors and the problem was that if he didn't like them there often wasn't anyone else to take that class, or even the next class from. Some majors had only a couple of professors. Surprisingly even the career center is much better at the flagship - way more companies recruiting on campus, super loyal alumni base all over the country, and having the honors program on the resume IS a differentiator. Some of this may depend on the state flagship of course, and the nature of the honors program.

Can you tell us which state college honors college?

Michigan.

U of Michigan is one of the top state schools. What about the SLAC? Can you give an idea, USNews 1-10, 11-20, 21- 30, 31-40, 41-50? Without this info, the comparison makes no sense.

http://www.thecollegesolution.com/15-things-to-know-about-u-s-news-college-rankings/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids did one of each. One went to a SLAC (as did I) the other to an OOS top flagship in the honors program. Both were great. Full pay at both and they were basically the same price so flagship not a price advantage. Having now been exposed to the state flagship I would choose that over a SLAC. So many more choices of classes and paths and the honors program provided structure and a small environment within a big school. Some say the teaching and focus on undergrads is better at SLACs but that is not always true. My DC at a SLAC had some weak professors and the problem was that if he didn't like them there often wasn't anyone else to take that class, or even the next class from. Some majors had only a couple of professors. Surprisingly even the career center is much better at the flagship - way more companies recruiting on campus, super loyal alumni base all over the country, and having the honors program on the resume IS a differentiator. Some of this may depend on the state flagship of course, and the nature of the honors program.

Can you tell us which state college honors college?

Michigan.

U of Michigan is one of the top state schools. What about the SLAC? Can you give an idea, USNews 1-10, 11-20, 21- 30, 31-40, 41-50? Without this info, the comparison makes no sense.

Honestly I was sharing my (and my DCs) experience and gave some reasons. If you don't like it or don't agree that's totally fine. If it doesn't make sense to you then ignore it. Everyone's kids and experience may be different - obviously my kids chose totally different schools and both had good experiences.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids did one of each. One went to a SLAC (as did I) the other to an OOS top flagship in the honors program. Both were great. Full pay at both and they were basically the same price so flagship not a price advantage. Having now been exposed to the state flagship I would choose that over a SLAC. So many more choices of classes and paths and the honors program provided structure and a small environment within a big school. Some say the teaching and focus on undergrads is better at SLACs but that is not always true. My DC at a SLAC had some weak professors and the problem was that if he didn't like them there often wasn't anyone else to take that class, or even the next class from. Some majors had only a couple of professors. Surprisingly even the career center is much better at the flagship - way more companies recruiting on campus, super loyal alumni base all over the country, and having the honors program on the resume IS a differentiator. Some of this may depend on the state flagship of course, and the nature of the honors program.

Can you tell us which state college honors college?

Michigan.

U of Michigan is one of the top state schools. What about the SLAC? Can you give an idea, USNews 1-10, 11-20, 21- 30, 31-40, 41-50? Without this info, the comparison makes no sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids did one of each. One went to a SLAC (as did I) the other to an OOS top flagship in the honors program. Both were great. Full pay at both and they were basically the same price so flagship not a price advantage. Having now been exposed to the state flagship I would choose that over a SLAC. So many more choices of classes and paths and the honors program provided structure and a small environment within a big school. Some say the teaching and focus on undergrads is better at SLACs but that is not always true. My DC at a SLAC had some weak professors and the problem was that if he didn't like them there often wasn't anyone else to take that class, or even the next class from. Some majors had only a couple of professors. Surprisingly even the career center is much better at the flagship - way more companies recruiting on campus, super loyal alumni base all over the country, and having the honors program on the resume IS a differentiator. Some of this may depend on the state flagship of course, and the nature of the honors program.

OP's question is limited to top 10 SLACs vs State Uni. Your experience sounds more like a lower ranking SLAC, of which there are many. Many private schools aren't worth the tuition.

I went to a top 10 SLAC and the DC mentioned above went to one just below that so I think within the range of the OPs question. If you read my post I said both were great and I didn't say the SLAC wasn't worth the tuition, only that DCs experience at a state flagship was excellent for the reasons stated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're better off going to the school with better name recognition. No one will know or care that you did honors at UMD. They'll be impressed that you went to Williams though.

Most people, including employers in NOVA, have heard more about UMD than Williams. Sorry, but it's true.

Most people who hire undergrads have heard of both and are going to look at far more than school name when making their decision, like work experience (if any) and GPA. Generally, but not exclusively, I find that grads of state schools have better work experience but grads of SLACs have impressive internship experience.

OP, one factor to consider is how many students graduate in 4 vs. 5 years. Most LACs of all stripes have a 4 year time to degree with very, VERY few exceptions (and that 4 years isn't supplemented with summer classes). State schools can really run the gamut. It doesn't necessarily equalize the cost difference, but it can be a factor.

I attended a SLAC and went to a state flagship for grad school. Prior to attending the public, I would have said SLAC every time. BUT, I found that truly exceptional students could really thrive in the public setting -- but, they really did have to be exceptional. I definitely met smarter undergrads at my grad school alma mater than I did at my SLAC, but I'd say that the average quality of student work was significantly higher at my SLAC. Additionally, the SLAC culture brings more students "up" and the public uni culture tends to bring bright and willing students up but leaves behind those who are less motivated. Additionally, social maturity matters. I was socially immature when I started college, and the closer knit SLAC environment worked better for me. But students with a bit more life experience wouldn't necessarily need that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids did one of each. One went to a SLAC (as did I) the other to an OOS top flagship in the honors program. Both were great. Full pay at both and they were basically the same price so flagship not a price advantage. Having now been exposed to the state flagship I would choose that over a SLAC. So many more choices of classes and paths and the honors program provided structure and a small environment within a big school. Some say the teaching and focus on undergrads is better at SLACs but that is not always true. My DC at a SLAC had some weak professors and the problem was that if he didn't like them there often wasn't anyone else to take that class, or even the next class from. Some majors had only a couple of professors. Surprisingly even the career center is much better at the flagship - way more companies recruiting on campus, super loyal alumni base all over the country, and having the honors program on the resume IS a differentiator. Some of this may depend on the state flagship of course, and the nature of the honors program.

Can you tell us which state college honors college?

Michigan.

Anonymous wrote:My kids did one of each. One went to a SLAC (as did I) the other to an OOS top flagship in the honors program. Both were great. Full pay at both and they were basically the same price so flagship not a price advantage. Having now been exposed to the state flagship I would choose that over a SLAC. So many more choices of classes and paths and the honors program provided structure and a small environment within a big school. Some say the teaching and focus on undergrads is better at SLACs but that is not always true. My DC at a SLAC had some weak professors and the problem was that if he didn't like them there often wasn't anyone else to take that class, or even the next class from. Some majors had only a couple of professors. Surprisingly even the career center is much better at the flagship - way more companies recruiting on campus, super loyal alumni base all over the country, and having the honors program on the resume IS a differentiator. Some of this may depend on the state flagship of course, and the nature of the honors program.

OP's question is limited to top 10 SLACs vs State Uni. Your experience sounds more like a lower ranking SLAC, of which there are many. Many private schools aren't worth the tuition.

Anonymous wrote:My kids did one of each. One went to a SLAC (as did I) the other to an OOS top flagship in the honors program. Both were great. Full pay at both and they were basically the same price so flagship not a price advantage. Having now been exposed to the state flagship I would choose that over a SLAC. So many more choices of classes and paths and the honors program provided structure and a small environment within a big school. Some say the teaching and focus on undergrads is better at SLACs but that is not always true. My DC at a SLAC had some weak professors and the problem was that if he didn't like them there often wasn't anyone else to take that class, or even the next class from. Some majors had only a couple of professors. Surprisingly even the career center is much better at the flagship - way more companies recruiting on campus, super loyal alumni base all over the country, and having the honors program on the resume IS a differentiator. Some of this may depend on the state flagship of course, and the nature of the honors program.

Can you tell us which state college honors college?