Anonymous wrote:Hello, my son, a junior, is researching colleges and is interested in top liberal arts colleges such as Middlebury, Bowdoin, Williams, etc. Isolation is not a major issue since he likes nature, but having a 'college town' is a plus so he won't be completely bored.

He has a high GPA and a 1510 SAT. He is very involved in music. He has a passion for geography, but he is stronger in math and science than in humanities. He plans on majoring in something STEM related, and is unsure about his future job.

He is quirky and very shy, so he hopes that liberal arts colleges will help him get out of his comfort zone. He also values school spirit, but more in a community sense than sports sense.

Should he research more into the top liberal arts colleges? Or should he focus more on bigger universities?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's my order (not USNWR): Swarthmore, Amherst, Williams, Wesleyan, Haverford, Pomona, Middlebury, Vassar, Bates, Hamilton, Harvey Mudd, Skidmore, Trinity, Connecticut College, Dickinson, Colgate, Colby, Davidson

your kid will get a great education at any of these schools. If you are full pay, you'll have a slight edge at some of them because they are not all need blind, except for the three or four at the top of the list, but those schools are extremely selective, just as hard to get into as many of the Ivies.

My kid is very shy, and she went to a SLAC (not on the list above, although she got into some of them) instead of a big university. It made a huge difference for her, and I'm sure it was the right choice, even though the school didn't offer as much research opportunity as she would have gotten at a larger university. But we couldn't afford a selective private (none offer merit aid), so she went to a lower-ranked college.

She graduated at the top of her class, and she got a lot of recognition from her professors, which would not have happened at a larger school. She really stood out, and that helped her self-confidence a lot. She made a handful of nice friends, but there weren't a lot of kids at her intellectual level, which was one drawback of her SLAC.

What an odd "order."

Skidmore, Conn College and especially Dickenson over Colgate, Colby and Davidson, in what universe?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With a 1510, OP’s kid can be selective. The only reason to move down the list would be if they need merit aid

No, that's not true at all. And my SLAC is now $81K a year and definitely not worth it.

Anonymous wrote:With a 1510, OP’s kid can be selective. The only reason to move down the list would be if they need merit aid

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's my order (not USNWR): Swarthmore, Amherst, Williams, Wesleyan, Haverford, Pomona, Middlebury, Vassar, Bates, Hamilton, Harvey Mudd, Skidmore, Trinity, Connecticut College, Dickinson, Colgate, Colby, Davidson

your kid will get a great education at any of these schools. If you are full pay, you'll have a slight edge at some of them because they are not all need blind, except for the three or four at the top of the list, but those schools are extremely selective, just as hard to get into as many of the Ivies.

My kid is very shy, and she went to a SLAC (not on the list above, although she got into some of them) instead of a big university. It made a huge difference for her, and I'm sure it was the right choice, even though the school didn't offer as much research opportunity as she would have gotten at a larger university. But we couldn't afford a selective private (none offer merit aid), so she went to a lower-ranked college.

She graduated at the top of her class, and she got a lot of recognition from her professors, which would not have happened at a larger school. She really stood out, and that helped her self-confidence a lot. She made a handful of nice friends, but there weren't a lot of kids at her intellectual level, which was one drawback of her SLAC.

What an odd "order."

Anonymous wrote:Here's my order (not USNWR): Swarthmore, Amherst, Williams, Wesleyan, Haverford, Pomona, Middlebury, Vassar, Bates, Hamilton, Harvey Mudd, Skidmore, Trinity, Connecticut College, Dickinson, Colgate, Colby, Davidson

your kid will get a great education at any of these schools. If you are full pay, you'll have a slight edge at some of them because they are not all need blind, except for the three or four at the top of the list, but those schools are extremely selective, just as hard to get into as many of the Ivies.

My kid is very shy, and she went to a SLAC (not on the list above, although she got into some of them) instead of a big university. It made a huge difference for her, and I'm sure it was the right choice, even though the school didn't offer as much research opportunity as she would have gotten at a larger university. But we couldn't afford a selective private (none offer merit aid), so she went to a lower-ranked college.

She graduated at the top of her class, and she got a lot of recognition from her professors, which would not have happened at a larger school. She really stood out, and that helped her self-confidence a lot. She made a handful of nice friends, but there weren't a lot of kids at her intellectual level, which was one drawback of her SLAC.

Anonymous wrote:Here's my order (not USNWR): Swarthmore, Amherst, Williams, Wesleyan, Haverford, Pomona, Middlebury, Vassar, Bates, Hamilton, Harvey Mudd, Skidmore, Trinity, Connecticut College, Dickinson, Colgate, Colby, Davidson

your kid will get a great education at any of these schools. If you are full pay, you'll have a slight edge at some of them because they are not all need blind, except for the three or four at the top of the list, but those schools are extremely selective, just as hard to get into as many of the Ivies.

My kid is very shy, and she went to a SLAC (not on the list above, although she got into some of them) instead of a big university. It made a huge difference for her, and I'm sure it was the right choice, even though the school didn't offer as much research opportunity as she would have gotten at a larger university. But we couldn't afford a selective private (none offer merit aid), so she went to a lower-ranked college.

She graduated at the top of her class, and she got a lot of recognition from her professors, which would not have happened at a larger school. She really stood out, and that helped her self-confidence a lot. She made a handful of nice friends, but there weren't a lot of kids at her intellectual level, which was one drawback of her SLAC.

Anonymous wrote:There are a few liberal arts colleges with strong engineering programs - three of them in Pennsylvania: Swarthmore, Lafayette, and Bucknell.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter did well in the small setting, because it was less intimidating and required her to step up.

Having said that, you are falling into the trap of only discussing very selective schools. Remember to visit and praise some less elite schools also, or we may be hearing you lament one year from now like many who have come before you.

(Check out St Olaf’s for example)

I think that friendly big schools can be as good for shy kids as small schools are, but I think any small school that has good science programs will be better for STEM kids (with the S being defined so as to exclude social sciences majors) than most big selective schools.

The problem is that (after adjusting for socioeconomic status, test-taking anxiety, etc.), a kid with 1510 on the SATs is just OK in terms of academic readiness when compared with typical STEM student at a T40 school or in the honors college at a solid state flagship. A big school will be focusing on turning the kid into an economics or poli sci major.

I think that a small school that’s fine with STEM kids staying in STEM is a lot more likely to let regular bright kids stay in STEM.

If a kid likes geography and likes STEM, maybe one approach would be to major in logistics or agribusiness at a big, friendly state school. My guess would be that those programs are easy to get into, attract many shy students, tend to require scientific literacy, and lead to fun, useful, lucrative jobs.

This is the dumbest post ever.

A kid with a 1510 is shut out of MIT, etc.? I think not.

You are basing your entire evaluation of this kid on one test score, one severely flawed test score, I might add.

OP, Ignore this post. Useless. And really, really dumb.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter did well in the small setting, because it was less intimidating and required her to step up.

Having said that, you are falling into the trap of only discussing very selective schools. Remember to visit and praise some less elite schools also, or we may be hearing you lament one year from now like many who have come before you.

(Check out St Olaf’s for example)

I think that friendly big schools can be as good for shy kids as small schools are, but I think any small school that has good science programs will be better for STEM kids (with the S being defined so as to exclude social sciences majors) than most big selective schools.

The problem is that (after adjusting for socioeconomic status, test-taking anxiety, etc.), a kid with 1510 on the SATs is just OK in terms of academic readiness when compared with typical STEM student at a T40 school or in the honors college at a solid state flagship. A big school will be focusing on turning the kid into an economics or poli sci major.

I think that a small school that’s fine with STEM kids staying in STEM is a lot more likely to let regular bright kids stay in STEM.

If a kid likes geography and likes STEM, maybe one approach would be to major in logistics or agribusiness at a big, friendly state school. My guess would be that those programs are easy to get into, attract many shy students, tend to require scientific literacy, and lead to fun, useful, lucrative jobs.

This is the dumbest post ever.

A kid with a 1510 is shut out of MIT, etc.? I think not.

You are basing your entire evaluation of this kid on one test score, one severely flawed test score, I might add.

OP, Ignore this post. Useless. And really, really dumb.

Anonymous wrote:With a 1510, OP’s kid can be selective. The only reason to move down the list would be if they need merit aid

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With a 1510, OP’s kid can be selective. The only reason to move down the list would be if they need merit aid

This is so not true. Many applicants to top liberal arts colleges with high SAT scores are rejected. No one can assume admission to a college with acceptance rates in the single digits.

Anonymous wrote:My daughter did well in the small setting, because it was less intimidating and required her to step up.

Having said that, you are falling into the trap of only discussing very selective schools. Remember to visit and praise some less elite schools also, or we may be hearing you lament one year from now like many who have come before you.

(Check out St Olaf’s for example)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter did well in the small setting, because it was less intimidating and required her to step up.

Having said that, you are falling into the trap of only discussing very selective schools. Remember to visit and praise some less elite schools also, or we may be hearing you lament one year from now like many who have come before you.

(Check out St Olaf’s for example)

I think that friendly big schools can be as good for shy kids as small schools are, but I think any small school that has good science programs will be better for STEM kids (with the S being defined so as to exclude social sciences majors) than most big selective schools.

The problem is that (after adjusting for socioeconomic status, test-taking anxiety, etc.), a kid with 1510 on the SATs is just OK in terms of academic readiness when compared with typical STEM student at a T40 school or in the honors college at a solid state flagship. A big school will be focusing on turning the kid into an economics or poli sci major.

I think that a small school that’s fine with STEM kids staying in STEM is a lot more likely to let regular bright kids stay in STEM.

If a kid likes geography and likes STEM, maybe one approach would be to major in logistics or agribusiness at a big, friendly state school. My guess would be that those programs are easy to get into, attract many shy students, tend to require scientific literacy, and lead to fun, useful, lucrative jobs.