<p>Some claim that in a small liberal art college one can get individualized attention and better interactions and all those benefits, while others say that even the top liberal arts colleges are overrated and therefore, cannot compete with the Ivy, Stanford, MIT or Duke. A friend of mine has a hard time to decide which kind of school to enroll. With the options to attend the Ivies and Duke, she is considering Bates College, Lafayette and Reed. Can anyone help with this dilemma?</p>
<p>Generally, the top LACs (Amherst, Swarthmore, Williams) are considered on par with the non-HYP Ivies. Bates, Lafayette, and Reed are a notch or two below that level.</p>
<p>Yeah, I agree with Catfish.</p>
<p>Top LACs are on level with top Unis- I'd turn an undergraduate education at Harvard down for any top LAC. However, Lafayette, Bates, and Reed aren't exactly Swarthmore or Amherst... An Ivy, especially one of the Ivies that concentrates on their undergrads, is probably a better choice than one of the less selective LACs.</p>
<p>I'm not sure, I MIGHT pick Bates over UPenn or something like that- depends on how important the LAC vibe is for your friend, how much they want personalized attention. And how much prestige is a factor for them, etc. </p>
<p>This hurts because I am probably going to an LAC ranked equally with Bates (Bryn Mawr).</p>
<p>I'd turn down these Ivies for it:
Yale
Harvard
Princeton
Cornell
UPenn (UPenn is my grad school of choice)</p>
<p>I'd seriously THINK about these Ivies:
Brown
Dartmouth
(Maybe Princeton too but the whole eating club thing sounds way too exclusionary to me)</p>
<p>And I'd abandon Duke, but that's just my personality. It all comes down to personal preference.</p>
<p>I think that many of the top liberal arts colleges are definitely on par with the top Ivies, and are among them as well.</p>
<p>I love LACs, but I agree that Bates and Lafayette are not schools that people would normally choose over the Ivies, not because they are LACs, particularly, but because they are not in the top tear of LACs that normally compete for Ivy quality and near-Ivy quality applicants (though I’m sure, especially these days, that there are Ivy quality applicants at them). Of course, fit sometimes matters more than prestige, so if she’d rather an LAC, maybe it is worth it to her.</p>
<p>Choosing Reed over any of the Ivies is, IMO, a less surprising choice. Despite its ranking (which is BS, since it doesn’t play the US World New ranking game), Reed is known for a rigorous and intense academic experiences, and has a rather unique atmosphere. If your friend is into the idea of a really intense and rigorous intellectual experience and a really quirky student body, I could see choosing Reed in a heartbeart...not to say that the Ivies aren’t rigorous and intellectual, but Reed is normally put in a special category along with UChicago and a few others in that regard.</p>
<p>It's all personal preference, I think. Top LACs and Ivies/other highly ranked universities are equal in prestige. You'll get a stellar education from any of them, so go for what you think you'd like the best.</p>
<p>Reed, Swarthmore and UChicago are often considered as a group, with Amherst, Carleton and Oberlin less quirky, but all are intellectual powerhouses. For someone interested in research or academia, the LACs compete very well indeed (re the ubiquitous future-PhD lists). As a group, the Ivies-plus are often said to result in higher-paying jobs for their four-year graduates (they don't "need" PhDs). The kind of school selected depends more on a student's goals and preferences.</p>
<p>I think the top LAC's are excellent and you can't go wrong. It boils down to the environment you want.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Reed, Swarthmore and UChicago are often considered as a group, with Amherst, Carleton and Oberlin less quirky, but all are intellectual powerhouses. For someone interested in research or academia, the LACs compete very well indeed (re the ubiquitous future-PhD lists). As a group, the Ivies-plus are often said to result in higher-paying jobs for their four-year graduates (they don't "need" PhDs). The kind of school selected depends more on a student's goals and preferences.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>that's quite true. think about the hordes of recruiters that besiege top Ivies every year. LACs are academically rigorous and would make a great starting point for an academic career or entry into med or law school. i'd say if you're thinking about med or law school, you don't have to worry about employment yet, so just go ahead and enjoy the stimulating and cosy environment of a LAC!</p>
<p>Top LACs are not overrated, but much rather underrated</p>
<p>I think that the top 3 lac's are on par with HYP, not a notch below them.</p>
<p>I would put amherst, williams, and Swarthmore on the same level overall as Columbia, Dartmouth, Duke, Penn, and Brown. I would put this group right after HYP.</p>
<p>Lafayette, Bates, and Reed are not generally considered to be at the same level as the Ivies or a place like Duke.</p>
<p>SWAP are on par for educational quality, but LACs cannot compete with HYPSM for "layman's prestige"</p>
<p>You should also keep in mind that a school like Reed has a very different kind of educational philosophy than an Ivy League school or a more 'prestigious' liberal arts college. The applications process is first and foremost about fit -- that is, where your child would be most comfortable and more inspired -- and you should evaluate schools accordingly.</p>
<p>Is it just me or does all this bickering over tiers seem a little crazy???</p>
<p>Are LACs overrated? One interesting perspective on this issue was recently provided by the Harvard University Faculty of Arts and Sciences, in their 2006 internal</a> review of the Harvard undergraduate curriculum:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Students and faculty must truly engage one another, close up, and not at a distance. The most consistent — and most accurate — criticism of a Harvard education today is that student-faculty contact is much too limited ... We should aspire that Harvard College prove itself to be the equal in teaching, mentoring, and inspiration to any of the great small liberal arts colleges in the American tradition... (p. 3)
[/quote]
[quote]
Why should all of the creative and liberating ideas for liberal education be left to the small residential liberal arts colleges? ... With Harvard’s resources and opportunities we could be both Harvard University and Williams College. (p. 94)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Harvard deserves some credit for (1) benchmarking itself against teaching-oriented LACs, rather than other research universities, and (2) making such a candid internal report available to the general public.</p>
<p>What level LACs are on doesn't really matter; you either want to be at that small of a school or not.</p>
<p>What about research at LACs? Aren't they lacking in that respect compared to big research universities?</p>
<p>My D goes to small LAC. She was among three sophomore women at her school who won Goldwater Scholars honors as sophomores. That was as many as HYPSDMC and more than many. Didn't seem to hold them back much. </p>
<p>Research is one area that you can find plenty of data, who is doing what and with how much cash for their UG labs. I'm sure these students would have won the same award had they chosen any of the elite schools that accepted them but ...you just never know. ;)</p>
<p>
[quote]
What about research at LACs? Aren't they lacking in that respect compared to big research universities?
[/quote]
In all but one type of research, yes. LACs are small, research is a secondary priority for LAC faculty, and there are few or no graduate students. So LACs rank way behind big universities, in terms of overall quantity and quality of research achievements. </p>
<p>But LACs commonly do excel in one specific type of research: undergraduate research. If there are no graduate students, then who do the faculty turn to for research assistance? They have no choice -- they have to recruit undergraduates and plug them into their projects. So LAC students are more likely to be involved in faculty research as undergraduates, and are more likely to work with faculty at a meaningful level.</p>
<p>Top LACs have very high placement rates into top graduate programs. Grad school applicants from LACs usually have a solid grounding in the fundamentals, have done meaningful research as undergraduates, and are accustomed to close working relationships with faculty. These are general qualities that graduate programs are looking for. </p>
<p>LAC students are less likely to get involved with cutting-edge, state-of-the-art research as undergraduates. But grad schools aren't typically concerned about this deficiency, because the grad school process is expected to correct it quickly.</p>