<p>“My daughter wants to find out what her friend had to do to get that job, …”
Great, and when she does that, make sure she asks what the term they use there, “FTL”, means.</p>
<p>According to the data cited above, BOTH LACS and research Unis are over-represented as the source of UG degrees for PhD students. This thread has quoted that LACs are over-represented, but the reserach Unis account for 20% of UGs, and 41% of biology PhD candidates, also over-represented. Many UG students go to “comprehensive” colleges and those schools show poorly for bio PhDs.</p>
<p>Economics are also a factor. In many cases, kids at LACs have more resources (not all, some get financial aid) but the reality is many strong students end up at the Big State U because it is cheaper. This is especially true to kids in the middle to upper middle class (too much income for financial aid and too little income to pay $50 grand out of pocket per year). The decision to pursue a PhD requires some level of economic comfort - particularly in liberal arts. While a science PhD student will get tuition waiver and a stipend, it is tough to live on that, especially with UG loans to pay off. Many liberal arts PhD students get less funding (a TA-ship perhaps) because there of limited outside money. Thus, another factor (just because this argument isn’t long or complex enough) may be that more LAC grads have the luxury of going to grad school rather than working or pursuing a professional degree due to more financial resources.</p>
<p>I agree with the following points:
- Some LACS are better than some top 30 Universities. However, I think the LAC quality drops off more quickly than the Uni quality
- Some LACs provide better UG education because the professors focus on the UG students, not their research or their grad students
- Some LACs, in some fields, limit the depth of coursework in certain fields and limit when course are offered. It can be difficult to get in a needed or wanted class, esp if a student takes a semester abroad.<br>
- Conversely, some Unis have over-subscribed courses and can’t sccomodate all students that want the class (my son was not able to fit in Japanese at his medium-sized uni as the classes kept being filled before his turn to register). It can be difficult to get into a needed or wanted course.
- LACs are better for some kids, Unis are better for others. All depends on the kid, the school, and the area of interest.</p>
<p>“Great, and when she does that, make sure she asks what the term they use there, “FTL”, means.”</p>
<p>This brings to mind another point… Some attention might be given to what each institution may do for the preponderant majority of their students, in every case, who do not go on to get PhDs. If 15-20% leave altogether, and of the remainder fewer than 20% get PhDs, that means the vast majority need to do something else. What then?</p>
<p>What if little darling’s brilliance is not adequately recognized there, and resulting grades do not warrant admission to a good PHD program ?? Or little darling realizes, along the way, that she actually does not want to pursue a Phd, after all?? Are other opportunities just the same as at alternatives?</p>
<p>At all institutions one can get a job through one’s own initiative, but does the school itself help you in any way? How many companies recruit for jobs on campus? Do the companies with the best jobs come to campus, or just the Peace Corps ?? This will become relevant, in the end, to the vast # grads from all these places, even the ones that have the most (though still small%) future Phds.</p>
<p>“Are liberals arts colleges perceived as second tier by College Confidential members?” I think that question has been amply answered here – to some, absolutely, and to others, no way. "</p>
<p>For the record, I don’t think they are “second tier”, otherwise I wouldn’t have let my daughters go off to them. Most of this is reaction to assertions here where some seem to feel they have blanket superiority, in fact. I may have felt that way too, before my family actually experienced them. Going forward though, when S gets around to it I’m pretty sure, based on what he’s heard around here, that he will be looking harder at places he thinks might be equally great but that offer a wider range of social and academic options, that’s all. </p>
<p>Not that these places necessarily keep you from achieving your objectives if you’re good enough, but I don’t believe they are necessarily “best”, or “better” as a blanket matter, certainly this little % thing does not indicate such, to me. We found there are limitations we encountered that also need to be considered, and will be going forward.</p>
<p>
FWIW, I actually tend to agree; the schools are so dissimilar that comparisons are difficult, but both schools “hand-pick” students, as do all selective schools.</p>
<p>“The life of the mind argument is, frankly, ■■■■■■■■. IMO.”</p>
<p>Fortunately, there are plenty of schools that don’t make this argument. We enjoy great diversity of schools.</p>
<p>“The numbers of students who get PhDs following undergrad at the nation’s leading universities vastly exceeds the numbers from the LACs.”</p>
<p>True but irrelevant when considering the overall “atmosphere” at a school, where percentage is influential.</p>
<p>“It’s not like the LACs aren’t going to be able to put any points on the board, but the outcome will not be in doubt.”</p>
<p>Students’ outcomes are one of the areas where LACs do very well.</p>
<p>“Schools whose student bodies are most homogeneous will always show better as %.”</p>
<p>This is another area of choice for HS students. E.g., targeting biology research, a student can choose a school with a core of like-minded students, or a school with more diversity of majors.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The above shows a fundamental difference between those who apply to LACs and top research universities. Those who attend college primarily to “get a good job” or “make the best starting salary” rarely apply to LACs. </p>
<p>My husband and I do alumni interviews for two Ivies (he does two, and I do one), and more and more kids are saying that the reason they want to attend is to “make lots of money.” At the university where we teach, many students decide to attend because the average starting salary is $2000 higher than a rival, or because Company X recruits. We have been shocked by this trend. These reasons should not come into play when choosing an education. Yes, the students have to find jobs or go to grad school after the four years are up, but the chances that an individual student gets recruited by Company X or gets a top salary are slim when you take into account a graduating class of 1000 or more. </p>
<p>Recruitment comes into play mostly for those who want to go to Wall Street or into engineering, and then only the very top students get offers.</p>
<p>Re post 382:</p>
<h1>4 applies to LACs as well as to unis. My S was shut out of two classes at his LAC (bad) because the profs wanted to keep the class size small (good). At Dartmouth, one course had 80 applicants for a class of 55 (and no TA to help out the prof).</h1>
<p>“The numbers of students who get PhDs following undergrad at the nation’s leading universities vastly exceeds the numbers from the LACs.”</p>
<p>"True but irrelevant when considering the overall “atmosphere” at a school, where percentage is influential "</p>
<p>For LAcs definitely, not so much for universities, IMO. </p>
<p>This “overall atmosphere” is of critical importance when considering an LAC, we found the predominant campus culture was highly important socially. </p>
<p>My own experience, at a university with many high capability students, is any so called “overall atmosphere” is hard to discern and not highly relevant. There are enough people there so they can break down into sub-groups that have more in common, whether by course of studies or socially. </p>
<p>By contrast, Ds both encountered clash with “overall atmospheres” at their LAcs, and there was nowhere else to go. Universities offer more room to maneuver socially. For me, there was no “overall atmospere” that was highly relevant, only the “micro-atmosphere” that I shared with like minded individuals. Of which there will likely be many, since many types of people go there, not just one.</p>
<p>The relative pervasiveness/ influence of “overall atmoshere” is one reason why S will likely look to larger schools (of comparable academic level).</p>
<p>Blossom, Cellardweller - not sure what either of your points were, but, FWIW -the six-year graduation rates for Colby and Wisconsin are:
Colby - (88%); Wisconsin (60.5%)
[News</a> & Events - University of Wisconsin System](<a href=“http://www.wisconsin.edu/news/2002/r020204.htm]News”>http://www.wisconsin.edu/news/2002/r020204.htm)</p>
<p>Monydad - if that’s Cornell you’re describing (“any so called “overall atmosphere” is hard to discern and not highly relevant.”) that is clearly not the perception of the place at-large nor on the CC board.</p>
<p>"Those who attend college primarily to “get a good job” or “make the best starting salary” rarely apply to LACs. "</p>
<p>So you mean those future Ibankers at Williams don’t want a high starting salary?? Have to tell Goldman…</p>
<p>The problem is, though, that the majority of those people who didn’t care about this will eventually need to get a job anyway, and when that happens it would be nice to have the option of landing a good one.</p>
<p>I don’t see this entirely as an LAC vs U thing, some LAcs have adequate recruitment.
I’m just saying it’s something you might think about, wherever. This is perhaps more evident to me since my D, who didn’t care, is now scraping by at sub-subsistence wages while her cousin took his Ivy degree to an I bank and is out of my sister’s pocketbook. An opportunity that was available to him via on-campus recruiting.</p>
<p>He could have alternatively applied to grad school. Goodness knows, hundreds of people from that school do. He preferred to do this, and fortunately he had that option there.</p>
<p>There may be institutions where only a trivial # students are helped by on-campus recruiting, however there are others where quite a few people benefit from this.</p>
<p>Monydad, you have to read my statement carefully. I doubt the Williams students chose it primarily to get a good job or make the best starting salary. They chose it for the excellent education and small academic environment. That some will get good jobs is a perk, not a motivation.</p>
<p>“Monydad - if that’s Cornell you’re describing (“any so called “overall atmosphere” is hard to discern and not highly relevant.”) that is clearly not the perception of the place at-large nor on the CC board.”</p>
<p>Yes it certainly is. When I was studying Physics there, I had really no idea what was going on in Hotel Administration, or Architecture college. I was never in a frat, I have no real idea what those people did, nor did I care. It is large enough that one can find one’s niche.</p>
<p>"Monydad, you have to read my statement carefully. I doubt the Williams students chose it primarily to get a good job or make the best starting salary. They chose it for the excellent education and small academic environment. That some will get good jobs is a perk, not a motivation. "</p>
<p>They could have alternatively selected Reed etc., why didn’t they…</p>
<p>Motivations differ, both in U settings but also among LAC students. One can equally choose larger U for excellent education and large course selection & broader social scene, not primarily jobs. After all, hundreds of people from Us go on for PhDs, etc. Many more than LAcs.</p>
<p>In both settings, it’s nice to have jobs as an option, is all I’m saying. Now that D1 has been through this. It in actuality is not equally an option everyplace, in our experience.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But is your D interested in Ibanking?</p>
<p>
For the three questions embedded above, the answer’s for my D’s LAC are yes, yes, and yes. Next?</p>
<p>
This may be true. My intuitive sense is that there’s a drop-off point after 50 or so LAC’s that’s akin to the point of about 100 universities. A small proportion of all options in the overall scheme of things but comprising the majority of colleges actively considered here on CC.</p>
<p>Here’s a small litmus test, though not bearing on the original Q regarding research opportunities: how many classes at a school use tests with multiple choice scantron forms? D never saw one in four years at her LAC; she knows someone from Arizona State that never had a test in four years that <em>wasn’t</em> on scantron forms.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I actually asked this one</p>
<p>at my son’s state U, about 15K students and third tier on US NEWS, he has had only had one class that used scantrons. None of his big science classes use them. It was a required general elective in communications that used it. While his friend at a midwest LAC reports three classes have used them. Both will be Juniors this fall</p>
<p>I suspect The answers would be all over the map</p>
<p>"But is your D interested in Ibanking? "
Certainly not originally. She did develop some degree of interest later, as her studies developed in a certain way. And some other students there were also interested. </p>
<p>But she did ultimately have interest in getting a decent paying job, of some kind. Where few employers of any kind except Peace Corps are coming to your campus there are differences here, it’s not just about I banking.</p>
<p>“…the answer’s for my D’s LAC are yes, yes, and yes.”</p>
<p>Again I said this was not solely a U vs. LAC thing, regardless of which it’s something one might want to keep in mind. At some level, anyway. Some LAcs are fine. In fact, in some cases these LACs are probably chosen in preference to some other LAcs in part for this reason. IMO.</p>
<p>My guess is that more Us are better than more LAcs on this score, but individual cases must be considered.</p>
<p>Monydad wrote:</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Monydad - LACs owe their resilience and popularity, in part, to the fact that a lot of people find the image you paint HIGHLY relevant and rather frightening.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Perhaps to you. I chose an economics / math honors program at NU over Wharton at Penn precisely because it was less pre-professional and I wanted more of a liberal arts education than what I would have gotten at Wharton. And I’m glad I did, as my economics education prepared me and my classmates equally for academia, govt work, and private business. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Right. Dh was a biology major at NU and would say the same thing. The people who were studying journalism, music, theater or engineering in no way negatively impacted our personal academic experience or prospects. They did add to the diversity of our experience though. </p>
<p>Which is why it then starts to get down to personal preference – does a given student desire a smaller campus in which there is no one studying journalism / engineering / architecture / hotel administration / business et al and there may be a more heterogenous feel, or a larger campus in which those schools also exist but have little bearing on the individual’s academic situation. Who can say which is better, except for the individual? Why all the hating?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why is that frightening, that there might be other fields of study at a college that you don’t know about or that don’t impact you? Or perhaps you’re saying something else?</p>