<p>my oldest graduated high school in 2000.
She attended K-12 with some of the brightest most capable kids, from some of the most supportive and knowledgeable families in the region.
Few are doing what they were interested in, in high school.
ONe girl who is, didn’t even attend high school, but went right to the UW- got a triple major- went into the Peace Corps for a few years and is now in D.C. apparently back to her teenage interest ( astronomy)</p>
<p>I don’t think that whether or not graduates are employable has as much to do with their degree or brand name, but with their preparation in college to transition that knowledge and skills acquired to the work force.</p>
<p>Another thing i have noticed with myself is- I downplay brand names.
When talking to people, who ask where my oldest attended college- even though I hold it in very high esteem, I don’t mention the name.
Not on purpose, really and for a while after she graduated, I was quick to mention it. After all she was the first in our family to attend a 4-yr college, let alone graduate from one, and I was very proud.</p>
<p>But, I quickly learned that either the questioners were * very impressed* so much so that it made me uncomfortable.
Or else they had never heard of it.
So it really didn’t make sense to mention the name.
I just say she went to school in Portland.
;)</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, by and large I agree with you, but I DO think it is more likely that the average LAC student will know professors – any professors, in and out of his major – compared to a Uni student of the same temperament, and at the same time it is certainly the case that for aggressive, proactive students Unis provide many more opportunities for almost everything, including cross-disciplinary connections.</p>
<p>(I note that your Classics/Medieval History example is an especially bad one, since those two fields are bound at the hip by Latin. Probably half or more of the Classics majors I know talk to medievalists on a regular basis, and there is a certain permeability of the membrane between the two fields. One of my favorite Classics majors just changed her major because they wouldn’t let her do her honors thesis on medieval poetry.)</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, I was not attacking you. It’s just that throughout this thread, evidence that certain schools value “life of the mind” is taken to mean “going for a Ph.D.”<br>
The excerpt from Reed’s website seems to suggest there is only two possibilities: one type of school where the life of the mind is exalted, and another type where the guys play football and the gals pretend they’re at a country club.</p>
<p>This discussion started taking a new path around post #361.</p>
<p>The reasons for focusing, before that, on research and Ph.D. production were sound.
It may be true that the graduates of some universities have a better track record than the graduates of some LACs for immediate employment, or for entrepreneurial wealth creation, or for any number of other outcomes not directly related to scholarship. But no one has presented good data to support that view. Furthermore, even if such data were available, it would be hard to establish that such success is attributable to the curriculum model (university vs. LAC) per se.</p>
<p>The mission of liberal education is not, by definition, job preparation.</p>
<p>So if we want to compare the two models (LAC vs. university) with respect to academic excellence, it makes sense to focus on performance factors, or on outcomes, that are clearly related to the essence and mission of what universities and colleges are set up to do. Which schools do a better job of discovering and disseminating knowledge? Which schools do a better job of motivating and preparing students to discover and disseminate knowledge?</p>
<p>The per capita Ph.D. production rate is one way to measure outcomes, and by that measure, LACs do well. Of course, it may be true that at a large university, every engineering student goes on to earn a Ph.D., while nobody else does. But I think we are trying to assess some likely outcomes, for random students, attributable to the quality of education per se.</p>
<p>S1 graduated from Wes. He did not have any closer interaction with his profs than S2 at Harvard. His mind was not any more cultivated than S2’s. S2 did take a few huge classes, but over half of his classes had fewer than 20 students, and a great many had fewer than 10. And, unlike S1, he was not shut out of any classes he wanted to take.</p>
<p>“I have yet to read a high school senior enthusing about the “life of the mind” in evidence at any college s/he is considering.”</p>
<p>I think that’s because there are relatively few such students; an infinitesimally small percentage of total students attend Swarthmore, Reed, St. John’s, UChicago, etc., where the “life of the mind” is talked about.</p>
<p>I disagree with this way of measuring academic excellence. Does it mean that students who graduate summa and go on to law school or med school should not be included in the statistics concerning academic excellence? Very strange.</p>
<p>So, suddenly, Monydad has refreshed his memory and recalls a few professors that he did get to know “outside of his lab”. Pizzagirl now agrees that this is a positive thing. Glad I could be of help. ;)</p>
<p>And, Marite, I’m glad we’re back to comparing Wesleyan and Harvard!</p>
<p>" I have yet to read a high school senior enthusing about the “life of the mind” in evidence at any college s/he is considering."</p>
<p>My D1 certainly considered it. Actually I did too, when I was choosing. Too bad D1 was phobic about being anyplace near people who joined frats and played sports, she would have had a better experience at my U. While largely avoiding the people she didn’t have affinity for, and finding a large cohort of like-minded people there.</p>
<p>marite, Wes and Harvard are two EXCEPTIONAL schools. What are your thoughts about other schools. I mean, my stateU experience was terrible. It was almost impossible to get to know professors. A friend, (full professor at a large, well regarded, stateU), jokes that she runs the other way whenever she sees an undergrad walking her way. She’s only interested in her grad students. While visiting S1 at his small LAC, in two days we bumped into professors from biology (2), chemistry (1), english (1), and government (1). They all stopped to talk (as S1 says they always do) about all sorts of stuff. The english professor even gave him some books. I was impressed. S2 will be heading off to a large research university and it’s yet to be determined what kind of experience he has (his major is undeclared). I’m hoping it will not be similar to mine. Luckily, he is outgoing, but I’m hoping the institutional differences do not create access problems.</p>
<p>Sorry, I guess I misunderstood. I thought you were saying that you never ran into a HS student who considered the “life of the mind” to be an important issue, and I thought was was agreeing with you that few consider it so, as evidenced by the few schools that promote the idea.</p>
<p>Uh, that’s not quite what I said. I said that it was odd to simultaneously tout that a benefit of an LAC is that you can get to know profs outside your field, but then not see that the benefit of a uni would be that there would be even MORE profs in a broader range of areas to get to know. If you were so inclined to play the get-to-know game, that is. </p>
<p>Maybe your courseload at Wes was easy enough that you had ample time to play befriend-the-profs; mine never was :-). (I’m just joshin’ with ya.)</p>
<p>But that’s the whole point, marite – your S was asking “where can I get the best math education for my needs,” not “what will others think of my choices?”</p>
<p>That’s the question that started this off – the question wasn’t
“Do LAC’s offer as good educations as research unis?”
but
“Are LAC’s perceived as second tier?”
Not what do LAC’s OFFER … but what are LAC’s PERCEIVED AS.</p>
<p>And someone who’s all over “what will other people think” is the antithesis of the kind of student who is interested in learning for learning’s sake. Because great learning can be had in places that my neighbors and drycleaner haven’t ever heard of, in fact that most people haven’t ever heard of.</p>
<p>You didn’t say you were “learning from” the professors not in your department or area of study. You said you knew “what was going on in the science building, who was teaching what, what the big specialties were.” And that you were sure the science majors knew who the hot-shot humanities teachers were. That’s all about just knowing names, though – not about learning. </p>
<p>The science major at Wesleyan who knows that Professor Whoever is supposed to really rock when it comes to French literature … well, what good does that do, until or unless said science major actually takes a class from Professor Whoever in French literature? It sounds like you believe that the small size of an LAC lends itself better to knowing various profs’ reputations?</p>
<p>Agreed, but it’s a long time ago since the thread was about “what will others think of my choices” and, as so often happens, it’s become “life of the mind” LACs vs. careerist pre-professional unis.</p>