<p>Is choosing to go to a top liberal arts school such as Amherst or Williams instead of an ivy league school considered a dumb choice? Are Amherst, Williams, Carleton e.t.c. comparable to ivies in academics or prestige? If someone compared Williams to Cornell in academics and reputation, would he be made fun of or are the two schools comparable? Just wondering.</p>
<p>Yes. LACs are crap. They give no use-able education, have no ability for undergrads to research and provide next to 0 opportunities for graduates. On top of that the small size sucks.</p>
<p>haha I figured with the name smallcollegesFTW you’d be in favor for LACs. So in your opinion, is it better to go to a decent large universtiy than a prestigious LAC?</p>
<p>^I think he was being sarcastic, which is totally unwarranted imo.</p>
<p>Send messages to CCers ChandlerBing and Elgin1. Both got into Williams and Cornell this spring, both had to make that decision, and both chose Williams. Cornell is an outstanding university with great name recognition - no doubt about it. But Williams offers perhaps the finest undergraduate education in the U.S.</p>
<p>I personally look down upon LAC’s for the same reasons as the sarcasm above, although definitely not to that degree. They’re still great schools.</p>
<p>I think that at LACs, like all other schools, you’ll get out an amount proportional to what you put it. You can certainly go to the best school ever and slack off and get nothing of worth done, or go to a homely LAC and get a great education. People matter more than the schools.</p>
<p>Williams over Cornell Arts and Sciences is a no-brainer.</p>
<p>Only someone woefully ignorant would condescend to LACs.</p>
<p>The only legitimate reason one would turn down a premiere LAC should be if one were interested in studying engineering, or planning on undertaking intensive research in the hard sciences.</p>
<p>Cornell is one of the most reputable institutions in the entire world, but it will never carry the same prestige as Harvard does. </p>
<p>However, at wedding parties or birth anniversaries, one can brag about Cornell to one’s Asian relatives, most of whom did not go to college and some of whom went to city college. Then, one can feel that momentary glorious rush as the spotlight descends upon oneself–as one laps up the enchanted looks, nods, and smiles of approval like a sick drunk–and one can go home on those nights feeling mildly content.</p>
<p>I’ve been having the debate about this for awhile too. In all honesty if preceived prestige is important to you, go to a big school. Name dropping is important to some people. But there is no question that Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore and Middlebury provide equally rigorous and intelectually stimulating educations. If one were to go strictly by USNWR, they would find that the above mentioned liberal arts schools are ranked “better” (by amoint of points allotted) than such schools as Wash U, Columbia, U Chicago, Brown, Cornell, etc. Of course most people on this board know rankings are crap, but nonetheless this may be a determining factor to someone. I always wanted to go somewhere big where I could name drop, but now that I’ve had time to think about it, I decided a Liberal Arts school provides the same caliber education, with a greater focus on the undergraduate community, within a smaller learning environment. What’s not to like?</p>
<p>Yes, LACs are sometimes looked down upon by those attending a big U. </p>
<p>LAC grads are generally more popular with grad schools than with employers.</p>
<p>The reverse also is true. I’m an LAC grad, and I also do some hiring for my company. If I get resumes from graduates of Bowdoin, Williams, Davidson, Carleton, etc., I’m much more likely to call them in for an interview than I am graduates of Syracuse, Boston University, UNC, Penn State, etc., all else being equal. We carry our biases with us through life. Since there are many more grads of large universities than small LACs, you’d think that attending a large uni would give you a proportionally greater step up in hiring. BUT–in my experience, grads of small colleges are much more loyal to their alma maters than grads of large universities. We look out for our own and go the extra step to help a fellow LAC grad out (at least I do). Proof is in the alumni giving rates…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, because we all know that a LAC such as Harvey Mudd does not offer a good choice for aspiring engineers!</p>
<p>/sarcasm off</p>
<p>^^The key phrase here is “such as Harvey Mudd.” Out of the hundreds of LACs in the US, how many offer a curriculum similar Harvey Mudd’s? Well, there is Harvey Mudd and…umm… uh…</p>
<p>The lone exception does little to invalidate the general rule.</p>
<p>^^–^^</p>
<p>Should one interested in learning business principles forego an Ivy Leage undergraduate education if the lone exception is Wharton’s Penn --or to a small degree Cornell? </p>
<p>PS The students of Swarthmore, Reed, or Smith might disagree that HMC constitutes the lone exception to the “engineering” rule.</p>
<p>Ivies are known for liberal arts education, not pre-professional, so I would say LAC are not looked down upon. Cornell’s A&S profile shows higher stats than other schools. Columbia’s engineering students can’t easily transfer into A&S. Dartmouth is a LAC, similar to Williams.</p>
<p>One thing I will add is many students do grow out of LAC by the time they are a junior. LAC is a lot more nurturing for freshmen, it’s a nice transition from HS to college. But universities like Cornell, Tufts, Duke…offer LAC type of environment within its individual school, but offer more research or internship opportunity later on. It is something to keep in mind when choosing between LAC and university.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, that’s not quite the only reason. There’s a kid on another thread interested in Tibetan Studies. How many LACs offer that? (As a matter of fact Kwu should be gratified that yes, Smith and the 5-college consortium do have a Tibetan Studies offering. OmMyGosh!)</p>
<p>In my opinion:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not at all, or at least certainly not by people admitted to both. I turned down Columbia for Pomona, as have five or six other people in my class. A friend of mine from third grade rejected Dartmouth for Pomona, and some have chosen to attend over other Ivy league schools such as Brown, Princeton and Harvard. The same is true for all of the top LACs.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In academics, yes (and perhaps better in certain ways, such as the individual attention), but they definitely aren’t comparable in prestige.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Only those who don’t know much about liberal arts schools would be likely to make fun of such a person. </p>
<p>Feel free to send me a message if you want more reasoning behind why I chose a liberal arts college over a number of universities.</p>
<p>Can top LACs provide a just as good, if not better, education than many top Unis? Yes. Can top Unis provide a just as good, if not better, education than many top LACs? Also yes. There are certainly pros and cons to each one, and while I believe that there are, generally speaking (and generally speaking most students don’t go into college knowing precisely what they want to study), more pros of LACs I don’t want a party and frat-dominated social scene. So in my book, that’s a con for many top unis and a pro for many top LACs. There are, of course, others who disagree with me, and our college lists would be very different. And that’s GOOD - it means we’re actually thought about what we want.</p>
<p>Ultimately, you can get a great education anywhere you go; it’s more a matter of taking opportunities than of having opportunities presented to you. But there are other things besides pure academic strength to think about when you’re deciding 4+ years of your life, and depending on what you want socially, in terms of finances, in terms of prestige, and in terms of surrounding area one type of school may suit you better than another.</p>
<p>okay thanks for all the good advice guys</p>