<p>i dont think u can compare small lib arts schools with national universities. First, to compare a school that has 200 kids a grade compared to a school with over 2 K, that is just absurd. It is much easier for Amherst to fill a class with HIGH scorers than it is for a place like Cornell, hence, the disparity among the entering stats between these schools. To say that Amherst is better than Cornell is absurd. Second, small lib arts school just dont have the same resources that larger schools do. They often do not have the same amount of courses and professors that larger places do. For instance, an english department in a lib arts school might contain 2 teachers while Cornell's department might contain around 20. That is 18 more teachers, more perspectives, and expertise areas.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think Cornell is so completely overrated, it is unbelievable to me. Where I am from,. so many kids with rather "questionable" stats get in. These kids, the majority at least, had no shot at any other top 15 school. My bro's friends, 2 of them just got into Cornell, both having under 650 on their SAT verbal.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>How brilliant! Obviously a schools quality is directly proportional to the average SAT score of those admitted! It makes so much sense! </p>
<p>But seriously, there's so much more to a school than that. You have to experience it.</p>
<p>"I know people with 800s rejected from Cornell."</p>
<p>I know a magical unicorn that grants wishes..... see, I can make up stuff to prove my points too.... :)</p>
<p>. . . Right. But I didn't make that up--this is CC and you go to NU. We all know people with 800s.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
My biggest beef I guess with HYPS, as well as some of the other powerhouse universities, is that undergrads have to fight with grad students for the top professor's attention.
[/QUOTE]
I can't speak for HYP but I can for Stanford. I can tell you for sure that any undergrad can get any professor’s attention. I'm just a freshman and still in all my classes my professors (not TAs mind you) practically beg students to come by in office hours. I love the fact that my school is large enough that I can frequently meet new people but small enough that I always bump into people I know. Also Stanford makes a great effort to make sure that freshman have small intimate classes with Professors. All freshmen are highly encouraged to take Introductory Seminars which are small classes (less than 18 students) with some of the biggest professors. I took one this quarter and it was amazing-I got to spend time with one of the most highly respected chemistry professors in the US! Also at Stanford there are 'faculty nights' where students invite professors to dine with them in their dining halls. I personally got the chance to invite my professor and it really was a great experience. What am I trying to say really is just because a university is large and/or has a large graduate body does not mean that undergrads don't get any attention or that they would necessarily get more in a smaller school!</p>
<p>"I think Cornell is so completely overrated, it is unbelievable to me. Where I am from,. so many kids with rather "questionable" stats get in. These kids, the majority at least, had no shot at any other top 15 school. My bro's friends, 2 of them just got into Cornell, both having under 650 on their SAT verbal. "</p>
<p>OMG! yeah man, Cornell is the worse school Ive seen because they admitted TWO students who have less than 650 on their verbal.
less than 650 isnt that bad. Its normal. Plus Cornell accepts more ppl, hence why their SAT scores arent as high as other schools.
And cornell isnt as good as other schools because of its SAT scores?
Im sure cornells SAT averages are higher than carletons right? No ones talking about how carleton sucks..mhmm...</p>
<p>" know a magical unicorn that grants wishes"
hahahahhha</p>
<p>There would seem to be 3 types of colleges in this discussion:</p>
<p>liberal arts colleges (usually with less than 3000 students and little or no grad school): Williams, Amherst, Lafayette, Wellesley, Pomona, Davidson, Bucknell, Colgate, Grinnell, Colby, etc.</p>
<p>Small/medium-sized universities (roughly 3000-11,000 undergrads...significant grad school, but not enough to dwarf the undergrads): Dartmouth, Duke, Princeton, Brown, Wake Forest, Lehigh, Carnegie Mellon, BC, Vanderbilt, Rice, Georgetown, Notre Dame, Tulane, Clark, etc.).</p>
<p>Bigger universities (usually 12K or more undergrads, with prominent grad schools that are often more of a focus than undergrads): Michigan, Berkeley, USC, Cornell, UCLA, UNC, Penn State, Boston U., etc.</p>
<p>There would seem to be at least two problems with this view:
1. The medium/small universities are usually lumped in with the large universities for rankings such as US News, even though the atmospheres, class size, and faculty/student interaction at them probably makes them more comparable to the liberal arts colleges.</p>
<ol>
<li> A lot of the most prominent colleges do not fall neatly into any of these categories: places like Harvard, Chicago, Columbia, Penn, and CalTech have fairly small undergrad populations, but they have large grad enrollments, so depending on how the undergrads are treated, it can vary from "small undergrad enrollment ensures plenty of attention" to "small undergrad enrollment gets dwarfed by large grad enrollment." Bottom line is that there is enough variety in colleges that splitting them into just 2 categories doesn't allow for accurate comparisons.</li>
</ol>
<p>THANK YOU TourGuide446. For the US News Report rankings you cannot be comparing a school like Dartmouth or Wake Forest to a school like MIT or Michigan.</p>
<p>It's like apples and oranges. You can't compare schools based on different philosophies.</p>
<p>
[quote]
First, to compare a school that has 200 kids a grade compared to a school with over 2 K, that is just absurd. It is much easier for Amherst to fill a class with HIGH scorers than it is for a place like Cornell, hence, the disparity among the entering stats between these schools. To say that Amherst is better than Cornell is absurd.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>higher selectivity doesn't equal better school. as someone said, harvard gets plenty of apps, but in some ways their applicant pool isn't as strong as small LACs. but both harvard and amherst are fortunate enough to get enough qualified applicants to create an exceptional class of students.</p>
<p>yet, the burden of calling yourself a selective school is filling your classes with exceptional students. obviously stats aren't everything, but just because a school is larger doesn't mean that their selectivity is less important. schools as large as cornell are able to be very selective, so class size is irrelevent.</p>
<p>however, the comparison between these two types/sizes of schools is very difficult when looking at everything else. still, i think you'd be crazy to choose cornell over amherst! i am a bit "absurd" though...</p>
<p>IMO, there are a lot of reasons to choose Cornell (or other big school) over Amherst, just as there are a lot of reasons to choose Amherst over a big school.</p>
<p>"Im sure cornells SAT averages are higher than carletons right? No ones talking about how carleton sucks..mhmm..."</p>
<p>according to usnwr: cornell 1290-1480
carleton 1320-1500</p>
<p>The LAC vs University question is definitely something that should be answered by each person based on their own likes/dislikes, financial situation, and what they want out of an undergrad experience. Personally, I went with Davidson ED where I will be attending next year, after visiting A LOT of colleges - mainly LACs with a few large public U's and Dartmouth. I found the atmosphere of an LAC much more tailored to me and better for an undergrad than a larger university. I want to have strong bonds with my peers and professors/faculty, rather than more numerous general acquaintances. I also found the opportunity to conduct research as early as a freshman with profs to be very important. Also, something that I dont that was mentioned before - I wanted to live on campus for 4 years in dorms/campus housing rather than have to fend for an apartment somewhere else and have to deal with landlords and what have you. </p>
<p>But again, this is something that everyone should decide for themselves, there is no right or wrong answer.</p>
<p>Depends on the university. Harvard guarantees housing all 4 years and most students choose not to leave the campus to live. My daughter is a freshman and has formed strong bonds with professors - one of whom has been called by a publication: one of the 10 most brilliant young scientists who will change the world. She is also doing research with stem cells. It depends on the individual. If you need to be led by the hand to the opportunities that exist then you need to be at a LAC certainly not at Harvard where the students are expected to be mature and capable of taking the initiative themselves.</p>
<p>"If you need to be led by the hand to the opportunities that exist then you need to be at a LAC certainly not at Harvard where the students are expected to be mature and capable of taking the initiative themselves."</p>
<p>-.................. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>My reaction exactly, kk.</p>
<p>could someone pm me on how to make new posts, im new here</p>
<p>Yeah, not really sure how true that last statement is - I'm pretty sure anyone - whether at a top LAC or University is going to have some form of initiative, and pretty much everyone in college is going to mature - that naturally comes with age. Also, I was referring to relationships that lasted throughout the four years of college and then afterward (not just the first semester of freshman year)... As far as your other statements - indeed it depends on the institution, but overall LACs are going to offer much more research experience and opportunities to get published as a co-author, etc in a research magazine than a unviersity. However, universities do have a broader scope of opportunities and most likely more tools, but are just harder to obtain as an undergraduate (and certainly as an underclassman). Again, just do your homework (and visit the places) and find the place that best suits you!</p>
<p>
[quote]
In my daughter's freshman class at Harvard, there are already students who have been exempted from taking undergraduate courses in their intended major and are taking graduate level courses. Without a graduate school, that is difficult to do.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Correct. One of the professors at my D's accepted students days at Swarthmore gave a presentation on who should not choose Swarthmore, rather than who should choose it.</p>
<p>One of his categories was students so far advanced in a field entering college that they would run out of undergrad courses.</p>
<p>Another category was students interested in a narrow niche field. Swahili majors. 14th century French military history specialists. Etc.</p>
<p>That's why there are no universal answers. You really have to weigh the pros and cons of each type of school against your own individual needs and preferences.</p>
<p>MtL07 - I don't fully agree with you. First, there are plenty of students even at Harvard who are sleeping on their butts, don't show up for review sessions, don't show up for office hours and then complain that they don't have contact with their professors. Secondly, you do not have the same opportunities at a LAC for research as at a research university (note the word research in front of the word university). As has been argued here before, at LACs, professors are more teaching oriented than research oriented. I suggest you look at various research journals and see where most of the papers are coming from. Also, you are getting exposure and recommendations from the research university to their own top level graduate programs. Harvard for example takes a much larger percentage of students from its own college into its graduate schools such as HMS, HBS,HLS then it does from other institutions. For example, suppose two students have the same gpa and mcat scores, who is going to stand the better chance of getting into HMS - a student from Amherst (or any LAC) or one from Harvard who has been doing research work at HMS and has recommendations from HMS professors?</p>