<p>^But living in a larger house is analogous to the higher quality of life represented by less debt.</p>
<p>This is a very difficult question as the answer is highly dependent on the student.
One can do well taking either road. The cost savings of $100,000 over 4 years is quite significant. There are however many possible advantages in attending a top LAC over a public university. There tends to be more grade inflation in many private schools than in public institutions. This might make a difference of as much as .2 to .4 in your GPA. This difference can be highly significant in graduate school applications. There also seems to be a higher percentage of acceptances to medical schools from the top privates in comparison to the top publics. This may be in part due to grade inflation as well as better undergraduate counseling and higher selectivity. Students who have higher SAT’s to get into college probably do better on standardized tests and therefore do better on MCATS. Applicants from undergraduate schools with more prestige also have a modest advantage aside from grades and test scores in comparison to other applicants. It is also possible that you will work harder when your peer group is more talented or motivated. You will certainly be more directly exposed to your faculty at a LAC than in a public university with much smaller classes and more one on one attention. It might not be as personal as the Oxbridge system with weekly tutorials but you will have much more feedback as to your work in a LAC than in a large public university. This will allow you to work more effectively.
Applicants to medical schools from the top private schools tend to have acceptance rates in the 70 to 80 % area while most public undergraduate schools seem to have significantly lower success rates.
The university experience is also a social education and going away to LAC will expose you to a much different world than you are used to at home. My personal opinion is that this allows for more personal growth.
You may however be the kind of student who does well in a large, less personal setting. If so, you can certainly achieve as much in a large public university as you can in a name LAC.
The choice really comes down to what are the possible school choices and how well will you fit in to each school to pursue your future.<br>
Lastly, you should further realize that most high school students who want to pursue an MD never make it. Many change their majors or desires. Many fail in the face of difficult classes and competition. Will these possibilities effect your decision?</p>
<p>I’m not sure if others have said this already, but assuming your stats are that of the average student at the top lacs, there’s no reason why you couldn’t possibly qualify for admissions at an alternative LAC that is ranked lower, say Occidental, that would also offer you merit aid. Merit aid, could potentially bring the cost of a private lower ranked school at the price of a state school.</p>
<p>Other than that don’t get yourself into a $200K debt for undergrad. I don’t know the math, but I presume your monthly payments towards loans after you graduate will be well over $1000 just for undergrad for 15-30 years. If you don’t go on to become a doctor(which many students who start off as pre meds don’t), what kind of job options will you have that would allow you to comfortably pay $1k each month for more than 15 years?</p>
<p>Agree with the above. In our family we feel there is great value in the small classes, the alumni network and the amazing resources you will get at a great LAC. If it’s going to cause financial problems for your family, that’s a different matter and what you can comfortably afford always needs to be the bottom line.</p>
<p>But for those families in the privileged position to send kids to these colleges, we see lots of value. DH, who went to Berkeley undergrad, is always marveling at the resources our kids have at their small, private colleges.</p>
<p>The concept of saving the great school for grad school puzzles me. First, how is everyone with this plan going to get into a top grad school? Business and law schools at the top are filled by top school grads. And while that seems to be less the case for med schools, given their price, isn’t that the time to shoot for a state school which will be much cheaper? </p>
<p>Most kids aiming for med school don’t end up there for one reason or another. A great school keeps your options open.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The prestige of the undergraduate institution itself does not confer much, if any, advantage in law school admissions. It’s all about the GPA and LSAT. While an elite undergraduate school may be marginally better than the cheaper school at preparing a student for the LSAT, that student will also face a more difficult time getting a high GPA. In the end, I think, it’s a wash, so the concept of saving the money for a great law school (instead of moving down a tier for scholarship money) is a completely sound one.</p>
<p>But top law and med schools ARE filled with students from top undergrads–statistically, the space for state school grads is limited at the tippy-top. It’s a worse situation for grad school, where academics are often the most prestige-conscious. In reality, many people who go to state school with plans for Ivy League grad will just end up attending state school grad as well–and there’s nothing inherently wrong with that!</p>
<p>^ Correlation does not imply causation.</p>
<p>Indeed it does not–but statistically, I think there’s a lot more people “planning” to attend say a T10 law school from State U than actually do. And it’s harder to get a 4.0 from State U than people seem to think.</p>
<p>noimagination: Correlation does imply causation. You’re implying, you’re stating that their might be an indirect correlation between the two.</p>
<p>Seth Roberts of UC Berkeley: “It’s dismissive. It is often used to dismiss data from which something can be learned. The life-saving notion that smoking causes lung cancer was almost entirely built on correlations. For too long, these correlations were dismissed.”</p>
<p>XKCD (lol :P): “Correlation doesn’t imply causation, but it does waggle its eyebrows suggestively and gesture furtively while mouthing ‘look over there’.”</p>
<p>Take a holistic look at the situation. Examine the people who want to attend a prestigious LAC, and get accepted, and graduate. This typical person will probably perform well, which will be on part of his own self, but on the part of the institution where the LAC will be able to contribute accessible professors and the fostering of critical thinking that you won’t get as another number in a state university.</p>
<p>These things as well as basically being able to perform graduate level work as an undergraduate, provides great benefits over your typical state university when applying to graduate school.</p>
<p>This isn’t to say you should go to an LAC though if its financially suicide. But are you sure you will be paying $200,000 for your four years? This sounds like you qualified for no merit aid, or financial need.</p>
<p>@Reborn: This situation has a number of variables that may or may not play a role. If you have some data to present, go right ahead. Unqualified generalizations don’t offer much.</p>
<p>It is not clear to me that the hypothetical high-achiever you mention will automatically benefit when it comes to grad school acceptance because of attending a high-brow school.</p>
<p>[Liberal</a> Arts Colleges](<a href=“http://www.rbs0.com/college.htm]Liberal”>Liberal Arts Colleges)</p>
<p>[Sweet</a> Briar College { New Study Confirms Benefits of Liberal Arts Colleges }](<a href=“http://www.sbc.edu/news/items/6110]Sweet”>News and Events • Sweet Briar College)</p>
<p>[Archived:</a> Class-Size Reduction: Myths and Realities](<a href=“http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/ClassSize/myths.html]Archived:”>http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/ClassSize/myths.html)</p>
<p>Additionally, if you have access to some databases you may be able to get your hands on “How the Liberal Arts College Affects Students”, done by Alexander Astin, who is described by some as an expert of Higher Education.</p>
<p>Med school aside, the student from the LAC has a much great likelihood of getting elite internships and jobs. For admission to law and business schools, these play a large role and goes a long way to explaining why these students are disproportionally represented at T10 law and business schools.</p>
<p>My parents will have to borrow for undergrad, and as you say Med school + Undergrad = too many loans…I think I’ll just focus on doing well at the state school and see what happens there.</p>
<p>Exactly. My son is doing pre-med at a state flagship, and we’ll help pay for med school. However, make sure your grades are high - especially your Organic grades. And, don’t rely on AP science/math classes, either retake the classes, or take the higher level classes.</p>
<p>You also asked about transferring from your public to a private, if you don’t like your public. People do that sometimes. However, it depends on the private. Ivies are hard to transfer to, while others are not.</p>
<p>Which of your state publics are you considering.</p>
<p>@Reborn: Interesting links. I still suspect that elite LAC students are positively self-selected through admittance and would thrive in other venues.</p>
<p>I don’t understand why the OP, like so many others, insisit on asking for our personal and intimate advice but refuse to tell us which schools they are considering. How do they expect us to give them any sort of constructive feedback. All top LACs are excellent, but some public universities, Cal, Georgia Tech, Indiana, Michigan, Penn State, UCLA, UCSD, UDub, UIUC, UNC-Chapel Hill, UT-Austin, UVa, William and Mary and Wisconsin-Madison are just as good or just slightly weaker than top 20 LACs.</p>
<p>Reborn: I don’t deny that there are wide-ranging effects of attending a LAC vs. a state school. What I do deny is that any of these effects will make a difference in law school admissions. I skimmed through the first link you provided, and while some of the claims sound plausible, they do not sound like they would play a role in law school admissions. Visualizing problems and a gaining a holistic intellectual background may pay off down the road, but you’re going to have to explain to me how they make a difference in law school admissions.</p>
<p>And if they do not boost one’s chances of attending a top law school, it is safe to say that for a student like the OP, attending a top undergrad and attending a top law school are mutually exclusive for financial reasons. Then it becomes a matter of weighing the long-term benefits of the LAC (which I don’t deny) against the long-term benefits of a top law school (which no one would deny). And in the end it’s still a personal choice, but I think saving the money for the top law school will win out for most.</p>
<p>James098: I’ve never (intentionally at least. Is the OP going to law school?) claimed anything in relation to law school.</p>
<p>EDIT: I see he’s going/looking at med/pre-med, in which case, I’d probably have to say an LAC might not be the best choice.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not everyone can afford or wants to pay for expensive babysitters. And except for a few of them, not particularly prestigious ones at that. </p>
<p>IMHO, only HYPSM are worth $200k.</p>
<p>
Considering that 48% of Princeton’s class of 2009 was unemployed at graduation, I would be quite hesitant to say that.</p>
<p>
Keeping one’s loans to a minimum serves one even better for keeping options open. </p>
<p>What if the OP decides that he wants to be, say, a musician? Or a teacher? While they are admirable career options, to be sure, I shudder to think of students in those fields shouldering that much debt. </p>
<p>To encourage otherwise without knowing more details is irresponsible in the extreme.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Most of these unemployed Princeton grads are holding out for the elite jobs. Are you saying they cannot get work at, say, Starbucks if they want to??</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree wholeheartedly. Unlike hmom5, the OP’s mom may not be a Wharton grad…</p>