<p>You can make a big school small. Yes, even a big-sport school. Think Stanford, Duke, Nortre Dame, Georgetown, Michigan Honors, UNC Honors, Wisconsin Honors, Texas Plan II, Penn State Schreyer… the list goes on. I view D1 sports like pro sports. They are hired guns to boost economy and morale. You can partake as much or as little as you like. I mean, would you rule out raising a family in Boston just because some people there are too obsessed with Red Sox and the Patriots?</p>
<p>As for pointing people to the USNWR ranking, forget it! Even if you could pull it off tactfully (I can’t imagine how), people are usually too polite to tell you they have never heard of your school in the first place. They would just nod, smile, and quietly admire your accomplishments despite the random college you went to. And, you know what, that would be just fine for most LAC graduates and parents, myself included.</p>
<p>For a school that lacks lay prestige, how good <em>IT</em> is (in the eyes of ranking agencies) matters very little; what matters is how good <em>YOU</em> will become. Go where you can be the best you can be.</p>
<p>However, this thread did use a specific example, and one that is astounding and indicative of something.</p>
<p>This thread, and dare I say this whole site, would not exist without the obsession, especially in certain demographics, about elite schools and admissions therein. So, once we are in that forest, we are in some trouble if a Bowdoin doesn’t “count” as “good enough.” Whether anyone should be in that forest to begin with, and the whole bit about being your best no matter where you go, are worthy separate issues.</p>
<p>There is also a big difference between where you decide to go and knowing that the pick is “good enough” for you (whatever that means), and how that same person will handle the question about where you went to college 10 years later. And if you know and are comfortable with the quality of your chosen school then presumably handling the question (and reaction) 10 years later won’t be a problem.</p>
<p>“For a school that lacks lay prestige, how good <em>IT</em> is (in the eyes of ranking agencies) matters very little; what matters is how good <em>YOU</em> will become. Go where you can be the best you can be.”</p>
<p>^This is a wonderful sentiment. That’s the way it should be looked at.</p>
<p>I just started another thread in this forum decrying the obsession with Ivies. This thread is very much similar in world view.</p>
<p>Of course many, many kids love being at a big, big-name school. There’s nothing wrong with a big school if that’s what you like. And some kids wouldn’t like a small, liberal arts college in a rural area. So to each his or her own; but to those who would just generally knock liberal arts colleges on general principle, I say the undergraduate experience at some of the elite liberal arts colleges can well be better than that at some of the top Ivies. And I’ve experienced both. Check the stats: more professors send their kids to liberal arts colleges than big universities. It’s because they know.</p>
<p>My daughter attends a prominent LAC and loves it, and so do I. Let me explain my reasoning: All of the “best” schools cost a great deal of money, and although we don’t qualify for financial aid, we cannot so easily afford an expensive school, either. I don’t mind so much the expense of my daughter’s school because she is getting a truly top-notch education. I have been impressed with the rigor of the academics at LACs. I truly believe–after researching this issue for a year now–that small LACs that emphasize undergraduate education, such as Bowdoin–provide the best education, even better than more well-known universities including the Ivy League schools. </p>
<p>You are very fortunate (and deserving) to be accepted to such a fine school.</p>
<p>I’m a current freshman at hamilton and I experienced the same frustration you did. It all works out in the end. Once you get there you meet great people and realize you found a great place and to hell with anyone who doubts it because you know it’s awesome. </p>
<p>by the way.(suffering from the old insecurity haha) has hamilton been/ is hamilton well recognized by grad schools and employers in the US?</p>
<p>Relating to sports branding Holy Cross fields 25-30 Div1 sports programs and recently HC swept Harvard and Yale in baseball. HC also beat Yale in womens lacrosse, and men’s hockey. Pretty impressive for a selective LAC of 2900 students.</p>
<p>This is a problem that is changing dramatically. I graduated from Middlebury 20 years ago. When I was first applying to jobs out of college I actually had someone in a west coast job interview ask me if it was a two-year school! After attending a big PAC-12 law school and an Ivy League Masters program, when I have job interviews today (fewer than I used to) people always remark on Middlebury and how impressive that is. Top LACs are becoming a bigger deal and the NESCAC in particular, is beginning to be held in as high regard as the Ivies - even though it has always offered as good an education as, if not better than the Ivies.</p>
<p>Employers and grad schools on the coasts know and respect Bowdoin. Wall Street firms and big consulting firms won’t recruit on campus like the do at Duke and Yale, but your resume will be read right along side of them. The only difference between schools like that and the top tier NESCACS (Bowdoin included, along with Amherst/Tufts/Middlebury/Williams) is size. It’s impossible for everyone to visit and know about all the great small schools, when the big ones receive all the attention. </p>
<p>Long story short: trust me, you’ll be fine.</p>
<p>^ School size isn’t the only difference.
LACs have total focus on undergraduates, universities don’t.
Many LACs have no classes, or very few, with 50 or more students;
large lecture classes are relatively commonplace at nearly all universities.
LACs focus exclusively on the liberal arts and sciences.
Universities also cover pre-professional and professional training in areas such as architecture, business, communications/journalism, engineering, law, medicine, nursing, vet science, etc. Many universities (including some very selective schools such as Duke, Georgetown, ND) have large D1 sports programs. With a few exceptions (like Holy Cross), most LACs have few of these distractions. In 2011-12 ND awarded 107 non-need-based athletic scholarships averaging $31K; Bowdoin awarded $0 (I’d be interested to see how the average stats of athletic scholarship recipients at ND and other schools compare to the overall average.)</p>
<p>To me, the important question isn’t why selective LACs don’t have more name recognition. It’s: why don’t more “elite” universities more fully emulate the LAC model in undergraduate education?</p>
<p>It’s important to note that the rankings have made prestige totally relative. The quality of education at the top fifteen National Universities and the top fifteen LACs is comparable - meaning there are 30 schools out there that offer an unbeatable education. However, the student at Cornell is upset that their school doesn’t have the prestige of Harvard and the student at Amherst is upset that their school doesn’t have the prestige of Princeton or the student at Davidson doesn’t have the prestige of Williams, when each of these students is getting a great education. This is the inherent problem with ranking schools annually by ladder rungs as opposed to tiers. All these schools are top tier and SHOULD have the same level of prestige, but until we rank by tier, they will not. </p>
<p>Imagine if we ranked cars the same way we rank schools. One year Mercedes would be better than BMW and the next year Lexus would be better than either of its German competitors. The fact is, they’re all great cars. You just have to pick the one that fits your needs the best.</p>
<p>No one goes to an LAC for prestige. If you did, you went to the wrong school. After a few years, you won’t care that people don’t recognize your school even if it is a top 20 LAC. You’ll probably have gone to a national university for graduate school that will provide the name recognition you’re looking for.</p>
<p>There is a trade-off involved. Having more faculty time spent on giving small faculty-led lower division courses means less faculty time available for other purposes, including more breadth and depth of upper division and graduate level courses. For some students, more of the latter outweighs the class size issues in the lower division courses.</p>
<p>Of course, a LAC-preferring student who does not want to be as limited in that respect may want to look at LACs with convenient cross-registration with RUs (e.g. Barnard / Columbia, or four LACs / University of Massachusetts - Amherst).</p>