<p>What the hell is wrong with you people? Find a good school that feels right for your child and you and go there.</p>
<p>So are you saying that Midwest LACs are… better than Northeast LACs. I’ve been reading this thread and I’m getting a subtle slant in favor of the Midwest. It’s very slight, but it’s there…</p>
<p>good point d’smum …and meshes w/ our experience, which is merely personal, not necessarily generalizable. But the only LAC Tier 1 college listed among the top 10 colleges/universities giving the most merit $$$ to the most students in Kiplingers was Denison University, just down the road from Kenyon in a gorgeous suburban (Columbus) college town and campus, Granville, OH. A really lovely place that is aggressively pursuing students perceived as bright, well rounded, scholarly but not to distraction, who can and would likely make genuine contribution to a 4 year community of learners. (They require on campus living all years). Unlike Oberlin and to lesser degree Kenyon, less and little purple hair, nose rings, etc. Strong in sciences, cinema, some perf arts, w/ a couple quirky programs (for an artsy fartsy type place …) athletic training, PE, and a few others. One they just added …Bluegrass music emphasis (there’s a violin prof who claims he learned the violin @ julliard (or some similar place) and the fiddle from his granddaddy. They’ve got some fantastic bluegrass student groups, accapella singing and gospel groups, and instrumental.)</p>
<p>No grad programs so all instructors are profs. Some high profile jock programs …swimming, tennis,lacrosse, (these 3 are always top 5 or so Div III) women’s bball. Some others have great uniforms, but competively weak. In same conf w/ oberlin, case, wooster, allegeny, owu, earlham, depauw. Students from all 50 states and about the same # of countries. One of top peace corps and teach America schools. Also one of top schools for inner city scholarhip kids (Boston and Chicago) from Posse Fdn. Having ventured out to about 8 highly selective East schools, while but a case of 1, it’s light years diff in terms of how they view student recruitment and the use of FA to build the class.</p>
<p>This is where Woody Hayes of OSU football fame (and later shame) went and first coached.</p>
<p>One of the prettiest campuses in an amazingly hilly Ohio area.</p>
<p>Hey Caristocrat …try telling your daughter that when she’s buying her wedding dress. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>Jahaba …beauty’s in the eye of the beholder, but my bias is that while there are definitely fine schools, and many in the NE and East …to have a shot at getting a great kid w/ tons of options and possibilities to go to Iowa or Minnesota or Ohio or …(you get it …
) you HAVE to be special and you have to produce above and beyond. It’s a heckuva trip from Omaha to Ft. Lauderdale for spring break …in fact it’s a heckuva trip anywhere. So again…just being equal in Iowa nearly always means being Miss Congeniality with Boston getting the crown and the next 3 runners-up slots. And it’s not because they’re prettier, nicer, smarter, or cheaper. Definitely NOT cheaper. And w/ so many more potential students w/in spitting distance …well, you see the point.</p>
<p>Empirically, very tough to prove the point your asking. In real life, it’s as plain as your hand in front of your face. IF you’re looking for quality, value, right-pricing, and the opportunity to go to see the Prairie Home Companion in St. Paul …or the green river on St. Paddy’s day in Chi-town in lieu of a Broadway show.</p>
<p>“So are you saying that Midwest LACs are… better than Northeast LACs. I’ve been reading this thread and I’m getting a subtle slant in favor of the Midwest. It’s very slight, but it’s there…”</p>
<p>Not necesarrily, but I am saying that the thread was asking about comparisons regarding Midwest and comparable NE LAC’s and in my personal opinion I think they are every bit as good. I think that schools like Carleton, Grinnell, Oberlin, Macalester etc…are just as good as schools like Williams, Swat, Amherst, Weslyan etc… In fact, I think if you moved a school like Carleton or Grinnell to the NE they would rank just as high. A big advantage to the NE schools for some reason has always been location. As we have evolved as a country they always had the history and upper edge in that department. I think that those schools are great schools too. </p>
<p>I do think you can get a better bang for you buck as far as affordability at some of the midwestern LAC’s as well. Some of the Midwest schools offer great merit aid and are some are a good bit cheaper as well. i/e Grinnell, Macalester, Oberlin, Keynon, Denison, St. Olaf etc… Carleton and Grinnell rank very high in USNWR. I believe 8th and 14th respectively(not so important for my family)… I wonder if you put those two schools in the NE how much higher would they rank or be sought after. </p>
<p>Obviously, the fit of the school is by far the most important factor and that is why we personally chose a small LAC that happens to be in the mid-west. I think for many they like the feel of the NE and what it has to offer too. I do think the mid-west schools are becoming more popular and will continue to as time goes on.</p>
<p>I am not saying that the NE schools are bad, I am just saying that the best schools in the Midwest are as good. If you look at the PHD rate coming out of a school like Grinnell(top 1%) and Carleton which I am sure is high too, it compares very well to a school like Williams or Swat and has not had the advantage of name recognition outside of the Midwest.</p>
<p>I think if one looks inside the ‘footprint’ of midwest and NE LAC’s one would find many of the same qualities/dynamics, with slight variations, on the theme of classroom intimacy, professors who teach, resources devoted to the students,etc, etc,. There may be, however, differences in what happens outside the ‘footprint’ of the campus in some NE vs Midwest LAC experiences. For instance, the school’s location in urban or rural environments. One son goes to school in a city where many of his friends, social experiences, and some academic discoveries, happen as he floats about from school to school (this is in Boston). Something he, and I, greatly value. Another son is more isolated in his small town LAC, but i suspect at least half of his learning experience has also taken place outside the classroom in the surrounding mountains (through the outdoor program) or nearby cities (within a half hour drive). Both picked a dynamic of inside and outside the campus experience which suited their interests. Now this could happen in any geographic region and often factors in towards the qualitative decision making process when one chooses a school (along with affordability, travel time, resources devoted to a particular field, athletics, etc). If one plants a Grinnell College in southern, coastal, Maine, one would very likely have a Bowdoin College, or visa/versa. When visiting Grinnell we overheard a discussion about birthing cafes (in a local deli) which was fascinating and relevant to those living in central Iowa and, I suspect, totally different than a conversation one might overhear in a deli in St. Paul or Philly. In my kids experience, heading outside the walls of their respective schools is part of the educational deal. How much is accessible w/in what kind of distance. . . .So, classroom dynamic is probably quite similar, outside the classroom is where each region can differentiate itself to the prospective student.</p>
<p>Having visited a LOT of liberal arts colleges in both the NE and the Midwest (albeit many only for a few hours’ around campus), my personal contribution to the “class” distinction is that “preppy” and athletic correlates more closely with class stratification than does geographic location. In my personal experience–and not saying this is necessarily representative–I felt more uncomfortable as someone of the straddling-class (having moved up to middle-class in my own lifetime) at Williams or Denison than at Vassar or Oberlin. Athletic, in particular, often correlates to sports like skiing or crew–innocuous, but most lower-income people don’t save up to 1) buy an expensive ski pass, 2) rent skiing/snowboarding equipment, 3) invest in personal ski equipment like a sufficiently insulated jacket, or 4) pay for lessons to learn how…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s not a perfect indicator because each school uses its own definition of who has “financial need,” but generally a higher percentage of students at the top Midwestern LACs fall into that category. Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, Middlebury, and Wesleyan are all right around 50% of freshmen with “financial need”; Haverford slightly higher at 52%, Bowdoin significantly lower at 41%, Colgate very low at 32%. At Carleton it’s 54%, at Grinnell 69%, Oberlin 53%, Macalester 64%. That seems like a significant difference. Now maybe the Midwestern schools are simply more generous in defining the upper bound of financial need; or maybe they need to be to compete against generally stronger Midwestern publics and/or to attract the out-of-region students they want. But even so, the differences are large enough to suggest a larger fraction of the student body at the Eastern LACs comes from higher income tiers. For whatever that’s worth.</p>
<p>Whistle Pig,</p>
<p>Just a slight correction. DePauw competes in the SCAC with Trinity University, Rhodes, Milsaps, Hendrix, Austin, Southwestern, Colorado College, Oglethorpe, Birmingham Southern and Centre. CC also has some DI. Yes, it is a very spread out conference.</p>
<p>I could be way off base here, but interestingly enough, I found the mid-west LAC’s to be higher in diversity (ie’ international students) than their NE Equivs. This is probably due again to the level of merit aid they provide. </p>
<p>I agree with Keilex on her assessment of social strata. It’s likely not going to be that noticable in day to day life, but when discussions of what people are doing over winter break, spring break, summer and how people are getting their internships, and there is a heavy contingent that are travelling to exotic places, using family connections for internships, etc that the economic divide becomes more apparent…that and the number of Tory Burch shoes and expensive bags and sunglasses strewn about the dorm rooms</p>
<p>Cayman, what precisely is your % of international students based on–visits? Stats? My guess would be that both % international and % affluent preppies would vary a lot from school to school in both the NE and MW. For example, Haverford and Swarthmore struck me as far less affluent in dress than Williams.</p>
<p>The % of internationals is often heavily influenced by recruiting. Although you make an interesting point about merit aid possibly being an attraction, some colleges like internationals because many are full pay.</p>
<p>I am very skeptical about generalizations about either region, or within a region. For example, all of these posts refer only to the most selective LACS in both regions, as if the rest did not exist. And, although people commonly think of Bowdoin, Colby and Bates in Maine as preppy peas in a pod, some posters who (unlike me) actually visited all 3 thought there were big diffrences in preppiness. How many of we posters have actually visited over a dozen LACs in each region? And how many of us think that one short visit gives an impression of unquestionable accuracy?</p>
<p>I agree that you cannot stereotype schools by regions. They each have their uniqueness. What I dislike is the idea that people somehow often think that midwest schools must be lacking in some areas because they are not rated as high as comparable east coast schools. The rankings in this case have more to do with geography than quality. There are great schools in all areas of the country. There are many reasons to look at schools in a specific area, but the discerning shopper will be willing to look at a broad spectrum of schools and not necessarily be ruled by the rankings or by “where everyone else goes”.</p>
<p>If you’re interested in specific strengths of some LACs in the two regions, have a look at these future grad school tables (ignore Reed, west coast; NE and MW schools are on the lists): [REED</a> COLLEGE PHD PRODUCTIVITY](<a href=“http://web.reed.edu/ir/phd.html]REED”>Doctoral Degree Productivity - Institutional Research - Reed College)</p>
<p>^ vossron, interesting info. I’d be wary about reading too much into a school’s production of future Ph.D.s, though. In many fields these days, especially in the humanities and social sciences, a Ph.D. is a ticket to unemployment or chronic underemployment. A high rate of Ph.D. production might tell us something about how strongly a school’s students are oriented towards the “purely academic” as opposed to pre-professional undergraduate training; but by itself it doesn’t necessarily tell us all that much about educational quality. On the other hand, I suppose we can infer that a school that produces a lot of future Ph.D.s in, say, history, must at least be offering courses that interest many of its students in further study in the field.</p>
<p>I think it’s more useful for showing the relative strengths of the schools in various fields. The absolute percentages of total future PhDs in all fields are not high; the top 100 schools range from 36% down to 5%; only 25 schools are above 10%, only three above 20%. Most PhDs work in industry anyway; there are few academic slots open at any given time.</p>
<p>A lot of these ranking systems are based on such factors as the students’ SAT scores, GPA, essays, activities, etc., right? In other words, the top eastern schools have their pick of superachieving students, and can indeed only take a small percentage of them. </p>
<p>For whatever reason, unfair or not, the Northeast schools have more top, top students. Macalester accepts 41 percent of the people who apply to it while Swarthmore accepts 17. SAT scores and ACT scores are higher at Swat (math 630-710 Macalester; 670-770 Swat, for example). The basic cost of going to each school, barring financial aid, is very similar ($49,600 Swat, 46,900 Macalester). It seems normal to assume that a school that accepts more than twice as many of those who apply would be more likely to offer more merit aid than one that turns down such a large percentage of students as Swarthmore, although schools like Swat have need blind admissions (and have great diversity–less than half of the students identify as being white Americans). They would make the smart decision to do what they need to do to attract stellar students. Now, this is not to say that Macalester is not a wonderful college with very smart students and that the experience of going there is not fantastic. It seems logical to assume that the quality of education there is excellent and the facilities are wonderful. Or that there aren’t students at Macalester who’d kick Harvard students’ butts with their genius. It’s just that according to things that can be measured, top Northeastern schools generally attract slightly more superachieving students. What that means subjectively is up for interpretation.</p>
<p>It is true that the very most selective LACs are concentrated in the Northeast. I don’t know that Macalester is the right MW school to compare against Swarthmore. Swarthmore, Amherst and Williams are the 3 most selective NE schools; the MW counterparts would be Carleton, Grinnell, and Oberlin. But yes, the scores and the USNWR rankings are a little notch lower among the ACM schools compared to the schools in the NESCAC conference.</p>
<p>What does this mean to a prospective student? One possibility is that more selective, higher ranking translates to more prestige, better networking, and better graduate outcomes (higher paying jobs, better grad school placements). Another is that more selective, higher ranking translates to a more stimulating discussion environment, and in that sense, better educational quality.</p>
<p>Either of these conclusions is hard to verify with data. Actually, by PhD productivity, as vossron cited above, the MW schools seem to outperform the NE schools. If they do so despite having slightly lower stats coming in, then maybe this should be doubly impressive. In my own opinion, the PhD productivity numbers are in fact a better outcome metric for the quality of undergraduate instruction than salary or even professional school placements. But, there are problems of interpretation. The PhD numbers do not break down where students are getting their doctorates. And, they do not account for the number of students who choose other demanding (and usually more lucrative) career paths such as law and medical school.</p>
<p>In the end, I don’t think the selectivity differences are significant enough to outweigh personal preferences or cost factors. Both groups of schools are selling pretty much the same educational package. The out of pocket costs for many middle class families do tend to be cheaper in the Midwest.</p>
<p>I don’t think the selectivity differences are significant enough to outweigh personal preferences or cost factors, either. I think if a kid gets a significant amount of merit aid, that should absolutely be a factor! But there’s no guarantee of that, either. The basic costs of the colleges are the same if you don’t get it for colleges that meet 100 percent of need. It’s true that AWS and the Ivys offer very little merit aid, but because they meet that 100 percent of need, a lot of lower middle class/poor people do go there. Plus, there’s not a school in this country that could survive if it did not have a significant number of students who pay full freight. And that includes plenty of middle class people. </p>
<p>So, all other costs being equal, then things like transportation come into play. Flying is expensive and inconvenient. Someone upthread was saying that their child was only a two and a half hour flight away–but when people fly, they have to spend time getting to and from the airport, and a significant amount of time going through security checks. Flights are also expensive and unreliable. It’s also difficult to know how to manage kids’ stuff. None of this is insurmountable. But it’s reasonable to count that as a factor. In that sense, staying in one’s region may be cheaper. </p>
<p>I agree that both groups of schools are selling pretty much the same educational package. Great LACs are great LACs. My kid goes to a great one and the professors spend endless amount of time with the students. </p>
<p>I guess what is bothering me here is the assumption that somehow just because schools like AWS are tangibly slightly “better” in terms of ranking, that somehow, that means that schools like Oberlin and Grinnell and Macalester somehow are intangibly better. Both eastern and Midwestern schools have intangible factors that contribute to why they are excellent. If your kid loses her heart for one school over another, if your financial aid package is superior at one school over another, if one is closer to home than another or has slightly more prestige than another, these are all factors that can weigh into a decision. You aren’t a fool to go to the Midwest nor a snob to go to the East. </p>
<p>I also think that</p>
<p>4 quick thoughts:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>I have not seen any posters comparing the faculty at the schools, just the stats of the students. In theory, the students should be influenced by the quality of the faculty, if that could be judged.</p></li>
<li><p>Comparing the quality of schools based on incoming GPAs/SATs is so common that it spurs colleges to game their numbers; not take the kids who are tremendously gifted in one area, but whoe weakness in another would bring down scores; and shun those more gifted in the arts than in math/verbal.</p></li>
<li><p>If the Macalester, St Olaf, etc folks feel unfairly overshadowed by the elite NE LACs, and, as one poster suggested, Carelton would be Swarthmore if it moved East, imagine how the many solid, but non-elite NE LACs feel. I suspect that, for example, Franklin & Marshall might feel–whether true or not-- that, if it moved West, it would fare better not competing for students in the geographic shadow of Swarthmore and Haverford.</p></li>
<li><p>I feel many students are disadvantaged by focusing on a school’s status or rank, rather than its personal fit for them. in particular, any student with the option of attending any of the many fine LAcs in the Midwest should not care at all how it is perceived relative to a school in any region to which they did not apply or wer enot admitted.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>A few students go through a more or less tortured path to wind up at a school and you think, gosh, that is just a perfect fit for this kid. At some earlier point, based on academic interests or another salient factor alone, that school might not even have made the short list. But when you put all considerations together, it seems just right.</p>
<p>For a larger number of applicants, there might be at least 6, 8, or a dozen colleges that more or less interchangably meet requirements. So you can choose based on location or cost without significantly affecting the goodness of fit. We may like to think of Wesleyan or Macalester as the place for lefty/liberal hipsters, or Trinity for preppy engineering students. In fact, at any of these schools, a large number of students belong to no such tribe, and the choice makes sense only for fairly mundane practical reasons.</p>