<p>I actually didn’t know all that about Asian traditions surrounding college acceptances. It puts some of the Asian-American single mindedness about prestige colleges into better perspective for me. </p>
<p>Woe to the poor Asian-American kid who has his/her heart set a little known, itty-bitty LAC that fits to a T… </p>
<p>Not every Asian American parent is an overbearing tiger parent.</p>
<p>As I had stated quite a while back, the Asian kids in our neighborhood are just as diverse, well-rounded, engaging as any other kids. It is “provincial” to stereotype them or their parents. </p>
<p>note to self-do not take bait on CC…</p>
<p>I am one of those who oppose to the tiger parenting style. I am just stating the fact that the situation you see for the poor Asian American kids whose parents have the tendency to push them comes from their traditions. And that is a system to build up kids from poor families in a fair and square way, that’s why they value it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think you vastly overestimate how well-known these selective LACS are, even within the ranks of those who supposedly value such rarified places. As I’ve already stated, I live near both Haverford and Swarthmore, and while I’m a data point of exactly one human being, I’m a pretty typical CC parent in that I placed a very high value on my kid’s education. I’m also an unapologetic LAC fangirl. I absolutely love them and fully intended to attend a small obscure one back in the day (Bard College), only to be thwarted by the price tag and feeling that my lower-middle class, low-income self couldn’t survive so far from home (a whopping 200 miles!). </p>
<p>When we started searching colleges with my son, it was with a very targeted focus on top LACs. Through that process, I discovered I’d never heard of a great number of top institutions! Oberlin? Of course. Carleton, Macalester and Grinnell? Not so much. Although I’d heard of Bowdoin and Middlebury (because I’d known graduates of each), I’d never heard of Williams or Whitman, Occidental or St. Olaf, Claremont-McKenna or Kenyon. Reed? St. John’s College? Lawrence and Beloit? Maybe. I did know about Kalamazoo–again because I knew someone who went there.</p>
<p>So, if I’m like a lot of folks out there, I’m guessing there were just as many great schools I wasn’t aware of as there were ones I was. </p>
<p>But I do think the OP is trying to distinguish between the tippy-top, need-blind LACs and the next tier down–all fantastic schools for the right kid that might also have some merit money to offer to make them worth the discount in prestige. We’re talking about the difference between say a Bowdoin/Haverford and a Lafayette/Muhlenberg/Earlham here. Or Washington&Lee/Davidson and Rhodes/Sewanee. Not Swarthmore and say Cabrini College (and for the record, I know some very bright graduates of Cabrini too)!</p>
<p>And I don’t think anyone here is suggesting a school “where the other kids eked in and just sat through class.” Surely you don’t think the US News LACs in the 50-100 range fit that description?</p>
<p>thanks, findmoreinfo, for that clarification. I do find that explanation helpful in understanding why some kids are pushed so hard and why the big name universities are so appealing for some. I was not aware of how university slots were distributed in some Asian countries so it was new info for me. I am completely aware that not all Asian-American families adhere to that stereotype, for those posters who seem to think I need to crawl out of my bigoted hole… </p>
<p>Silly anecdote - if rankings didn’t exist, my kids would probably think Princeton is a low-achieving school. That’s because we watch the Big Bang Theory and Sheldon & Howard are always ragging on Leonard for having attended Princeton. </p>
<p>Lucie, I was just responding to the idea “pretty much EVERY LAC…is a ‘no name.’” There are no-names, of course and sure, they usually sit lower down in the national media rankings. But some of them, when you look deeper, are tops on their regional lists or in certain academic fields.</p>
<p>I just wouldn’t call, say, Rhodes, a no-name just because some folks hadn’t heard of it before. Nor am I comfy with the persistent notion that there is little distinction among colleges. </p>
<p>We all refer occasionally to East Nowhere and Podunk. We’re not that far apart.</p>
<p>@LucietheLakie- that’s exactly right. I’m not talking about the difference between Swarthmore and Cabrini and I find it kind of amazing that anyone would characterize schools out of the top 25 as places “where the other kids eked in and just sat through class.” I was aware of a lot of the tippy top LAC’s because I went to one but the tier right below that is full of names I’d never heard of until we started searching with my son. But you are right, most people have never heard of any of them which makes them prestigious only to people “in the club” so to speak, whereas being a graduate of a tippy top RU has a different weight. My son has a specific goal in mind for grad school, a tippy top program in his intended field, and that has guided our search for LAC’s. Schools that have records of sending their graduates on to the most competitive grad schools made the cut, others got passed over. Our search has been made easier in some ways by filtering for his intended major but that has also eliminated a lot of great schools as options, including Grinnell and Reed. Once we eliminated for lack of major, geographic preferences, and too dominant Greek culture, we were left with a fairly short list. Then visits eliminated 4 more and we are left with a list that has a top 10 and four below 50. But based on data other than US News, it’s hard for me to really distinguish between his four in the lower tier and those in the 10-50 tier. His opportunities for original research in particular, are better at his 50-100 choices than they would have been at the 10-50 choices. The difference seems to be primarily selectivity and sometimes average test scores, but not always. So choosing a school only because it’s more selective doesn’t seem very well thought out, especially when it’s a LAC that 99% of people will never have heard of anyway. But if your dream grad school has a good relationship with your preferred LAC, that’s a reason to consider it, even if the rankings don’t grant it top whatever status. What I find irritating is that US News is taken as gospel by so many, if it’s highly ranked then it must be good and I think there is enough literature out there now to suggest that is not always the case. Conversely, if it not highly ranked, some people assume it’s populated by drooling zombies who are majoring in remedial shoe-tying. Notice I said “some”, so nobody needs to get peevish. </p>
<p>For the record, I didn’t characterize [all] schools out of the top 25 as places “where the other kids eked in and just sat through class.” In fact, I’m defending many of the lower media ranked schools (when there’s a reason) and agree with Lucie that, " in the end, that matter are your student’s rankings of the schools."</p>
<p>I simply said, D1 would not have been empowered at a school that lacked a certain intellectual climate. And that there are distinctions. Of course. We all know it, whether or not we take that as a public stand.</p>
<p>When I was going to my LAC, I always thought it was better than Williams. There was no one (ranking) to tell me otherwise.</p>
<p>Also need to say one of D1’s second choices (there were two) was a school not even in the top 50, but with a great dept, with great profs heavily engaged in what interested her.</p>
<p>ebmama, we went through almost the exact same process you did. There are SO many micro-variables that are more important than the macro “I’ve heard such and such is a good school, so on the list it goes.” For kids that know they want to go on to grad school,–especially those with well-defined interests already–it really is essential to do homework on outcomes for students from particular institutions in particular fields.</p>
<p>I really think we’re all splitting hairs here. I don’t think anyone in this thread was ever comparing a top 50-100 research uni or LAC with “Podunk U” (however one defines it)!</p>
<p>Nonetheless, anyone who attends a LAC, and I don’t care how selective it is, needs to be prepared that the vast majority of people you meet in your lifetime will not have heard of your school nor realize how “prestigious” it is. And it’s not just tiny elite LACs either. Most people couldn’t list the Ivies beyond Harvard and Yale (and possibly Princeton). Don’t let any of it bother you or influence where you go to school. We’re talking about a nation where one in three doesn’t believe in evolution either!</p>
<p>But coming back to the OP’s original question, I think looking at median standardized test scores (or the top 25th percentile for a flagship university’s honors college) is a helpful data point when trying to evaluate the academic qualifications of students found at any given school and was more relevant to me as I evaluated schools than their US News (or other) rankings.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s a good thing. A school’s “prestige” (or fame) is a burden, particularly in a self-styled democracy.</p>
<p>Not a parent or guardian. If rankings did not exist and schools were the same in every other regard as they are today, I’d choose between:</p>
<p>Centre
Chicago
Kalamazoo
Kenyon
Princeton (because of financial aid)
Reed
Sewanee: Univ. of the South
Swarthmore
Yale</p>
<p>I keep reading the original question and wondering if people really picked colleges by the ranking. “If rankings didn’t exist” then I assume all colleges would be considered equal, so where would my child have picked? Right where she is. She didn’t consider rankings at all. She considered cost, offerings, size, location. I would have liked the cost lower, she would have liked the size smaller (although now is enjoying the football, the number of clubs, the many many many friends she’s made) but it didn’t matter if the school was ranked 12th or 112 - it’s the same school whether USNWR thinks it’s good or not. I trust my own evaluation more than USNWR.</p>
<p>I know some people only consider schools in the top 50, so if every school was even maybe that student would have made a different choice, considered a school currently ranked #77 or #93. I really don’t think there are many who ruled out schools just because of rankings. If they did, then they may have missed a good opportunity. </p>
<p>I think the OP is looking for people to say “Oh, she would have picked Lawrence College if only it were ranked 20 places higher” or “we didn’t even consider schools in Kansas because none were rated in the top 10.” Isn’t it rather small to not consider schools you otherwise like because they aren’t ranked in the top 20? Are you not going to take a job at GHI corporation because it is not ranked as high as ABC or DEF? Are you not going to even apply?</p>