Since Liberal Arts colleges are more focused on an all around education, while Top research Universities focus on a specific subject mostly, do Liberal Arts colleges look for well rounded students more than Research Universities? Ive read that top Universities such As Harvard look for a very focused student in Extracurriculars rather than a well rounded student, is this the same for Top LAC’s such as Amherst and Williams.
There’s not a huge difference in the admissions process among top LACs and top research universities. Quite the opposite, I suspect that liberal arts colleges might actually seek out some focused students that stand out compared to all the well rounded candidates.
I don’t think there is a systematic difference.
Top LACs might value well-roundedness in their students philosophically, but they don’t have room to admit every academically qualified, well-rounded applicant they get. They have to focus/differentiate somehow. So a qualified applicant who is also a top athlete or world-class musician is going to have an edge at Williams just like they would at Stanford.
I don’t think there is much difference.
One way the admissions process is different is that at a lot of LACs, the admission decision is made by committee, while at a larger university the decision may be made by a single reader. So there could be more opportunity for ecs and essays to grab the attention of a LAC, as more eyes are on that app
No real difference.
I agree, no difference. Both types of schools will accept some well rounded students and some students with very defined interests.
I would think the small liberal arts schools are more aware of having enough students to fill up the sports teams and perform in the theater and write for the newspaper etc. A small school has fewer people available for all they offer so they have to make extra sure that every single person they admit has something to contribute to the school. They need their dancers, trombone players, tennis players, leaders etc.
@citymama9 - the selective ones (like Amherst and Williams, as mentioned by the OP) have enough applicants that they don’t have to worry a whole lot about that.
This is not necessarily true, if you compare the general education requirements at various schools. Some research universities, like MIT, Chicago, and Columbia, have extensive general education requirements, while some LACs, like Amherst and Evergreen State, have minimal to no general education requirements. Of course, some research universities, like Brown, have minimal to no general education requirements, while some LACs, like Harvey Mudd, have extensive general education requirements.
I honestly don’t think colleges of any type are counting their dancers or leaders or newspaper writers, or trombone players if they don’t have a conservatory. They count athletes in a limited way (number coaches can ask for.
In a university that admits by school, I see absolutely zero difference between a university’s College of Arts and Sciences (or whatever it’s called) and a liberal arts college. It’s the same thing except one sits on a campus with schools of engineering, nursing, music, what-have-you and the other doesn’t.