Liberal arts college vs. University

College Search & Selection
41

<p>A note about science majors - as a potential bio or physics major at Carleton (Carleton’s name seems to be coming up every now and then), I thought I should mention that Carleton in particular is an LAC known for its science programs, particularly geology, biology and physics. I’m not sure exactly why, but we seem to attract a lot of science/math types, so I think you’d be surprised at the number of people who have “majors that require science.”</p>

<p>That being said, in terms of your overall question of LAC vs. University - I personally love the smaller environment that my school fosters. I like the fact that I can regularly meet with teachers during office hours, and that most of my teachers know me by name by the end of the second week of term, even in larger classes of 40 students or so. Obviously, the social scene here is also very different - we don’t have a Greek system and the smaller student body means that parties are limited in size - but I actually find a nice balance between smaller, more intimate parties/hangouts and larger parties in the townhouses. And, of course, there are countless other things to do as well. In general, I feel like I’m getting a great education here, and I really like the personalized, motivating environment that Carleton fosters.</p>

<p>At the same time, an LAC obviously has its limits. I might be generalizing here based on my own school experience, but I think it’s unquestionable that if you’re looking for a larger range of diversity, you should go to a larger university. Carleton actually has a fair amount of socioeconomic diversity, and also a range of people with diverse interests and backgrounds - but if you’re looking for ethnic diversity, then you would probably be more interested in a larger school. I’ve been satisfied with my experience at Carleton, and I feel like I’ve met many different types of people; however, this is probably the one area in which I would say that a larger university clearly wins out.</p>

<p>There are benefits to larger universities as well - more professors doing research probably translates to more undergraduate research opportunities, for example. But I feel like a smaller student body with a wide diversity of interests means that the people who are interested will almost certainly be able to find internships, research opportunities, etc., and already I’ve applied for several positions over the summer (keep in mind that I am only a second-term freshman), as well as several different study abroad programs. </p>

<p>I am extraordinarily satisfied with my experience at an LAC, and if you have any other questions feel free to ask!</p>

<p>By the way, monydad - I can’t remember the exact quote - but I can reassure you that some of the us LAC students, at least, are at an LAC because we chose it over some of the “national universities” (including, incidentally, Cornell). :)</p>

42

<p>No doubt, D1 and D2 both would not apply to alma mater, applied only to LACs.
Unfortuantely this choice did not work well for either of them. D2 transferred to alma mater and is much happer for it.</p>

43

<p>

</p>

<p>I’m wondering if a part of that is the earlier time you attended versus the times my cousin and high school classmates attended. </p>

<p>I also have an aunt who attended Cornell during the late 1950’s and was shocked to hear from my cousin and her college classmates about how much grade-grubbing and academic one-ups-manship there was as that was not part of her experiences there. </p>

<p>Moreover, not everyone considers “heavily cutthroat competitive science-tech school feel” to be a bad thing. Most of the high school classmates who are Cornell alums actually thrived on being in that atmosphere and regarded it as one great reason for attending.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Know of several classmates at my LAC who did the same. Among the schools they turned down included Georgetown, JHU, Chicago, Berkeley, Brandeis, NYU, Brown, Columbia, Cornell, and Yale.</p>

44

<p>"I’m wondering if a part of that is the earlier time you attended versus the times my cousin and high school classmates attended. "</p>

<p>CC readers can decide who to trust on an anonymous message board for themselves. I’ve a daughter there now who is thrilled with the place. People can decide for themselves how much weight to give what you say your cousin said, or what the thousands of people you went to high school with said. (None of whom are there now either), and what I say, and what others say. “cutthroat” and “grade-grubbing” are not appealing images to anybody, nor do they pertain, IMO. At least not in degree to define one’e experience, one cannot account for the behavior of every individual, anyplace.</p>

<p>Suggest parties interested in cultures of particular schools speak with actual students there, for example the school sub-forums on CC would be one place to look.</p>

45

<p>“Oberlin’s East Asian studies/language programs is one of the college’s strengths among those who are in the East Asian Studies field. On the other hand, some higher ranked LACs either didn’t have East Asian studies/languages at the time I applied…or they were severely limited in their emphasis. Several other classmates turned down admission to Vassar, Carleton, Bowdoin, Haverford, Georgetown, JHU, and Davidson because of this very issue.”</p>

<p>So you are here saying Oberlin’s programs do not represent typical LACs, but are an outlier, as compared to these several other prestigious LACs such as Carleton, Vssar, bowdoin, Haverford and Davidson. Yet you chose this outlier to compare vs. Harvard in a line of argument where it was implied as typical of LACs generally. But here you’re instead saying it isn’t.</p>

<p>If it is unusual in being so much better in this area than all these other LACs, then perhaps it is not a good example to be used to compare LACs as a class to other institutions.</p>

46

<p>“However, the problems you have described with your daughters are not unique to just LACs”</p>

<p>This is true, one should check individually. However common sense suggests it is more likely to happen where there is fewer staff in a department altogether. Where there is a teeny department to start wih, if the one person there with interest in a certain subarea goes on sabbatical, or changes jobs, the cupboard is bare. When D1 was considering transferring I checked, all her potential target universities had courses in the subarea that was missing at her LAC. I also checked several other LACs, these also did not have courses in it. This was not something that could be checked before choosing where to matriculate, because said interest did not materialize until afterwards. A larger staff is more likely to accommodate, by happenstance, such evolving interests, simply because more is offered. But its true that this will not always be the case, nor will any given university always have a larger department or more courses in every single area than every LAC. We’re talking absolutes when we perhaps shouldn’t be, but IMO the odds are more on one side than the other, in this regard.</p>

47

<p>^^</p>

<p>Monydad,</p>

<p>My point was that having weaknesses/gaps in certain programs/sub-fields is a problem which is not exclusive to LACs as you seem to be implying here. Universities, even elite ones, also have this issue. </p>

<p>Also, as many here already know, using rankings as an overriding metric is not always the best way to go about searching for colleges/universities. Sometimes schools which are ranked lower by USNWR may have programs which are weaker/nonexistent in higher-ranked schools as several classmates in high school/college experienced. </p>

<p>One high school classmate who was a big on USNWR rankings and taken in by the Ivy hype ended up being quite miserable at Harvard when she found the Engineering program there to be far less than what she had initially thought after turning down “lower ranking/non-Ivy” schools with far more impressive engineering programs like Berkeley, MIT, and Stanford. Fortunately, she rectified that somewhat when she matured enough to take off the Ivy-blinders and ended up going to Stanford for engineering grad school where she was much happier.</p>

48

<p>Chris:
Your post is particularly interesting to me because I had the same inquiry from my Swedish nephew who is thinking about coming to the US to study economics. He is not guaranteed to me admitted to HHS in Stockholm and is exploring alternatives. His father (my brother) is horrified at the idea of having to spend $50K per year and asked me to try to dissuade him. I didn’t exactly do that but some of the issues I raised are probably just as relevant in your case:</p>

<p>Undergraduate study in the US is not an especially attractive option for most Western Europeans You can see it in the numbers. Unlike in graduate school which has always attracted Europeans in droves, the number of Europeans in US colleges in actually very small. This includes the very top colleges where you can often count the number of Europeans on a single hand. In part this is due to the high cost but perhaps more so is the relatively poor educational value. Most Europeans students are one to two years ahead of US students by the end of high school. So you will be spending the first two years in college going through material typically covered in high school in Europe. This differential can be minimized by obtaining sophomore status upon enrollment and a number of US universities will grant European applicants sophomore status. LACs tends to be stingy with advanced standing just as they are with AP or IB credits but some may give advanced standing. I would definitely check.</p>

<p>Undergraduate studies in the US and Europe do not track well If your intention is to return to Europe for professional or graduate studies you may find that you have to retake a lot of classes upon your return and you get very little if any credit for your US studies. US education especially at a LAC is very general while European education is highly specialized and much more pre-professional. While In Europe you start law, medical or business school right after high school that is not the case in the US. You will therefore find that will be significantly behind your peers who stayed in Europe. Now if you intend to stay in the US, the situation may be different. Typically, it is quite hard to get permanent residency after studying in the US especially for undergrad.</p>

<p>My nephew was clearly more interested in the positives of a US undergraduate education.</p>

<p>You don’t have to make a career choice right away and can defer that decision until graduation (and beyond). That is certainly an advantage if you are not sure you want to go into law or business or medicine. The problem is your Dad may not be excited about spending $200K for you to get a degree in East Asian studies or Communications.</p>

<p>Residential college life in the US is unique and potentially life changing I never experienced it as I came to the US as a graduate student but it is something I am very happy my own kids get to enjoy. Student life in Stockholm is actually quite fun (I have a niece at HHS) but is still not the same. You don’t live on campus in Continental Europe. The school spirit that you can find in US colleges is much stronger than anything in Europe. This why most Americans will give tons of money to their respective colleges after they graduate. This true at small LACs and huge schools like USC. For many it was the best time in their lives, in between adolescence and adulthood. My wife who is US educated developed many lifelong friendships with her college classmates something I missed entirely. </p>

<p>It is for you (and probably your parents if they foot the bill) to decide if the positives outweigh the negatives. I never considered sending my kids to college in Europe, in part because I wanted them to experience the US residential system. I have a D at MIT and another at Tulane and they both love it. </p>

<p>BTW if you are seriously interested in MIT, you can PM me. I interview applicants to MIT and can give you some pointers. There is definitely a very strong sense of belonging and it is very much a work hard-play hard environment. Half the student body joins fraternities or sororities and MIT parties are notorious in Boston! One of the frats has many internationals and several of my D friends are actually Swedish. Boston is arguably the best college town in the world with over 50 colleges in the immediate vicinity. As far as interest in math, MIT would be hard to beat. It can be somewhat intimidating with over 100 students participating in the annual Putnam Competition (the biggest college math competition) and most of them placing at the top. But MIT is much more than just a tech school. It has one of the best economics departments in the world and a top undergraduate business school. It is also not very big. The undergraduate student body is about the same size as that of Dartmouth, the smallest Ivy. The biggest issue for internationals is getting in but you have a slight advantage applying from Europe.</p>

49

<p>Chris, I can see why someone who lives in Europe (or Asia) would be confused by the American college system. The concept of the small liberal arts college just doesn’t exist outside of the US and it’s hard to make a comparison.</p>

<p>Small LACs are not exclusively focused on “arts” as in humanities. In their case the term “liberal arts” encompasses humanities, social studies and math and science. In general LACs do not offer degrees in professional or graduate studies. There are exceptions – some LACs have engineering programs for example, some have business programs, some have a masters program or two. </p>

<p>Because they are small by definition, LACs tend to have specific characters, both socially and academically, moreso than larger universities. Some are excellent in math/science, some less so. Each school will tend to attract students of similar personality types; however, from one LAC to another there is a wide range of personalities.</p>

<p>Colleges and universities both vary greatly in academic calibre – from very rigorous to undemanding. This is not a function of size. There are excellent large, medium and small colleges. There are lousy large, medium and small colleges. The top tier colleges – of all sizes – admit the most academically accomplished students; however the final choice of the most accomplished students is often driven as much by finances as prestige. Private colleges are all very expensive and you almost need a PhD to understand financial aid.</p>

<p>The top tier colleges – of all sizes – send many of their graduates to the top tier graduate and professional programs. The top tier LACs do very well in graduate school placements; HOWEVER, if you wish to do graduate work in Europe you’d be better off at a large to medium university as LACs are less well known outside America.</p>

<p>From reading your posts it seems to me that you would like an academically rigorous small to medium college/university in a non-urban environment where you can study math/science/economics and have a traditional campus experience. You want a focus on undergraduate teaching, an accessible faculty and a supportive community. </p>

<p>There are quite a few that fit that description. Some to look at: Dartmouth, Princeton, Williams, Amherst, Middlebury, Bowdoin, Carleton. There are others, but these will get you going. Once you’ve put together a shortlist that fits your requirements you can expand it to include some less selective choices.</p>

<p>If you need/want financial aid, your list will be very different.</p>

50

<p>“Most Europeans students are one to two years ahead of US students by the end of high school.”</p>

<p>If that’s the situation I suggest give yet more consideration to attending a school that has access, either directly or via consortium, to a more substantial body of upper level courses, not a smaller amount. The problems D1 and Marite’s son encountered are more likely to be felt if you are skipping over most of the first year or two of offerings at a small school IMO.</p>

51

<p>

</p>

<p>This is also not a problem limited to the LACs based on my own experiences researching and applying to colleges and those of high school and college classmates who did the same. </p>

<p>Quite a few of them ended up transferring from larger universities to LACs because the larger unis also had that issue in their respective fields of interest (i.e. Georgetown, JHU, Brandeis, etc). </p>

<p>Moreover, being obsessively fixated on USNWR rankings is a good way to overlook the fact that higher ranking schools may have weaker/smaller departments for one’s academic interests than lower ranking schools. </p>

<p>Better to research each individual school’s academic departments and evaluate them on your own terms.</p>

52

<p>

</p>

<p>I definitely agree. Ideally you want to have the option to take grad level courses by junior/senior year.</p>

53

<p>cellardweller, thanks alot for your input on the matter of going to college vs HHS (which actually is on the top of my list of Swedish schools). Does MIT only interview people in the US or can I get an interview in Sweden? In that case I would really love some pointers :)</p>

<p>Momrath: “From reading your posts it seems to me that you would like an academically rigorous small to medium college/university in a non-urban environment where you can study math/science/economics and have a traditional campus experience. You want a focus on undergraduate teaching, an accessible faculty and a supportive community.”</p>

<p>Very well put if I may say so myself. The non-urban part is negotiable and so is the size of the school. Would not decline an offer to attend MIT or Harvard.</p>

<p>Momrath: “There are quite a few that fit that description. Some to look at: Dartmouth, Princeton, Williams, Amherst, Middlebury, Bowdoin, Carleton. […] If you need/want financial aid, your list will be very different.”</p>

<p>Dartmouth and Princeton offer full-need admission to international students and so does Yale, Harvard, Amherst and MIT. I do need financial aid, but I have no idea of how hard it is for me to recieve from other top colleges.</p>

54

<p>Chris, I’m an American that lives in Asia and I’ve followed international admissions for many years. </p>

<p>Most selective colleges and universities offer “full” need based aid to internationals. What is “full” is arguable because what the college determines that you need, may or may not align with what you actually need. As an international you will have additional travel expenses, which may or may not be covered. You should ask your parents to use an on-line financial aid calculator to give you an idea of what to expect.</p>

<p>Some colleges bill themselves as “need blind” which means that they don’t consider your financial status when they evaluate you, but that is a secondary consideration. There’s some evidence that “need blind” doesn’t exist practically speaking as your application will be full of clues to your family’s economic standing.</p>

<p>All colleges limit the percentage of internationals that they admit. When they do admit internationals, they are looking for backgrounds that will add diversity to their communities – in race, in religion, in geography, in life experience. </p>

<p>Smaller schools, especially rural ones, that have difficulty attracting high achieving non-whites, often use international admissions to increase their diversity percentages. Universities that are well known globally get an excess of high achieving international applicants and can be pretty choosy about who they admit and why.</p>

<p>As a (presumably) White male European, you won’t be able to play the diversity card. In order to get admitted to an ultra-selective school like Harvard or MIT, even *without *financial aid, someone from your demographic would need extraordinary academic standing or unique extra-curricular accomplishments. </p>

<p>Go ahead and apply to any and all, but if you really want an American education, you should focus on some less selectives, that have a history of admitting internationals. </p>

<p>If urban is okay with you, then I’d suggest Macalester, an excellent school with a strong international focus. Also consider any of the non-urban LACs like Williams, Carleton, Grinnell, Kenyon, Hamilton, Middlebury, Bowdoin, Colby that attract fewer European applicants. </p>

<p>The Ivy league + MIT and Stanford do have an ample number of international students, but the trend is toward students third world, developing cultures. As a white European you’ll have to come up with an knock out application in order to be considered even by the (relatively) less selective ivies, like Brown, Dartmouth or Cornell. </p>

<p>Perhaps you have an extracurricular – arts, sports, community service – or family/ethnic background story that could be parlayed here?</p>

55

<p>Chris:</p>

<p>Very few schools offer need based financial aid to internationals. The ones you listed are the only ones that are need blind. Not surprisingly they are among the most selective. Some schools may offer merit aid to internationals and that needs to be checked with the financial aid office of the college. You should keep a broad list if you want any aid as it varies hugely from school to school. Athletic recruits can also get scholarships. If you are very good at a sport for instance and are willing to play for the college team you could be recruited and get an early offer. Annika Sorenstam for instance got a full scholarship to study and play golf at the University of Arizona. Hockey is very popular among many schools in the Midwest and Northeast. It may sound crazy for a European to be admitted to a university on athletic merit, but that can be huge hook for admission, even at places such as Harvard. MIT unfortunately does not really recruit athletes but it can still be a plus on the application. </p>

<p>You can definitely get an MIT interview in Sweden and it is pretty much required for admission. Please note that MIT does not admit by major which means that the requirements are pretty much the same for all applicants. In general you are expected to have taken the most advanced math and science classes offered by your high school (even if you want to study economics). You will get a lot more information on the MIT board on CC. </p>

<p>Don’t hesitate to PM me for more specifics. I could put you in touch with Swedish students currently at MIT.</p>

56

<p>

cellar, I agree with what you’ve written except for the above. Need based financial aid for internationals is not uncommon at private schools. It is limited and highly subjective, but if admitted, need will be covered. (Again, the amount of need is determined by the school.) </p>

<p>Merit aid for internationals, though it can happen, is quite rare.</p>

<p>As you note, there are just a few schools that are still “need blind” for internationals. Some (including me) think that “need blind” doesn’t really exist even at schools that profess to have it, but that’s another topic.</p>

57

<p>While my wife and I are both Cornell Alums, unlike Monydad, we did not feel our experience there was ideal and therefore encouraged our kids to examine LACs. D is finishing up at Pomona and couldn’t be happier. Cornell’s 1,000+ Psych class was entertaining (both wife and I took Dr. Maas’ class), but not that educational, and in my case, the small group session was taught by yours truly, a “TA” who was only a college junior and had no teaching experience or training. In contrast, D’s classes average 8 students taught only be professors and she goes to dinner regularly with her teachers. Wife and I have decided that the natural progression of education is to do the “Ivy” thing, realize it’s mostly hype, then finally understand that personalized teaching is the best way to enlightenment, hence the liberal arts education. My kids couldn’t be happier.</p>

58

<p>You’ve described the first stage of the progression, with which I agree.
Unfortunately I’ve then experienced the second stage of the progression, where my family learns the LACs have limitations too. D2 transferred out of LAC to Cornell and loves it there. Glad your kids have not caused you to witness stage 2, but I am making people aware that it exists as well. Because I have witnessed it via two kids. Pomona is better situated than most to avoid some of the less favorable aspects, due to consortium, but others are not so blessed. Both environments have their strengths and limitations, not just one.</p>

<p>Maas is only there because it is a highly rated course, year after year.
The students, and alums (save some evidently), like it or it would be gone.</p>

59

<p>I think monydad offers a valuable perspective based on his daughters’ experience.</p>

<p>What LACs excel at is general education in bread-and-butter liberal arts fields like History or English. If you want to specialize early or want something arcane, then a LAC is probably not ideal (unless you know for sure what you want and can identify a LAC with unusual strength in exactly that area, e.g. Williams in Art History or Bryn Mawr in Urban Studies.) I doubt that even the best students would be repeating HS courses in humanities or social science at a solid LAC, but “running out of courses” could be an issue for example in math, computer science, or natural science for some very accelerated kids. </p>

<p>I’d prefer a good LAC over a big, sprawling, impersonal university with many 500-student classes, but a strong student should be able to find a school that combines suitable course selection with a strong undergraduate focus.</p>

60

<p>“based on his daughters’ experience”</p>

<p>Experiences, plural. There were two of them. D2s issues were not academic, they were in part social, clash of personality with prevailing campus culture which can be of greater importance as the size of school shrinks. At the larger school, which has greater social diversity, she has really found her niche. D1 also encountered social issues relating to clash of fit with the prevailing campus culture at her LAC, but additionally encountered the academic limitations described. In both cases, they thought they fit well prior to attending, but then found otherwise. And did not find alternative niches there, sufficient to be happy with their situations.</p>

<p>I too am not a great fan of huge lectures. But to be honest once a class is to be delivered in lecture format, due to enrollment or subject matter, it doesn’t matter so much how many other people are also sitting there listening to the lecture. The material is learned either way. I’ve had good and bad results in both types of class formats. The more intimate settings usually feel better though, to me, no question. (hence the motivation for stage 1). However, a large class selection also feels good, something I appreciated only in hindsight via D1 (hence stage 2).</p>

<p>As a great woman said, “Don’t it always go to show that you don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone”.</p>

<p>I agree that a mix of both worlds could be optimal. D2 actually got that, more or less, by transferring from her LAC to the U after “intro survey-course land” was over. Maybe S will find a better solution.</p>