<p>I think people here are maybe concerned that you will be academically more talented than your peers, on average, at some of these schools. That can be an advantage, as you’ll probably graduate at the top of your class and get lots of awards when you finish college. The question is, will you be frustrated if the level of instruction is aimed to the average of your peers?</p>
<p>I doubt that professors with very small class sizes dumb down curriculum when confronted by a smart engaged student. I think that is a non-worry and one perhaps perpetuated by the growth in the concept of “rankings.”</p>
<p>warriordaughter, there’s a thread on this list that is currently running on the site. It might help you assess the overall student body (according to test scores, anyway) at some of the schools you are interested in.</p>
<p>[Complete</a> Ranking Of America’s Smartest Colleges - Business Insider](<a href=“http://www.businessinsider.com/complete-ranking-of-americas-smartest-colleges-2013-9]Complete”>Complete Ranking of America's Smartest Colleges)</p>
<p>I agree with momofthreeboys that professors are not going to dumb down content to the average–if anything they will simply push the top students harder. This has been my son’s experience in some of the classes where he excels at his LAC. Because the classes are so small, the professors know him personally. In other classes, he is far from the “smartest” one (or at least is outside his comfort zone). In all of them, he is being challenged.</p>
<p>Westminster College in Fulton, MO is definitely rewarding East and West Coast studentswith substantial merit aid. Decent science programs with good placement for medical and dental schools. No gigantic lecture halls, and no language barrier issues with graduate TAs.</p>
<p>Westminster actually has slightly more men than women, unusual for most LACs. There is Greek Life but of course many other activities as well including College Republicans, Young Dems, and a recently formed Young Americans for Liberty (mentioning this as you have a conservative outlook. There are a substantial number of international students from all continents. Students tend to live on campus all 4 years.</p>
<p>Westminster is an hour from the STL airport and 2.5 hours from the KC airport both of which have direct flights to major cities on both coasts. It is about 30 minutes from Columbia (home of Mizzou) and another airport that provides connecting flights to bigger cities.</p>
<p>OK, I confess, I said “level of instruction” to be p.c. – I really wanted to say if your peers, on average, aren’t as passionate about the subject matter, take a longer time to grasp concepts, etc., but that sounds really mean and insulting and is a huge generalization. (But it is true to an extent – I have been a professor and to some degree, as with any public speaking, you need to know your audience.)</p>
<p>I went to a university on merit aid where I was one of the top students. It was a large school with larger class sizes (until I got to junior and senior year when they got small – my major had about 17 students total). I got to know all of my professors regardless. I was definitely challenged, though I did find college easier than high school, and have no regrets about my choice.</p>
<p>But I do know some kids who get very frustrated with “dumb questions” asked in class. Not my kids, but some other kids. There are also students who thrive in an environment where the students are very engaged and ask high level questions. But it sounds like you have your mind made up, so this is probably all a moot point.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, even professors at small LACs may need to set the taught curriculum level to the average student. Especially if the gap between the average and brightest is large and moreso in wake of increasing weight being given to student evaluations in evaluating Professors for tenure at LACs where teaching is given much weight. </p>
<p>Not saying this is necessarily a bad thing always, but there are cases where if a few students are more quick on the uptake and/or are much more engaged/passionate enough with the material to feel “full speed ahead” whereas the majority of the classmates aren’t, there could be serious issues for those few bright students.* </p>
<p>Saying this as someone who attended an LAC and took university classes at two elite universities. </p>
<ul>
<li>Some of this may also be cultural. For instance several friends who attended Duke mentioned most students they’ve encountered in class tend to grow annoyed with students who are more quick on the uptake and/or are much more engaged/passionate enough with the material to feel “full speed ahead”…especially during class discussions. I find this bewildering as openly expressing such attitudes would have been regarded as anti-intellectual at my LAC and “academic sour grapes” at my urban public magnet high school.</li>
</ul>
<p>
</p>
<p>Had a similar educational experience myself. Only difference was I was overwhelmed academically in HS and ended up excelling in undergrad.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Or dumb stock phrases from students who were obviously sleeping in class/oblivious to class discussions when called on by a Prof. A friend and I in a college lit class had one such classmate whose dumb stock phrase to every question was “Water, a symbol of life”. Not surprisingly, she was nicknamed “water girl” by the rest of us.</p>
<p>cobrat, we all have anecdotes supporting one idea or another.</p>
<p>For the OP’s sake, let’s take one of the schools on her list: Hillsdale. According to the stats I cited above, the average SAT score is 1305. Exactly 100 points above that is Georgetown (1405). And exactly halfway between is Oberlin (1360). These are all schools attracting very bright students. The advantage of the smaller schools, in my opinion, is the reason I stated above–professors know the students in their classes and can tailor their instruction and, to some degree, expectations, accordingly. I seriously doubt a kid who is challenged by the curriculum at Georgetown would be bored out of his or her mind at Hillsdale. </p>
<p>I should add that there are a number of CC favorites that appear below Hillsdale on the list–higher-ranked schools such as Lafayette, Bucknell, Holy Cross, BU, Pitt, Dickinson, etc. I don’t hear a lot of people on this site complaining that these schools are not challenging their (very bright) kids adequately.</p>
<p>The challenge level may also depend on which specific courses or major the student selects. If a high ability/motivation chooses a major that happens to be a “gut” major at the particular school, then s/he may be unsatisfied with the level of instruction, even if the same major may be taught at a more challenging level at some other school that may have apparently lower incoming student academic credentials but where the major attracts the high ability/motivation students. There may also be cases where a given major can be taken as a “gut” major, but high ability/motivation students can choose honors or otherwise more challenging courses within the major.</p>
<p>I like your post Sally305. There are absolutely CC “favorites” that come up time and time again that accept lower stat kids than some of the very good LACs that are not mentioned often in these forums.</p>
<p>Thank you so so much for all the advice. I’ve been worrying over a bunch of these questions a lot over the past couple months so some perspective from those who have gone before is nice.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This reminds me of something my English teacher told me once that has become my motto: Yes, there are such things as stupid questions. Don’t be afraid to ask them anyways ;)</p>
<p>The main thing I’m concerned about is that classes will be geared at a significantly lower level at a lower-ranked/easier-admissions college. I don’t want to coast through college simply because I can. On the other hand, to be perfectly honest I’ve been at the top of the pack in most of my high school classes. I grasp concepts quickly but don’t mind explaining them to classmates (say in a study group). And my high school academic experience has been amazing. My teachers have pushed me to the next level (one biology teacher has lent me books from her personal library and we talk about them over lunch).</p>
<p>So, based on my high school experience, I don’t think I necessarily need a collegeful of intellectual peers to be challenged. Some peers, yes. Great teachers, yes.</p>
<p>Edited to add: I also wanted to clarify that I certainly don’t have my mind completely made up and none of your replies are moot points 
But from a practical perspective, it seems that I need to at least apply to several “lesser” colleges simply for merit aid purposes.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My main point is that the problem of having the professor dumb down the curriculum to the average isn’t limited to lower tier/ranked colleges. It’s also variable by one’s own proficiency in given subjects and/or the academic strength’s of one’s HS. </p>
<p>However, once you’re in the first tier or two, it’s less likely to be an issue for the above-average academic achiever as opposed to schools in the lower tiers.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I actually knew several people who transferred out of BU both because it was exceedingly expensive and the general academic level was too low for them. They all ended up graduating from Top 20 universities/LACs…such as Wesleyan…and got far better FA/scholarships to boot.</p>
<p>Thanks, momofthreeboys. This is where the East Coast bias of this site seems to reveal itself most. I would really love to see the analytics on where visitors come from.</p>
<p>Since you’re considering small colleges and small universities in the Midwest, take a look at South Dakota School of Mines & Technology in Rapid City, SD. Yes, it’s a STEM school but it’s small size gives it a more intimate feel. It’s not exclusively an engineering school. There’s an Applied Biology major as well as Chemistry.</p>
<p>Many SDSM&T students get involved in undergraduate research and the school has a great job placement rate, even in non-Engineering fields. That’s because of its reputation for rigorous academics. A while ago I read of an alumnae, a corporate executive who majored in Chemistry at SDSM&T. The school is also committed to increasing the number of women on campus, which at present stands slightly under 30%. Incidentally, there are students from many states on campus, including California. Finally, tuition costs are much lower than most private colleges. I’d guess that before counting financial aid, the tuition at SDSM&T is about 1/2 of the colleges you mentioned in your post. Check it out.</p>
<p>warriordaughter - you sound like a very bright and kind young woman. At some point in your life/career, I think it would be interesting for you to be in an environment surrounded by lots of other bright people. It is fun to be intellectually challenged by peers, and it makes you think more critically and creatively. There will be a time for it, if not in college, then perhaps in graduate school.</p>
<p>If the OP were a potential Olympic athlete, I doubt many people would excitedly be encouraging her to train with a college junior varsity or club team. If the OP were a potential world class musician, few people would encourage her to stick with her local music school and to find her “peeps” there.</p>
<p>But it’s not PC to tell a HS kid that in fact, there are differences between a campus which attracts hundreds or thousands of bright and ambitious and highly motivated students, vs. a campus where there may be 80-90 of these kids in residence at any one time. It’s not PC to describe the difference between a college where you can be gob-smacked by the sheer excitement of being surrounded by kids- some of whom are just legions smarter and better prepared than you, vs. a college where you might be the top, or the second, or at least in the top five of your class.</p>
<p>This I don’t get. It’s not bashing the other kids, or the faculty, or the colleges, to encourage a kid to make sure that she won’t outgrow a small college IF SHE GETS TO MAKE A CHOICE. </p>
<p>Jeez. You folks want to tell Helen Mirren and Maggie Smith that they should be doing community theater since there are many talented performers who do community theater? Of course there are. Hardly the point.</p>
<p>Blossom I don’t disagree with you but there is a prevailing “bent” toward certain colleges on this forum that at times doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. The OP has a pretty good list of colleges that include very high performing kids from the common data set statistics. Many of us lobbied the OP on a previous thread to include one reachy school with good aid on the application list. I would say the OP is a smart cookie to be spending time focusing on the match and safety schools, too many kids focus on the reach schools only to end up at match schools they have not spent considerable time researching and thinking about.</p>
<p>Good grief, blossom. The OP–one of the most mature and articulate high school students I have encountered on this site–is asking specifically for midwestern schools where she will qualify for merit aid. To receive merit aid, one generally has to be at the top of the admissions pile. She will be at the top at virtually any college she applies to. She also specifically described her experience in high school where she is already standing above her peers academically, and how it hasn’t gotten in the way of her thriving and having a wonderful educational experience.</p>
<p>I’m guessing you didn’t attend a small LAC yourself. There are great professors at even ones you’ve never heard of who are in it for the opportunity to teach bright, intellectually curious students regardless of what test scores they had. Many of the small schools you would turn up your nose at would offer incredible opportunities for a student like WarriorDaughter–with extra attention, undergraduate research, and so on.</p>
<p>The thing is, sally305, some of us think she could get significant merit aid at higher ranked LACs where the peer group and quite possibly the instruction in the sciences could be better, and therefore should not rule them out. </p>
<p>Research in the sciences is definitely present at LACs, but some are much more known than others in the sciences, and there certainly are some standouts. Warriordaughter can easily assess this by looking at faculty publications.</p>
<p>(I was not aware of a another thread, sorry – that is news to me.)</p>
<p>But she has other parameters as well, such as a fairly politically conservative environment and a midwest location. And as for the “ranking” issue–my point, as well as that of momofthreeboys and others (here and elsewhere), is that in many cases the ranking does not correlate directly to a stronger peer group. Nor does it correlate to greater opportunities post-graduation.</p>
<p>I know St. Olaf is on your list, and I’m glad. I think you would thrive there.</p>