The problem with Liberal Arts Colleges

College Search & Selection
21

<p>

Why would we “say you do the bare minimum”? What if you are passionate about a subject and want to take more courses in it?

Many excellent public universities are cheaper, but I don’t think we necessarily need to get into that here.

A truly brilliant budding mathematician may be able to specialize the the point that only a few schools are satisfactory (ie those with extensive ongoing research in those fields). However, I believe this thread is more geared toward discussing an intelligent but not amazing math student. For them, the broad range of choices might still be useful in helping them choose a more specialized field.

This is good. I will certainly not dispute that some LACs are superb for math/science - while I would recommend hedging one’s bets with a research university where courses will definitely be available, a student who feels the need for the more personal environment would probably be better off at the elite LAC. This is comparing golden apples to golden oranges - different products, but worth a lot either way. However, the drop-off from elite to less-elite is sharper with LACs (especially in math). An advanced student at, say, U Utah could take graduate courses. A student at a lesser LAC could not.</p>

22

<p>All those extra courses at the Us have students enrolled in them, and those students chose to take those courses. Because they wanted to, and they can.</p>

<p>"It’s not that fewer courses are offered in the sense that there is a lack of depth/breadth of courses. Rather, one can’t depend on certain courses to be offered every single semester, every single year. There is no lack of advanced or upper-level classes. "</p>

<p>This can be resolved without rhetoric, by going to the registrar’s list of courses actually given at institutions of interest, in each of the last 2 or 4 semesters, and simply counting the courses that were actually given in a particular field. Not listed in the catalog, but actually given. Be sure to include sections of classes too,in addition to the number of times each course was given, to see how easy it will be to avoid course conflicts.</p>

<p>Besides, an upper level course that you want, that isn’t being offered the semester/ year you can take it is no better to you than if it was not offered at all.</p>

<p>“…but how many of them could you actually take, or would you actually want to take?”</p>

<p>It’s not a question of having so many, it’s a question of if you get interested in some one particular thing, as your studies progress, will you be able to pursue that one thing. Or two things, or three things, as the case may be. If they have a lot, there is a greater chance that the particular ones you wind up wanting will be among them.</p>

<p>In D1s case, she wanted to pursue a particular subarea of her field, and her LAC didn’'t offer it. Period. Of course she didn’t literally “run out of courses” she just couldn’t pursue her interests there fully, she took other courses that they actually offered but that she preferred less.</p>

<p>If someone, after junior year, decides out of the blue for some reason that they want to take some weird language,etc., it would be nice if, by serendipity, their school happpened to offer it. This type of thing has a greater likelihood of working out at a school with more offerings, in more areas, generally. Some students choose to take these courses, when they but have the option to do so; that’s why they can be offered there. Students who don’t have those options can’t choose them. Prior to entering college many people cannot accurately predict what they will wind up becoming interested in down the road.</p>

23

<p>It seems this thread has deteriorated into which is better, a LAC or large Univ - not the differences.</p>

<p>To the OP - you will find top schools in each category, and you will find pro’s and con’s for each. It is really up to the individual to decide what environment is best and which college / university is the best fit for them</p>

<p>It is very simplistic (and incorrect) for some to argue one group is better than the other</p>

24

<p>

</p>

<p>A “statistically small” number of people is all it takes to practice law in the 50 states of the union; fewer still to practice medicine; fewer still to occupy a professorship at a leading college or university; fewer still to write a successful play or book; fewer still to run the Executive Branch of the United States or to sit on the Supreme Court. It’s not about sheer numbers of people learning enough to get a job in order to raise a family. It’s about harnessing education as a true engine of social change, something the public sector has simply not been able to do as <em>efficiently</em> as the private sector.</p>

25

<p>“Harvard is the most reputable institution of higher learning in the world.
Not even Yale or Princeton can compare to Harvard in reputation.
No school can compare to Harvard: therefore, you should go to Harvard, since you seem to care so much about reputation.”</p>

<p>What a US-centric focus this writer has!</p>

<p>British universities, from Oxford, Cambridge, to University of London, outshine HYP.</p>

<p>Few US liberal arts colleges are state-supported, so most of the US liberal arts colleges are private schools that are quite expensive. A few good government-supported national LACs are both quite excellent and inexpensive: the military academies, New College of Florida, William & Mary, St. Marys of Maryland.</p>

<p>The major benefit of an LAC is that its mission is undergraduate education. Major national research universities focus on research, often to the detriment of undergraduate education.</p>

<p>Even very bright and motivated students get lost at research universities in auditoriums filled with 600-student classes taught by graduate students whose grasp of English may fall far short of “fluent.”</p>

<p>LACs typically have much smaller classes taught by actual professors whose reason for being is teaching undergraduate students.</p>

26

<p>

</p>

<p>There is no one “University of London”. It’s a system that includes the London School of Economics, which is quite good but not the best.</p>

<p>American universities are frequently ranked best in the world.</p>

27

<p>

</p>

<p>I believe he was simply talking about reputation, and let’s face it, whether we agree with it or not, Harvard does indeed have the world’s most powerful brand name in higher education. I tend to think that the prestige is somewhat undeserved, but we can’t deny its existence. In contrast, while the constituent schools that comprise the University of London are all fine schools, none of them, not even LSE, can be considered remotely as prestigious as Harvard or even Oxbridge.</p>

28

<p>

I’m sure it in fact is about “learning enough to get a job in order to raise a family” for the vast majority of Americans, and I’m not sure why you seem to regard this as some sort of lesser task for mere mortals. But perhaps I misunderstood you…?</p>

29

<p>^ Well, that is the difference in philosophy. Many people who prefer LACs also subscribe to the idealistic vs. practical mode–yes, it’s definitely important to learn enough to get a job, though not necessarily to raise a family, but it may also be equally or more important to be immersed in a specific type of intellectual environment. That’s not to say that other schools are unintellectual–far from it–but that they are a different TYPE of intellectual environment.</p>

30

<p>I would add SUNY Geneseo to the list of excellant public LACs…Geneseo is always up at the top of the list with the other colleges listed above i.e. New College of Florida, St. Mary’s and William and Mary.</p>

31

<p>

</p>

<p>Do you have any factual basis whatsoever for this rather sweeping statement?</p>

32

<p>From a typical abstract:
“College access has increased, but college success has not. About 85 percent of high school graduates plan to attend college, and over three quarters attempt a college degree. Nearly half of these students do not ever finish college, and the college dropout rate is much higher among lower- income students (most of whom begin in or end up in community colleges). Less than 20 percent ever complete a college degree, despite the tremendous effort they put into trying to turn their plans into reality.”
<a href=“Page%206%20of%2019”>url=http://www.allacademic.com//meta/p&lt;em&gt;mla&lt;/em&gt;apa&lt;em&gt;research&lt;/em&gt;citation/1/8/4/3/5/pages184359/p184359-6.php&lt;/a&gt; - When aspirations meet reality for low-income minority high school students in their transition to college authored by Deil-Amen, Regina.</p>

33

<p>Perhaps I am missing something, but I fail to see how the above quote provides any support for your sweeping generalization.</p>

34

<p>I suppose we’d like to see a comparison between public v. private school graduation rates for disadvantaged students (however one defines “disadvantaged”) or some social mobility data such as the figures Washington Monthly uses.</p>

<p>That is, if we assume that an important part of the college mission is to be an agent of social change, or an engine of social mobility.</p>

35

<p>I agree it would be nice. But, on the face of it, LACs would only have to beat the 20% graduation mark to make my point – and, you have to agree that’s a pretty low benchmark.</p>

36

<p>"^Many people who prefer LACs also subscribe to the idealistic vs. practical mode–yes, it’s definitely important to learn enough to get a job, though not necessarily to raise a family, but it may also be equally or more important to be immersed in a specific type of intellectual environment. "</p>

<p>The same can be said for students who study at Arts & sciences colleges housed within larger universiities. </p>

<p>It should also be noted that, at the end of the day,most everyone will need to work someplace, and many students at all these Arts & Sciences colleges, stand-alone or not, are not completely bereft of practical motivations. Many of them take deliberate actions that will prepare them for the professions, academia, or the workplace. In many cases a liberal arts education is the most typical, tried and true path for those vocations. Some people are truly in an Ivory tower never never land, but others are consciously on the first rung preparing for their future vocation, just as deliberately as engineering students may be for theirs. It’s just that the target future vocations, and entry requirements, are different.</p>

<p>My friends from undergrad Arts & sciences are mostly college professors, writers, editors, lawyers, and doctors. These ends were not arrived at by pure accident, they did stuff in college to pave their way for them. They had to do more afterwards, of course, but their college years were not irrelevant towards their, eventually, achieving these careers. These are all, to my mind, “practical” vocations, requiring specifically learned knowledge & skills, and these liberal arts college grads do them for a living. And, in part, directed their undergrad studies on tracks that led to these eventual ends.</p>

<p>So let’s not “drink the Kool-aid” and overglorify.</p>

37

<p>I doubt that information regarding public and private school graduation rates for these students would provide any useful information. I expect that the large majority of “disadvantaged” students do not have the realistic opportunity to make a choice between a public and private institution. As to those that do have the opportunity, I would generally expect them to be successful wherever they attend school, given the qualities that likely afforded them the choice and opportunity in the first place.</p>

38

<p>^^that’s fine. you’ve saved me a lot of time trying to engage you in a rational conversation.</p>

39

<p>This seems to be the common response when one has no useful information to offer. </p>

<p>I acknowledge my opinons are just that. Though I think the rationale on which they are based is reasonable, I would certainly be willing to list to any information you might have to the contrary and have not suggested otherwise. Given your response, you apparently have none.</p>

40

<p>All I’m saying, is I think I’ve met my burden, I’ve brought some data to the table that supports my point of view. If you think that data is irrelevant then the burden shifts to you. Otherwise, we can be here all day. :/</p>