<p>FALCON is an unusual program and does not, in my opinion, tell us much about the pros and cons of universities v. LACs. You could argue that it does take the critical mass of a larger school to put together a program like FALCON. But usually, if you want an intensive immersion experience in a foreign language, whether you attend a LAC or a university, you need to go abroad (or else to something like one of the Middlebury summer schools). The selection of upper level courses is another thing. No doubt about it, a university with a good graduate program in Asian languages/lit/civ will give you more choices (assuming you can and will take advantage of them).</p>
<p>It’s the same over and over: the LAC offers personal mentorship and intimate teaching by professors, attracting those interested in academics and advanced degrees; the big U offers better employment possibilities, a campus with more advanced facilities, and a more traditional big-school experience. There is overlap.</p>
<p>My brother goes to WM, an LAC-like public university. They have a program with the Columbia Fu school of Engineering to do 3 years at WM, 2 years at Fu, and get 1 BE and 1 Bachelor’s in your choice from WM.</p>
<p>My brother (who considered majoring in some branch of engineering, now a physics major) decided against this program because it took 5 years. Why pay the extra 50k per year to attend a school to get a degree that you dont need? At a University, you’d pay 100k less (private) to get the same degree.
So what makes 3/2 better? The additional Bachelor’s degree? Hah! Who needs an additional BA/BS? If you want to do acoustics engineering and major in electrical engineering with a concentration in acoustics, why do you need a BA in statistics, or, more realistically, and LAC humanities major? I doubt having a useless BS will help. And it will just put you 100k in the hole.</p>
<p>And even if the BA DOES help, is it worth it? Wouldnt it be cheaper and better to just get the 4 year degree and 1 year of work/research experience instead of being in school to get a useless degree?</p>
<p>If you got a Masters, however, it would change everything.</p>
<p>"…the big U offers "
More. That is the biggest difference. </p>
<p>They offer many more courses. They have more majors, more minors more everything in terms of strict academics. And also more clubs, more extracurriculars of every sort.</p>
<p>Yes many of them also offfer better employment options for those seeking that. But the biggest difference is not what you said it is that they offer multiple times the number of courses. And more sections of courses. And teach the courses more frequently, not every other year.</p>
<p>The LACs offer much less, less frequently, with fewer sections available. But in smaller classes. And they are more intimate and uniform socially, which can be great socially if you fit, or horrible if it turns out you don’t (though perhaps you thought you would).</p>
<p>“You could argue that it does take the critical mass of a larger school to put together a program like FALCON”</p>
<p>yes I could, and I will.</p>
<p>"No doubt about it, a university with a good graduate program in Asian languages/lit/civ will give you more choices (assuming you can and will take advantage of them). "</p>
<p>It is nice to have the option to take advantage of them, if you wind up wanting to do that. But even if you don’t, the university also offers more lower level courses in the various subject areas, and more subject areas altogether. When people have the option to spread their wings a little they often take advantage of it. D2 is studying in Arts & sciences at her university. Before she finishes there she will have also taken courses at three other colleges there, besides Arts & Sciences, Because they offered something she decided she wanted to take. She could decide that because they were there to be offered and available to her.</p>
<p>Not always. Some classmates at an Ivy with a topflight Asian Studies program felt the language program…while good…did not compare with the rigor or intensity of what they had at our LAC. Fortunately, they were able to opt out of taking the 4-5th year modern Chinese and could dive straight into first or second-year literary Chinese or advanced topics in Chinese literature/language in their grad programs. </p>
<p>Incidentally, one could have taken 5 years of modern Chinese, literary Chinese, and advanced topics at Oberlin if they so desired and could demonstrate adequate preparation for doing so. However, since so few students are able to get to that point consistently, such courses are rarely offered as stand-alone courses. </p>
<p>Most classmates IME end up taking them as requested private readings after consultation and approval from the Chinese language faculty.</p>
<p>The big U offers more and less. The LAC offers less and more. Different. Choose which emphasis you prefer.</p>
<p>For those who don’t know, LACs’ offering courses less frequently is mostly irrelevant; the sequences are scheduled appropriately for graduation. If this is an issue for you, the schedules are public; just check them, and if there’s not enough for you, choose the big U.</p>
<p>Uniform socially? Whatever does that mean?</p>
<p>bz, you’re right, if you’re not interested in a liberal arts education, don’t go the 3/2 route.</p>
<p>Even if an advanced course is not offered in a given semester or year, one can often ask to take it as a private reading after consulting with a Professor and make a case. </p>
<p>IME and those of most classmates, getting desired advanced courses not offered as stand-alone courses wasn’t an issue so long as the student didn’t come across as underprepared, a half-baked flake, and/or assuming a Prof wasn’t in the tiny minority of capricious jerks you’d find at any campus.</p>
<p>A lot better than the experiences of some friends at the larger Ivies and large state flagship universities like the UCs who were shut out of popular or major courses needed for graduation. </p>
<p>Incidentally, a few high school classmates chose LACs over prestigious UC schools(Berkeley and UCLA) because they were concerned about not being able to graduate in 4 years because of lack of offered courses in a critical semester/year and/or being shut out of such courses.</p>
<p>“LACs’ offering courses less frequently is mostly irrelevant”
I strongly disagree. It might be irrelevant only of there’s nothing else at the school you want to take. Otherwise conflicts are more likely at the LAC, due to the infrequency of offerings, and you are more likely to miss on something you wanted to take.</p>
<p>When something is offered multiple times, in multiple sections, it is less of a challenge to schedule it in at some point. This is less the case when it is offered only once every two years, in one particular section only. Because the same may be true of some other course you also desperately want to take- like the advanced Chinese example cited previously. Single sections of each, each given only every other semester or every other year cause more likelhood of missing. This is precisely why D1s acquaintance missed out on the last advanced chinese course. It’s also why D1 had to take two courses her last semester that she didn’t want, but needed to finish out a major. The several courses in her major that she would have preferred were only offered the prior semester when she was away, or the prior year only.One was usually offered the semester she returned, but wasn’t this time because the one prof. who gave it went on leave or something.</p>
<p>GTalum that website doesnt mention it taking 1 year to get the masters or doctorate in Engineering. In fact I am all but certain that you cant get a masters in engineering in 1 year without taking ANY prerequisite engineering courses.
[Combined</a> Plan Program | Columbia University Office of Undergraduate Admissions](<a href=“http://www.studentaffairs.columbia.edu/admissions/engineering/combined/]Combined”>http://www.studentaffairs.columbia.edu/admissions/engineering/combined/)
3/2 is most popular. But it takes longer. So is it worth it to go to an LAC to become an engineer if you can finish school a year earlier at a university?</p>
<p>With 4,000 institutions of higher learning, one should expect an extremely broad range of courses and services. For this reason, one cannot speak about LACs versus Unis without addressing the simple fact that LACs and Unis come in different flavors. For instance, why would a comparison between Penn and Swarthmore be similar to a comparison between the same LAC and … Penn State? </p>
<p>When trying to make a point, I believe we all use our personal experiences to form our opinions. Very few of us have had the luxury or opportunity to attend both a LAC and a large state or research university. On the other hand, a few more can rely on the experience of siblings or rely on the undergraduate/graduate experience in the two types of school. The direct experience of my family --obviously anecdotal-- is that there were FEWER problems in being able to pick favorite classes at the LAC than at the research university, and this both at the undergraduate level and the graduate level. </p>
<p>In general terms, the greater availability and redundancy of the classes does not eliminate the competition to get into one particular class. There is no real difference between a LAC offering two sections every year and a large university offering ten sections if there are 10 times more undergraduates at the larger school. And, if there is a difference, it is that the LAC strives to have all of its student graduating in four years, and often with dual or double majors. </p>
<p>Regarding greater “choices” of classes, one could make an analogy: if the UG were a breakfast, one could really like to eat out a small diner of 10 to 12 tables. The owners, Robert and Hubert offer a small menu of waffles, eggs, and crepes. All of the menu is cooked to order. After a few visits, the owners know what the patrons want and will even accept suggestions. However, when the in-laws visit, one might decide to take the family to a local luxurious hotel for one of those decadent brunches that offer a bountiful buffet and lavish ice sculptures. As expected some “award-winning” chef wrote the extensive menu. However, although a few dishes are elaborate, the scrambled eggs come from a pre-mixed bottle, and unless you get there early, the offerings have been languishing on the table for a few hours. What was “good” is long gone! Of course, you can slide to the omelet “chef” where Julio, a recent immigrant from Honduras who is working his way up the ladder the kitchen staff will gladly whip something for you … as long as one sticks to “over-easy” or “cheese omelet” or knows a … few words of Spanish. That or one of the pre-cooked waffles! </p>
<p>Yes, the buffet looks impressive. Just as impressive as the name of the chef. However, after scratching the surface, the story is quite different. In the context of the large university, the executive chef is the star professor who MIGHT give the lecture and rely on his “Julio’s,” the mere apprentices who respond to fancy names such as TAs of GSs or whatever the school decide to call the cheap labor they recruit in their graduate programs. </p>
<p>In the end, there are plenty of people who decide on spending their money at Hubert and Robert. The choices might be limited, the place spartan, but the food is fresh delicious. There are also plenty of people who love to spend their cash at a dominical brunch where the range of choices … and quality is extremely large. </p>
<p>It’s is a matter of personal preferences. The same could be said for out higher education. Students are free to prepare a list of applications that corresponds to their own criteria. For some, the edcuational smörgåsbord is essential. For others, the smaller and more indivualized program are more important. </p>
<p>Is there one that is better? That remains entirely in the eye of the beholder!</p>
<p>I think the whole “LAC is quality over quantity and Uni is quantity over quality” logic is faulty.
In reality, depending on what department you’re in, the quality of education can be much better than at LACs. Name an LAC that offers as high-quality undergrad IR education such as SFS, Tufts, or Princeton. What about an Econ program as good as UChicago, Princeton, or Harvard? An engineering program (other than Harvey Mudd) as good as CMU, MIT, Caltech?
The point is that you can get JUST as good an education at a university than at an LAC. And unless it’s a mediocre university, you dont have to worry about getting the “cold buffet leftovers”</p>
<p>Monydad, Hanna expressed her disappointment with Bryn Mawr, and the other account is about Barnard. With the often claimed benefits of it’s affiliation with COlumbia, it does not seem that the accounts present much similarity, at least not a problem with availability of courses. And, even if it were, obviously, the experience I reported seems to be entirely different.</p>
<p>“In general terms, the greater availability and redundancy of the classes does not eliminate the competition to get into one particular class. There is no real difference between a LAC offering two sections every year and a large university offering ten sections…”</p>
<p>There’s tons of difference, particularly when the LAC course is given in one solitary section only every other year. If you have to miss it that one time, that is the only single time you will have a chance at it your entire undergraduate career. you are much more likely to be able to get that class, at some point, at the university.</p>
<p>If anyone reading this thread really believes that there is no difference in accessibility between a course given in one sole section, only every other year, and a course given in more than one section, every year, go in peace. I have already related actual incidences of people being burned by this at an LAC, but believe what you want.</p>
<p>the accounts present much similarity, …"
I already stated that the latter case did not involve course limitations. The common thread is limitations related to institution size. Some aspects are academic, others are social. But small has its ramifications, and these ramifications are many- faceted. Some are, at least arguably, good. But some aren’t, necessarily.</p>
<p>“…the experience I reported seems to be entirely different.”
What experience did your report? Please provide a link to the CC poster who atttended as an undergrad both a “top 30” LAC and a “top 30” private university and has posted his/ her experience. Or their kid’s experience.</p>
<p>Well, at this point perfectpixie has seen the arguments that favor the universities as well as the LACs. </p>
<p>In my opinion, the university side seems to be winning the debate. For me, the wider and deeper range of course offerings is a crushing advantage - not to mention the great choice of nonacademic diversions. Also, it’s ridiculous to not allow prerequisite credit for APs; that is a real problem, particularly with these ludicrous prices.</p>