I have been told here quite explicitly that attendance at a LAC is prep-school 2.0 for “those kids who need that”, so you may be on to something.
1 Like
I made no comment about the frequency, including any comment about the frequency in comparison to taking more than 4 years. However, it’s definitely a thing. And finances can be a driver. ETA: both to save on tuition, and to begin earning sooner.
This is reasonable though not universal. N of 1 but my spouse was URM + FGLI at a HYPSM and had the time of their life. But, did face socioeconomic pressures small (can’t join the gang for a bite out) and large (can’t go on the spring break trips).
For sure. Was not intending to capture all approaches or rationale for collecting AP credit (or placement).
2 Likes
I have yet to see the luxe dorms I’ve been reading about. As long as it is clean and well kept (and pest free) that’s fine. It doesn’t have to be an architectural masterpiece.
A good friend in law school was a Middlebury guy. He used to gush about their rooms and how big and opulent they are. I’ve never seen them in person, but I’ve heard they’re nice. That probably doesn’t include the old (but nice looking) dorm building they’re about to raze.
I attended a NESCAC school and the double I had as a senior is now a single. it was so, so small (but right in heart of campus so we were happy).
2 Likes
Yeah, I don’t remember being very high maintenance as an undergrad. As you said, heat and rodent-free were just about my only requirements.
1 Like
Here’s a different perspective. My hypothesis is that for most colleges, the strongest students get outsized returns relative to the rest of the student body. This applies to the strongest students at Ivy+ colleges, but it also applies to the strongest students at LACs, and the strongest students at state flagships too. Just to be clear, I am not saying this is the only path to being successful after college, simply a well-defined one.
So to me, this means it’s better for a student to absolutely shine at the state flagship vs being a middling student at say Columbia. Because the middling students at Columbia are unlikely to get the most competitive jobs in any field that hires on merit, whether it be in finance, consulting, journalism, CS, business, etc. The strongest students in a college get the support of the faculty, who are often much more important for job placements than the career office.
ETA: And for those going into graduate school, those faculty recommendations are critical.
4 Likes
Absolutely agree. Shine in whichever pond you are swimming and you will be just fine.
2 Likes
One of my history classes (at my public high school) was taught by a Yale grad. He was quite good. Although I’ll note that the best and most rigorous history teacher at that school was not a T20 grad.
1 Like
I definitely agree the outstanding students, including in terms of professor recommendations when relevant, can have the largest value-added benefits. And people should keep that in mind when choosing a college–going to the college where many other people want the same thing but only a few can get it is a pretty dicey proposition.
1 Like
In some cases, that may be unavoidable (e.g. pre-med).
It is all relative, right? The necessary science courses could have more or fewer pre-med track students depending on the college, and choosing the college where you will maximize the percentage of other pre-med track students in your Bio, Chem, and so on courses does not necessarily strike me as necessarily an optimal strategy.
1 Like
For sure not a perfect predictor! Larger point being that relatively speaking, and likely owed to earnings prospects, few of our “best and brightest” are drawn to teaching, especially to our young(est) kids where their impact may be outsized. (I can only imagine what the culture wars are now inflicting on this).
To add my N of 1, my favorite teacher growing up, the one by whom I was - by far - most inspired, happened to be a HYPSM alum. Though, he went to a SUNY for his masters 
1 Like
Interesting paradox, especially since the same competition for UMC families seems to exist at the state university level:
Colleges Spend Like There’s No Tomorrow. ‘These Places Are Just Devouring Money.’ (msn.com)
1 Like
A thread has been started on university spending: WSJ: Colleges Spend Like There’s No Tomorrow. ‘These Places Are Just Devouring Money.’ - #5 by Knowsstuff
1 Like
Thanks, MoB1!
1 Like
This summarizes the “Gentlemen’s Agreement” nicely:
If progressive elitism has allowed selective universities to reconcile moralistic progressivism with the elitism that is the source of their desirability, what happens when Ivy League admissions officers’ power to reshape social norms is no longer undergirded by an appeal to racial justice?
The Alchemy of the Ivies - The Atlantic
Non-Paywall: The End of Progressive Elitism? (msn.com)
3 Likes
Interesting opinion piece, although I can’t say I agree with the author’s belief that the Ivy League’s true but hidden mission is to spread political liberalism. The Ivy League exists, and has always existed, to benefit members of the elite no matter their political persuasion. But I do agree with his general idea that the Ivys are a type of finishing school. It’s not that they don’t provide an excellent and rigorous education --they do (although there are definitely ways to avoid the rigor) – it’s that the education is not the main point. If a rigorous education were the main point, students would be just as happy to attend St. John’s or Reed or Missouri S&T.
My own cynical model is that the Ivys aim for the following rough recipe: 2 parts finishing school, 1 part PR, 1 part raw merit. These are the institutional priorities (IPs.) Prospective students should ask themselves whether they contribute to this IP recipe or not. Legacies, donors, the ultra rich (top 0.1-1%), the children of politicians and celebrities, athletes in blueblood sports etc. contribute to the finishing school. Pell grantees, first gens, URMs, other hard-knock-life students, sets of quadruplets etc, and kids from unpopulated states contribute to PR. Applicants with super high stats, multiple awards, and other undeniable accomplishments contribute to the merit bucket. It’s certainly possible to be in more than 1 bucket at a time, but applicants don’t need to be. The real customers are those in the finishing school bucket. The PR and raw merit buckets are just there for marketing and to give a veneer of legitimacy.
6 Likes
Yes, I think the article implies that much of the finishing school’s “legitimacy” is contingent upon the last two IPs remaining in a state of constant conflict.
Colleges in the US are probably mostly liberal (in the US definition) by default these days because US political conservatives tend to have more negative views about college generally (especially recently) and about the diversity that colleges generally end up having (even without consciously trying for it) that is greater than most people’s lives before and after college.
2 Likes