<p>Are LAC's good at everything? They seem just a good place to develop one's intellectualism, but i don't see how they're particularly strong in any department. The majors seem pretty much all the same.</p>
<p>I agree: every single person, regardless of where they go to college, should major in either engineering or science.</p>
<p>if by intellectualism, you're including theoretical science (without which there wouldn't be much applied science), you're probably right. The best ones are pretty strong across the board.</p>
<p>wait, kwu are you kidding?</p>
<p>o and btw does anyone know if LAC's are harder/easier to get into than ivy league schools?</p>
<p>they have the same acceptance rates.
i'm wondering what kind of people apply to LAC's--the people that expect that it's easier to get into, or the people who actually want to learn. i want to know my competition. (:</p>
<p>threefive: All LACs are different. Some are better in some departments, some in others. In general, the idea is to get a somewhat broad educational experience, learning things in a bunch of different categories, and learning important basic skills like critical thinking, etc. Regardless, there ARE majors and specialization, and the majors are not all the same. Just like anywhere else, you choose your major based on your interests and then have to complete certain requirements (a certain number of credits in that particular major, for exp.). As johnwesley said, the best ones are awesome across the board.</p>
<p>MOST are probably not as hard to get into as the ivies, but that's largely because the ivies are so prestigious that their reputation along gets them a bajillion applicants, meaning the percentage accepted is gonna be smaller. IMO, a lot of LACs can provide just as good an education as the ivies, and some of the more selective ones can still be really tough to get into.</p>
<p>And as to people, I'm the kind of people that apply to LACs (rising senior), and I think that the want to learn vs. easier issue depends hugely on the specific LAC. Personally, I'm on the completely impractical want-to-learn end of the spectrum. As in, I want to major in anthropology and learn everything I can about indigenous people in Australia, Northern Canada, Siberia and Peru/Brazil, ignoring the fact that, in the real world, such knowledge has very little practical application. I will probably end up in grad school and, following that, stuck in academia for the rest of my life.</p>
<p>Woohoo! An eternity of learning!</p>
<p>Due apologies for the sarcasm.
Since you're considering applying to LACs, I should help you.</p>
<p>Despite figures that place liberal arts selectivity at anywhere from 12 to 25 percent of applicants admitted, the pool of students that applies to such schools is a self-selecting one. Students who apply to a mix of LACs are just as academically strong and personally talented and motivated as those students who apply to the Ivy League schools. However, they do tend to be more intellectual, considering they are willing to make a commitment toward being a part of a particularly intimate and rigorous learning environment.</p>
<p>The selectivity of schools such as Harvard and Columbia is deceptive, because any average Joe or Jane will throw an application at those schools, even if he or she isn't competitive. However, the pools for the best liberal arts colleges are higher in overall quality. Those who apply to top LACs usually apply to schools such as Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Stanford, and Brown as well.</p>
<p>If you're concerned about job placement, know that schools such as Williams, Amherst, Pomona, Wellesley, and Swarthmore are all heavily favored.</p>
<p>In regard to your question about exceptionally strong majors, two schools come to my mind. Haverford excels in the natural sciences, and Middlebury College excels in language study. But, if you're just looking for an all around excellent education, a quality academic experience, than any LAC is a good choice to turn to.</p>