<p>I apologize if this isn't the right forum for this thread in advance, I wasn't exactly sure where I should put this. Anyways, this has been a topic that has been bothering me for a while. I just don't understand why LACs remain to be dwarfed by Universities in regards to recognition. I can't speak for employers and recruits in the post-graduate level for college but it seems that LACs aren't very well-known within my community which makes me worry that they may not be as competitive as Universities. When looking at Top College Rankings, like USNews, is it fair to compare the top 20 or so Univesities to the Top 20 LACS? Can one assume that a school like Williams is just as evenly ranked with a school like Harvard/Princeton? </p>
<p>I was accepted to Bates College, a prestigious LAC in Maine, which happens to be #21 on USNEWS, so I thought that people would be able to recognize the college. However, it seems that most people have never even heard of it--. If the US News Rankings were comparable for LACs and Universities then shouldn't Bates be just as recognizable as say, Emory (USNews Rank #20), Berkley (USNews Rank#21), or Georgetown (USNews Rank#22)? I understand that rank and prestige aren't everything and the ranking lists of USNews shouldn't be considered the "end-all-be-all" in terms of a good college education (which I'm sure I can attain at Bates), but it still bothers me. It isn't as if LACs don't have comparative ranks, endowments, or the selectivity of their University counterparts.</p>
<p>Just a side note: I remember the other day one of my closest friends informed her peers that she had been accepted into Williams and I was truly happy for her. She wore the school colors (gold/yellow, purple) that day to show her school spirit (It was College Spirit Day for seniors that day) She jokingly described how many of her other family and friends confused her college colors for those of LSU (Louisiana State University). I find it a bit odd that big-OOS schools can be more recognizable than more prestigious colleges. That isn't to say LSU isn't a good school, I'm sure it provides a decent education and experience for it's students, but I still find that peculiar as well. What do you guys think?</p>
<p>The general public doesn’t know top LAC schools because there’s no reason for them to hear of them. Obviously schools like Harvard are heard and known around the world, but everyone knows about other schools because there’s generally much more exposure Ie- D-I sports) and their classes are larger so they produce more alumni. USNWR definitely doesn’t mean everything. </p>
<p>Everyone knows Alabama because of their football team, and everyone knows Indiana because of Basketball, etc. But how would the general public hear about a place like Bates or Swathmore?</p>
<p>Because most of those LAC’s aren’t as well known. Most people usually do not think about a LAC because of how small the university is. U usually hear more about national universities in school, on the news, and various sources of information. Maybe it is due to funding? Or possibly the amount of research. The programs also play into a factor. </p>
<p>However, this only applies to average people.</p>
<p>Name recognition aside, in terms of prestige, LACs are still at a disadvantage relative to similarly ranked universities. As for students, I’d say Harvard’s are stronger in stats than Williams’, for example. My feeling is that a top ranked LAC can be a very good choice if one plans to go on to a very good graduate school. My advice to my son is to apply mostly to universities, with a couple of good LACs thrown in so he will have more choices.</p>
<p>recognition can come in a few different places. It can come from sports and research for example, neither of which LACs are particularly strong in.</p>
<p>I think that they are less recognizable because there are typically no big time sports at LACs and there are fewer alumni. However, the top LACs are absolutely recognized by employers as well as grad schools. If you prefer the atmosphere/experience that a top LAC can offer (as was the case with my D) then that is the type of school you should choose.</p>
<p>There are several drivers of reputation/prestige:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Impact on the academic/science world. This is directly related to research, which strongly favors research universities</p></li>
<li><p>Size and geographic distribution of alumni body. The more spreadout and numerous the alumni, the more exposure a university will have. This is further enhanced if the alumni are in high places</p></li>
<li><p>Athletics: Universities like Duke, Michigan, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Ohio State etc…benefit a great deal from having major athletics programs.</p></li>
<li><p>Location! Location! Location! Universities located in major cities such as New York, Chicago, LA, DC, Boston etc… benefit a great deal as a result of their popular locales.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Unfortunately, LACs do poorly on all four fronts; they do not conduct much research, they have tiny alumni bodies, they are not dominant in most manor revenue sports and they are mostly located in rural/suburban areas.</p>
<p>Selectivity and USNWR rankings are also drivers, but they are less impactful as they mostly influence high school students.</p>
<p>That being said, when you apply to graduate schools, Bates (and other elite LACs) will be very highly regarded. Do well at Bates, and you will do well anywhere. You have much to be proud of.</p>
<p>If you like Bates go and be happy. It is plenty well known by grad schools and employers in the NE. </p>
<p>As for rankings, I think the LAC rankings are a lot more subjective than the university ones (i.e, is W&L really 45 places better than Reed, 23 LAC’s ahead of Oberlin and 32 ahead of the USAFA-- really?). Once you get past the top 7 or 8, the rest through about 40 can all be debated.</p>
<p>Also, rankings are less relevant to LACs which have particular strengths and weaknesses in the subjects and majors offered. For example, there are likely no students who seriously consider both Harvey Mudd and Sarah Lawrence, so ranking the two against each other is pointless.</p>
<p>Bates has a population of around 1,700 students. UC Berkeley has a population (undergrad + grad) of close to 36,000 students. Wouldn’t it be weird if they were equally well known?</p>
<p>As an aside, I remember a homestay I did in Italy many years ago. I brought gifts from Boston, including Harvard sweatshirts, for the family. “Harvard?” they asked, “What’s Harvard?” Amazed, I explained that it was considered America’s finest university. “Wasn’t that the University of Michigan?” they asked. That was the sweatshirt they wanted!</p>
<p>[Before anyone gets upset, I recognize that UM is a great school-the story is to illustrate the vagaries of reputation.]</p>
<p>A good university comparison is with Caltech. It’s a major research university that far excels in the first category (generally a peer of Harvard in research), but fails in [at least the first part of the] second category, the third category, and arguably the fourth category (Pasadena isn’t THAT far from Los Angeles [my sister commutes there daily for work] but lacking a car you’d probably rarely commute to the city; and it’s also fairy suburban.)</p>
<p>These factors contribute to Caltech’s relative obscurity (except, unsurprisingly, in academic circles where it’s one of the best research universities in the world.)</p>
<p>Short of winning the Rose Bowl or the NCAA Tournament – both obviously impossible – there is little Bates can do to raise its visibility among the general populace. Even if Bates were to produce a President of the United States its fame would be fleeting. Occidental got a brief chance to stand in the limelight when Barack Obama won the 2008 election, but does anyone really remember his connection with that school anymore. Quick quiz for you (and no cheating): Name Ronald Reagan’s alma mater.</p>
<p>I would say that the LACs might want to market themselves better.</p>
<p>For example, few people have even heard of Middlebury. </p>
<p>Or Haverford.</p>
<p>The fact that no one has even heard of these schools, let alone knows much about them, shows that a lot of work needs to be done by these schools.</p>
<p>Name recognition is important in life.</p>
<p>If you tell your prospective father in law or employer that you went to Dartmouth, he will likely be impressed, but if you told him you went to Middlebury or Haverford, he might simply shrug his shoulders.</p>
<p>That being said, my son is going to University of St Andrews in Scotland. Not exactly a household name.</p>
<p>You just made someone in Dubai ecstatic. Probably enough to make him order another dozen shirts for his little prince! </p>
<p>Name recognition is just that! Newsweek (or wherever that Matthews works) published a list of the (purported) best high schools in the country. How well would that match with what people in the Northeast consider the very best schools? Are the boarding schools household names outside the circle of people who can afford the bills --or obtain financial aid? </p>
<p>LACs will never be as recognizable as the major universities one reads about in the press or sees on television. This might be disappointing to whomever consider an education to be a prestige ticket to great riches.</p>
<p>“As an aside, I remember a homestay I did in Italy many years ago. I brought gifts from Boston, including Harvard sweatshirts, for the family. “Harvard?” they asked, “What’s Harvard?” Amazed, I explained that it was considered America’s finest university. “Wasn’t that the University of Michigan?” they asked. That was the sweatshirt they wanted!”</p>
<p>I have always liked Italians. Very perceptive people. :-)</p>