admissions "hot spots" spread

[curmudgeon]

This young grad student is at Columbia after attending Georgetown.

........It seems to me that the traditional LAC is ill-equipped to meet the needs of today's top students since in most cases, it will not have the masters level courses and certainly not have any professional level courses for a student of talent to take. .......When students see their peers with the exact same AP scores move on to fifth year masters and first year professional school, they will not want to attend the LAC to have their achievement go unrewarded.

This gives us all hope that our kids can attend Columbia for grad school , too. No matter what level of scholarship they attain.

In other posts this fella has dissed Notre Dame among others , and Wellesley, Williams, and Amherst as being worthless or at least not worth the money . Of course all LAC's are in that category.

I feel so passionate about this issue that I suggest a fiscal whore thread be put up so parents and students know the culrprits and can start boycotting them (we already have Amherst, Williams and Wellesley)

[StickerShock]

He dissed Notre Dame? O.K.....now he's really discredited himself.

[curmudgeon]

And to make matters worse he went from top 12, to top 20 and Georgetown is #23 meaning to him worthless. What a riot. Emory at #18, also on his diss list is ranked 5 full spots before G'town . He also disses Colgate , Wake Forest, and Holy Cross by name (and everyone else pretty much by reference).

We're still waiiting on your list of top 12 and 20 #23.

There's a whole season of applicants that need to be enlightened about which schools are worth their price. Hey, 23? Wasn't that Jordan's number? and that new Dr. Pepper campaign? Nope, it's just proof this fellow doesn't have or need all the data.



Edit: Although I am trying to approach this from a somewhat humorous angle, I find this poster's assertions both ignorant and insulting to those of us who believe that fine educations can be found outside the usual suspects. The complicated decisions that students and their families make can't be boiled down to simplistic, childish top 12 lists. For anyone to assert that it's top twelve or "why bother?" is just not respectful. This is prestige whoring at its worst.

[bethievt]

I'm willing to bet that not one of mt "top student" son's LAC will make "the list".

[curmudgeon]

bethie, I'll bet you're right. Now let's see if we can flush the rabbit out of the hole.


(Of course, like in a Hitchcock film , once he gives the "lists" and many great schools are left off the rest of the flock will descend and peck his eyes out.)

[vienna man]

I just go for a jog and come back to find myself being trashed with statements I never made. What am emotional hot button I have seemed to push. As long as you quote me factually I have no problem. But taking my tightly bounded, narrowly argued statements out of context is inexcusable and worhty of your apology.

I questioned the policies of certain LACs in denying all AP credit even to students who have scored at the highest level on the AP exams. I find such policies to be fiscally and not educationally based and point out the culprits. That is entirley different than saying that LACs are "worthless". You know that but ignore it.

At no point have I ever disrespected anyone or any institution. My posts are always backed up by facts and logic. Questioning the value proposition behind $45,000 tuitions/fees that have grown beyond any sense of reason the last ten years is very different from saying that education is "worthless."
Citing information from a table or a book is not 'dissing' anyone. At no point do I ever in questioning the value proposition, disparage anyone's education. I would never be so foolish as to use terms like worthless.

[curmudgeon]

Let's let everyone look at your record and see what you said. Are you not saying they are not worth the money? Worth less ? Not worth what they are charging? Not worth more than cheaper alternatives? And that applies to all schools except 12 or 20?

Your position is clear. Top schools as you define them or don't spend the money. Isn't that your position? Isn't your position about LAC's

It seems to me that the traditional LAC is ill-equipped to meet the needs of today's top students since in most cases, it will not have the masters level courses and certainly not have any professional level courses for a student of talent to take. .......When students see their peers with the exact same AP scores move on to fifth year masters and first year professional school, they will not want to attend the LAC to have their achievement go unrewarded.

What's out of context? Your position seems clear. You don't like LAC's or anybody out of the Top 12 or 20.

[curmudgeon]

and anyway, we're waiting on your 12 and 20 lists. Ante up.

[vienna man]

Those liberal arts colleges that do not have professional courses and graduate level courses will not be able to meet the needs of the specific student we are talking about in that prior post which was someone with a full year of AP credit based on examination. A LAC that does not have upper division coursework does not meet the needs of the top level student and should grant him/her the first BA degree in 3 years. That is far different than saying that LACs are worthless or worthless to the student. And that is the context of the thread.

[curmudgeon]

Those liberal arts colleges that do not have professional courses and graduate level courses will not be able to meet the needs of the specific student we are talking about in that prior post which was someone with a full year of AP credit based on examination.

See? That is consistent. No reason to go there then , is there? Waste of money would you say? BTW, zero LAC's have grad programs, at least not extensive ones . That's what makes them LAC's by Carnegie classification/common definition.

But ND, Wake Forest and Emory aren't LAC's . What your answer for them?

[vienna man]

There is no reason for our full year 30 credit AP man to go to an LAC that will not give him credit for his work. That is quite different than saying "no reason to go there at all". If an LAC were to deny a student with 5 grades of 5 credit, there is no reason to go there.

SInce I never "dissed" anyone I cannot comment on the Wake Forest, Notre Dame or Emory statements.

[MarathonMan88]

Viennaman,

Since the top 10 research institutions start out with such superbly qualified students and graduate them in larger numbers than LACs, they'd better produce more Rhodes scholars, Ph.Ds, etc. In fact, it would be an indictment of the education that they're giving if they didn't. When you start to look at things on a per capita basis, and begin to look longer term, the picture looks a bit different:

A study done in 1998 found that even though only 3 percent of American college graduates were educated at residential liberal arts colleges alumni of these colleges accounted for:

* 23 percent of Pulitzer Prize winners in drama, 19 percent of winners in history, and 18 percent in poetry from 1960 to 1998.

* 20 percent of Phi Beta Kappa inductees between 1995 and 1997

* 19 percent of U.S. presidents

* 9 percent of all Fulbright scholarships

* 8 percent of Forbes magazine's wealthiest CEOs in 1998

* 8 percent of former Peace Corps volunteers

Liberal arts colleges produce nearly twice as many graduates who earn degrees in sciences as other institutions (on a per capita basis). In a recent two-year period, about 20 percent of scientists elected to the prestigious National Academy of Sciences got their undergraduate degrees at liberal arts colleges.

I think a lot of presidents, scientists, Fulbright scholars, and CEOs might beg to differ with your view that their educational needs were not met. Its precisely the lack of early specialization and ability to think "longitudinally" that's one of the strengths of a liberal education for some people.

http://www.collegenews.org/topliberalartscolleges.xml

[DespSeekPhd]

Actually, graduate studies are best done at a different institution than undergrad. If a person wants to just take a few classes, they can do that whenever and wherever. But those grad level classes without an actual grad degree are pretty worthless, as far as career, etc. go. Most grad students do not do their grad studies at their undergrad institution, as it is discouraged as "intellectual incest." So an LAC that doesn't offer grad or professional courses for the undergrad isn't any more of a disadvantage to the student that attends. Also, most grad schools allow a grad student to take a few undergrad classes for graduate credit (usually an extra paper or 2 is required). So the distinction between undergrad and grad is smaller than you seem to think. As far as professional schools, most universities won't let an undergrad take courses in the professional school, so it matters not. Besides, what are you going to do with a med school course in biochemistry without an MD? No one cares where you took it in the real world.

If you're talking about level of challenge, upper-level undergrad LAC classes, esp. at the top LACs, are as challenging as some early grad classes, and grad schools recognize that as such. I went to an LAC (local, not nationally known), and the coursework I had to do in upper level classes was comparable to coursework and analysis in top schools and early grad classes.

[vienna man]

We discuss the very specific instance of a student with 30 credits from AP exams being denied all credit in the context of the $45,000 tuitions of the mid 2000s, and you come back as though I have indicted all the liberal arts colleges!

I am willing to have an argument, over what I said. Nothing more. Nothing less. If you want to argue about LACs or a specific LAC denying AP credits, that is what the argmument is about. Not this nonsense

[DespSeekPhd]

Not all LACs deny AP credit. In fact, very few do. If you're angry about particular schools doing so, fine. Understandable to a point, although I can't figure out why you wouldn't just say, "We won't apply there" and move on instead of dwelling on it. In the college search, you find the schools that fit you best - that includes course offerings, environment, financial aid, and transferable credits, among other things. I think the problem here has been that you have A) indicted all LACs for the "sins" of a few, and B) called colleges below a particular USN&WR level far inferior, which is far from true.