My son is trying to decide between three liberal arts colleges and our state’s flagship school. I will say right now that we and he are very familiar with this state school. It is an excellent school. It is large, known for strong academics but also a rowdy social scene, and not necessarily a perfect fit for him. But he is still content to attend it, and he would definitely have the opportunities to succeed there.
I am hoping to gather input about his other three choices, Carleton, Macalester, and Grinnell.
Academics
He is intending to major in math, and wants to later complete a master’s. He wants to do research, maybe as a career, probably in chaos theory or dynamical systems.
Obviously, the state school has the most comprehensive math offerings, including its grad classes. However, Carleton seems to be comparable, with coursework in analysis and applied math that perfectly fits his interests. Macalester also has a fairly broad math curriculum, though it is seemingly not as renowned for this as Carleton. Grinnell looks to have the most meagre math offerings, with mainly rotating topics courses at the upper level.
I think an important point here is that (honestly) he is not a prodigy in math. He doesn’t wake up and go to sleep thinking about math, for all that he loves the subject. It’s not as if he needs, for his intellect’s sake, a deeply intensive math curriculum that would prepare him to become a great mathematician. Still, he will have completed calculus 1-3, linear algebra, differential equations, and probability theory during high school, and there is somewhat of a worry that the LACs might not offer enough courses for him. One of the things we are wondering about is whether the math seminars and math topics courses at LACs tend to able to match the rigor and range of state flagship math departments at the upper level.
He is also planning to take lots of art history courses, though he doesn’t plan on pursuing a career there. All four of his options offer an art history major, if he ends up wishing to add one, and he’s satisfied with the coursework options in this. One point he’s mentioned is that he would feel more emboldened to take these art history courses at the less expensive schools, since he would feel less pressured internally to treat his degree as an investment to be repaid. This is something we’ve been trying to talk through.
The open curriculum at Grinnell is also hugely appealing to him, mainly because he wants his classmates to have chosen their classes out of an interest in the subject itself. He does not like the idea of people having to tick boxes. The trimester system at Carleton hasn’t really been a factor for him.
Social Life
He is not at all interested in partying or sports or fraternities, all of which are big in our flagship.
The main reason he applied to the LACs was his feeling that it would be much easier to find a sense of community at one. He’s taken classes at the state flagship for a few years and is not a great fan of the lecture courses, not because they make it difficult to learn, but because they make it difficult to meet classmates and professors. He says that lecture halls are sparsely filled and his classmates don’t talk in discussion sections. The collaborative bent of a LAC excites him greatly.
The populations of the three LACs seem to overlap somewhat. Macalester has been a little off-putting, because he’s not at all oriented towards social justice, and he’s not sure how the queer culture would affect dating and friendships for him as a straight asian male. He is still very interested in attending a school that is international and economically diverse, and Grinnell thus seems like it would be best in these two regards, though our flagship would obviously fit them even more. Our impression of Carleton is that it is wealthier and less international but also more intellectual (which he likes).
These are all really just assumptions, though. He would appreciate more opinions about the sorts of students who tend to fit in at each school.
He hasn’t visited any of these LACs, but he says that campus and location aren’t important to him.
Cost
Carleton would cost a little more than $90,000 per year. Macalester and Grinnell would cost a little less than $60,000 per year. Our flagship would cost a little less than $30,000 per year.
We are able to afford any of them, reasonably comfortably, but we want to feel “good” about this investment, whatever that means. Differences of $30,000 between schools are significant, especially when we’re not sure what precisely the extra money would be spent on.
My son is kind of torn between his options. He is really, really drawn to the community at a LAC, and loves how tight-knit they seem. But I sense that he often makes arguments for the state school on the basis that it is “good enough,” that he can still have a nice college experience there for a lot less money. For instance,
- “Grinnell has an open curriculum, but the state school will take my AP credits so I anyways won’t have to take gen eds.”
- “It’s hard to make friends during classes at the state school, but I also wasn’t living in the dorms, and besides a lot of my high school friends would be there too.”
etc. It feels like he is trying to talk himself into going to the state school only because it is so much cheaper, when we are lucky to be able to pay for any of these excellent colleges. I am happy for him to go to the state school, but I don’t want him to feel like he’s settling. I want him to be enthusiastic about his choice. Right now the sentiment seems to be “there’s no frontrunner, so why not just choose the cheapest?”.
So what are the great things about each of these LACs, for a student like him hoping to study math and make friends who are passionate about academics? Is there one among these that stands out given the type of social and academic experience that he’s seeking? Does anyone have any thoughts or experiences to share? Or is anyone in a similar position? Thanks for all advice!