Liberal Arts Colleges for a Shy Kid

College Search & Lists
21

Having read the above suggestions–

  1. Consortium LAC could be a good alternative. Often they are small LACs that allow a student to start at their home school and when they feel they are ready they can expand socially and academically to the other schools. Haverford is a great, nurturing consortium school. The students are very accepting of others. It’s not as small as it looks on paper because its “sister” school is Bryn Mawr. Swarthmore is also part of the consortium though further away. One problem with lovely schools like Hamilton and Williams is that they are small and insular. If they are in an area that’s too rural or isolated the students can get antsy and want to expand. Consortiums solve this problem. Other consortium schools include a) the five schools that include Pomona, Harvey Mudd, etc. I’d check them out. b) the Haverford, Brym Mawr, UPenn, Swat group. c) Amherst, Smith, Mt. Holyoke etc. These schools tend to pool activities which means that they draw students from all schools for the orchestray, potentially. Getting between campuses is included.

  2. One outlet for small isolated schools are study abroad programs and with your son interested in Japan, that’s probably on his horizon. I personally approach study abroad programs cautiously as the part most parents and schools forget is the re-entry. A one-semester program somewhat limits language exposure. A full year helps with that. OTOH, if a student spends all of junior year abroad, they return to a vastly changed campus from a social stand-point. They know only one class of students. Their friends have graduated mostly. It can be rough. For your son I want to draw your attention to the JET program for after graduation. It is a Japan-government program that pays graduates to go to Japan to live for at least one year and teach English. JET students of course also polish their language skills and can move into other sorts of work from there, with appropriate attention to visa and other issues.

  3. I echo that Swat is not a nurturing environment but more intellectually competitive along the lines of UChicago.

  4. For schools that are fun and welcoming I echo Vassar (on the trainline to NYC allows for the students to get into and out of the City in a single day and all of the arts and music available there; also has good Japan language), Wesleyan (great music here), Skidmore actually offers a more overtly nurturing environment for their students as per their official presentation; Amherst (here is the list of Five College Consortium music offerings: https://www.fivecolleges.edu/music/ensembles ); Haverford.

22

Those who value space should note that, by campus acreage, Williams is larger than Haverford and Bryn Mawr combined and that Hamilton is larger than the entire combined Quaker Consortium (Haverford, Bryn Mawr, Swarthmore and Penn).

23

@Publisher , you have said similar to this before: “Small, rural LACs can be a cruel environment for a student who doesn’t fit in.“

You know I have to respond. ?

I will counter that a large or even medium sized university can be just as cruel because they can feel impersonal and overwhelming. Students can feel lost and insignificant. There might be so much to do that they don’t know where to start. A large lecture hall with a few hundred students can make a student feel totally insignificant. In the college life forum, I’ve seen dozens of posts over the years from students who feel lonely and isolated at every type of college.

For my introverted kid, going to a large school was out of the question. She felt she would never be heard or get a chance to interact with professors. For her, going to an LAC meant she was able to interact with professors right from the start. Classes at LACs tend to be small and discussion based, so she was able to find her voice. The biggest class my D ever had was 60 students. By the time she graduated, she had eaten meals at professors houses and was on a first name basis with many of them.

I am never shy about being a cheerleader for LACs and I understand their limitations, but there are also disadvantages to big universities. Few will disagree that it is harder to get to know professors at bigger schools. So it might be worth asking the OP if her son feels that somewhere down the line, having easy access to professors might be important to him.

I also 100% don’t agree with this: “I don’t think the schools discussed can be considered as a nurturing environment where social skills can be developed.” I think most of the schools mentioned in this thread have very high retention rates. Kids are happy. They come back. They are, imo, generally nurturing places, but they don’t hold your hand. Rather, it’s the self-selecting nature of students who choose the small environment those schools offer. Nearly all classes are taught by profs, not grad students.

No, LACs aren’t for everyone, but neither are schools with over 6000 students.

OP, speaking of Japanese again, and study abroad… My daughter chose a home-stay program and was required to speak Japanese. It’s a competitive program to get into, and the other students were from colleges mentioned in this thread. Look up AKP, Associated Kyoto Program. If a student truly wants to learn, living with native speakers is better.

If you want to consider a really wonderful college that’s a bit off the beaten path and where merit aid will almost certainly be in the running given your son’s stats, take a look at Whitman. It has a strong Japanese program. There were several Whitties in AKP when my D did it. Great kids.

24

ANY school can be cruel (especially for a shy kid) if it isn’t the right fit.

I’m a huge proponent of LACs as my D had an absolutely fantastic expereince at one. Yet, when we toured LACs we felt that many of them had a “vibe” or “personality.” My D eliminated a number of LACs after her list after an initial visit (“too artsy”, “too preppy” etc.). So I tend to think that fit is very important at a LAC. And, based on my S’s feelings I also think that the intimacy/close-knit aspect of LACs is not for everyone.

FWIW at my S’s mid-size university he had typical class size of about 30-35 students. He had only two larger lecture classes which were capped around 60 students (which was also the max. my D had for a couple of lecture classes at her LAC).

Bottom line is (assuming all options are affordable) listen to your child and follow his/her lead about what specific colleges and what types of colleges are good fits.

25

Small rural LACs tend to have fewer options for students.

Medium sized & large universities have small classes, honors colleges or honors programs, many types of living options from theme houses to substance free housing, and a wide variety of activities both on & off campus.

I worry that some may think that a small, rural college environment equates to a more nurturing, more parental type of setting. While possible, it is equally likely that one may not fit in and be left with few options and unable to transfer due to financial concerns.

Many students have wonderful experiences at LACs and many students experience growing pains during their first year at large universities. Honors colleges / programs and theme housing are two ways that larger schools become more intimate during one’s first year. Once adjusted, students at larger schools have more options socially & academically.

Is an LAC experience superior to that of a large university or vice-versa ? It really depends upon the individual.

My concern in this thread is that the parent OP may have unrealistic expectations for the shy, introverted student. If these expectations are not met at a small, rural LAC, there are fewer options socially & academically. For many, transferring simply is not a financially realistic option.

Small, rural LACs are tiny, isolated communities.

Small, rural LACs are not designed to perform parental duties. “Nurturing” is a word that raises this concern.

Again, it really depends upon the individual’s ability to cope with matters. Unrealistic, idealistic expectations are likely to lead to disappointment.

Many students have engaging, meaningful developmental experiences at medium and large sized universities from their freshman year through their senior year.

Small, rural LACs can be an unpleasant experience for those who do not fit in due to limited opportunities academically, socially, and otherwise. More options and more opportunities are why the vast majority of people are attracted to-- and live in-- large cities and metropolitan areas rather than in rural areas.

And, in my opinion, it is more than just “different strokes for different folks” as one can make a large school small, but one cannot make a small school large.

26

I could present a valid counterpoint for every point in post #24, but I won’t unless OP asks, and she has yet to return.

Some of the LACs mentioned here really are rural, particularly Middlebury, Hamilton, and Williams. They happen to be three of the best LACs in the country. Again, I point to their retention rates, which are exceptionally high. Their students are happy. They stick around.

Quite a few of the LACs mentioned are not rural. They are in small towns, or large towns, or in cities, or part of a consortium. They too have high retention rates.

Larger schools have high retention rates too. There are shy kids at all types of schools, and extroverts at all types of schools.

I would guess that if you asked LAC students the primary reason they chose a small school, the answer would be heavily skewed towards wanting smaller classes and opportunities to interact with professors, right from the start. Bigger schools have smaller classes for upperclassmen, but for underclassmen, they are not common.

ETA: My son was dead set against LACs and goes to Binghamton, a mid sized university of 13,000. He loves it. He has had a couple of smallish classes so far. It’s the right place for him. Different strokes for different folks.

1 Like
27

It is important to try to define “small” in reference to undergraduate students enrolled. “Small”, in my opinion, is a function of number of students enrolled and of diversity of those students. The more diverse, the better.

In my view, Middlebury College with approximately 2,700 undergraduate students which includes slightly more than 10% international students is not small. Middlebury College strives for–and has achieved–diversity among its enrolled students.

Colgate University and Bucknell University–although classified as LACs–are not small in terms of undergraduate students enrolled. Wesleyan University–an LAC–is neither small nor rural. Certainly the Claremont group of schools (Pomona, Harvey Mudd, Claremont McKenna College, Scripps & Pitzer) are neither small nor rural.

To me, there is no magic number of enrolled students which makes an LAC small or not-small. I know of one rural LAC with 2,400 undergraduate students which I consider to be very small due to its isolation and striking lack of diversity. Another LAC --Vassar College-- also with 2,400 students is not small as it is quite diverse, although not politically diverse.

I understand that many students at small, rural LACs enjoy their college experience. My point is not that small, rural LACs are undesirable; my point is that one must understand the campus culture–the dominant personality–of such schools. And that one should not have unrealistic expectations of the “nurturing” aspect of these schools.