<p>Oh, please! Davidson is a college that prior to the basketball success of a year or two ago, few people who weren’t affiliated with the school or who didn’t live in the NC area had heard of. That didn’t make it not a fine, excellent school, of course. </p>
<p>This is ALL regional - which someone like the so-called informatives of the world seem not to understand. </p>
<p>I live in Chicago. Carleton and Grinnell have FAR, FAR more awareness than Davidson and Haverford. Which doesn’t mean anything! </p>
<p>And in other parts of the country, Davidson and Haverford have FAR, FAR more awareness than Carleton and Grinnell! Now what?? </p>
<p>That’s why informative’s assertions that colleges he’s never heard of “don’t deserve” to be in top spots. It just reflects a certain region, which is no more or less important than any other region. Carleton’s lack of widespread knowledge in the east coast is no different from Bowdoin’s lack of widespread knowledge in the midwest. Neither of those things disqualify them from being accurately ranked as top schools.</p>
<p>I agree with Pizzagirl. LACs just don’t have national reputations. Amherst is probably the closest thing to a “national LAC”. This said, I think there are many LACs that have strong reputations. Claremont McKenna, Colgate, Macalester, Middlebury, Oberlin, Pomona, Swarthmore, Vassar, Wellesley, Wesleyan and Williams all come to mind.</p>
I don’t think labeling schools as underrated or overrated is usually very helpful, but Davidson would definitely qualify as vastly underrated. </p>
<p>Of all 30 schools on the CC Top LACs list, only the following schools have fewer posts than Davidson: Bates, Colby, Macalester, Trinity, Whitman. Five schools!</p>
<p>I can only assume this is because Davidson is in the South (aka Nooo, Anywhere But There). If it’s not in the Northeast (the place for Prestige and a True Education), the Midwest (the place for Quirky and Intellectual), or in California (the place for Fun People), it’s not worth notice.</p>
<p>LACs are much more regional than their national university counterparts. This is why they are less well known in other parts of the country. It doesn’t make them lesser schools. Maybe the degree you receive doesn’t travel as well, but the education is still good.</p>
<p>My dad knows Williams and Amherst and Midd. But somehow he has a harder idea with me being interested in Carleton. I think it’s got a sort of Minnesota/midwest/NOT east coast stigma. I’m willing to bet more people who consider themselves <em>decently</em> knowledgeable about this sort of thing (not your pizza boy or a Florida retiree, obviously) will know Williams and Amherst but not be impressed at all by the Carleton name.</p>
<p>More people in WHAT part of the country? One more time … the decently knowledgeable people in the midwest are more likely to know Carleton. The decently knowledgeable people in the east are more likely to know Williams or Amherst. Of course, the really knowledgeable people in both parts would have heard of all of them. </p>
<p>And no, informative, frankly most universities beyond HYPSM are still regional in terms of their appeal. You should look up bclintonk’s posts. He did a series showing what schools the students of each state submit their SAT/ACT’s to. The top schools were strongly, strongly a function of what was either in or near that state.</p>
<p>There’s only two things that really matter here: 1. The only opinion that really counts is the opinion of your future employer; and 2. Did x school give you a good education and prepare you for the rest of your life.</p>
<p>My parents aren’t the type to go bragging to everyone they know that their son got into such and such a college and neither am I. This reputation stuff is incredibly pointless and it’s sad to see how much people value it.</p>