Some schools with higher diversity like University of California - Riverside, University of Texas - Dallas, University of Hawaii - Manoa are probably not as difficult to get into as Williams, Amherst, Kenyon, or Hamilton. But the reasons for selectivity differences in these cases are not related to diversity or not.
There is also a big difference in the pool of URM now than there was 30 years ago. The applications allow for reporting multi races or no race at all. People who would have checked âwhiteâ years ago might now check âmix raceâ or two or more boxes. The SES of the URMs might be a lot different than it was, overall, 30 years ago. Kids like my Chinese daughter were raised in multirace households. My kids look different on the outside, but their educations, activities, culture events were the same. I donât think my Chinese daughter brings more to the diversity of a campus than her sister, other than physical appearance. In fact, I think my Chinese daughter is much more âAmericanâ in her choices of food, dress, music, politics, etc. than her white but much more international thinking sister. Sheâs certainly much more conservative.
Regarding the diversity remarks aboveâ
It does seem like a lot of the white kids at the LAC I know best must be athletes.
More of Sâs friends are members of minority groups than are white, and the dining halls and campus definitely look beautifully diverse.
I am a public school employee and my son has friends from socioeconomic realms different from ours: he has several friends at college who are on full financial aid, yet also he can now name the top NY private schools and northeastern boarding schools, none of which he had ever heard of before college.
I think it has been such an amazing experience so far for my kid to have friends from so many different backgrounds. Even right now, as the ball dropped in NY and he exchanged messages with friends, some of them had experienced New Yearâs several hours ago in nations across the ocean, and some of them will not experience it for another three hours on the west coast of the U.S. The diversity of Williams has been one of its real benefits.
That this diversity exists within a tight community is another. Today we were talking about how the entry (dorm group) is a real âfamilyâ for him.
There are multiple contributing factors. General selectivity is obviously a key factor⊠likely the most important one for admission at the discussed schools. Being unhooked is also relevant for chance of admission. However, I think the most relevant hook is athletics, rather than ones typically associated with diversity.
Williams was mentioned. 46% of students at Williams are varsity athletes (https://www.forbes.com/colleges/williams-college/ ). 46% of students being varsity athletes is huge compared to larger colleges â a far larger portion of students than are traditional URMs at Williams. Williams has won the NACDA Directorsâ Cup for having the best sports performance in Div III in 18 of the past 19 years, so itâs safe to assume a lot of students are getting a strong admissions boost for being athletes who will contribute to Williams continued athletic success. There are far more athletes than URMs, and many athletes likely receive a greater admissions boost than associated with the diversity related hooks. The athletes that are admitted tend to have little racial and SES diversity. The Amherst report found that 74% of athletes were white and 4% low income, compared to 35% white and 31% low income for non-athletes. If Williams had similar percentage and lack of overlap between athletes and other hooks, then it would imply that the vast majority of students fall into one of the discussed hook groups.
Kenyon and Hamilton have a similar high percentage of athletes, but itâs my understand that their athletes as a whole are on a lower level, so athletics likely has less admissions influence. For example, in this yearâs Directorâs cup rankings, Williamâs was first with 1127 points, and Hamilton was a distant last in the NESCEC with only 89 points. Williams is generally more selective than Hamilton as measured by all traditional metrics, but the difference in selectivity is likely even larger for the slightly more than half of students who are not varsity athletes at the 2 schools.
But not all of those athletes were recruited.
Division III athletic recruiting often works differently than the traditional recruiting model that is frequently discussed on this forum. The report at https://www.amherst.edu/system/files/media/PlaceOfAthleticsAtAmherst_Secure_1.pdf gives a good summary for Amherst. It mentions that at the time of the report 35-38% of the class was varsity athletes, or ~160 per class. Of those ~160 athletes per class, there are 67 spots for âathletic factorâ admits who are identified by coaches as critical athletes for the success of the team and other 60-90 âcodedâ athletes who are identified by the coaches as academically high achieving students who are also excellent athletes. Both groups get a boost in admissions, although the boost for the former group is larger. Ignoring athletic admits who donât play on the team all years, these 2 groups that are identified by coaches and receive an admissions boost would compose ~140 of the 160 or ~85% of varsity athletes and ~1/3 of students. The few remaining athletes are mostly walk-ons and athletes who have additional hooks. The report mentions, * âwhen a coach identifies a student of color, low income or first generation student, the student can be brought to the attention of the admission office without that student counting as a coded or âathletic factorâ athlete.â*
My nephew goes to our huge state flagship and he is surrounded by kids from his high school. My S19 is looking mostly at LACs that either no classmates are applying to or only one or two. His number 1 choice has the same racial student file breakdown as the university with like 40000 students.
It just comes down to where you feel comfortable. My S19 did not apply to any state schools - he knew it wasnât for him.
@data10 that report is fascinating. I only skimmed it and will read it later but my eyes were drawn to a sentence about the problems on the cross country team. It seemed to be about mental health but the issue wasnât called out specifically. Do you or anyone else out there know what happened? I continue to be surprised at the drinking and drug use of cross country kids on D3 campuses. At our high school, the XC kids are the clean kids, the true student athletes. They donât do drugs or drink and they care about their bodies. Iâm not understanding what happens between high school and college that these kids become partiers. And Iâm really concerned about some issue at Amherst with the team that would be specifically called out in this report.
Hm found info here. https://www.wthr.com/article/cross-country-team-apologizes-for-lewd-emails-about-women
Not sure what this says about the personalities of the kids who go to LACs. Iâm derailing again. Sorry.
I will say, though, that at some LACs, there is a division socially between the athletes and the non-athletes and thatâs something to think about when searching for a LAC
@homerdog
Be prepared to be appalled. Iâm glad President Biddy Martin took strong and decisive action.
It doesnât say anything about the personality of kids who go to LACs.
What does the terrible death of Tim Piazza day about the personalities of the kids who attend big universities?
My daughter started off at one lac and transferred to another one. Didnât see anything like the above. One was not very diverse and when we asked about diversity at one of the school tours the student said âwe have diversity, there are catholics and protestants at the schoolâ so when we stopped laughing to ourselves we saidâŠ" No racial diversity" and he told us of the Asian person he just had lunch with⊠Canât make this up!
Her second lac is actually very diverse⊠Sorta like the real world⊠Who would if thought?
My son goes to a major big ten school. Just more offerings and more space to roam around in. You have outgoing and introverted at both. My daughter needed /wanted small and he just wanted large big ten. He looked at small /medium schools also. He said no matter where he landed he would of made it his home.
For both it was a feel thing once decided they offered the majors they wanted. Michigan feels so much different then UIUC or Purdue. Same with Lacs, Illinois Weslsyan University is a much different feel then Beloit or Knox as an example.
@homerdog â pmâing you.
In my opinion, OPâs question cannot be easily answered as there are too many variables involved. Nevertheless, it is tough to deny that attending most LACs is like living in a fishbowlâeveryone knows your business, or so it may seem.
I agree that âone can make a large school small, but cannot make a small school largeâ. Always amazed by the presence of a strong Greek system at some LACs as they tend to make a small school smaller.
The impact of honors colleges & theme living at large universities is worth considering for those seeking small classes & close relationships with other students & professors.
S attends what I view as a small school (4800) but large for LAC standards. Essentially itâs an LAC but also has an UG business school (highly ranked). He certainly enjoys the intimacy of small classes, UG focus (profs do research but they ALL teach. Virtually every class is taught by a Prof. That actually attracts a certain type of Prof who wants to be actively engaged with UG students), residential college community - required to live on campus 3 yrs so very tight knit student body. Plenty of majors and clubs. Big enough to meet new people all the time but small enough to maintain the intimacy.
That was important to him. A lot of it comes down to what your in state choices are. Weâre in FL. Although the major state Us are gaining in popularity and climbing the rankings, they are massive (think 35k-60k students). Resources are scarce which leads to huge classes, online classes even within major, housing shortages, etc. None of that is bad and most I know are quite happy with their experience, but it just wasnât for him.
Then you start looking at other state schools, and other than a few, UVA, UNC, UMich, UCB, W&M - very different entirely, much more like the school he attends - you think why would he go to UGA vs UF? So S found what he wanted in the 4k-10k student body arena. Very much the best of both worlds - for him.
We have family at various LACs:
The one at Hamilton is very quiet, doesnât party, doesnât go out much and is an artist. We saw her a few weeks ago and she sat on the couch and spoke to her sister. She only engaged socially with her immediate family. When I greeted her she averted eye contact and seemed uncomfortable ( she is not on the autistic spectrum). Her mother told me that she ( mom) is frustrated because her daughter has not had any internships and has not visited the career center. After graduation she will be home for awhile âfiguring it out.â Grandmother describes her as âawkwardâ ( not in her presence). Good HS student but not way up thereâŠfamily went to Hamilton and she was initially WLâd.
The one at Swarthmore appears to be self assured and confident. She engages very easily in conversation. She doesnât party but did have a glass of wine when we saw her last summer. She gave up sports due to injuries and is very interested in the sciences.
Family at Colgate. They are very âŠveryâŠwealthy and party a lot. This is their main activityâŠself reported. Good HS studentsâŠbut not superior. Applied ED.
Friend at ColgateâŠloves history, attends a few parties but not a big drinker. Strong HS student but nowhere near the top of his class. Applied to 12 LACs and got 11 rejections and/or WL. Attends CarletonâŠbecause thatâs where he was accepted. He will be home following graduation figuring out his next moveâŠheâs not sure yet.
I think there are different types of students at all schoolsâŠwhether they are large universities or small LACs. There are just way too many variables involved. My own D attends a large university and connects on many levels to the girl at SwarthmoreâŠthey share common interests and can talk for hours. She doesnât connect to the family at Colgate ( she doesnât party) or to the girl at HamiltonâŠwhose lack of initiative would drive my type A kid crazy.
I agree that it is hard to group personalities on the basis of large universities versus LACs. People âŠfamiliesâŠare just too complicated for thatâŠand there are many types at all schoolsâŠpartiers, intellects etc.
Circling back to say, I donât think it is so much student personality broadly as student learning style. My LAC kid knew he needed the small group setting to keep him focused and engaged as he has always had to move and talk while he studies or works. His LAC classes range from caps of 16-28, and that range creates an environment where he has to participate and be engaged, the kind of learning environment he thrives in. On the other hand, my flagship kid learns like I do â read or listen, take notes, review your notes, make outlines â so a lecture hall worked for him, though he too had majors seminars capped at 18 so had the experience of plenty of smaller classes. Both of mine have had close relationships with faculty, though it was easier for the LAC kid as those kind of connections are almost inevitable whereas my flagship kid had to affirmatively reach out to build those relationships.
Socially, there is not much room to move at at LAC if one wants to move on from awkward decisions â the âex,â the bad hook up etc. are often just a table away in the dining hall â and that has its challenges.
Check out this reference: Where do the children of professors attend college? by
John Siegfried, Malcolm Getz
I think there are many different types of personalities at any college/university. Even common âstereotypesâ of each college do not apply to all, or even a majority, of the students at a college.
That said, many people attracted to a small college may like the idea of a close community. They may enjoy knowing many of the names of people they see and feeling that the kids they live with at school are a family of sorts.
Whereas some kids may want the opportunity to have privacy or to reinvent themselves as often as they like or to feel there are limitless opportunities to meet new people, knowing a lot of the kids and staff members may be viewed as a tremendous positive by kids choosing a small college.
Being anonymous in a giant classroom or crowd may feel less comfortable to them. I was a small college grad, and frankly, I felt really overwhelmed by the size of the place when we visited Cornell (even though the town and area were so gorgeous, I would not mind living there). The whole time we were walking around the campus, I was thinking to myself that I had to hide my own anxious reaction, and that if my son were to choose it, he would be fine and do as well there as he would anywhere else, because of his personality. But when we were walking back to the car and he said he had no interest in Cornell because it was too big, both my husband and I later admitted to each other that we both felt some relief. Then we drove to the next LAC on the tour, Colgate, and son announced, âI like the small colleges more.â
Very interesting study by Siegfried and Getz, pretty much in line with my post in #24 regarding why we chose LAC or LAC-like colleges.