Why a Large Flagship/Public?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ Sure they’re cheaper but the idea of a school where 75% of students come from a single state seems entirely unappealing.”

Especially if that state is one of the tiny ones in the northeastern part of this country.

Not sure that matters

Of course it matters. Texas and California are both huge states with large populations. There is a much larger diversity of students at their state flagships than someone attending the University of Rhode Island.

I attended URI and never ran into high school friends. 15,000 students at URI, 800 at my high school, maybe 5% got into the school and attended.

PP here: and 800 was entire HS, 200 in my class in which 10 were admitted and accepted

That’s because you can drive 25 miles or less and be in a different state. That’s the point.

This is nonsense. I am so happy I live in Mass now, as I don’t miss the “pointedness” of DC, or lack thereof

My comment was in response to the poster who stated that a school which had 75% of its students from one state was unappealing. The URI is 56% instate, which is unusually high for an average public university. California is huge. 85% of UCLA is instate. There is much, much more diversity at UCLA than there is at URI or any state school in the northeast.

Diversity of what, high school friends? Fact is - and back on topic - that state schools aren’t necessarily extensions of high schools. For some it’s a blue proposition (just because it’s further away and costs more doesn’t make it the best choice), for others it’s about flexibility, for others it’s about options after undergrad, etc.

So you agree with the statement, “Sure they’re cheaper but the idea of a school where 75% of students come from a single state seems entirely unappealing..”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD is at Michigan. To her, it represents the whole package. Many opportunities, academic and social. Great research to be involved in even as an undergrad. Well respected. Huge alumni network for job opportunities.

She doesn’t like the fierce competition for some classes but she actually said to me, “I took some classes I didn’t think I would like all that much but they turned out to be good. And now I am more interested in X.”

It is true that as a Freshman she could disappear and no one would know. As the kids progress, many of their classes get smaller and it would be much harder to skip classes and such. Even as a sophomore some of her classes like Mandarin had maybe 20 people. She said her Freshman year was the outlier in this respect, and overall academically it was probably the least fun year but most fun socially.

She is very happy with her choice but it’s not for all kids. Other DD is at Colby. Go figure.

Can you elaborate on the 'fierce competition for some classes'? I'm not sure what you mean by that? Competition to get the classes you want to take?

It is quite common at state flagships to need five or six years to graduate because certain courses are notoriously overbooked or infrequently offered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DC is attending UVA and not doing well. The only appeal is the in-state tuition.

Sorry to hear this. Do you mean to imply DC is not doing well because of the large, impersonal nature of a state university?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD is at Michigan. To her, it represents the whole package. Many opportunities, academic and social. Great research to be involved in even as an undergrad. Well respected. Huge alumni network for job opportunities.

She doesn’t like the fierce competition for some classes but she actually said to me, “I took some classes I didn’t think I would like all that much but they turned out to be good. And now I am more interested in X.”

It is true that as a Freshman she could disappear and no one would know. As the kids progress, many of their classes get smaller and it would be much harder to skip classes and such. Even as a sophomore some of her classes like Mandarin had maybe 20 people. She said her Freshman year was the outlier in this respect, and overall academically it was probably the least fun year but most fun socially.

She is very happy with her choice but it’s not for all kids. Other DD is at Colby. Go figure.

Can you elaborate on the 'fierce competition for some classes'? I'm not sure what you mean by that? Competition to get the classes you want to take?

It is quite common at state flagships to need five or six years to graduate because certain courses are notoriously overbooked or infrequently offered.

I believe the poster was referring to competition IN the classroom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD is at Michigan. To her, it represents the whole package. Many opportunities, academic and social. Great research to be involved in even as an undergrad. Well respected. Huge alumni network for job opportunities.

She doesn’t like the fierce competition for some classes but she actually said to me, “I took some classes I didn’t think I would like all that much but they turned out to be good. And now I am more interested in X.”

It is true that as a Freshman she could disappear and no one would know. As the kids progress, many of their classes get smaller and it would be much harder to skip classes and such. Even as a sophomore some of her classes like Mandarin had maybe 20 people. She said her Freshman year was the outlier in this respect, and overall academically it was probably the least fun year but most fun socially.

She is very happy with her choice but it’s not for all kids. Other DD is at Colby. Go figure.

Can you elaborate on the 'fierce competition for some classes'? I'm not sure what you mean by that? Competition to get the classes you want to take?

It is quite common at state flagships to need five or six years to graduate because certain courses are notoriously overbooked or infrequently offered.

That is absolutely not true. If anyone is not graduating in four years, it's because their major requires more time than that to complete, they've changed majors, they've taken time off, they haven't planned well, they've failed courses, or any of a host of other reasons that don't include courses not being available that are required. Maybe some people make that up as an excuse to cover something else they'd rather not talk about, but....

[Anonymous]

I am a PP that went to a state flagship in the 1980's.

It was true that some popular or required classes were hard to get into, but you figured out how to satisfy other requirements until you could get into those classes. It took initiative and in a pre-compouter era, presented challenges.

today, they way schools have "course builder" programs, it is virtually impossible not to get the classes you need or want, unless you are unwilling to compromise on things like having a class at 8:00 on a Friday morning. In which case, no sympathies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ Sure they’re cheaper but the idea of a school where 75% of students come from a single state seems entirely unappealing.”

Especially if that state is one of the tiny ones in the northeastern part of this country.

Not sure that matters

Of course it matters. Texas and California are both huge states with large populations. There is a much larger diversity of students at their state flagships than someone attending the University of Rhode Island.

I attended URI and never ran into high school friends. 15,000 students at URI, 800 at my high school, maybe 5% got into the school and attended.

PP here: and 800 was entire HS, 200 in my class in which 10 were admitted and accepted

That’s because you can drive 25 miles or less and be in a different state. That’s the point.

This is nonsense. I am so happy I live in Mass now, as I don’t miss the “pointedness” of DC, or lack thereof

My comment was in response to the poster who stated that a school which had 75% of its students from one state was unappealing. The URI is 56% instate, which is unusually high for an average public university. California is huge. 85% of UCLA is instate. There is much, much more diversity at UCLA than there is at URI or any state school in the northeast.

Diversity of what, high school friends? Fact is - and back on topic - that state schools aren’t necessarily extensions of high schools. For some it’s a blue proposition (just because it’s further away and costs more doesn’t make it the best choice), for others it’s about flexibility, for others it’s about options after undergrad, etc.

So you agree with the statement, “Sure they’re cheaper but the idea of a school where 75% of students come from a single state seems entirely unappealing..”

No.

[Anonymous]

OP,
They don't know any better and they don't have the money for private even if they had a clue. If you gave them money for private college, they'd ask if they could still send their kid to a large public U and use the leftover sum to buy a boat or a new truck. Their kid's top priorities in a college are: Partying, hookup culture, name recognition, following the local masses, and an easy degree. The moms and dads want their kids at a nearby party college so they can use it as an excuse to go tailgate with them. Things like small classes, quality professors, smart classmates are literally not on their radar at all. Seriously, not at all. The middle class are largely sheep and are very provincial and predictable. They watch a lot of reality and sports on TV, they drink Bud Light and boxed wine, and send their kids to local government schools. It is what it is. And don't forget, nobody calls their baby ugly. The degree mill their kid goes to is the BEST public U and their kid is "loves it!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD is at Michigan. To her, it represents the whole package. Many opportunities, academic and social. Great research to be involved in even as an undergrad. Well respected. Huge alumni network for job opportunities.

She doesn’t like the fierce competition for some classes but she actually said to me, “I took some classes I didn’t think I would like all that much but they turned out to be good. And now I am more interested in X.”

It is true that as a Freshman she could disappear and no one would know. As the kids progress, many of their classes get smaller and it would be much harder to skip classes and such. Even as a sophomore some of her classes like Mandarin had maybe 20 people. She said her Freshman year was the outlier in this respect, and overall academically it was probably the least fun year but most fun socially.

She is very happy with her choice but it’s not for all kids. Other DD is at Colby. Go figure.

Can you elaborate on the 'fierce competition for some classes'? I'm not sure what you mean by that? Competition to get the classes you want to take?

It is quite common at state flagships to need five or six years to graduate because certain courses are notoriously overbooked or infrequently offered.

That is absolutely not true. If anyone is not graduating in four years, it's because their major requires more time than that to complete, they've changed majors, they've taken time off, they haven't planned well, they've failed courses, or any of a host of other reasons that don't include courses not being available that are required. Maybe some people make that up as an excuse to cover something else they'd rather not talk about, but....

And your statement here is based on what? I am not the PP, but I ran a scholarship program for international students for a number of years and this phenomenon occurred frequently in the CA school system, but for UC and CSU schools. And this is over 20 years ago. A student would enter junior year needing certain classes in their track and the school would announce the course was oversubscribed...and would not be available for another two years. This happened with nearly all our finance/STEM students - really quite maddening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP,
They don't know any better and they don't have the money for private even if they had a clue. If you gave them money for private college, they'd ask if they could still send their kid to a large public U and use the leftover sum to buy a boat or a new truck. Their kid's top priorities in a college are: Partying, hookup culture, name recognition, following the local masses, and an easy degree. The moms and dads want their kids at a nearby party college so they can use it as an excuse to go tailgate with them. Things like small classes, quality professors, smart classmates are literally not on their radar at all. Seriously, not at all. The middle class are largely sheep and are very provincial and predictable. They watch a lot of reality and sports on TV, they drink Bud Light and boxed wine, and send their kids to local government schools. It is what it is. And don't forget, nobody calls their baby ugly. The degree mill their kid goes to is the BEST public U and their kid is "loves it!"

And who are you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure they’re cheaper but the idea of a school where 75% of students come from a single state seems entirely unappealing.

+1
College is about discovering new areas of interest, geographic cultures and people. Not living a 13th year of high school.

This^. There is more to higher education than a paper degree.

I always feel sort of sad for the kids who go to in-state U, often (but not always) joining the same sorority or fraternity as all the older friends from their high school, and they keep the same exact clique of high school friends all through college! You can follow it on Facebook. Literally 5 to 12 friends who remain basically joined at the hip from like 9th grade through college and often after college in Washington, NYC, etc. Maybe sad isn't the right word, I understand the appeal I guess, but it's not the ideal college experience, in my opinion. That said, I think with iPhones and social media, it must be increasingly common to make fewer new friends at college, especially if you remain in-state.

I don't know of a single kid in the DMV who did what you just described. None.

Come on. Be honest. So many tend to extend their high school set up into college. I observe it often.

Please explain how you "observe this often?" Do you stalk local high school students and their social media postings? How old are you?

You don't have any 40- and 50-something friends with young adult children? Your kids don't have any friends? Friends and friends' kids and our own kids' friends grow up and share photos over the year on Facebook. You can see that those same friends they were in pictures with in 9th and 10th grade, are the same kids in photos with them on 12th grade beech week and high school graduation photos, are the same kids in college Greek event and spring break photos, are the same kids in Nashville or Manhattan together or taking some ski trip out to Vail together. It's easy to spot.

This
Yes, it is so easy to spot. I do observe it often. And I don't think it is a bad thing but like another poster said prior, the college experience should be different than the high school one. Ideally, that is.

Way to respond to your own post, lol. Next time be less obvious!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP,
They don't know any better and they don't have the money for private even if they had a clue. If you gave them money for private college, they'd ask if they could still send their kid to a large public U and use the leftover sum to buy a boat or a new truck. Their kid's top priorities in a college are: Partying, hookup culture, name recognition, following the local masses, and an easy degree. The moms and dads want their kids at a nearby party college so they can use it as an excuse to go tailgate with them. Things like small classes, quality professors, smart classmates are literally not on their radar at all. Seriously, not at all. The middle class are largely sheep and are very provincial and predictable. They watch a lot of reality and sports on TV, they drink Bud Light and boxed wine, and send their kids to local government schools. It is what it is. And don't forget, nobody calls their baby ugly. The degree mill their kid goes to is the BEST public U and their kid is "loves it!"

Troll

[Anonymous]

My DS is at VA Tech and when we looked at schools he only wanted to consider big colleges. He liked the idea of meeting lots of different people, lot of activities, etc. He's pretty outgoing and it seems to be working out fine. But, I think it helps that he's in a pretty small major so he will still get to know faculty well. He hangs out with new people but also a close friend from HS. Which is also great. I don't get this disdain for having life long friends. Is it supposed to be admirable to dump everyone you care about just because you are moving into a different phase of life? Do you think spending time with old friends absolutely means you aren't making new friends too? If you do want to cut ties, it's easy to do at a big school. He says he doesn't see any of the many kids from his HS that go there since he doesn't seek them out. It was the same when I went to a mid-sized state school long ago. There were 5 kids from my HS there and only one I saw with any regularity because we ended participating in the same EC.

I don't think big flagships are great for all students. My DD wants a small LAC and the biggest school she'll consider is W&M. And I agree that for her that is best while for DS big was best.

[Anonymous]

I attended a LAC while the majority of my HS classmates (who enrolled in college; the majority did not) attended the two large unis in our state or one of the five regionals. Many returned to our hometown, landed jobs, married, had kids, were active in the local schools, took care of their parents as they aged, and are now grandparents themselves. While my life pretty much doesn't resemble theirs in many ways, I just don't get the vitriol here. It is certainly great for our hometown that folks return, pay taxes, and plow money back into the community. It's not necessarily what I sought in life, but I don't begrudge them for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP,
They don't know any better and they don't have the money for private even if they had a clue. If you gave them money for private college, they'd ask if they could still send their kid to a large public U and use the leftover sum to buy a boat or a new truck. Their kid's top priorities in a college are: Partying, hookup culture, name recognition, following the local masses, and an easy degree. The moms and dads want their kids at a nearby party college so they can use it as an excuse to go tailgate with them. Things like small classes, quality professors, smart classmates are literally not on their radar at all. Seriously, not at all. The middle class are largely sheep and are very provincial and predictable. They watch a lot of reality and sports on TV, they drink Bud Light and boxed wine, and send their kids to local government schools. It is what it is. And don't forget, nobody calls their baby ugly. The degree mill their kid goes to is the BEST public U and their kid is "loves it!"

Troll[/quote

Defense mechanism. You're coping. The truth hurts.