CTCL schools

[Anonymous]

"Guys, you can get the best education at the PMS schools. The Perpetually Most Supreme schools. They consist of 40 random universities across the country that are amazing and have the best undergraduate experiences, never mind their questionable financial health, negligible name value, and that you can get a superior undergraduate experience at many other schools, as well. I am so proud of all our PMS alumni, and PMS families, too."

[Anonymous]

They’re great. And they suck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:CTCL is not a real thing. STOP trying to make it a thing.

No one cares. Seriously. It's just embarrassing at this point.

If it's not a real thing and no one cares, why are you commenting on this thread?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CTCL is not a real thing. STOP trying to make it a thing.

No one cares. Seriously. It's just embarrassing at this point.

If it's not a real thing and no one cares, why are you commenting on this thread?

Caroline Calloway is without doubt the most influential figure in pop culture right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CTCL is not a real thing. STOP trying to make it a thing.

No one cares. Seriously. It's just embarrassing at this point.

If it's not a real thing and no one cares, why are you commenting on this thread?

Caroline Calloway is without doubt the most influential figure in pop culture right now.

What?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CTCL is not a real thing. STOP trying to make it a thing.

No one cares. Seriously. It's just embarrassing at this point.

If it's not a real thing and no one cares, why are you commenting on this thread?

Because overtly transparent branding exercises are nauseating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have had a good experience with a CTCL school. In a cynical way, I do appreciate their branding exercise. They have taken second tier liberal arts colleges which would typically have had a more homogenous and regionally restricted student body and---by virtue of the CTCL consortium---been able to expand their applicant pool. I think that is a good thing. Otherwise---my experience now having done the college search for multiple kids is that unless your kid has great stats and can either get into a top 25 public or private university or SLAC, then most schools are very geographically constrained in terms of their student body.

I also think their inclusion process helps you differentiate between SLACs outside the top ones that actually have energy, vision, interesting curricula and those that are just sort of trundling along. The marketing angle can be cheesy but I agree with their inclusion criteria in a lot of ways. I do think you have to carefully look at their selections though--some are really strong, but others may have lower financial health, not offer robust programs you're interested in or have weaker graduation rates than you're comfortable with (though even the lowest grad rates among these schools are higher than the national average).

Agreed. DD applied to two as safeties and felt secure that if she went, her experience would be somewhat similar to that she might get at a higher-rated SLAC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have had a good experience with a CTCL school. In a cynical way, I do appreciate their branding exercise. They have taken second tier liberal arts colleges which would typically have had a more homogenous and regionally restricted student body and---by virtue of the CTCL consortium---been able to expand their applicant pool. I think that is a good thing. Otherwise---my experience now having done the college search for multiple kids is that unless your kid has great stats and can either get into a top 25 public or private university or SLAC, then most schools are very geographically constrained in terms of their student body.

I also think their inclusion process helps you differentiate between SLACs outside the top ones that actually have energy, vision, interesting curricula and those that are just sort of trundling along. The marketing angle can be cheesy but I agree with their inclusion criteria in a lot of ways. I do think you have to carefully look at their selections though--some are really strong, but others may have lower financial health, not offer robust programs you're interested in or have weaker graduation rates than you're comfortable with (though even the lowest grad rates among these schools are higher than the national average).

Agreed. DD applied to two as safeties and felt secure that if she went, her experience would be somewhat similar to that she might get at a higher-rated SLAC.

+1. They're great options as safeties or matches, depending on the student, and they often give substantial merit aid which can make the cost comparable to a state school. But unlike at most state schools, you get the smaller classes and stronger faculty relationships, and a focus on undergraduate academics as opposed to sports or Greek life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have had a good experience with a CTCL school. In a cynical way, I do appreciate their branding exercise. They have taken second tier liberal arts colleges which would typically have had a more homogenous and regionally restricted student body and---by virtue of the CTCL consortium---been able to expand their applicant pool. I think that is a good thing. Otherwise---my experience now having done the college search for multiple kids is that unless your kid has great stats and can either get into a top 25 public or private university or SLAC, then most schools are very geographically constrained in terms of their student body.

I also think their inclusion process helps you differentiate between SLACs outside the top ones that actually have energy, vision, interesting curricula and those that are just sort of trundling along. The marketing angle can be cheesy but I agree with their inclusion criteria in a lot of ways. I do think you have to carefully look at their selections though--some are really strong, but others may have lower financial health, not offer robust programs you're interested in or have weaker graduation rates than you're comfortable with (though even the lowest grad rates among these schools are higher than the national average).

Agreed. DD applied to two as safeties and felt secure that if she went, her experience would be somewhat similar to that she might get at a higher-rated SLAC.

+1. They're great options as safeties or matches, depending on the student, and they often give substantial merit aid which can make the cost comparable to a state school. But unlike at most state schools, you get the smaller classes and stronger faculty relationships, and a focus on undergraduate academics as opposed to sports or Greek life.

Well stated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They’re great. And they suck.

+1

But this is true of almost every college.

[Anonymous]

Word of advice— don’t use the term CTCL in real life.

[Anonymous]

Loren Pope originally came up with the phrase. It made sense in the context of his book. It still makes sense. We are huge fans in my family, which also includes HYP grads and big state U grads.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Loren Pope originally came up with the phrase. It made sense in the context of his book. It still makes sense. We are huge fans in my family, which also includes HYP grads and big state U grads.

And that's all that matters. Kudos.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Loren Pope originally came up with the phrase. It made sense in the context of his book. It still makes sense. We are huge fans in my family, which also includes HYP grads and big state U grads.

+1 The book has an overall positive message and outlook that is refreshing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Loren Pope originally came up with the phrase. It made sense in the context of his book. It still makes sense. We are huge fans in my family, which also includes HYP grads and big state U grads.

I guess even being legacies your kids can’t get into HYP huh?