nonpressure cooker/well adjusted yet prestigious schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: A prestigious (highly selective as defined here) school without pressure is like magically delicious chocolate cake without calories.

And if you find either one, please let me know.

+100
If you want true door-opening prestige in many areas, you have to go to a pressure cooker school and avoid being in the bottom
1/4. The caveat is that for the top students, they do not see them as a pressure cooker, because success comes more easily to them with their drive and intelligence, even if they come from poor or modest backgrounds. The rest fight it out to keep near the average. They will still be successful because of the “name” factor and alumni connections of these schools. The ones who struggle are the bottom 1/4 of these schools who do not have any family connections.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seriously depends on the major. Business or soft science majors are more laid back across schools. The most pressure-cooker schools are full of STEM kids

That's mostly because engineering and pre-med are difficult everywhere. But there's a difference between infamous pressure cookers like Carnegie Mellon and Cornell and schools that do value the overall student experience like Rice or even MIT. The stress is there. But there's a difference between external stress and internal stress. A collaborative, non-competitive atmosphere takes some of the edge off from the STEM grind.

[Anonymous]

Yale

[Anonymous]

What about the Claremont Colleges if you open to SLAC?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Id imagine the smaller schools that are extensions of prep schools -- i.e. Bates, Colby, Bucknell etc. have a less pressure cooker environment. They are less rigorous than Middlebury, Bowdoin etc. but still sort of in the same bracket -- elite SLAC adjacent.

It's so dismissive to call these schools "extensions of prep schools." I bet if a 17-year-old is attending a prep school, you're impressed by their academic pedigree, but if an 18-year-old attends a SLAC, you think they're a slacker.

I think PP could have been more careful with their wording, but IME it’s 100% true that if you went to Andover Exeter etc, a SLAC is going to have a really similar feel. There’s nothing wrong with that - plenty of my classmates went on to matriculate at SLACs and it was perfectly respectable. But believe it or not, they are similar settings, just with more public drunkenness added in.

So for the 400 seniors at Andover and the 300 at Exeter, these schools might be more of the same. But they're not more of the same for most of the rest of the 3.8 million seniors graduating every year.

Maybe better just to say that Andover and Exeter are like SLACs for pre-college students?

I’m an Exeter grad, and skipped applying to SLACs for this reason, though I loved boarding school. Ended up at an urban school, and then transferred to a women’s college (still urban).

[Anonymous]

College is a source of pressure and major or track add more to it but student themselves are part of the pressure as a lot of pressure is rooted into their ability to handle rigor, workload, friendships, parties, drinking, weed, dating, time management and responsibility.

Rice, Vanderbilt, Yale, and Brown rank as relaxed and supportive places for majority but obviously you'll find people who can manage to be miserable there as well.

[Anonymous]

Some info here is misconception or urban myth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If your kid jumps through all the high school hoops required to get into a Top 25 university, college is almost certainly going to be a much lower intensity environment than high school, regardless of where they go

Not true at all

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your kid jumps through all the high school hoops required to get into a Top 25 university, college is almost certainly going to be a much lower intensity environment than high school, regardless of where they go

Not true at all

+1 more bad information

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lots of SLACs fit the bill—unless not enough prestigious for you?

Which ones?
I have a kid who is a great athlete who is being recruited at two Top10 SLACs and several Top30.
I know Haverford, Swarthmore, Carleton and Colgate put on the academic pressure and I don't want that for my son who has ADHD and feels serious AP burnout in high school as he ends his jr year.

I'm always on the lookout for a SLAC that has a decent reputation but isn't out to kill these kid's spirit. I don't just mean that they give support. That's part of it. I mean which schools don't pile on the work to the point of exhaustion. My opinion based on our own tours is that it might depend more on the professor than the school. The major also matters. Kids on a premed track who have to take organic chemistry are going to suffer no matter where they are.

If someone disagrees, I'd love to hear it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Haverford, Swarthmore, Carleton and Colgate

One of these schools is not like the others! (Colgate)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of SLACs fit the bill—unless not enough prestigious for you?

Which ones?
I have a kid who is a great athlete who is being recruited at two Top10 SLACs and several Top30.
I know Haverford, Swarthmore, Carleton and Colgate put on the academic pressure and I don't want that for my son who has ADHD and feels serious AP burnout in high school as he ends his jr year.

I'm always on the lookout for a SLAC that has a decent reputation but isn't out to kill these kid's spirit. I don't just mean that they give support. That's part of it. I mean which schools don't pile on the work to the point of exhaustion. My opinion based on our own tours is that it might depend more on the professor than the school. The major also matters. Kids on a premed track who have to take organic chemistry are going to suffer no matter where they are.

If someone disagrees, I'd love to hear it.

He should look at Bucknell. He'll land a job on The Street alongside graduates of the pressure cooker schools you named (especially Colgate) but will have had a much more enjoyable and relaxed college experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you're DC is looking for a SLAC, it's hard to beat Davidson for work/life/prestige balance. Amazing career services, too.

Really? I crossed it off my list early because I have always thought it seemed really harsh.
I know they have the honor code and you can take tests where you want but I assumed workload was tough

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of SLACs fit the bill—unless not enough prestigious for you?

Which ones?
I have a kid who is a great athlete who is being recruited at two Top10 SLACs and several Top30.
I know Haverford, Swarthmore, Carleton and Colgate put on the academic pressure and I don't want that for my son who has ADHD and feels serious AP burnout in high school as he ends his jr year.

I'm always on the lookout for a SLAC that has a decent reputation but isn't out to kill these kid's spirit. I don't just mean that they give support. That's part of it. I mean which schools don't pile on the work to the point of exhaustion. My opinion based on our own tours is that it might depend more on the professor than the school. The major also matters. Kids on a premed track who have to take organic chemistry are going to suffer no matter where they are.

If someone disagrees, I'd love to hear it.

For Carleton, at least, they're not trying to "kill the kids' spirits," nor do they "pile on the work to the point of exhaustion." Yes, the students work hard, but the pressure is more self-imposed by students who want to do well. (And the desire to work hard work is often a result of a love of learning.) It may not be for everyone, but I don't think it fits with the stereotype you listed.

[Anonymous]

Stanford. Pretty laid back
Good chance of admission if you have above 1500 in SAT