Colleges with very smart and successful students but relatively few DCUM competitive a**hole types

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have not read through all of the posts yet, but CMU for sure. I read the first few pages and saw MI listed - as a former professor there, I would advise against, same with Rice. Rochester is also a solid choice. Is a top 30, but under the radar, so smart kids, but not egocentric, tend to go.

Really? (I happen to appreciate a good grindy kinda person, but the CMU vibe is not chill, IME. Certainly not relative to Rice and Michigan.)

True, CMU isn’t chill at all. Students will work very hard.

But hard-working doesn't mean assholes. The frat boys or image-obsessed or Vineyard Vines wearing kids aren't going to CMU.
I don't know a lot about RIce, but my nephew goes there. He is a bit of an asshole - as is my brother.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MIT has a wonderful collaborative culture. Lots of super smart and successful graduates.

+1. It is too challenging for baseless competition. I loved it, and the collaboration made me smarter and lots of contacts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My son got into Yale and felt like it would be too much of a "frat-bro" environment and chose Stanford instead. After spending a weekend at Yale he told me "I feel like I'd accidentally be friends with guys who date rape girls but don't think of themselves as rapists."

DD got into Brown and chose Berkeley instead. Both kids felt like California kids are smart and strive to do well, but without pushing other people out of their way.

??? Your son thinks Yale is too frat-bro and chose Stanford?!?! It sounds like your kids wanted to go to California.

[Anonymous]

You asked about Bowdoin. My kid graduated from there. In general, it's more community minded than cut-throat. Even after graduation, there are alumni events and kids keep in touch with professors. Bowdon's location is also better than many of the other LACs we visited. Maine is beautiful and Portland and Freeport are close. Just be sure your kid wants to attend a school that small. There are real advantages and disadvantages. The kids get lots of time with professors and small classes - but if they change their mind and want to pursue something more pre-professional, they will have to transfer or, more likely, take it up at the grad level.

[Anonymous]

Strayer

[Anonymous]

I went to college in the midwest. I didn't find assholes there like you do here. Swear on it...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The top public universities: Michigan, Berkeley, and UCLA. My oldest chose Michigan over Penn and Brown for more or less the reasons OP mentioned. Kids are just as smart and accomplished but there’s less hand-holding, less snootiness and social-climbing pressure, and as far as we can tell, in many industries (outside of the ones for which being extremely wealthy or an Ivy Leaguer are the main qualifications) alumni are equally well regarded.

My concern is those big flagship universities get their top ratings based on their graduate schools. Undergraduate can be a less satisfying experience.

+1

PP omitted UVA which probably has the best undergrad experience out of all the top publics.

UVA is not top public and has many a**holes.

[Anonymous]

City College at CUNY

[Anonymous]

Is there a site that lists geographic origin of undergraduates? Looking for institutions with the fewest DMV progeny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The top public universities: Michigan, Berkeley, and UCLA. My oldest chose Michigan over Penn and Brown for more or less the reasons OP mentioned. Kids are just as smart and accomplished but there’s less hand-holding, less snootiness and social-climbing pressure, and as far as we can tell, in many industries (outside of the ones for which being extremely wealthy or an Ivy Leaguer are the main qualifications) alumni are equally well regarded.

My concern is those big flagship universities get their top ratings based on their graduate schools. Undergraduate can be a less satisfying experience.

+1

PP omitted UVA which probably has the best undergrad experience out of all the top publics.

UVA is not top public and has many a**holes.

Rated #4 -- is pretty close to "top", I wouldn't quibble about that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The top public universities: Michigan, Berkeley, and UCLA. My oldest chose Michigan over Penn and Brown for more or less the reasons OP mentioned. Kids are just as smart and accomplished but there’s less hand-holding, less snootiness and social-climbing pressure, and as far as we can tell, in many industries (outside of the ones for which being extremely wealthy or an Ivy Leaguer are the main qualifications) alumni are equally well regarded.

My concern is those big flagship universities get their top ratings based on their graduate schools. Undergraduate can be a less satisfying experience.

+1

PP omitted UVA which probably has the best undergrad experience out of all the top publics.

UVA is not top public and has many a**holes.

Rated #4 -- is pretty close to "top", I wouldn't quibble about that.

And W&M ranked at #5 for Undergraduate teaching makes it a "top" school on the issue most important to me - undergraduate teaching. Unfortunately DC didn't see it that way.

[Anonymous]

Just stay out of the northeast or mid atlantic and you'll be fine.

[Anonymous]

I have not waded through this whole thread, but I recommend looking at Reed College. When I attended in the late-90s, there was zero competition over grades. The students were incredibly driven, but somehow not in competition with one another. The school eschews US NEWS rankings, latin honors, etc., which helps a lot.

I got a top-notch education. When I later attended a T-14 law school, I felt way better prepared than many of my peers who had gone to HYSP, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have not waded through this whole thread, but I recommend looking at Reed College. When I attended in the late-90s, there was zero competition over grades. The students were incredibly driven, but somehow not in competition with one another. The school eschews US NEWS rankings, latin honors, etc., which helps a lot.

I got a top-notch education. When I later attended a T-14 law school, I felt way better prepared than many of my peers who had gone to HYSP, etc.

They got some issues in Portland right now. Not so sure I'd want my kid going there. (Plus, you got to admit it's a very niche school for a certain kind of student).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son got into Yale and felt like it would be too much of a "frat-bro" environment and chose Stanford instead. After spending a weekend at Yale he told me "I feel like I'd accidentally be friends with guys who date rape girls but don't think of themselves as rapists."

DD got into Brown and chose Berkeley instead. Both kids felt like California kids are smart and strive to do well, but without pushing other people out of their way.

That is such completely disgusting and horrible thing to write about Yale.

I think your outrage should be for the behavior:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/yale-delta-kappa-epsilon-2018-1%3famp

Harvard’s underground fraternities are just as sketchy.

No institution is beyond reproach, don’t let your ivy worship blind you. And yes I’m an hyp alum.