CTCL schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We visited a bunch of LACs. Some were NESCACs. Some were CTCL. some were other things. Among the colleges we saw, the CTCLs generally seemed warmer/more friendly and generally less selective/less anxious. The eye opener for me was that the CTCLs still seemed intellectual and focused on the world, even though the students weren't especially competitive. That's why I'm a fan.

"CTCL" does convey something informative. While I would not have chosen a CTCL for myself, I am really glad one of my kids did. My kid has learned a ton and received a lot of attention in a collaborative, low stress environment.

Your kid didn't get into better schools. And you know it. That's why your kid "chose" it.

I just don't get this. Why does it matter to you?

Sometimes finances choose the college. Both my VA cousins got into Duke yet their parents indicated that they could only attend if Duke offered them the difference between Duke and UVA. That didn't happen, so go Cavs for them.

I have one DC with the stats for a couple of Ivies and top NESCACs. After this DC saw what happened to senior friends this cycle, my guess is that a number of CTCL-type schools will be on DC's list. I have another DC where some CTCLs may still be reaches when that DC gets to app time. I don't blow off the latter kid just because the former kid might get into "better schools." Fit is fit.

It matters because it’s a dishonest response. Had the poster’s kid got into one of the NESCAC schools visited, the kid would’ve ended up there and the poster wouldn’t be posting how glad they were that the kid went to a CTCL school. Instead they’d be on a thread about that NESCAC school praising it.

The Duke/UVA analogy is ridiculous. They are essentially peer institutions. Yes, Duke is higher ranked by US News and somewhat more selective, but Duke/UVA is not Bowdoin/Juniata for example. Not even close. It makes heaps of sense for in state VA students to turn down schools in Duke’s class for UVA.

Or perhaps they'd be on the CTCL thread saying how much they liked that college and were glad it was an option as a safety.

It seems like the haters' issue is that people who can't afford or whose kids can't get into a highly ranked LAC have the audacity to assert that their kids are getting a good educational experience at a lower ranked school. They think if your kid can't go to one of 10ish LACs then they don't deserve to have a LAC experience and should slink off in shame to a regional large state school and, really, probably not even bother with college because they are doomed to failure and their parents should cut them off for being so mediocre.

The issue isn't the CTCL label but that a group of lower-ranked LACs have to gall to share the positive things about their schools in a way that gets more attention than working individually. Juniata should just not let people know about their very high med school admissions rate. Wooster shouldn't tell people they have a unique approach to undergrad research. Because they can never be as awesome as Amherst or Williams they should just shut up and go out of business.

Are there crappy LACs out there who probably should go out of business, absolutely. There are a LOT of LACs to sort through so the CTCL list and the info in the book which emphasizes what are the factors you should be looking at for a good school are helpful in figuring out which ones might be worth your time and money. I realize that may not seem worthwhile to someone whose only qualification for picking where to apply is the US News list.

I really hope I don't know these people IRL and I feel very sorry for your children that all you care about is the ranking of the school one goes to.

All well and good. But, again, just be honest.

[Anonymous]

The problem is you are assuming the PP was being dishonest. You have no basis for this assumption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We visited a bunch of LACs. Some were NESCACs. Some were CTCL. some were other things. Among the colleges we saw, the CTCLs generally seemed warmer/more friendly and generally less selective/less anxious. The eye opener for me was that the CTCLs still seemed intellectual and focused on the world, even though the students weren't especially competitive. That's why I'm a fan.

"CTCL" does convey something informative. While I would not have chosen a CTCL for myself, I am really glad one of my kids did. My kid has learned a ton and received a lot of attention in a collaborative, low stress environment.

Your kid didn't get into better schools. And you know it. That's why your kid "chose" it.

I just don't get this. Why does it matter to you?

Sometimes finances choose the college. Both my VA cousins got into Duke yet their parents indicated that they could only attend if Duke offered them the difference between Duke and UVA. That didn't happen, so go Cavs for them.

I have one DC with the stats for a couple of Ivies and top NESCACs. After this DC saw what happened to senior friends this cycle, my guess is that a number of CTCL-type schools will be on DC's list. I have another DC where some CTCLs may still be reaches when that DC gets to app time. I don't blow off the latter kid just because the former kid might get into "better schools." Fit is fit.

It matters because it’s a dishonest response. Had the poster’s kid got into one of the NESCAC schools visited, the kid would’ve ended up there and the poster wouldn’t be posting how glad they were that the kid went to a CTCL school. Instead they’d be on a thread about that NESCAC school praising it.

The Duke/UVA analogy is ridiculous. They are essentially peer institutions. Yes, Duke is higher ranked by US News and somewhat more selective, but Duke/UVA is not Bowdoin/Juniata for example. Not even close. It makes heaps of sense for in state VA students to turn down schools in Duke’s class for UVA.

Or perhaps they'd be on the CTCL thread saying how much they liked that college and were glad it was an option as a safety.

It seems like the haters' issue is that people who can't afford or whose kids can't get into a highly ranked LAC have the audacity to assert that their kids are getting a good educational experience at a lower ranked school. They think if your kid can't go to one of 10ish LACs then they don't deserve to have a LAC experience and should slink off in shame to a regional large state school and, really, probably not even bother with college because they are doomed to failure and their parents should cut them off for being so mediocre.

The issue isn't the CTCL label but that a group of lower-ranked LACs have to gall to share the positive things about their schools in a way that gets more attention than working individually. Juniata should just not let people know about their very high med school admissions rate. Wooster shouldn't tell people they have a unique approach to undergrad research. Because they can never be as awesome as Amherst or Williams they should just shut up and go out of business.

Are there crappy LACs out there who probably should go out of business, absolutely. There are a LOT of LACs to sort through so the CTCL list and the info in the book which emphasizes what are the factors you should be looking at for a good school are helpful in figuring out which ones might be worth your time and money. I realize that may not seem worthwhile to someone whose only qualification for picking where to apply is the US News list.

I really hope I don't know these people IRL and I feel very sorry for your children that all you care about is the ranking of the school one goes to.

I'm a DP from the person you're responding to, but the majority of people have no issue with the schools themselves. It's the weird branding/grouping/labeling of "CTCL" that comes off as very try-hard and fake. CTCL is a type of cancer, not an official grouping of colleges.

OMG, who cares???? Other than athletic conferences what makes something an "official grouping of colleges"? Is the USNews "Top 10" an "official grouping of colleges"? It can be a helpful list -- like the Sierra Club list of colleges or the Money Magazine Best Value Colleges, or great colleges for X major on College Xpress, or Princeton Review lists of colleges that are good for different things. If a school promotes that they are on one of those lists or does a college fair together related to some commonality is that "try-hard/fake"? I'm really just baffled by this position. It really seems to come down to a disdain that a lower ranked school could possibly provide a good education experience. Is it that you paid a lot for a higher-ranked school and are insecure that maybe you didn't get your money's worth? The haters seem to be very invested in protecting the dubious ranking system of USNews over any other way of considering colleges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We visited a bunch of LACs. Some were NESCACs. Some were CTCL. some were other things. Among the colleges we saw, the CTCLs generally seemed warmer/more friendly and generally less selective/less anxious. The eye opener for me was that the CTCLs still seemed intellectual and focused on the world, even though the students weren't especially competitive. That's why I'm a fan.

"CTCL" does convey something informative. While I would not have chosen a CTCL for myself, I am really glad one of my kids did. My kid has learned a ton and received a lot of attention in a collaborative, low stress environment.

Your kid didn't get into better schools. And you know it. That's why your kid "chose" it.

I just don't get this. Why does it matter to you?

Sometimes finances choose the college. Both my VA cousins got into Duke yet their parents indicated that they could only attend if Duke offered them the difference between Duke and UVA. That didn't happen, so go Cavs for them.

I have one DC with the stats for a couple of Ivies and top NESCACs. After this DC saw what happened to senior friends this cycle, my guess is that a number of CTCL-type schools will be on DC's list. I have another DC where some CTCLs may still be reaches when that DC gets to app time. I don't blow off the latter kid just because the former kid might get into "better schools." Fit is fit.

It matters because it’s a dishonest response. Had the poster’s kid got into one of the NESCAC schools visited, the kid would’ve ended up there and the poster wouldn’t be posting how glad they were that the kid went to a CTCL school. Instead they’d be on a thread about that NESCAC school praising it.

The Duke/UVA analogy is ridiculous. They are essentially peer institutions. Yes, Duke is higher ranked by US News and somewhat more selective, but Duke/UVA is not Bowdoin/Juniata for example. Not even close. It makes heaps of sense for in state VA students to turn down schools in Duke’s class for UVA.

Or perhaps they'd be on the CTCL thread saying how much they liked that college and were glad it was an option as a safety.

It seems like the haters' issue is that people who can't afford or whose kids can't get into a highly ranked LAC have the audacity to assert that their kids are getting a good educational experience at a lower ranked school. They think if your kid can't go to one of 10ish LACs then they don't deserve to have a LAC experience and should slink off in shame to a regional large state school and, really, probably not even bother with college because they are doomed to failure and their parents should cut them off for being so mediocre.

The issue isn't the CTCL label but that a group of lower-ranked LACs have to gall to share the positive things about their schools in a way that gets more attention than working individually. Juniata should just not let people know about their very high med school admissions rate. Wooster shouldn't tell people they have a unique approach to undergrad research. Because they can never be as awesome as Amherst or Williams they should just shut up and go out of business.

Are there crappy LACs out there who probably should go out of business, absolutely. There are a LOT of LACs to sort through so the CTCL list and the info in the book which emphasizes what are the factors you should be looking at for a good school are helpful in figuring out which ones might be worth your time and money. I realize that may not seem worthwhile to someone whose only qualification for picking where to apply is the US News list.

I really hope I don't know these people IRL and I feel very sorry for your children that all you care about is the ranking of the school one goes to.

I'm a DP from the person you're responding to, but the majority of people have no issue with the schools themselves. It's the weird branding/grouping/labeling of "CTCL" that comes off as very try-hard and fake. CTCL is a type of cancer, not an official grouping of colleges.

OMG, who cares???? Other than athletic conferences what makes something an "official grouping of colleges"? Is the USNews "Top 10" an "official grouping of colleges"? It can be a helpful list -- like the Sierra Club list of colleges or the Money Magazine Best Value Colleges, or great colleges for X major on College Xpress, or Princeton Review lists of colleges that are good for different things. If a school promotes that they are on one of those lists or does a college fair together related to some commonality is that "try-hard/fake"? I'm really just baffled by this position. It really seems to come down to a disdain that a lower ranked school could possibly provide a good education experience. Is it that you paid a lot for a higher-ranked school and are insecure that maybe you didn't get your money's worth? The haters seem to be very invested in protecting the dubious ranking system of USNews over any other way of considering colleges.

The key difference, you blathering rube, is that people don't go around boasting about how they went to an SCLOC school or an MMBVC school.

[Anonymous]

The haters, as you call us, have nothing against non top 20 schools. Our issue is with parents who insist that being a CTCL school somehow makes these schools special or above the many hundreds of schools with similar standards and students and faculty and sizes and program etc etc etc that aren’t participating in their joint marketing efforts.

And, cmon: this is DCUM. The overwhelming majority of posters and lurkers on this board absolutely positively would rather send their kid to a top 20 school than to a CTCL school. They just would, and everybody knows it. They’re settling for a CTCL school by labeling it a “good fit” when what they really mean is “it’s the best fit that took my kid.” And, really, that’s ok. You don’t need to justify your choices on an anonymous forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The haters, as you call us, have nothing against non top 20 schools. Our issue is with parents who insist that being a CTCL school somehow makes these schools special or above the many hundreds of schools with similar standards and students and faculty and sizes and program etc etc etc that aren’t participating in their joint marketing efforts.

And, cmon: this is DCUM. The overwhelming majority of posters and lurkers on this board absolutely positively would rather send their kid to a top 20 school than to a CTCL school. They just would, and everybody knows it. They’re settling for a CTCL school by labeling it a “good fit” when what they really mean is “it’s the best fit that took my kid.” And, really, that’s ok. You don’t need to justify your choices on an anonymous forum.

Sorry, but you don't know what the overwhelming majority of posters want, and you sure as hell don't know what lurkers want. I don't understand why you'd be so offended that someone would consider any school a good fit for their kid, such that you'd repeatedly post here that these people must be dishonest. Apparently you do need do justify your choices on an anonymous forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We visited a bunch of LACs. Some were NESCACs. Some were CTCL. some were other things. Among the colleges we saw, the CTCLs generally seemed warmer/more friendly and generally less selective/less anxious. The eye opener for me was that the CTCLs still seemed intellectual and focused on the world, even though the students weren't especially competitive. That's why I'm a fan.

"CTCL" does convey something informative. While I would not have chosen a CTCL for myself, I am really glad one of my kids did. My kid has learned a ton and received a lot of attention in a collaborative, low stress environment.

Your kid didn't get into better schools. And you know it. That's why your kid "chose" it.

I just don't get this. Why does it matter to you?

Sometimes finances choose the college. Both my VA cousins got into Duke yet their parents indicated that they could only attend if Duke offered them the difference between Duke and UVA. That didn't happen, so go Cavs for them.

I have one DC with the stats for a couple of Ivies and top NESCACs. After this DC saw what happened to senior friends this cycle, my guess is that a number of CTCL-type schools will be on DC's list. I have another DC where some CTCLs may still be reaches when that DC gets to app time. I don't blow off the latter kid just because the former kid might get into "better schools." Fit is fit.

It matters because it’s a dishonest response. Had the poster’s kid got into one of the NESCAC schools visited, the kid would’ve ended up there and the poster wouldn’t be posting how glad they were that the kid went to a CTCL school. Instead they’d be on a thread about that NESCAC school praising it.

The Duke/UVA analogy is ridiculous. They are essentially peer institutions. Yes, Duke is higher ranked by US News and somewhat more selective, but Duke/UVA is not Bowdoin/Juniata for example. Not even close. It makes heaps of sense for in state VA students to turn down schools in Duke’s class for UVA.

Or perhaps they'd be on the CTCL thread saying how much they liked that college and were glad it was an option as a safety.

It seems like the haters' issue is that people who can't afford or whose kids can't get into a highly ranked LAC have the audacity to assert that their kids are getting a good educational experience at a lower ranked school. They think if your kid can't go to one of 10ish LACs then they don't deserve to have a LAC experience and should slink off in shame to a regional large state school and, really, probably not even bother with college because they are doomed to failure and their parents should cut them off for being so mediocre.

The issue isn't the CTCL label but that a group of lower-ranked LACs have to gall to share the positive things about their schools in a way that gets more attention than working individually. Juniata should just not let people know about their very high med school admissions rate. Wooster shouldn't tell people they have a unique approach to undergrad research. Because they can never be as awesome as Amherst or Williams they should just shut up and go out of business.

Are there crappy LACs out there who probably should go out of business, absolutely. There are a LOT of LACs to sort through so the CTCL list and the info in the book which emphasizes what are the factors you should be looking at for a good school are helpful in figuring out which ones might be worth your time and money. I realize that may not seem worthwhile to someone whose only qualification for picking where to apply is the US News list.

I really hope I don't know these people IRL and I feel very sorry for your children that all you care about is the ranking of the school one goes to.

I'm a DP from the person you're responding to, but the majority of people have no issue with the schools themselves. It's the weird branding/grouping/labeling of "CTCL" that comes off as very try-hard and fake. CTCL is a type of cancer, not an official grouping of colleges.

OMG, who cares???? Other than athletic conferences what makes something an "official grouping of colleges"? Is the USNews "Top 10" an "official grouping of colleges"? It can be a helpful list -- like the Sierra Club list of colleges or the Money Magazine Best Value Colleges, or great colleges for X major on College Xpress, or Princeton Review lists of colleges that are good for different things. If a school promotes that they are on one of those lists or does a college fair together related to some commonality is that "try-hard/fake"? I'm really just baffled by this position. It really seems to come down to a disdain that a lower ranked school could possibly provide a good education experience. Is it that you paid a lot for a higher-ranked school and are insecure that maybe you didn't get your money's worth? The haters seem to be very invested in protecting the dubious ranking system of USNews over any other way of considering colleges.

The key difference, you blathering rube, is that people don't go around boasting about how they went to an SCLOC school or an MMBVC school.

I have never met a parent or alumnus who bragged that they went to "a College That Changed Lives." Never. You're making a complete straw man argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We visited a bunch of LACs. Some were NESCACs. Some were CTCL. some were other things. Among the colleges we saw, the CTCLs generally seemed warmer/more friendly and generally less selective/less anxious. The eye opener for me was that the CTCLs still seemed intellectual and focused on the world, even though the students weren't especially competitive. That's why I'm a fan.

"CTCL" does convey something informative. While I would not have chosen a CTCL for myself, I am really glad one of my kids did. My kid has learned a ton and received a lot of attention in a collaborative, low stress environment.

Your kid didn't get into better schools. And you know it. That's why your kid "chose" it.

I just don't get this. Why does it matter to you?

Sometimes finances choose the college. Both my VA cousins got into Duke yet their parents indicated that they could only attend if Duke offered them the difference between Duke and UVA. That didn't happen, so go Cavs for them.

I have one DC with the stats for a couple of Ivies and top NESCACs. After this DC saw what happened to senior friends this cycle, my guess is that a number of CTCL-type schools will be on DC's list. I have another DC where some CTCLs may still be reaches when that DC gets to app time. I don't blow off the latter kid just because the former kid might get into "better schools." Fit is fit.

It matters because it’s a dishonest response. Had the poster’s kid got into one of the NESCAC schools visited, the kid would’ve ended up there and the poster wouldn’t be posting how glad they were that the kid went to a CTCL school. Instead they’d be on a thread about that NESCAC school praising it.

The Duke/UVA analogy is ridiculous. They are essentially peer institutions. Yes, Duke is higher ranked by US News and somewhat more selective, but Duke/UVA is not Bowdoin/Juniata for example. Not even close. It makes heaps of sense for in state VA students to turn down schools in Duke’s class for UVA.

Or perhaps they'd be on the CTCL thread saying how much they liked that college and were glad it was an option as a safety.

It seems like the haters' issue is that people who can't afford or whose kids can't get into a highly ranked LAC have the audacity to assert that their kids are getting a good educational experience at a lower ranked school. They think if your kid can't go to one of 10ish LACs then they don't deserve to have a LAC experience and should slink off in shame to a regional large state school and, really, probably not even bother with college because they are doomed to failure and their parents should cut them off for being so mediocre.

The issue isn't the CTCL label but that a group of lower-ranked LACs have to gall to share the positive things about their schools in a way that gets more attention than working individually. Juniata should just not let people know about their very high med school admissions rate. Wooster shouldn't tell people they have a unique approach to undergrad research. Because they can never be as awesome as Amherst or Williams they should just shut up and go out of business.

Are there crappy LACs out there who probably should go out of business, absolutely. There are a LOT of LACs to sort through so the CTCL list and the info in the book which emphasizes what are the factors you should be looking at for a good school are helpful in figuring out which ones might be worth your time and money. I realize that may not seem worthwhile to someone whose only qualification for picking where to apply is the US News list.

I really hope I don't know these people IRL and I feel very sorry for your children that all you care about is the ranking of the school one goes to.

I'm a DP from the person you're responding to, but the majority of people have no issue with the schools themselves. It's the weird branding/grouping/labeling of "CTCL" that comes off as very try-hard and fake. CTCL is a type of cancer, not an official grouping of colleges.

OMG, who cares???? Other than athletic conferences what makes something an "official grouping of colleges"? Is the USNews "Top 10" an "official grouping of colleges"? It can be a helpful list -- like the Sierra Club list of colleges or the Money Magazine Best Value Colleges, or great colleges for X major on College Xpress, or Princeton Review lists of colleges that are good for different things. If a school promotes that they are on one of those lists or does a college fair together related to some commonality is that "try-hard/fake"? I'm really just baffled by this position. It really seems to come down to a disdain that a lower ranked school could possibly provide a good education experience. Is it that you paid a lot for a higher-ranked school and are insecure that maybe you didn't get your money's worth? The haters seem to be very invested in protecting the dubious ranking system of USNews over any other way of considering colleges.

The key difference, you blathering rube, is that people don't go around boasting about how they went to an SCLOC school or an MMBVC school.

I have never met a parent or alumnus who bragged that they went to "a College That Changed Lives." Never. You're making a complete straw man argument.

It's the acronym - CTCL - that is off-putting. People use the term "CTCL school" all the time. Check this thread. Try harder. Think harder.

[Anonymous]

This is reminding me of the "Black Lives Matter" - NO! "ALL Lives Matter" response.

Is it that people are offended by the "Changes Lives" name, thinking it is saying that *only* these colleges can change lives? It's really OK, I'm sure your college changed your life and lots of colleges can. The point of the original book is that some people (clearly lots on DCUM) think it's only those highly selective/highly ranked schools that can provide a "change your life" experience. Loren Pope, after working at the NYT, was a college counselor who had a list of less selective schools that he found did particularly well on the factors that contribute to that experience and so he shared it. He wasn't saying that if you get into Wesleyan and Clark that you should go to Clark but rather that if you *aren't* the student who is getting into Wesleyan that here are a bunch of other places you could get a great education. He wasn't saying only these colleges can change your life but trying to broaden peoples' minds. Clearly, a losing battle for some audiences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The haters, as you call us, have nothing against non top 20 schools. Our issue is with parents who insist that being a CTCL school somehow makes these schools special or above the many hundreds of schools with similar standards and students and faculty and sizes and program etc etc etc that aren’t participating in their joint marketing efforts.

And, cmon: this is DCUM. The overwhelming majority of posters and lurkers on this board absolutely positively would rather send their kid to a top 20 school than to a CTCL school. They just would, and everybody knows it. They’re settling for a CTCL school by labeling it a “good fit” when what they really mean is “it’s the best fit that took my kid.” And, really, that’s ok. You don’t need to justify your choices on an anonymous forum.

My kid wants Reed or Macalester or Rhodes. His choices. He could probably do better, but those are the schools he is interested in. He wants an LAC in an urban environment. He isn't interested in the grind that it would take to compete for a top 20 spot. I'm fine with him making that choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The haters, as you call us, have nothing against non top 20 schools. Our issue is with parents who insist that being a CTCL school somehow makes these schools special or above the many hundreds of schools with similar standards and students and faculty and sizes and program etc etc etc that aren’t participating in their joint marketing efforts.

And, cmon: this is DCUM. The overwhelming majority of posters and lurkers on this board absolutely positively would rather send their kid to a top 20 school than to a CTCL school. They just would, and everybody knows it. They’re settling for a CTCL school by labeling it a “good fit” when what they really mean is “it’s the best fit that took my kid.” And, really, that’s ok. You don’t need to justify your choices on an anonymous forum.

My kid turned down admission to multiple more highly ranked schools (INCLUDING 1 NESCAC: a grouping you seem comfortable with) to attend a CTCL mostly be cause it was a better FIT for what she was seeking in an undergrad experience.

You are claiming that people making this choice do not exist, and you are wrong.

(By the way, it has turned out to be an amazing experience for her. So, there is that.)

I am so glad that she knows herself and can turn off the noise generated by people of your ilk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is reminding me of the "Black Lives Matter" - NO! "ALL Lives Matter" response.

Is it that people are offended by the "Changes Lives" name, thinking it is saying that *only* these colleges can change lives? It's really OK, I'm sure your college changed your life and lots of colleges can. The point of the original book is that some people (clearly lots on DCUM) think it's only those highly selective/highly ranked schools that can provide a "change your life" experience. Loren Pope, after working at the NYT, was a college counselor who had a list of less selective schools that he found did particularly well on the factors that contribute to that experience and so he shared it. He wasn't saying that if you get into Wesleyan and Clark that you should go to Clark but rather that if you *aren't* the student who is getting into Wesleyan that here are a bunch of other places you could get a great education. He wasn't saying only these colleges can change your life but trying to broaden peoples' minds. Clearly, a losing battle for some audiences.

You've truly and utterly jumped the shark here. Absolutely despicable comparison. You're disgusting.

For the thousandth time - it's the insistence on using this dumb acronym. Just say you went to a liberal arts college. Just say you went to Juniata, or St. Olaf, or Hillsdale, or whatever. I'm sure those schools are great. CTCL is a dumb acronym and entirely, obviously self-promotional, which will turn people off however much you insist otherwise. No one goes around saying they went to a SCLOC or MMBVC or FGTC or PRHS school, and if they did, they'd be met with the same confusion and eye-rolling.

[Anonymous]

I, for one, am glad there are more than ten or twenty great colleges in this country.

[Anonymous]

As far as the weirdo who says no one knows what CTCL means, except that it is an acronym for a type of cancer (!)

You need to get out more because we are not all oncologists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As far as the weirdo who says no one knows what CTCL means, except that it is an acronym for a type of cancer (!)

You need to get out more because we are not all oncologists.

CTCL is the official acronym for a type of cancer. Just search it on Google.

If you're really insisting that people know or care what "CTCL schools" mean, you're only doing yourself a disservice. Please, I invite you to continue your CTCL boosterism in real life and see how that goes for you.