Overrated schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, if colleges ranked 10 to 20 are overrated, with what would you replace them? You know, there are these things called cardinal numbers. If you can't think of any to replace them, how could they possibly be overrated?

Most college from 20-40 could replace them easily. Carnegie Mellon for example is considered a far more rigorous university by those in the know than Vanderbilt, Washington University, Northwestern, etc. and has the same amount of prestige in general and far more prestige in engineering.

Most college?

So you are saying that a majority of colleges ranked 20 to 40 are better than those ranked 10 to 20? OK, name 11.

Words have meaning.


(Not that I care. I am just pointing out typical DCUM idiocy.)

Where did I say better? I said replaceable.

In no particular order: CMU, Georgia Tech, Berkeley, Tufts, Michigan, UCLA, UC San Diego, UNC, UVA, Case Western, Boston College. Even NYU, USC, Boston University and multiple other UC's such as Davis, Irvine and Santa Barbara could be on that list, as well as schools well outside of the top 40 such as Pepperdine and a whole host of publics.

The point of course isn't that only the top 10-20 in essence could be replaced - Northwestern is within the top 10 and I think that could easily be replaced as well. The point is the prestige drop off after Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Yale, Princeton, Caltech is massive. Colleges Columbia, Penn, Cornell, Dartmouth, Brown have cachet due to being in the Ivies, and Duke/Georgetown have cachet for being schools where prep school kids go to have being rejected by the Ivies.

In general, these colleges, and especially the last 4:

U. Chicago (6), Northwestern (9), Hopkins (10), Notre Dame (15, lol), Vanderbilt (15), Rice (17), Washington University (19)

are not all that impressive to the general population throughout the country. No one cares if you went to Hopkins outside of the DMV area, unless its Hopkins medical school. And literally no one cares about Notre Dame unless its about football rivalries.

Hey Dumpy, do you know where “ivies” as in “Ivy League” came from? It’s short for “IV,” roman numeral 4. IV League. Ergo, Ivy League refers to the original 4 league members - Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Columbia.

This is an urban legend, and like most of them, is false:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivy_League

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All the non-Ivies ranked 10-20 on US News are pretty overrated e.g. Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Georgetown, WashU, Hopkins. Nobody really cares about those schools. They're fine but nothing to obsess over and they churn out plenty of "meh" undergrads every year. It's not like Northwestern or Emory are lottery tickets, but that's how some lunatic tiger moms act.

This is very much true, which makes it confusing as to why so many are obsessed with these schools based on their top 20-ish ranking.

These privates are pretty much regionally prestigious at most. In the upper Midwest, Northwestern is somewhat prestigious perhaps. Outside, not many people care about it. Frankly, I feel the same way about U. Chicago, which gets a lot of undue cachet due to its recent association with Obama - who was a lecturer, not a professor.

In the lower midwest, perhaps Washington University is somewhat prestigious. Maryland for Hopkins. South/Appalachia for Vanderbilt, perhaps. Ironically Georgetown may be the most "prestigious throughout the mid-Atlantic/Northeast due to its association as a school for prep school kids who couldn't get into the Ivies.

This regional prestige is also true for Ivies like Dartmouth and Brown, but their reputation as Ivies does carry some cachet throughout the country/world, even if unjustifiably so

These universities may have some fields that are very well known nationwide/worldwide within those in the know about the field such as academics i.e. pre-med at Hopkins, international relations and investment banking/consulting recruiting at Georgetown, Economics at U. Chicago, investment banking at Dartmouth, etc. etc.

You have typed a lot of words. Congrats on that.

Now if only they made a salient point, you would have a win.

They make the point that you tiger-moming your kid and paying $5,000 for SAT prep classes and then paying $70,000/year so your kid can live in St. Louis is not worth the money or time if they plan to live anywhere outside of the lowest Midwest

You use a pejorative and then bring in financials. I thought the discussion was about educational qualities?

The idea that Dartmouth and Brown Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Hopkins etc. have "regional" prestige is absolutely ridiculous. No better way to show your ignorance than to assume others are.

In addition, and most importantly, people should encourage their children to attend schools that will prepare them best for the lives they want. Arguing that one "brand identity" is not equal to another is is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

/and yeah I know that's not a proper contextual use of the quotation from Macbeth, my mid-40s ranked private college learn-ded me gud.

Do you lack reading comprehension? I did not say Dartmouth and Brown have 'regional prestige', I specifically said their association as Ivies gives them country-wide and world-wide recognition, earned or not.

You don't think Northwestern, Hopkins, Vanderbilt have regional prestige? You think these are nationally renowned universities across the board? Hopkins is for medical school only, and I specifically stated that its known for pre-med. Outside of that, not at all.

Your words:

This regional prestige is also true for Ivies like Dartmouth and Brown

I rest my case.

Hahaha, why don't you post the entire quote you lying hack?

This regional prestige is also true for Ivies like Dartmouth and Brown, but their reputation as Ivies does carry some cachet throughout the country/world, even if unjustifiably so

You think that qualifies your statement? And by the way, I DID quote it, above. Your Words. Choose them more carefully next time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, if colleges ranked 10 to 20 are overrated, with what would you replace them? You know, there are these things called cardinal numbers. If you can't think of any to replace them, how could they possibly be overrated?

Most college from 20-40 could replace them easily. Carnegie Mellon for example is considered a far more rigorous university by those in the know than Vanderbilt, Washington University, Northwestern, etc. and has the same amount of prestige in general and far more prestige in engineering.

Most college?

So you are saying that a majority of colleges ranked 20 to 40 are better than those ranked 10 to 20? OK, name 11.

Words have meaning.


(Not that I care. I am just pointing out typical DCUM idiocy.)

Where did I say better? I said replaceable.

In no particular order: CMU, Georgia Tech, Berkeley, Tufts, Michigan, UCLA, UC San Diego, UNC, UVA, Case Western, Boston College. Even NYU, USC, Boston University and multiple other UC's such as Davis, Irvine and Santa Barbara could be on that list, as well as schools well outside of the top 40 such as Pepperdine and a whole host of publics.

The point of course isn't that only the top 10-20 in essence could be replaced - Northwestern is within the top 10 and I think that could easily be replaced as well. The point is the prestige drop off after Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Yale, Princeton, Caltech is massive. Colleges Columbia, Penn, Cornell, Dartmouth, Brown have cachet due to being in the Ivies, and Duke/Georgetown have cachet for being schools where prep school kids go to have being rejected by the Ivies.

In general, these colleges, and especially the last 4:

U. Chicago (6), Northwestern (9), Hopkins (10), Notre Dame (15, lol), Vanderbilt (15), Rice (17), Washington University (19)

are not all that impressive to the general population throughout the country. No one cares if you went to Hopkins outside of the DMV area, unless its Hopkins medical school. And literally no one cares about Notre Dame unless its about football rivalries.

Hey Dumpy, do you know where “ivies” as in “Ivy League” came from? It’s short for “IV,” roman numeral 4. IV League. Ergo, Ivy League refers to the original 4 league members - Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Columbia.

This is an urban legend, and like most of them, is false:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivy_League

Hah......that PP is so dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All the non-Ivies ranked 10-20 on US News are pretty overrated e.g. Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Georgetown, WashU, Hopkins. Nobody really cares about those schools. They're fine but nothing to obsess over and they churn out plenty of "meh" undergrads every year. It's not like Northwestern or Emory are lottery tickets, but that's how some lunatic tiger moms act.

This is very much true, which makes it confusing as to why so many are obsessed with these schools based on their top 20-ish ranking.

These privates are pretty much regionally prestigious at most. In the upper Midwest, Northwestern is somewhat prestigious perhaps. Outside, not many people care about it. Frankly, I feel the same way about U. Chicago, which gets a lot of undue cachet due to its recent association with Obama - who was a lecturer, not a professor.

In the lower midwest, perhaps Washington University is somewhat prestigious. Maryland for Hopkins. South/Appalachia for Vanderbilt, perhaps. Ironically Georgetown may be the most "prestigious throughout the mid-Atlantic/Northeast due to its association as a school for prep school kids who couldn't get into the Ivies.

This regional prestige is also true for Ivies like Dartmouth and Brown, but their reputation as Ivies does carry some cachet throughout the country/world, even if unjustifiably so

These universities may have some fields that are very well known nationwide/worldwide within those in the know about the field such as academics i.e. pre-med at Hopkins, international relations and investment banking/consulting recruiting at Georgetown, Economics at U. Chicago, investment banking at Dartmouth, etc. etc.

You have typed a lot of words. Congrats on that.

Now if only they made a salient point, you would have a win.

They make the point that you tiger-moming your kid and paying $5,000 for SAT prep classes and then paying $70,000/year so your kid can live in St. Louis is not worth the money or time if they plan to live anywhere outside of the lowest Midwest

You use a pejorative and then bring in financials. I thought the discussion was about educational qualities?

The idea that Dartmouth and Brown Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Hopkins etc. have "regional" prestige is absolutely ridiculous. No better way to show your ignorance than to assume others are.

In addition, and most importantly, people should encourage their children to attend schools that will prepare them best for the lives they want. Arguing that one "brand identity" is not equal to another is is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

/and yeah I know that's not a proper contextual use of the quotation from Macbeth, my mid-40s ranked private college learn-ded me gud.

Do you lack reading comprehension? I did not say Dartmouth and Brown have 'regional prestige', I specifically said their association as Ivies gives them country-wide and world-wide recognition, earned or not.

You don't think Northwestern, Hopkins, Vanderbilt have regional prestige? You think these are nationally renowned universities across the board? Hopkins is for medical school only, and I specifically stated that its known for pre-med. Outside of that, not at all.

Your words:

This regional prestige is also true for Ivies like Dartmouth and Brown

I rest my case.

Hahaha, why don't you post the entire quote you lying hack?

This regional prestige is also true for Ivies like Dartmouth and Brown, but their reputation as Ivies does carry some cachet throughout the country/world, even if unjustifiably so

You think that qualifies your statement? And by the way, I DID quote it, above. Your Words. Choose them more carefully next time.

Hey Dumpy, what’s your fetish with IVs? IVs, including the four horsemen, aren’t all that. One poster said Cornell is a hotel university with guaranteed admission.

Bob Dylan said when he was a young man, he was very perceptive about people who were in position to help him and always gravitated towards those with power. IVs are like that. They are just incredibly perceptive about who will be the future leaders of this world. They gravitate toward those in power the same way flies gravitate toward cow testicles. CalTech likewise knows how the game is played. They pick students from the upper echelon of the $ociety.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, if colleges ranked 10 to 20 are overrated, with what would you replace them? You know, there are these things called cardinal numbers. If you can't think of any to replace them, how could they possibly be overrated?

The point is once you’re outside the top 10 or so, nobody really cares. Splitting hairs about 13 vs 25 vs 37 vs 41 is totally unimportant except to insecure status-obsessed strivers. 10-20 and 20-30 and ... 60-70 all offer fine opportunities. But nothing outside of the top 10 or so is a lottery ticket or IMMEDIATELY impresses the s*** out of everyone — read: it’s not signaling anything near what tiger crazies seem to think about their genetics, parenting or status. Lastly, once you’re outside of the top 10, the colleges are full of many just flat out normal kids who will work normal careers for normal money.

And 1-10 schools? Tell us.

Ivies
MIT
Stanford
Duke (maybe)

Outside of those schools, the prestige, name rec, and gaining entry to some any elite club (lottery ticket!) falls off a cliff. Nobody really gives a flying f*** about Emory, WashU, Rice, Northwestern, Hopkins or even UChicago. In their own regions, sure, people are familiar with them and your kid will have opportunities. But even then, you think all the former Big Ten state school frat and sorority bros who run Chicago deeply respect UChicago? You think all the UT, A&M and SMU good ole boys in Dallas are deeply impressed by Rice? No, they’re not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, if colleges ranked 10 to 20 are overrated, with what would you replace them? You know, there are these things called cardinal numbers. If you can't think of any to replace them, how could they possibly be overrated?

The point is once you’re outside the top 10 or so, nobody really cares. Splitting hairs about 13 vs 25 vs 37 vs 41 is totally unimportant except to insecure status-obsessed strivers. 10-20 and 20-30 and ... 60-70 all offer fine opportunities. But nothing outside of the top 10 or so is a lottery ticket or IMMEDIATELY impresses the s*** out of everyone — read: it’s not signaling anything near what tiger crazies seem to think about their genetics, parenting or status. Lastly, once you’re outside of the top 10, the colleges are full of many just flat out normal kids who will work normal careers for normal money.

And 1-10 schools? Tell us.

Ivies
MIT
Stanford
Duke (maybe)

Outside of those schools, the prestige, name rec, and gaining entry to some any elite club (lottery ticket!) falls off a cliff. Nobody really gives a flying f*** about Emory, WashU, Rice, Northwestern, Hopkins or even UChicago. In their own regions, sure, people are familiar with them and your kid will have opportunities. But even then, you think all the former Big Ten state school frat and sorority bros who run Chicago deeply respect UChicago? You think all the UT, A&M and SMU good ole boys in Dallas are deeply impressed by Rice? No, they’re not.

And who really gives a hoot about H except a striver like you? CalTech is only a notch above Cal Poly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, if colleges ranked 10 to 20 are overrated, with what would you replace them? You know, there are these things called cardinal numbers. If you can't think of any to replace them, how could they possibly be overrated?

The point is once you’re outside the top 10 or so, nobody really cares. Splitting hairs about 13 vs 25 vs 37 vs 41 is totally unimportant except to insecure status-obsessed strivers. 10-20 and 20-30 and ... 60-70 all offer fine opportunities. But nothing outside of the top 10 or so is a lottery ticket or IMMEDIATELY impresses the s*** out of everyone — read: it’s not signaling anything near what tiger crazies seem to think about their genetics, parenting or status. Lastly, once you’re outside of the top 10, the colleges are full of many just flat out normal kids who will work normal careers for normal money.

And 1-10 schools? Tell us.

Ivies
MIT
Stanford
Duke (maybe)

Outside of those schools, the prestige, name rec, and gaining entry to some any elite club (lottery ticket!) falls off a cliff. Nobody really gives a flying f*** about Emory, WashU, Rice, Northwestern, Hopkins or even UChicago. In their own regions, sure, people are familiar with them and your kid will have opportunities. But even then, you think all the former Big Ten state school frat and sorority bros who run Chicago deeply respect UChicago? You think all the UT, A&M and SMU good ole boys in Dallas are deeply impressed by Rice? No, they’re not.

Do you really think MIT students looking at H’s URMs, legacies, donors, meathead athletes, and MIT rejects are impressed? And do you really think Cal poly grads who make as much money as CalTech grads are impressed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As someone who went to one of the "top five" for grad school, I would have to say they are all replaceable for undergrad. God I loved flunking out all those wannabe pre-meds as a TA for Introductory Chemistry. For all the difficulty getting into this school, the freshmen didn't seem that bright to me.

Certainly, but the point of my post was about prestige/name recognition of the college, not the undergraduate student quality. think everyone knows that Ivies and Stanford admit a bunch of undeserving legacy, donor, etc. kids who tend to make up the lower 25-50% of the admitted class's spectrum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All the non-Ivies ranked 10-20 on US News are pretty overrated e.g. Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Georgetown, WashU, Hopkins. Nobody really cares about those schools. They're fine but nothing to obsess over and they churn out plenty of "meh" undergrads every year. It's not like Northwestern or Emory are lottery tickets, but that's how some lunatic tiger moms act.

This is very much true, which makes it confusing as to why so many are obsessed with these schools based on their top 20-ish ranking.

These privates are pretty much regionally prestigious at most. In the upper Midwest, Northwestern is somewhat prestigious perhaps. Outside, not many people care about it. Frankly, I feel the same way about U. Chicago, which gets a lot of undue cachet due to its recent association with Obama - who was a lecturer, not a professor.

In the lower midwest, perhaps Washington University is somewhat prestigious. Maryland for Hopkins. South/Appalachia for Vanderbilt, perhaps. Ironically Georgetown may be the most "prestigious throughout the mid-Atlantic/Northeast due to its association as a school for prep school kids who couldn't get into the Ivies.

This regional prestige is also true for Ivies like Dartmouth and Brown, but their reputation as Ivies does carry some cachet throughout the country/world, even if unjustifiably so

These universities may have some fields that are very well known nationwide/worldwide within those in the know about the field such as academics i.e. pre-med at Hopkins, international relations and investment banking/consulting recruiting at Georgetown, Economics at U. Chicago, investment banking at Dartmouth, etc. etc.

You have typed a lot of words. Congrats on that.

Now if only they made a salient point, you would have a win.

They make the point that you tiger-moming your kid and paying $5,000 for SAT prep classes and then paying $70,000/year so your kid can live in St. Louis is not worth the money or time if they plan to live anywhere outside of the lowest Midwest

You use a pejorative and then bring in financials. I thought the discussion was about educational qualities?

The idea that Dartmouth and Brown Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Hopkins etc. have "regional" prestige is absolutely ridiculous. No better way to show your ignorance than to assume others are.

In addition, and most importantly, people should encourage their children to attend schools that will prepare them best for the lives they want. Arguing that one "brand identity" is not equal to another is is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

/and yeah I know that's not a proper contextual use of the quotation from Macbeth, my mid-40s ranked private college learn-ded me gud.

Do you lack reading comprehension? I did not say Dartmouth and Brown have 'regional prestige', I specifically said their association as Ivies gives them country-wide and world-wide recognition, earned or not.

You don't think Northwestern, Hopkins, Vanderbilt have regional prestige? You think these are nationally renowned universities across the board? Hopkins is for medical school only, and I specifically stated that its known for pre-med. Outside of that, not at all.

Your words:

This regional prestige is also true for Ivies like Dartmouth and Brown

I rest my case.

Hahaha, why don't you post the entire quote you lying hack?

This regional prestige is also true for Ivies like Dartmouth and Brown, but their reputation as Ivies does carry some cachet throughout the country/world, even if unjustifiably so

You think that qualifies your statement? And by the way, I DID quote it, above. Your Words. Choose them more carefully next time.

No you didn't, you quoted less than half my statement. I don't need to choose my words more carefully, you need to read more carefully. You are grasping for straws here buddy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, if colleges ranked 10 to 20 are overrated, with what would you replace them? You know, there are these things called cardinal numbers. If you can't think of any to replace them, how could they possibly be overrated?

Most college from 20-40 could replace them easily. Carnegie Mellon for example is considered a far more rigorous university by those in the know than Vanderbilt, Washington University, Northwestern, etc. and has the same amount of prestige in general and far more prestige in engineering.

Most college?

So you are saying that a majority of colleges ranked 20 to 40 are better than those ranked 10 to 20? OK, name 11.

Words have meaning.


(Not that I care. I am just pointing out typical DCUM idiocy.)

Where did I say better? I said replaceable.

In no particular order: CMU, Georgia Tech, Berkeley, Tufts, Michigan, UCLA, UC San Diego, UNC, UVA, Case Western, Boston College. Even NYU, USC, Boston University and multiple other UC's such as Davis, Irvine and Santa Barbara could be on that list, as well as schools well outside of the top 40 such as Pepperdine and a whole host of publics.

The point of course isn't that only the top 10-20 in essence could be replaced - Northwestern is within the top 10 and I think that could easily be replaced as well. The point is the prestige drop off after Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Yale, Princeton, Caltech is massive. Colleges Columbia, Penn, Cornell, Dartmouth, Brown have cachet due to being in the Ivies, and Duke/Georgetown have cachet for being schools where prep school kids go to have being rejected by the Ivies.

Blah blah blah

So, what you are saying is not that numbers 10 to 20 are overrated, but rather 10 through 20 ain't worth shit. This must be your Ivy League education failing you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone who went to one of the "top five" for grad school, I would have to say they are all replaceable for undergrad. God I loved flunking out all those wannabe pre-meds as a TA for Introductory Chemistry. For all the difficulty getting into this school, the freshmen didn't seem that bright to me.

Certainly, but the point of my post was about prestige/name recognition of the college, not the undergraduate student quality. think everyone knows that Ivies and Stanford admit a bunch of undeserving legacy, donor, etc. kids who tend to make up the lower 25-50% of the admitted class's spectrum.

Excuse me, but did I say that just the rich whiteys were being flunked? Such idiocy. Must be DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone who went to one of the "top five" for grad school, I would have to say they are all replaceable for undergrad. God I loved flunking out all those wannabe pre-meds as a TA for Introductory Chemistry. For all the difficulty getting into this school, the freshmen didn't seem that bright to me.

Certainly, but the point of my post was about prestige/name recognition of the college, not the undergraduate student quality. think everyone knows that Ivies and Stanford admit a bunch of undeserving legacy, donor, etc. kids who tend to make up the lower 25-50% of the admitted class's spectrum.

The “prestige” and “name recognition” you associate with H’s URMs, legacies, donors, and meathead jocks exist only in your thick skull.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All the non-Ivies ranked 10-20 on US News are pretty overrated e.g. Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Georgetown, WashU, Hopkins. Nobody really cares about those schools. They're fine but nothing to obsess over and they churn out plenty of "meh" undergrads every year. It's not like Northwestern or Emory are lottery tickets, but that's how some lunatic tiger moms act.

This is very much true, which makes it confusing as to why so many are obsessed with these schools based on their top 20-ish ranking.

These privates are pretty much regionally prestigious at most. In the upper Midwest, Northwestern is somewhat prestigious perhaps. Outside, not many people care about it. Frankly, I feel the same way about U. Chicago, which gets a lot of undue cachet due to its recent association with Obama - who was a lecturer, not a professor.

In the lower midwest, perhaps Washington University is somewhat prestigious. Maryland for Hopkins. South/Appalachia for Vanderbilt, perhaps. Ironically Georgetown may be the most "prestigious throughout the mid-Atlantic/Northeast due to its association as a school for prep school kids who couldn't get into the Ivies.

This regional prestige is also true for Ivies like Dartmouth and Brown, but their reputation as Ivies does carry some cachet throughout the country/world, even if unjustifiably so

These universities may have some fields that are very well known nationwide/worldwide within those in the know about the field such as academics i.e. pre-med at Hopkins, international relations and investment banking/consulting recruiting at Georgetown, Economics at U. Chicago, investment banking at Dartmouth, etc. etc.

You have typed a lot of words. Congrats on that.

Now if only they made a salient point, you would have a win.

They make the point that you tiger-moming your kid and paying $5,000 for SAT prep classes and then paying $70,000/year so your kid can live in St. Louis is not worth the money or time if they plan to live anywhere outside of the lowest Midwest

You use a pejorative and then bring in financials. I thought the discussion was about educational qualities?

The idea that Dartmouth and Brown Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Hopkins etc. have "regional" prestige is absolutely ridiculous. No better way to show your ignorance than to assume others are.

In addition, and most importantly, people should encourage their children to attend schools that will prepare them best for the lives they want. Arguing that one "brand identity" is not equal to another is is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

/and yeah I know that's not a proper contextual use of the quotation from Macbeth, my mid-40s ranked private college learn-ded me gud.

Do you lack reading comprehension? I did not say Dartmouth and Brown have 'regional prestige', I specifically said their association as Ivies gives them country-wide and world-wide recognition, earned or not.

You don't think Northwestern, Hopkins, Vanderbilt have regional prestige? You think these are nationally renowned universities across the board? Hopkins is for medical school only, and I specifically stated that its known for pre-med. Outside of that, not at all.

Keep on posting Dopey. As long as you are posting, we know you are not out rioting and looting. Nice knowing the country is safe.

DP. Trumper much? Your guy will lose big time on Nov 3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All the non-Ivies ranked 10-20 on US News are pretty overrated e.g. Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Georgetown, WashU, Hopkins. Nobody really cares about those schools. They're fine but nothing to obsess over and they churn out plenty of "meh" undergrads every year. It's not like Northwestern or Emory are lottery tickets, but that's how some lunatic tiger moms act.

This is very much true, which makes it confusing as to why so many are obsessed with these schools based on their top 20-ish ranking.

These privates are pretty much regionally prestigious at most. In the upper Midwest, Northwestern is somewhat prestigious perhaps. Outside, not many people care about it. Frankly, I feel the same way about U. Chicago, which gets a lot of undue cachet due to its recent association with Obama - who was a lecturer, not a professor.

In the lower midwest, perhaps Washington University is somewhat prestigious. Maryland for Hopkins. South/Appalachia for Vanderbilt, perhaps. Ironically Georgetown may be the most "prestigious throughout the mid-Atlantic/Northeast due to its association as a school for prep school kids who couldn't get into the Ivies.

This regional prestige is also true for Ivies like Dartmouth and Brown, but their reputation as Ivies does carry some cachet throughout the country/world, even if unjustifiably so

These universities may have some fields that are very well known nationwide/worldwide within those in the know about the field such as academics i.e. pre-med at Hopkins, international relations and investment banking/consulting recruiting at Georgetown, Economics at U. Chicago, investment banking at Dartmouth, etc. etc.

You have typed a lot of words. Congrats on that.

Now if only they made a salient point, you would have a win.

They make the point that you tiger-moming your kid and paying $5,000 for SAT prep classes and then paying $70,000/year so your kid can live in St. Louis is not worth the money or time if they plan to live anywhere outside of the lowest Midwest

You use a pejorative and then bring in financials. I thought the discussion was about educational qualities?

The idea that Dartmouth and Brown Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Hopkins etc. have "regional" prestige is absolutely ridiculous. No better way to show your ignorance than to assume others are.

In addition, and most importantly, people should encourage their children to attend schools that will prepare them best for the lives they want. Arguing that one "brand identity" is not equal to another is is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

/and yeah I know that's not a proper contextual use of the quotation from Macbeth, my mid-40s ranked private college learn-ded me gud.

Do you lack reading comprehension? I did not say Dartmouth and Brown have 'regional prestige', I specifically said their association as Ivies gives them country-wide and world-wide recognition, earned or not.

You don't think Northwestern, Hopkins, Vanderbilt have regional prestige? You think these are nationally renowned universities across the board? Hopkins is for medical school only, and I specifically stated that its known for pre-med. Outside of that, not at all.

Your words:

This regional prestige is also true for Ivies like Dartmouth and Brown

I rest my case.

Hahaha, why don't you post the entire quote you lying hack?

This regional prestige is also true for Ivies like Dartmouth and Brown, but their reputation as Ivies does carry some cachet throughout the country/world, even if unjustifiably so

You think that qualifies your statement? And by the way, I DID quote it, above. Your Words. Choose them more carefully next time.

No you didn't, you quoted less than half my statement. I don't need to choose my words more carefully, you need to read more carefully. You are grasping for straws here buddy.

Here's what funny:

You make a claim and then keep posting the very text that proves it to be untrue. Again, and again.

You continue to amuse me immensely. "Please proceed, Senator..."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone who went to one of the "top five" for grad school, I would have to say they are all replaceable for undergrad. God I loved flunking out all those wannabe pre-meds as a TA for Introductory Chemistry. For all the difficulty getting into this school, the freshmen didn't seem that bright to me.

Certainly, but the point of my post was about prestige/name recognition of the college, not the undergraduate student quality. think everyone knows that Ivies and Stanford admit a bunch of undeserving legacy, donor, etc. kids who tend to make up the lower 25-50% of the admitted class's spectrum.

What you're failing to acknowledge is that the Ivies, Stanford, Duke, MIT get the best of the best. So even the somewhat under-qualified URMs, legacies, rich kids are the best of the best. And they have a nose for potential. Kushner is an idiot, was bribed into Harvard ... yet he's essentially de facto POTUS right now making $100M a year.

The snapchat billionaire kid Evan seems to have had some string pulled to get him into Stanford (rich dad). He's worth $5 billion. Carly Fiorina's dad obviously got her into Stanford ... yet she still became top exec at AT&T and then CEO of HP.

A verifiable dumb as a brick URM student-athlete from our neighborhood went to an HYPS. 10 years later he's making big bucks in some vague "community outreach" role at a Fortune 100 company.

Our oldest son graduated from an Ivy. His college girlfriend was an awful engineering student; totally clueless. She shamelessly cheated her way all through the major and had him (and other boys) literally do her work. She's now a tech exec in SV making millions a year.