Why a Large Flagship/Public?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DD is at Michigan. To her, it represents the whole package. Many opportunities, academic and social. Great research to be involved in even as an undergrad. Well respected. Huge alumni network for job opportunities.

She doesn’t like the fierce competition for some classes but she actually said to me, “I took some classes I didn’t think I would like all that much but they turned out to be good. And now I am more interested in X.”

It is true that as a Freshman she could disappear and no one would know. As the kids progress, many of their classes get smaller and it would be much harder to skip classes and such. Even as a sophomore some of her classes like Mandarin had maybe 20 people. She said her Freshman year was the outlier in this respect, and overall academically it was probably the least fun year but most fun socially.

She is very happy with her choice but it’s not for all kids. Other DD is at Colby. Go figure.

My DC is at UCLA and I can say the same thing. Academic and research powerhouse with great opportunities for undergrads too. It's extraordinarily diverse in every way and filled with super smart, motivated students. DC landed a well-paid summer internship this year at a major tech company and is not even a STEM major. DC is having an amazing experience both academically and socially. DC graduated from a small, private high school and had no desire to go to a small private university. Only applied to large publics and had the choice of Michigan, UT Austin and UCLA. All top choices in my opinion.

Sure, these schools are not for everyone but my DC is thriving in the UCLA environment.

[Anonymous]

My kid ruled out big state schools early. When we toured them, they felt like cities. For example, you could never leave your things on the table in the library or they would get stolen. Parking was difficult and expensive. This was not the case at the small LAC's she favored.

As a parent, I liked the idea of her finishing her growing into adulthood in a relatively closed, safe environment. She will have her twenties to face all of the world's dangers and hardships (no need to encounter that at 18, though of course there is learning in doing so). What is wrong with her sitting on an Adirondack chair reading on a beautiful spring day? Four years at an LAC struck me as a rather idyllic interlude. Her professors stroll by. She knows their dogs.

At the time she was choosing, I supervised a recent U of MD graduate. She said that during finals week she had to go to her parents house to study, since there was no seats on campus/in the library. That stuck with me.

I was happy that my DC preferred and got the LAC opportunity. (Note: we are not wealthy. She chose second tier schools that gave generous merit aid.)


Both environments undoubtedly suit some kids. So we don't have to fight over this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid ruled out big state schools early. When we toured them, they felt like cities. For example, you could never leave your things on the table in the library or they would get stolen. Parking was difficult and expensive. This was not the case at the small LAC's she favored.

As a parent, I liked the idea of her finishing her growing into adulthood in a relatively closed, safe environment. She will have her twenties to face all of the world's dangers and hardships (no need to encounter that at 18, though of course there is learning in doing so). What is wrong with her sitting on an Adirondack chair reading on a beautiful spring day? Four years at an LAC struck me as a rather idyllic interlude. Her professors stroll by. She knows their dogs.

At the time she was choosing, I supervised a recent U of MD graduate. She said that during finals week she had to go to her parents house to study, since there was no seats on campus/in the library. That stuck with me.

I was happy that my DC preferred and got the LAC opportunity. (Note: we are not wealthy. She chose second tier schools that gave generous merit aid.)


Both environments undoubtedly suit some kids. So we don't have to fight over this.

You sound pompous and your kid sounds childlike. No offense intended. Just advising that you read a post like this through the eyes of potential readers before clicking "submit."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid ruled out big state schools early. When we toured them, they felt like cities. For example, you could never leave your things on the table in the library or they would get stolen. Parking was difficult and expensive. This was not the case at the small LAC's she favored.

As a parent, I liked the idea of her finishing her growing into adulthood in a relatively closed, safe environment. She will have her twenties to face all of the world's dangers and hardships (no need to encounter that at 18, though of course there is learning in doing so). What is wrong with her sitting on an Adirondack chair reading on a beautiful spring day? Four years at an LAC struck me as a rather idyllic interlude. Her professors stroll by. She knows their dogs.

At the time she was choosing, I supervised a recent U of MD graduate. She said that during finals week she had to go to her parents house to study, since there was no seats on campus/in the library. That stuck with me.

I was happy that my DC preferred and got the LAC opportunity. (Note: we are not wealthy. She chose second tier schools that gave generous merit aid.)


Both environments undoubtedly suit some kids. So we don't have to fight over this.

1,335 acre campus and she couldn't find anywhere to study. Seriously? I went to a state school just as large and never had that problem. You could always find an empty room somewhere. This is a really lame reason not to attend a large school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid ruled out big state schools early. When we toured them, they felt like cities. For example, you could never leave your things on the table in the library or they would get stolen. Parking was difficult and expensive. This was not the case at the small LAC's she favored.

As a parent, I liked the idea of her finishing her growing into adulthood in a relatively closed, safe environment. She will have her twenties to face all of the world's dangers and hardships (no need to encounter that at 18, though of course there is learning in doing so). What is wrong with her sitting on an Adirondack chair reading on a beautiful spring day? Four years at an LAC struck me as a rather idyllic interlude. Her professors stroll by. She knows their dogs.

At the time she was choosing, I supervised a recent U of MD graduate. She said that during finals week she had to go to her parents house to study, since there was no seats on campus/in the library. That stuck with me.

I was happy that my DC preferred and got the LAC opportunity. (Note: we are not wealthy. She chose second tier schools that gave generous merit aid.)


Both environments undoubtedly suit some kids. So we don't have to fight over this.

You sound pompous and your kid sounds childlike. No offense intended. Just advising that you read a post like this through the eyes of potential readers before clicking "submit."

So much for the olive branch...I guess you are defensive.

My kid WAS a very young college freshmen, as are many humans at 17.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid ruled out big state schools early. When we toured them, they felt like cities. For example, you could never leave your things on the table in the library or they would get stolen. Parking was difficult and expensive. This was not the case at the small LAC's she favored.

As a parent, I liked the idea of her finishing her growing into adulthood in a relatively closed, safe environment. She will have her twenties to face all of the world's dangers and hardships (no need to encounter that at 18, though of course there is learning in doing so). What is wrong with her sitting on an Adirondack chair reading on a beautiful spring day? Four years at an LAC struck me as a rather idyllic interlude. Her professors stroll by. She knows their dogs.

At the time she was choosing, I supervised a recent U of MD graduate. She said that during finals week she had to go to her parents house to study, since there was no seats on campus/in the library. That stuck with me.

I was happy that my DC preferred and got the LAC opportunity. (Note: we are not wealthy. She chose second tier schools that gave generous merit aid.)


Both environments undoubtedly suit some kids. So we don't have to fight over this.

She specifically mentioned the library and lounges throughout campus. Just quoting a recent student's experience. Don't attack the messenger.

How come it is okay to sing the praises of large public settings, but those who prefer small LAC's are getting pushback? Perhaps some parents are wondering if they kids missed out maybe?

1,335 acre campus and she couldn't find anywhere to study. Seriously? I went to a state school just as large and never had that problem. You could always find an empty room somewhere. This is a really lame reason not to attend a large school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid ruled out big state schools early. When we toured them, they felt like cities. For example, you could never leave your things on the table in the library or they would get stolen. Parking was difficult and expensive. This was not the case at the small LAC's she favored.

As a parent, I liked the idea of her finishing her growing into adulthood in a relatively closed, safe environment. She will have her twenties to face all of the world's dangers and hardships (no need to encounter that at 18, though of course there is learning in doing so). What is wrong with her sitting on an Adirondack chair reading on a beautiful spring day? Four years at an LAC struck me as a rather idyllic interlude. Her professors stroll by. She knows their dogs.

At the time she was choosing, I supervised a recent U of MD graduate. She said that during finals week she had to go to her parents house to study, since there was no seats on campus/in the library. That stuck with me.

I was happy that my DC preferred and got the LAC opportunity. (Note: we are not wealthy. She chose second tier schools that gave generous merit aid.)


Both environments undoubtedly suit some kids. So we don't have to fight over this.

Pompous? I don't see it.

You sound pompous and your kid sounds childlike. No offense intended. Just advising that you read a post like this through the eyes of potential readers before clicking "submit."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid ruled out big state schools early. When we toured them, they felt like cities. For example, you could never leave your things on the table in the library or they would get stolen. Parking was difficult and expensive. This was not the case at the small LAC's she favored.

As a parent, I liked the idea of her finishing her growing into adulthood in a relatively closed, safe environment. She will have her twenties to face all of the world's dangers and hardships (no need to encounter that at 18, though of course there is learning in doing so). What is wrong with her sitting on an Adirondack chair reading on a beautiful spring day? Four years at an LAC struck me as a rather idyllic interlude. Her professors stroll by. She knows their dogs.

At the time she was choosing, I supervised a recent U of MD graduate. She said that during finals week she had to go to her parents house to study, since there was no seats on campus/in the library. That stuck with me.

I was happy that my DC preferred and got the LAC opportunity. (Note: we are not wealthy. She chose second tier schools that gave generous merit aid.)


Both environments undoubtedly suit some kids. So we don't have to fight over this.

You sound pompous and your kid sounds childlike. No offense intended. Just advising that you read a post like this through the eyes of potential readers before clicking "submit."

Since we are giving advice to each other, if you don't intend to offend someone, maybe don't call them pompous (which I did not get from the post at all) or demean their child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DD is at Michigan. To her, it represents the whole package. Many opportunities, academic and social. Great research to be involved in even as an undergrad. Well respected. Huge alumni network for job opportunities.

She doesn’t like the fierce competition for some classes but she actually said to me, “I took some classes I didn’t think I would like all that much but they turned out to be good. And now I am more interested in X.”

It is true that as a Freshman she could disappear and no one would know. As the kids progress, many of their classes get smaller and it would be much harder to skip classes and such. Even as a sophomore some of her classes like Mandarin had maybe 20 people. She said her Freshman year was the outlier in this respect, and overall academically it was probably the least fun year but most fun socially.

She is very happy with her choice but it’s not for all kids. Other DD is at Colby. Go figure.

Can you elaborate on the 'fierce competition for some classes'? I'm not sure what you mean by that? Competition to get the classes you want to take?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t really understand a school the size of a HS. I don’t understand wanting to be buddy buddy with professors. I want somebody who learned the material without hand holding and get out and got a job. I don’t need to hire somebody who needed to be handled and coddled and “known”.

Many want to fly under the radar and just get an education.

If you hire a flag state student they are self starters, don’t need to bring their dog to work for support and work hard.

No offense but you don’t seem terribly bright.

We’ll you are wrong

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DD is at Michigan. To her, it represents the whole package. Many opportunities, academic and social. Great research to be involved in even as an undergrad. Well respected. Huge alumni network for job opportunities.

She doesn’t like the fierce competition for some classes but she actually said to me, “I took some classes I didn’t think I would like all that much but they turned out to be good. And now I am more interested in X.”

It is true that as a Freshman she could disappear and no one would know. As the kids progress, many of their classes get smaller and it would be much harder to skip classes and such. Even as a sophomore some of her classes like Mandarin had maybe 20 people. She said her Freshman year was the outlier in this respect, and overall academically it was probably the least fun year but most fun socially.

She is very happy with her choice but it’s not for all kids. Other DD is at Colby. Go figure.

Go figure what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid ruled out big state schools early. When we toured them, they felt like cities. For example, you could never leave your things on the table in the library or they would get stolen. Parking was difficult and expensive. This was not the case at the small LAC's she favored.

As a parent, I liked the idea of her finishing her growing into adulthood in a relatively closed, safe environment. She will have her twenties to face all of the world's dangers and hardships (no need to encounter that at 18, though of course there is learning in doing so). What is wrong with her sitting on an Adirondack chair reading on a beautiful spring day? Four years at an LAC struck me as a rather idyllic interlude. Her professors stroll by. She knows their dogs.

At the time she was choosing, I supervised a recent U of MD graduate. She said that during finals week she had to go to her parents house to study, since there was no seats on campus/in the library. That stuck with me.

I was happy that my DC preferred and got the LAC opportunity. (Note: we are not wealthy. She chose second tier schools that gave generous merit aid.)


Both environments undoubtedly suit some kids. So we don't have to fight over this.

You sound pompous and your kid sounds childlike. No offense intended. Just advising that you read a post like this through the eyes of potential readers before clicking "submit."

Since we are giving advice to each other, if you don't intend to offend someone, maybe don't call them pompous (which I did not get from the post at all) or demean their child.

"I liked the idea of her finishing her growing into adulthood in a relatively closed, safe environment. She will have her twenties to face all of the world's dangers and hardships (no need to encounter that at 18, though of course there is learning in doing so). What is wrong with her sitting on an Adirondack chair reading on a beautiful spring day? Four years at an LAC struck me as a rather idyllic interlude. Her professors stroll by. She knows their dogs."

If that's not pompous I don't know what is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid ruled out big state schools early. When we toured them, they felt like cities. For example, you could never leave your things on the table in the library or they would get stolen. Parking was difficult and expensive. This was not the case at the small LAC's she favored.

As a parent, I liked the idea of her finishing her growing into adulthood in a relatively closed, safe environment. She will have her twenties to face all of the world's dangers and hardships (no need to encounter that at 18, though of course there is learning in doing so). What is wrong with her sitting on an Adirondack chair reading on a beautiful spring day? Four years at an LAC struck me as a rather idyllic interlude. Her professors stroll by. She knows their dogs.

At the time she was choosing, I supervised a recent U of MD graduate. She said that during finals week she had to go to her parents house to study, since there was no seats on campus/in the library. That stuck with me.

I was happy that my DC preferred and got the LAC opportunity. (Note: we are not wealthy. She chose second tier schools that gave generous merit aid.)


Both environments undoubtedly suit some kids. So we don't have to fight over this.

You sound pompous and your kid sounds childlike. No offense intended. Just advising that you read a post like this through the eyes of potential readers before clicking "submit."

Since we are giving advice to each other, if you don't intend to offend someone, maybe don't call them pompous (which I did not get from the post at all) or demean their child.

"I liked the idea of her finishing her growing into adulthood in a relatively closed, safe environment. She will have her twenties to face all of the world's dangers and hardships (no need to encounter that at 18, though of course there is learning in doing so). What is wrong with her sitting on an Adirondack chair reading on a beautiful spring day? Four years at an LAC struck me as a rather idyllic interlude. Her professors stroll by. She knows their dogs."

If that's not pompous I don't know what is.

DP. No, sorry, it’s not “pompous.” Arguably, it’s precious and reflective of a bubble mentality. But I have no problem with it.

[Anonymous]

Blessed to have W&M in VA which, despite its larger than slac size, feels like a slac.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid ruled out big state schools early. When we toured them, they felt like cities. For example, you could never leave your things on the table in the library or they would get stolen. Parking was difficult and expensive. This was not the case at the small LAC's she favored.

As a parent, I liked the idea of her finishing her growing into adulthood in a relatively closed, safe environment. She will have her twenties to face all of the world's dangers and hardships (no need to encounter that at 18, though of course there is learning in doing so). What is wrong with her sitting on an Adirondack chair reading on a beautiful spring day? Four years at an LAC struck me as a rather idyllic interlude. Her professors stroll by. She knows their dogs.

At the time she was choosing, I supervised a recent U of MD graduate. She said that during finals week she had to go to her parents house to study, since there was no seats on campus/in the library. That stuck with me.

I was happy that my DC preferred and got the LAC opportunity. (Note: we are not wealthy. She chose second tier schools that gave generous merit aid.)


Both environments undoubtedly suit some kids. So we don't have to fight over this.

You sound pompous and your kid sounds childlike. No offense intended. Just advising that you read a post like this through the eyes of potential readers before clicking "submit."

Since we are giving advice to each other, if you don't intend to offend someone, maybe don't call them pompous (which I did not get from the post at all) or demean their child.

"I liked the idea of her finishing her growing into adulthood in a relatively closed, safe environment. She will have her twenties to face all of the world's dangers and hardships (no need to encounter that at 18, though of course there is learning in doing so). What is wrong with her sitting on an Adirondack chair reading on a beautiful spring day? Four years at an LAC struck me as a rather idyllic interlude. Her professors stroll by. She knows their dogs."

If that's not pompous I don't know what is.

DP. No, sorry, it’s not “pompous.” Arguably, it’s precious and reflective of a bubble mentality. But I have no problem with it.

Yea, you're right. Wrong word. How about annoying? Nauseating?