Which of the T20 schools have the least driven, intense, goal-oriented students?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
A person who’s never heard of Carleton—or Swarthmore, Amherst, Williams, etc.—tells me that that they and/or their parents weren’t privy to certain elite circles. Truth. |
Anonymous
|
It is difficult to find an answer in such sweeping generalizations. I went to W&M and had a great time but the stereotype is the student body is not fun. I was not going out 4 nights/week but I often did something social 1-2 nights and always had my door open so dorm mates would drop in and out. I remember studying on Barksdale all afternoon, and thinking it doesn’t get better than reading in the sun on a blanket. I also was an daily runner and participated in a few clubs, the subject of which I am still involved today.
Definitely seemed to me that most people liked to study (myself included) and that didn’t stress me out terribly. Finals must have been hard (I don’t remember but I do remember being really tired the first days when I got home for winter break). So maybe that is my long-winded way of saying checking out a T50 for balance. I ended up with a dream job right out of W&M and great friends. |
Anonymous
| So DCUM. Sing it with me: “You’ve got the dream but not the drive.” |
Anonymous
|
I think you look to Southern California because the weather and outdoors and general vibe will help keep stress and focus on classes in manageable perspective.
So UCLA and Pomona (feel free to chime in those aren’t T20 now 🙄) |
Anonymous
This. I’m having a hard time with this thread. College is supposed to be for studying. OP seems to want the “top credentials” for their kid, with none of the effort. OP I’m sure your kid can find an easy major and the stoner crowd, and enjoy some Gentleman’s Cs. |
Anonymous
In the current US News National Liberal Arts Colleges ranking, Carleton is tied for #6. 1. Williams 2. Amherst 3. Pomona 4. Swarthmore 5. Wellesley 6. Bowdoin, Carleton, US Naval Academy Claremont McKenna is tied for 9th, Middlebury for 11th, Grinnell for 15th, Barnard for 18th, Harvey Mudd for 29th. Perhaps the PP who said it is "never ranked on ANY T20 list" prefers a different ranking system, but US News isn't exactly obscure. It is also listed as #1 for Undergraduate Teaching for National Liberal Arts Colleges by US News. The fact that it flies under the radar ("a school most people have ever heard of") actually supports its place in this discussion. And while its physical location is lovely, some people write it off because it is located in Minnesota. Ultimately, students aren't there because they think people will be impressed by the name on the diploma. Instead, it fits a lot of what OP was looking for, a place with students with "top credentials that would nonetheless have a lot of fun kids who don't take themselves seriously." |
Anonymous
There is a difference between being in a place where people study for joy and an intense desire to learn and a place where people study because they just want elite As, and they mostly don’t care about the subject matter. The former is heaven for nerds, which is how OP describes her DC. The latter is a Tracy Flick hellscape. I don’t think OPs child wants “easy.” What my guess that OPs child wants is a classic collegiate learning experience where the primary goal is educational, not achievement. It used to be that those were synonymous in the T20, but they aren’t any more. OP, I would look at a smaller SLAC. Those tend to be the top academic environments where the students are also motivated by a joy of learning. There are less of them gunning for med school, law school, b-school, venture funding, etc. immediately after graduation and there will be kids willing to take academic risk for the sake of learning in those schools. |
Anonymous
| PP here. Argh. FEWER of them. Sigh. |
Anonymous
You mean T20s were places where the privileged could expect that all the need to do is get admitted, and then slack? So sad for students finding out they actually have to work hard. And you’re always free to slack - nobody is going to stop you. I learned this in law school where many “Tracy Flick” types realized that with a strict curve they were always going to get Bs, so they turned their focus elsewhere. OP’s child is showing really poor character. Can’t bring themselves to study hard. Can’t bring themselves to accept being a B student and focus on their own goals. Can’t accept the reality and instead chooses to blame others and call them names (“grinds” and “Tracey Flicks.”) |
Anonymous
Most people don’t consider the top 20 SLAC list topic schools. I mean Colby, a top 20? Come on. |
Anonymous
“top schools” |
Anonymous
| What T15 us going to thwart this students desire to learn? If she is not focused on grades then don't focus on grades. |
Anonymous
OP here. This is a little mean, since you’re responding to me pointedly while relying on thread drift for your facts. OP’s *KID* sought out and is already attending a top school. There are no Cs. Kid just wants to socialize more than once a month and locate similar friends who accept a 93 instead of pulling all-nighters for the 96.5 Tracy Flick. Did she have fun? It is instructive that no one has first- or second-hand experience with a objectively top school that has a fun campus vibe. |
Anonymous
Well excuse us |
Anonymous
Of course you are a lawyer. In any event, you have nicely demonstrated the problem. You are deeply insecure and feel seen by what OP describes (which is a real phenomenon; ask any tenured T20 professor about how many of their students now are driven by a desire for education rather than achievement). You are lashing out at OPs child for having poor character, when OPs child has in fact identified an issue that is widely discussed by academic leaders at T20 schools. Do you think your post makes you look like the calm and rational one? OPs child comes across as far more insightful than you, an adult who is so scared of what OPs child observed that he feels compelled to call a teenager names. You will never understand the joy of learning a subject purely for the joy of learning. That’s okay, but that means you can’t understand the environment that OPs child wants. |