williams vs vassar?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think the actual education quality is very different, but Williams is more famous, has a higher rank, and enjoys a larger endowment.

Is Williams more famous? Vassar is pretty well known...Lisa Simpson was thinking of going there.

In the real world, maybe 10 percent of Americans are familiar with Williams. And maybe 12 percent with Vassar.

No Dog in this fight - neither of my kids have interest in these schools;

I've heard countless references in Film and TV about Vassar. First heard about it on Beverly Hillbillies and recently on Silicon Valley. I think the Entertainment industry has a lot of alumni from Vassar - the other comments bolster this position with descriptions like "artsy".

Williams is not referenced at all in Entertainment but those who about colleges know about Williams.

I'm leaning towards Vassar as being more popular but not necessarily "better". And if you have these choices then "life is good!"

Well if you ever need a job from someone who watches Beverly Hillbillies reruns, you know which school to go to.

Ok. my point was which school is more known. Like UC Berkeley vs UCLA. UCLA is more popular outside of the US.

Off topic, but I don’t think that’s true. UCLA might be as or more popular in the US because of sports. But those are mostly US sports that aren’t nearly as popular overseas. Berkeley always tops it in international rankings and has a far more pervasive influence in the history of science worldwide. I say this as one of the people who gets annoyed when boosters talk about his it’s the best school of all time for undergrads— it is not. But everyone who takes intro chem anywhere sees its impact in filling out the periodic table. Everyone interested in CS (which seems like 1/4 of all people studying stem these days) knows something about Berkeley’s role in co-feeding (with Stanford) Silicon Valley’s tech innovation. Most who studied physics have heard something about its history with the Manhattan project. And the world at large is aware of its extensive track record with Nobel-prize winning research, something like 5 times as many affiliations as UCLA. It’s not really close in terms of historic contributions to what we know about nature or to tech innovation.

UCB had done more - fully agree; digging deeper into this hole more that I thought I would. My UCLA vs UCB statement is anecdotal and not based on a survey - my overseas relatives who drop names like: Cambridge and Oxford. They looked at me funny when I said UCB over UCLA. I still maintain the recognition of the University is on the eye of the beholder, ask a person in: Oregon - GMU vs JMU? If they watched the Final Four 20years ago they may lean GMU. Its nothing to do with a knowledgeable educated weight. And at a certain level - if I'm interviewing people from UCLA vs UCB, I'm not giving either extra points. If its between Williams and Vassar - you better bring more than a name. You better hope your education prepped you for my interview. I picked a UVA CS grad over a CMU grad - simply because the UVA grad did more with their time at UVA then work towards a paper with beautiful calligraphy. I'm reading this thread to see how Williams makes someone better skilled for the real-world? I'm getting answers like its a Coke vs Pepsi debate - very shallow. At least CMU says they do it by hands-on. Caltech says the difficulty in exams is astounding on top of practical hands-on. Eh sometimes you need to dig through a lot of dirt to find a jem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Vassar isn't good for straight boys to be honest.

This is only an issue for dcum. Vassar is fine for a straight man and he’ll have his picking for gf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think the actual education quality is very different, but Williams is more famous, has a higher rank, and enjoys a larger endowment.

Is Williams more famous? Vassar is pretty well known...Lisa Simpson was thinking of going there.

In the real world, maybe 10 percent of Americans are familiar with Williams. And maybe 12 percent with Vassar.

No Dog in this fight - neither of my kids have interest in these schools;

I've heard countless references in Film and TV about Vassar. First heard about it on Beverly Hillbillies and recently on Silicon Valley. I think the Entertainment industry has a lot of alumni from Vassar - the other comments bolster this position with descriptions like "artsy".

Williams is not referenced at all in Entertainment but those who about colleges know about Williams.

I'm leaning towards Vassar as being more popular but not necessarily "better". And if you have these choices then "life is good!"

Well if you ever need a job from someone who watches Beverly Hillbillies reruns, you know which school to go to.

Ok. my point was which school is more known. Like UC Berkeley vs UCLA. UCLA is more popular outside of the US.

Off topic, but I don’t think that’s true. UCLA might be as or more popular in the US because of sports. But those are mostly US sports that aren’t nearly as popular overseas. Berkeley always tops it in international rankings and has a far more pervasive influence in the history of science worldwide. I say this as one of the people who gets annoyed when boosters talk about his it’s the best school of all time for undergrads— it is not. But everyone who takes intro chem anywhere sees its impact in filling out the periodic table. Everyone interested in CS (which seems like 1/4 of all people studying stem these days) knows something about Berkeley’s role in co-feeding (with Stanford) Silicon Valley’s tech innovation. Most who studied physics have heard something about its history with the Manhattan project. And the world at large is aware of its extensive track record with Nobel-prize winning research, something like 5 times as many affiliations as UCLA. It’s not really close in terms of historic contributions to what we know about nature or to tech innovation.

UCB had done more - fully agree; digging deeper into this hole more that I thought I would. My UCLA vs UCB statement is anecdotal and not based on a survey - my overseas relatives who drop names like: Cambridge and Oxford. They looked at me funny when I said UCB over UCLA. I still maintain the recognition of the University is on the eye of the beholder, ask a person in: Oregon - GMU vs JMU? If they watched the Final Four 20years ago they may lean GMU. Its nothing to do with a knowledgeable educated weight. And at a certain level - if I'm interviewing people from UCLA vs UCB, I'm not giving either extra points. If its between Williams and Vassar - you better bring more than a name. You better hope your education prepped you for my interview. I picked a UVA CS grad over a CMU grad - simply because the UVA grad did more with their time at UVA then work towards a paper with beautiful calligraphy. I'm reading this thread to see how Williams makes someone better skilled for the real-world? I'm getting answers like its a Coke vs Pepsi debate - very shallow. At least CMU says they do it by hands-on. Caltech says the difficulty in exams is astounding on top of practical hands-on. Eh sometimes you need to dig through a lot of dirt to find a jem.

I'm not sure if you are saying that calligraphy is good or bad, but Steve Jobs said calligraphy was the most important course he took in college. It developed his interest in design, which was a major thing that differentiated Apple products from the ugly stuff other companies were creating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vassar isn't good for straight boys to be honest.

This is only an issue for dcum. Vassar is fine for a straight man and he’ll have his picking for gf

It’s okay for a straight guy to have a cohort of like friends. Or access to them. Just as a gay kid would have a better outcome in a school that has plenty of gay kids.

Dating is an issue only DCUM focuses on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think the actual education quality is very different, but Williams is more famous, has a higher rank, and enjoys a larger endowment.

Is Williams more famous? Vassar is pretty well known...Lisa Simpson was thinking of going there.

In the real world, maybe 10 percent of Americans are familiar with Williams. And maybe 12 percent with Vassar.

No Dog in this fight - neither of my kids have interest in these schools;

I've heard countless references in Film and TV about Vassar. First heard about it on Beverly Hillbillies and recently on Silicon Valley. I think the Entertainment industry has a lot of alumni from Vassar - the other comments bolster this position with descriptions like "artsy".

Williams is not referenced at all in Entertainment but those who about colleges know about Williams.

I'm leaning towards Vassar as being more popular but not necessarily "better". And if you have these choices then "life is good!"

Well if you ever need a job from someone who watches Beverly Hillbillies reruns, you know which school to go to.

Ok. my point was which school is more known. Like UC Berkeley vs UCLA. UCLA is more popular outside of the US.

Off topic, but I don’t think that’s true. UCLA might be as or more popular in the US because of sports. But those are mostly US sports that aren’t nearly as popular overseas. Berkeley always tops it in international rankings and has a far more pervasive influence in the history of science worldwide. I say this as one of the people who gets annoyed when boosters talk about his it’s the best school of all time for undergrads— it is not. But everyone who takes intro chem anywhere sees its impact in filling out the periodic table. Everyone interested in CS (which seems like 1/4 of all people studying stem these days) knows something about Berkeley’s role in co-feeding (with Stanford) Silicon Valley’s tech innovation. Most who studied physics have heard something about its history with the Manhattan project. And the world at large is aware of its extensive track record with Nobel-prize winning research, something like 5 times as many affiliations as UCLA. It’s not really close in terms of historic contributions to what we know about nature or to tech innovation.

UCB had done more - fully agree; digging deeper into this hole more that I thought I would. My UCLA vs UCB statement is anecdotal and not based on a survey - my overseas relatives who drop names like: Cambridge and Oxford. They looked at me funny when I said UCB over UCLA. I still maintain the recognition of the University is on the eye of the beholder, ask a person in: Oregon - GMU vs JMU? If they watched the Final Four 20years ago they may lean GMU. Its nothing to do with a knowledgeable educated weight. And at a certain level - if I'm interviewing people from UCLA vs UCB, I'm not giving either extra points. If its between Williams and Vassar - you better bring more than a name. You better hope your education prepped you for my interview. I picked a UVA CS grad over a CMU grad - simply because the UVA grad did more with their time at UVA then work towards a paper with beautiful calligraphy. I'm reading this thread to see how Williams makes someone better skilled for the real-world? I'm getting answers like its a Coke vs Pepsi debate - very shallow. At least CMU says they do it by hands-on. Caltech says the difficulty in exams is astounding on top of practical hands-on. Eh sometimes you need to dig through a lot of dirt to find a jem.

I'm not sure if you are saying that calligraphy is good or bad, but Steve Jobs said calligraphy was the most important course he took in college. It developed his interest in design, which was a major thing that differentiated Apple products from the ugly stuff other companies were creating.

"paper with beautiful calligraphy" was a sarcastic euphemism for a college degree; calligraphy on its own is good and I encourage those who want to learn it to learn it; Some cultures equate the practice with meditation.