When you can’t get into an Ivy +

[Anonymous]

My oldest chose Amherst for the law school admissions advantage (and it paid off) but I agree with you for the most part. My youngest is a junior now and doesn’t know what she wants to do so UVA is her best option.

[Anonymous]

Some state schools are not that amazing, especially if they are not the right fit academically or socially, and some aren't even that cheap! You can go to an out of state public, or a private somewhere, for cheaper. And a better fit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why don’t you just go to your state flagship, especially if it’s ranked in , say, the top 50? Tell me it makes no sense to pay all of that money for a private university that isn’t ranked in the top 15 or 20 when you could go to UVA, Michigan, North Carolina, maybe Florida, and obviously the UC schools?

Because you can’t just choose where you’ll go to school. My DC didn’t get into UVA, but got into a higher ranked flagship in another state.

Kids with ivy level stats get rejected from the most competitive state flagships all the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why don’t you just go to your state flagship, especially if it’s ranked in , say, the top 50? Tell me it makes no sense to pay all of that money for a private university that isn’t ranked in the top 15 or 20 when you could go to UVA, Michigan, North Carolina, maybe Florida, and obviously the UC schools?

Because you can’t just choose where you’ll go to school. My DC didn’t get into UVA, but got into a higher ranked flagship in another state.

Kids with ivy level stats get rejected from the most competitive state flagships all the time.

Edit: … can’t choose where you’ll get into school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you don’t get into T15, you probably also didn’t get into UVA. Then there is no much difference tuition wise between UM and Rochester. Both are attractive to many students.

So you are saying what… UVA is T15 like?

Yes, UVA is ranked no 24 by USNWR. And no. 4 in the United States of public schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because my oldest wanted International Affairs. Georgetown and George Washington are both in the top 10 for that major. UMD, our in-state, is terrible.

He really liked GW's urban campus, so he went with that, and got some merit aid. Thankfully we can afford it.

For STEM, I agree that UMD would have been sufficient.

LOL @ "sufficient"

it’s ok. you didnt get into an actual top stem school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why don’t you just go to your state flagship, especially if it’s ranked in , say, the top 50? Tell me it makes no sense to pay all of that money for a private university that isn’t ranked in the top 15 or 20 when you could go to UVA, Michigan, North Carolina, maybe Florida, and obviously the UC schools?

Well, people that have instate Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, Georgia Tech, and UT-Austin as options are in a wonderful place. And I suspect very few of those families can be persuaded to drop an additional $250,000 for undergrad at a different school.

But that's five schools out of 5000 colleges. There are a bazillion reasons why people choose something different than the state flagship. And for middle class families, the elite private schools are often cheaper than state flagships. Plus major strength, programs, vibe, network, opportunities, sports, location, community, weather, and on and on.

Many people who have instate in CA go private if they can afford it. UCB and UCLA are great graduate schools and they can be good choices for many kids but any top UC comes with alot of compromises which limits their attractiveness to many.

Please. If you’re in-state and get admitted to Berkeley or UCLA that’s where you’re going. UCLA is a dream for most California teens.

are you an idiot? is that why the in state yield is only like 50%?

[Anonymous]

College park is a terrible location. That’s why. Too bad. I wish it was in Westminster or bel air or some place like that.

[Anonymous]

Stage flagships are all very big. DC really wants a smaller environment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why don’t you just go to your state flagship, especially if it’s ranked in , say, the top 50? Tell me it makes no sense to pay all of that money for a private university that isn’t ranked in the top 15 or 20 when you could go to UVA, Michigan, North Carolina, maybe Florida, and obviously the UC schools?

Well, people that have instate Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, Georgia Tech, and UT-Austin as options are in a wonderful place. And I suspect very few of those families can be persuaded to drop an additional $250,000 for undergrad at a different school.

But that's five schools out of 5000 colleges. There are a bazillion reasons why people choose something different than the state flagship. And for middle class families, the elite private schools are often cheaper than state flagships. Plus major strength, programs, vibe, network, opportunities, sports, location, community, weather, and on and on.

Many people who have instate in CA go private if they can afford it. UCB and UCLA are great graduate schools and they can be good choices for many kids but any top UC comes with alot of compromises which limits their attractiveness to many.

Please. If you’re in-state and get admitted to Berkeley or UCLA that’s where you’re going. UCLA is a dream for most California teens.

are you an idiot? is that why the in state yield is only like 50%?

DP. UCLA’s is 60%. UCB’s is 50%. These are already strong yields. Then factor in that some kids get into both and can’t choose both so they show up in one school’s yield but not the other. That means the two-school yield (i.e., they chose at least one of the two) is even higher. Maybe use that big brain of yours before calling people idiots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why don’t you just go to your state flagship, especially if it’s ranked in , say, the top 50? Tell me it makes no sense to pay all of that money for a private university that isn’t ranked in the top 15 or 20 when you could go to UVA, Michigan, North Carolina, maybe Florida, and obviously the UC schools?

Well, people that have instate Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, Georgia Tech, and UT-Austin as options are in a wonderful place. And I suspect very few of those families can be persuaded to drop an additional $250,000 for undergrad at a different school.

But that's five schools out of 5000 colleges. There are a bazillion reasons why people choose something different than the state flagship. And for middle class families, the elite private schools are often cheaper than state flagships. Plus major strength, programs, vibe, network, opportunities, sports, location, community, weather, and on and on.

Many people who have instate in CA go private if they can afford it. UCB and UCLA are great graduate schools and they can be good choices for many kids but any top UC comes with alot of compromises which limits their attractiveness to many.

Please. If you’re in-state and get admitted to Berkeley or UCLA that’s where you’re going. UCLA is a dream for most California teens.

are you an idiot? is that why the in state yield is only like 50%?

DP. UCLA’s is 60%. UCB’s is 50%. These are already strong yields. Then factor in that some kids get into both and can’t choose both so they show up in one school’s yield but not the other. That means the two-school yield (i.e., they chose at least one of the two) is even higher. Maybe use that big brain of yours before calling people idiots.

Yep. And many CA kids choose other UCs over UCLA or Berkeley. My friend's daughter chose Irvine over admits to both of the other two because of a dance program. Another friend's kid chose UCSB over UCLA. So I personally know two kids and I barely know anyone in CA!

Much of the rest of the world is not as ratings obsessed as DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why don’t you just go to your state flagship, especially if it’s ranked in , say, the top 50? Tell me it makes no sense to pay all of that money for a private university that isn’t ranked in the top 15 or 20 when you could go to UVA, Michigan, North Carolina, maybe Florida, and obviously the UC schools?

Especially the west coast. For them it’s Stanford, and they know what the Ivy League and mit are, but if you start talking about any of the nescac schools or Emory they’re going to give you a blank stare. They know what Duke is because of basketball and vandy because their football team will upset a top 5 team every few years.

The dc tiger mom / striver culture is a very sad little bubble.



Well, people that have instate Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, Georgia Tech, and UT-Austin as options are in a wonderful place. And I suspect very few of those families can be persuaded to drop an additional $250,000 for undergrad at a different school.

But that's five schools out of 5000 colleges. There are a bazillion reasons why people choose something different than the state flagship. And for middle class families, the elite private schools are often cheaper than state flagships. Plus major strength, programs, vibe, network, opportunities, sports, location, community, weather, and on and on.

Many people who have instate in CA go private if they can afford it. UCB and UCLA are great graduate schools and they can be good choices for many kids but any top UC comes with alot of compromises which limits their attractiveness to many.

Please. If you’re in-state and get admitted to Berkeley or UCLA that’s where you’re going. UCLA is a dream for most California teens.

are you an idiot? is that why the in state yield is only like 50%?

DP. UCLA’s is 60%. UCB’s is 50%. These are already strong yields. Then factor in that some kids get into both and can’t choose both so they show up in one school’s yield but not the other. That means the two-school yield (i.e., they chose at least one of the two) is even higher. Maybe use that big brain of yours before calling people idiots.

Yep. And many CA kids choose other UCs over UCLA or Berkeley. My friend's daughter chose Irvine over admits to both of the other two because of a dance program. Another friend's kid chose UCSB over UCLA. So I personally know two kids and I barely know anyone in CA!

Much of the rest of the world is not as ratings obsessed as DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:College park is a terrible location. That’s why. Too bad. I wish it was in Westminster or bel air or some place like that.

Yeah..like 7 miles from our nations capital is just a terrible location. Said no one that goes there It may not be your cup of tea, but it's ideal for many.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you don’t get into T15, you probably also didn’t get into UVA. Then there is no much difference tuition wise between UM and Rochester. Both are attractive to many students.

So you are saying what… UVA is T15 like?

NP. From our public high school, you need a 1500+ and 4.5 gpa to get into UVA. I’m assuming pp means that if you didn’t get into a T20, you may also not have gotten into UVA.

Many kids at our school go to UVA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some state schools are not that amazing, especially if they are not the right fit academically or socially, and some aren't even that cheap! You can go to an out of state public, or a private somewhere, for cheaper. And a better fit.

My kid got into UVA but didn’t like it one bit. He wasn’t crazy about Williamsburg either. As a non-STEM who didn’t want a large school- VT (my alma mater) was a no starter. We let him apply anywhere and then had the surprise that he actually got into 2 Ivies and some T10s. After visiting and exploring each school even more, the fit and location and resources in his field made one a clear winner, a very expensive winner, but he’s already had so many benefits and it’s only been 1 year.

We do see the attention that each student gets, the smaller class sizes, the leadership and ease with which everything is handled, etc. Very different from public.

Although, I wouldn’t pay for a private or out of state unless there were very clear advantages—-or if the kid wasn’t serious about academics.