What T20 school isn’t “grim” these days?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kenyon, Wesleyan, Macalester, Haverford. Holy Cross, Boston College…

All great schools (several on my own DD’s list, so this is great to hear), but would these fit OP’s “T-20” requirement?

I don’t know what that “requirement” is but, yes, some of the above are top 20 SLACs. OPs criteria means that, except for the 3-4 national universities mentioned, SLACs are the way to go. Would not recommend Swarthmore (a grind) or military academies (not SLACs in any event) but all other schools on that top 20 or so SLAC list will fit the bill.

My patients include a lot of military academy students. I respectfully disagree that all of them should be avoided due to "grim" conditions. In particular, the Air Force Academy and the Coast Guard strike me as places that foster a sense of wonder and even fun at times, based on my 1st person conversations with their students. These young adults seem genuinely happy.

USAFA is an excellent place for engineering and I know multiple young people who LOVE their positions in US Space Force, if that's of interest.

USNA sounds more intense for current students, but damn if they don't have close friends. I have no opinion on West Point and I'd have to agree with PP that the Marines should probably be avoided if one is looking for balance ....

OP’s kid wants to study humanities, so military academies are out. Don’t know if these schools are grim or not; my point is that they are not SLACs and don’t belong on the SLAC list.

I think we can all agree that English, history, fine arts, legal studies and maybe poli sci would fit the criteria

https://www.usafa.edu/academics/majors-minors/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have kids at Vanderbilt and Rice and they are both very happy. Neither school is grim. Vanderbilt tends to attract smart, extroverted, and very social students. Rice is nerdier, but it has a very inclusive residential college system. At both schools, students seem to be supportive of each other rather than competitive. The happiness factor was a big reason why we chose those schools.

Among other schools we visited, Notre Dame seemed to have a really good vibe. Very friendly students. Not particularly diverse though. And surprisingly, the University of Chicago seemed like a pretty happy place for the right kind of student.

In contrast, Columbia seemed exceptionally dour. And we felt no love for Northwestern. It seemed cold in all meanings of the word.

Mine was accepted to NU, and we visited for admitted students event. I thought it was a beautiful campus, not cold at all. But, I did notice that there didn't seem to be a lot of kids hanging out on the green (weather could have been better for part of it, though). A friend is there and loving it. Mine chose Brown -- really likes the overall kindness and community feel. Some fantastic professors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That doesn’t take away from the fact that the Stanford campus is undeniably grim now.

My friends and I have clerked for judges who are instantly skeptical when encountering briefs with arguments relying on adjectives like very, undoubtedly, obviously, etc.

"Undeniably grim" is a red flag for your credibility, and so is claiming as "fact" something that's subjective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading the Princeton thread.
And Northwestern thread….depressing.

Which T20 schools aren’t “grim” or soulless?

Looking for semi- intellectual but still social and lively.
Small class sizes key.
Where you know your classmates……
Humanities major.

Most kids at Princeton and Northwestern are quite happy and thriving. If you're going to make decisions based on the outliers, you probably shouldn't be looking at T20 schools because they will all have kids who weren't happy about their experiences.

Almost 1/3 of kids at Princeton major in computer science and engineering; add biological sciences and econ to the mix and that’s just over 1/2 of all students. This disproportion is only growing with expansion of engineering etc. Not a good place for a humanities major.

Wouldn’t that make a great for humanities major? Really small class sizes, access to professors and a ton of resources going your way since the herd has moved in another direction?

Not any more than Johns Hopkins is good for humanities majors. Sometimes life of the mind types don’t want to be surrounded by preprofessional grinder types.

Because the 'life of the mind' does not include trying to learn physics or chemistry or engineering, right? The life of the mind does not include facility with math or interest in biology, right?

Say you don’t have a humanities kid and did not major in humanities without saying you don’t have a humanities kid and did not major in humanities…

That was a lame response. The students have interests beyond their majors, and it's not like students are "preprofessional grinder types" just because they are majority in CS or ORFE any more than every Comparative Lit major intends to get a Ph.D and become a professor.

Lame is one word for it. My kids are both STEM majors but in no way, shape or form does that mean that they are non-intellectual grinds. While I would have had no problem with their being humanities majors if that was what they decided, I think a case can be made that as non-humanities majors, they are exposed to a greater breadth of 'intellectual' challenges because they have to understand math and physics, etc., in their majors but also pursue humanities courses in some depth. It is probably less common for a classics major to take 6 CS courses (or whatever it would take to minor in a STEM field) than it is for a STEM major to take 6 classes in order to minor in a humanities field. And I am by no means asserting that the classics major can't handle the CS courses - I am just arguing that they are less likely to pursue the non-humanities courses in as much depth.

I wish you were right. But I’ve never met anybody who was thrilled to find themselves seated next to an engineer on a long plane ride.

More like, “If anybody is seated next to a overweight insurance salesman, I’d be happy to swap seats with you!”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That doesn’t take away from the fact that the Stanford campus is undeniably grim now.

My friends and I have clerked for judges who are instantly skeptical when encountering briefs with arguments relying on adjectives like very, undoubtedly, obviously, etc.

"Undeniably grim" is a red flag for your credibility, and so is claiming as "fact" something that's subjective.

DCUM maxim: The worst and most baseless opinions are often delivered with the most hyperbolic confidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kenyon, Wesleyan, Macalester, Haverford. Holy Cross, Boston College…

All great schools (several on my own DD’s list, so this is great to hear), but would these fit OP’s “T-20” requirement?

I don’t know what that “requirement” is but, yes, some of the above are top 20 SLACs. OPs criteria means that, except for the 3-4 national universities mentioned, SLACs are the way to go. Would not recommend Swarthmore (a grind) or military academies (not SLACs in any event) but all other schools on that top 20 or so SLAC list will fit the bill.

My patients include a lot of military academy students. I respectfully disagree that all of them should be avoided due to "grim" conditions. In particular, the Air Force Academy and the Coast Guard strike me as places that foster a sense of wonder and even fun at times, based on my 1st person conversations with their students. These young adults seem genuinely happy.

USAFA is an excellent place for engineering and I know multiple young people who LOVE their positions in US Space Force, if that's of interest.

USNA sounds more intense for current students, but damn if they don't have close friends. I have no opinion on West Point and I'd have to agree with PP that the Marines should probably be avoided if one is looking for balance ....

OP’s kid wants to study humanities, so military academies are out. Don’t know if these schools are grim or not; my point is that they are not SLACs and don’t belong on the SLAC list.

I think we can all agree that English, history, fine arts, legal studies and maybe poli sci would fit the criteria

https://www.usafa.edu/academics/majors-minors/

You don’t decide what to major in; the military decides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That doesn’t take away from the fact that the Stanford campus is undeniably grim now.

My friends and I have clerked for judges who are instantly skeptical when encountering briefs with arguments relying on adjectives like very, undoubtedly, obviously, etc.

"Undeniably grim" is a red flag for your credibility, and so is claiming as "fact" something that's subjective.

DCUM maxim: The worst and most baseless opinions are often delivered with the most hyperbolic confidence.

DCUM maxim: lawyers, judges and, especially, persnickety law clerks can’t write. Also, never put a comma before etc. Tell your friends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kenyon, Wesleyan, Macalester, Haverford. Holy Cross, Boston College…

All great schools (several on my own DD’s list, so this is great to hear), but would these fit OP’s “T-20” requirement?

I don’t know what that “requirement” is but, yes, some of the above are top 20 SLACs. OPs criteria means that, except for the 3-4 national universities mentioned, SLACs are the way to go. Would not recommend Swarthmore (a grind) or military academies (not SLACs in any event) but all other schools on that top 20 or so SLAC list will fit the bill.

My patients include a lot of military academy students. I respectfully disagree that all of them should be avoided due to "grim" conditions. In particular, the Air Force Academy and the Coast Guard strike me as places that foster a sense of wonder and even fun at times, based on my 1st person conversations with their students. These young adults seem genuinely happy.

USAFA is an excellent place for engineering and I know multiple young people who LOVE their positions in US Space Force, if that's of interest.

USNA sounds more intense for current students, but damn if they don't have close friends. I have no opinion on West Point and I'd have to agree with PP that the Marines should probably be avoided if one is looking for balance ....

OP’s kid wants to study humanities, so military academies are out. Don’t know if these schools are grim or not; my point is that they are not SLACs and don’t belong on the SLAC list.

I think we can all agree that English, history, fine arts, legal studies and maybe poli sci would fit the criteria

https://www.usafa.edu/academics/majors-minors/

You don’t decide what to major in; the military decides.

That's not eve close to true. Why chime in if you don't have any experience?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading the Princeton thread.
And Northwestern thread….depressing.

Which T20 schools aren’t “grim” or soulless?

Looking for semi- intellectual but still social and lively.
Small class sizes key.
Where you know your classmates……
Humanities major.

Most kids at Princeton and Northwestern are quite happy and thriving. If you're going to make decisions based on the outliers, you probably shouldn't be looking at T20 schools because they will all have kids who weren't happy about their experiences.

Almost 1/3 of kids at Princeton major in computer science and engineering; add biological sciences and econ to the mix and that’s just over 1/2 of all students. This disproportion is only growing with expansion of engineering etc. Not a good place for a humanities major.

Wouldn’t that make a great for humanities major? Really small class sizes, access to professors and a ton of resources going your way since the herd has moved in another direction?

Not any more than Johns Hopkins is good for humanities majors. Sometimes life of the mind types don’t want to be surrounded by preprofessional grinder types.

Because the 'life of the mind' does not include trying to learn physics or chemistry or engineering, right? The life of the mind does not include facility with math or interest in biology, right?

Say you don’t have a humanities kid and did not major in humanities without saying you don’t have a humanities kid and did not major in humanities…

That was a lame response. The students have interests beyond their majors, and it's not like students are "preprofessional grinder types" just because they are majority in CS or ORFE any more than every Comparative Lit major intends to get a Ph.D and become a professor.

Lame is one word for it. My kids are both STEM majors but in no way, shape or form does that mean that they are non-intellectual grinds. While I would have had no problem with their being humanities majors if that was what they decided, I think a case can be made that as non-humanities majors, they are exposed to a greater breadth of 'intellectual' challenges because they have to understand math and physics, etc., in their majors but also pursue humanities courses in some depth. It is probably less common for a classics major to take 6 CS courses (or whatever it would take to minor in a STEM field) than it is for a STEM major to take 6 classes in order to minor in a humanities field. And I am by no means asserting that the classics major can't handle the CS courses - I am just arguing that they are less likely to pursue the non-humanities courses in as much depth.

I wish you were right. But I’ve never met anybody who was thrilled to find themselves seated next to an engineer on a long plane ride.

More like, “If anybody is seated next to a overweight insurance salesman, I’d be happy to swap seats with you!”

Some of the most fascinating people have a love of math and science. But they probably aren’t talking to strangers on planes and trains. Unlike the blowhard attorney talking a poor college kids ear off on the Acela l was on last week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kenyon, Wesleyan, Macalester, Haverford. Holy Cross, Boston College…

All great schools (several on my own DD’s list, so this is great to hear), but would these fit OP’s “T-20” requirement?

I don’t know what that “requirement” is but, yes, some of the above are top 20 SLACs. OPs criteria means that, except for the 3-4 national universities mentioned, SLACs are the way to go. Would not recommend Swarthmore (a grind) or military academies (not SLACs in any event) but all other schools on that top 20 or so SLAC list will fit the bill.

My patients include a lot of military academy students. I respectfully disagree that all of them should be avoided due to "grim" conditions. In particular, the Air Force Academy and the Coast Guard strike me as places that foster a sense of wonder and even fun at times, based on my 1st person conversations with their students. These young adults seem genuinely happy.

USAFA is an excellent place for engineering and I know multiple young people who LOVE their positions in US Space Force, if that's of interest.

USNA sounds more intense for current students, but damn if they don't have close friends. I have no opinion on West Point and I'd have to agree with PP that the Marines should probably be avoided if one is looking for balance ....

OP’s kid wants to study humanities, so military academies are out. Don’t know if these schools are grim or not; my point is that they are not SLACs and don’t belong on the SLAC list.

I think we can all agree that English, history, fine arts, legal studies and maybe poli sci would fit the criteria

https://www.usafa.edu/academics/majors-minors/

You don’t decide what to major in; the military decides.

That's not eve close to true. Why chime in if you don't have any experience?

Oh? It’s darned well close to true when you want to study humanities and it is decided, as it sometimes is, that, no, the service’s needs “take precedence.” Here’s a cite:

“ Although the Naval Academy is different in most ways from a typical college, most midshipmen can choose their major like students do at other colleges. However at the Naval Academy, the needs of the Naval Service always take precedence. Therefore, starting with the Class of 2013, and expanding to NROTC college programs, at least 65 percent of the U.S. Naval Academy graduates commissioned into the U.S. Navy must complete academic majors in science, technology, engineering or mathematics disciplines. Midshipmen often delve into these majors with increased levels of specialization. ”

https://go.navyonline.com/blog/an-academic-tour-naval-academy-majors#:~:text=Although%20the%20Naval%20Academy%20is,Naval%20Service%20always%20take%20precedence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That doesn’t take away from the fact that the Stanford campus is undeniably grim now.

My friends and I have clerked for judges who are instantly skeptical when encountering briefs with arguments relying on adjectives like very, undoubtedly, obviously, etc.

"Undeniably grim" is a red flag for your credibility, and so is claiming as "fact" something that's subjective.

DCUM maxim: The worst and most baseless opinions are often delivered with the most hyperbolic confidence.

DCUM maxim: lawyers, judges and, especially, persnickety law clerks can’t write. Also, never put a comma before etc. Tell your friends.

Let's do a little pedantic copyediting for fun: (1) You're missing a serial comma after "judges," (2) the clause following the colon should begin with a capitalized "Lawyers" since it's part of a complete sentence, and (3) commas go before "etc." when the "etc." is the last item in a list of three or more items (refer to mistake no. 1). I think all of this is covered by Strunk & White if you want to cite check me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That doesn’t take away from the fact that the Stanford campus is undeniably grim now.

My friends and I have clerked for judges who are instantly skeptical when encountering briefs with arguments relying on adjectives like very, undoubtedly, obviously, etc.

"Undeniably grim" is a red flag for your credibility, and so is claiming as "fact" something that's subjective.

DCUM maxim: The worst and most baseless opinions are often delivered with the most hyperbolic confidence.

DCUM maxim: lawyers, judges and, especially, persnickety law clerks can’t write. Also, never put a comma before etc. Tell your friends.

Let's do a little pedantic copyediting for fun: (1) You're missing a serial comma after "judges," (2) the clause following the colon should begin with a capitalized "Lawyers" since it's part of a complete sentence, and (3) commas go before "etc." when the "etc." is the last item in a list of three or more items (refer to mistake no. 1). I think all of this is covered by Strunk & White if you want to cite check me.

No, commas should never go before etc. Why? Read it aloud; it never has a pause. The Oxford comma should never be used to surround “and” — it’s super awkward. And E.B. White ain’t no good writer either. Dude writes about pigs, and came out with his flawed style guide a century ago. But you would know this if you understood that good writing does not come from a book; it’s not something to be “looked up” (unless you’re a lawyer).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That doesn’t take away from the fact that the Stanford campus is undeniably grim now.

My friends and I have clerked for judges who are instantly skeptical when encountering briefs with arguments relying on adjectives like very, undoubtedly, obviously, etc.

"Undeniably grim" is a red flag for your credibility, and so is claiming as "fact" something that's subjective.

DCUM maxim: The worst and most baseless opinions are often delivered with the most hyperbolic confidence.

DCUM maxim: lawyers, judges and, especially, persnickety law clerks can’t write. Also, never put a comma before etc. Tell your friends.

Let's do a little pedantic copyediting for fun: (1) You're missing a serial comma after "judges," (2) the clause following the colon should begin with a capitalized "Lawyers" since it's part of a complete sentence, and (3) commas go before "etc." when the "etc." is the last item in a list of three or more items (refer to mistake no. 1). I think all of this is covered by Strunk & White if you want to cite check me.

One other point: never follow colons with capital letters. If you want a new sentence, you start a new sentence. Colons are used for flow. Try the “flow” in your head with a capital “N” for never in the above sentence. It’s different — and worse.

But I do understand that some people need crutches when writing does not come naturally to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That doesn’t take away from the fact that the Stanford campus is undeniably grim now.

My friends and I have clerked for judges who are instantly skeptical when encountering briefs with arguments relying on adjectives like very, undoubtedly, obviously, etc.

"Undeniably grim" is a red flag for your credibility, and so is claiming as "fact" something that's subjective.

DCUM maxim: The worst and most baseless opinions are often delivered with the most hyperbolic confidence.

DCUM maxim: lawyers, judges and, especially, persnickety law clerks can’t write. Also, never put a comma before etc. Tell your friends.

Let's do a little pedantic copyediting for fun: (1) You're missing a serial comma after "judges," (2) the clause following the colon should begin with a capitalized "Lawyers" since it's part of a complete sentence, and (3) commas go before "etc." when the "etc." is the last item in a list of three or more items (refer to mistake no. 1). I think all of this is covered by Strunk & White if you want to cite check me.

One other point: never follow colons with capital letters. If you want a new sentence, you start a new sentence. Colons are used for flow. Try the “flow” in your head with a capital “N” for never in the above sentence. It’s different — and worse.

But I do understand that some people need crutches when writing does not come naturally to them.

https://www.grammarly.com/blog/capitalization-after-colons/
https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/articles/colons/
https://libguides.royalroads.ca/punctuation-capitalization/capsemicolons
https://cmosshoptalk.com/2022/02/15/when-to-capitalize-after-a-colon/
https://www.grammarbook.com/blog/commas/capitalization-with-colons/

Thus ends my pedantry for today. I'm out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have kids at Vanderbilt and Rice and they are both very happy. Neither school is grim. Vanderbilt tends to attract smart, extroverted, and very social students. Rice is nerdier, but it has a very inclusive residential college system. At both schools, students seem to be supportive of each other rather than competitive. The happiness factor was a big reason why we chose those schools.

Among other schools we visited, Notre Dame seemed to have a really good vibe. Very friendly students. Not particularly diverse though. And surprisingly, the University of Chicago seemed like a pretty happy place for the right kind of student.

In contrast, Columbia seemed exceptionally dour. And we felt no love for Northwestern. It seemed cold in all meanings of the word.

Mine was accepted to NU, and we visited for admitted students event. I thought it was a beautiful campus, not cold at all. But, I did notice that there didn't seem to be a lot of kids hanging out on the green (weather could have been better for part of it, though). A friend is there and loving it. Mine chose Brown -- really likes the overall kindness and community feel. Some fantastic professors.

I hated being at Northwestern, but it’s a terrific school that gives great class. Kids just have to go in understanding that it’s a big, bureaucratic, tough place.