What school, which is generally considered good,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Emory, because I am still irate about an article I read, discussing how they'd admitted a poor, relatively high performing first gen kid from Texas and proceeded to ruin her life.

Link?? Never heard about this! (considering Emory for DS)

Don't have the link ready, but story published probably around 2018. Followed around three poor Hispanic girls with pretty good SAT scores.The Emory attendee's SATs were still notably below the Emory average, though. Her fiancee', who worked for an auto dealership, co-signed the (very large) loan freshman year. Student had to get a job, because poor. Student had to work *really* hard in class at the very least because of a lack of preparation in her not very good school district. Combination started burning her out, and left her not enough time to e.g. figure out that there were other sources of money she could've tapped. Relationship with fiancee broke down, but he was still on the hook for $30K or whatever the number was. Lots of social difficulties relating to the other kids. Went back next year. More things went south. Stopped attending classes. Failed out, owing massive sums of money and entirely burnt out on college.

But the important thing is Emory got to feel really good about itself for admitting a poor first-gen Hispanic girl, a talented writer, who, if she'd gone to a cheaper, less competitive school, could've shined.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Emory, because I am still irate about an article I read, discussing how they'd admitted a poor, relatively high performing first gen kid from Texas and proceeded to ruin her life.

Harvard, because for decades institutionally they did not care about the education of their undergraduates, and now the undergraduates don't care either, spending all their spare time trying to network with each other.

Howard, which is ineptly run and coasting off a reputation that has been unjustified since at least desegregation, and also sounds too much like "Harvard" for my tastes.

Duke, which has never done any soul searching about how it tried to ruin the lives of its own lacrosse players.

NYU, which is wildly overpriced and full of people who think NYU is a good idea.

Columbia, which even before the latest round of protests was famous for raking in a ton of cash by running scam master's degrees on the gullible.

What would you like Duke to have done. There were lots of lawsuits and the kids got paid and that also likely limits what Duke can say or do. That is a really dumb reason to dislike a school. As are most of your reasons for other schools. Please tell us where you went so we can dislike it for no good reason. If you even went to college.

Well, at the start, the faculty and students could have not gone insane. After that, the admin could've tried to dial down the outrage. And when things started to become even more obvious than they were at the start, they could've backpedaled faster. And in the end, any of the particularly rabid could've shown some sort of sign that they had learned a lesson, or at least been quietly put out to pasture for having caused Duke to have such a black eye. Nope.

[Anonymous]

Baylor

[Anonymous]

Duke, USC, Notre Dame, and Alabama purely for stupid sports reasons. But if my DC had been interested in these schools, I wouldn't have stood in their way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Emory, because I am still irate about an article I read, discussing how they'd admitted a poor, relatively high performing first gen kid from Texas and proceeded to ruin her life.

Link?? Never heard about this! (considering Emory for DS)

Don't have the link ready, but story published probably around 2018. Followed around three poor Hispanic girls with pretty good SAT scores.The Emory attendee's SATs were still notably below the Emory average, though. Her fiancee', who worked for an auto dealership, co-signed the (very large) loan freshman year. Student had to get a job, because poor. Student had to work *really* hard in class at the very least because of a lack of preparation in her not very good school district. Combination started burning her out, and left her not enough time to e.g. figure out that there were other sources of money she could've tapped. Relationship with fiancee broke down, but he was still on the hook for $30K or whatever the number was. Lots of social difficulties relating to the other kids. Went back next year. More things went south. Stopped attending classes. Failed out, owing massive sums of money and entirely burnt out on college.

But the important thing is Emory got to feel really good about itself for admitting a poor first-gen Hispanic girl, a talented writer, who, if she'd gone to a cheaper, less competitive school, could've shined.

Something seems fishy about this. Emory launched its no-loan policy for needy kids in 2007.

This person doesn’t sound like a student that would have to take out any loans.

[Anonymous]

UC schools for OOS- not worth it. Not even Berkeley or UCLA. If my kid had the stats to get into those two, they could get a better undergrad academic environment somewhere else - for cheaper. Like at a smaller private college where they would qualify for merit aid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Emory, because I am still irate about an article I read, discussing how they'd admitted a poor, relatively high performing first gen kid from Texas and proceeded to ruin her life.

Link?? Never heard about this! (considering Emory for DS)

Don't have the link ready, but story published probably around 2018. Followed around three poor Hispanic girls with pretty good SAT scores.The Emory attendee's SATs were still notably below the Emory average, though. Her fiancee', who worked for an auto dealership, co-signed the (very large) loan freshman year. Student had to get a job, because poor. Student had to work *really* hard in class at the very least because of a lack of preparation in her not very good school district. Combination started burning her out, and left her not enough time to e.g. figure out that there were other sources of money she could've tapped. Relationship with fiancee broke down, but he was still on the hook for $30K or whatever the number was. Lots of social difficulties relating to the other kids. Went back next year. More things went south. Stopped attending classes. Failed out, owing massive sums of money and entirely burnt out on college.

But the important thing is Emory got to feel really good about itself for admitting a poor first-gen Hispanic girl, a talented writer, who, if she'd gone to a cheaper, less competitive school, could've shined.

Something seems fishy about this. Emory launched its no-loan policy for needy kids in 2007.

This person doesn’t sound like a student that would have to take out any loans.

Np. Here's a gift link to the article. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/23/education/poor-students-struggle-as-class-plays-a-greater-role-in-success.html?unlocked_article_code=1.JE8.W3fQ.ZjPFlN4vpDSp&smid=url-share

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Emory, because I am still irate about an article I read, discussing how they'd admitted a poor, relatively high performing first gen kid from Texas and proceeded to ruin her life.

Link?? Never heard about this! (considering Emory for DS)

Don't have the link ready, but story published probably around 2018. Followed around three poor Hispanic girls with pretty good SAT scores.The Emory attendee's SATs were still notably below the Emory average, though. Her fiancee', who worked for an auto dealership, co-signed the (very large) loan freshman year. Student had to get a job, because poor. Student had to work *really* hard in class at the very least because of a lack of preparation in her not very good school district. Combination started burning her out, and left her not enough time to e.g. figure out that there were other sources of money she could've tapped. Relationship with fiancee broke down, but he was still on the hook for $30K or whatever the number was. Lots of social difficulties relating to the other kids. Went back next year. More things went south. Stopped attending classes. Failed out, owing massive sums of money and entirely burnt out on college.

But the important thing is Emory got to feel really good about itself for admitting a poor first-gen Hispanic girl, a talented writer, who, if she'd gone to a cheaper, less competitive school, could've shined.

(Or perhaps also if Emory had better systems -- or possibly even a system -- to provide extra support for students that it knew would struggle. But that's a lot harder than letting them sink or swim.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Emory, because I am still irate about an article I read, discussing how they'd admitted a poor, relatively high performing first gen kid from Texas and proceeded to ruin her life.

Link?? Never heard about this! (considering Emory for DS)

Don't have the link ready, but story published probably around 2018. Followed around three poor Hispanic girls with pretty good SAT scores.The Emory attendee's SATs were still notably below the Emory average, though. Her fiancee', who worked for an auto dealership, co-signed the (very large) loan freshman year. Student had to get a job, because poor. Student had to work *really* hard in class at the very least because of a lack of preparation in her not very good school district. Combination started burning her out, and left her not enough time to e.g. figure out that there were other sources of money she could've tapped. Relationship with fiancee broke down, but he was still on the hook for $30K or whatever the number was. Lots of social difficulties relating to the other kids. Went back next year. More things went south. Stopped attending classes. Failed out, owing massive sums of money and entirely burnt out on college.

But the important thing is Emory got to feel really good about itself for admitting a poor first-gen Hispanic girl, a talented writer, who, if she'd gone to a cheaper, less competitive school, could've shined.

Something seems fishy about this. Emory launched its no-loan policy for needy kids in 2007.

This person doesn’t sound like a student that would have to take out any loans.

Np. Here's a gift link to the article. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/23/education/poor-students-struggle-as-class-plays-a-greater-role-in-success.html?unlocked_article_code=1.JE8.W3fQ.ZjPFlN4vpDSp&smid=url-share

The Emory kid hadn't filed the necessary paperwork that would allow her to avoid plans, and by the time she realized the error all the money was gone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Emory, because I am still irate about an article I read, discussing how they'd admitted a poor, relatively high performing first gen kid from Texas and proceeded to ruin her life.

Link?? Never heard about this! (considering Emory for DS)

Don't have the link ready, but story published probably around 2018. Followed around three poor Hispanic girls with pretty good SAT scores.The Emory attendee's SATs were still notably below the Emory average, though. Her fiancee', who worked for an auto dealership, co-signed the (very large) loan freshman year. Student had to get a job, because poor. Student had to work *really* hard in class at the very least because of a lack of preparation in her not very good school district. Combination started burning her out, and left her not enough time to e.g. figure out that there were other sources of money she could've tapped. Relationship with fiancee broke down, but he was still on the hook for $30K or whatever the number was. Lots of social difficulties relating to the other kids. Went back next year. More things went south. Stopped attending classes. Failed out, owing massive sums of money and entirely burnt out on college.

But the important thing is Emory got to feel really good about itself for admitting a poor first-gen Hispanic girl, a talented writer, who, if she'd gone to a cheaper, less competitive school, could've shined.

Something seems fishy about this. Emory launched its no-loan policy for needy kids in 2007.

This person doesn’t sound like a student that would have to take out any loans.

Np. Here's a gift link to the article. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/23/education/poor-students-struggle-as-class-plays-a-greater-role-in-success.html?unlocked_article_code=1.JE8.W3fQ.ZjPFlN4vpDSp&smid=url-share

The Emory kid hadn't filed the necessary paperwork that would allow her to avoid plans, and by the time she realized the error all the money was gone.

loans, not plans!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Emory, because I am still irate about an article I read, discussing how they'd admitted a poor, relatively high performing first gen kid from Texas and proceeded to ruin her life.

Link?? Never heard about this! (considering Emory for DS)

Don't have the link ready, but story published probably around 2018. Followed around three poor Hispanic girls with pretty good SAT scores.The Emory attendee's SATs were still notably below the Emory average, though. Her fiancee', who worked for an auto dealership, co-signed the (very large) loan freshman year. Student had to get a job, because poor. Student had to work *really* hard in class at the very least because of a lack of preparation in her not very good school district. Combination started burning her out, and left her not enough time to e.g. figure out that there were other sources of money she could've tapped. Relationship with fiancee broke down, but he was still on the hook for $30K or whatever the number was. Lots of social difficulties relating to the other kids. Went back next year. More things went south. Stopped attending classes. Failed out, owing massive sums of money and entirely burnt out on college.

But the important thing is Emory got to feel really good about itself for admitting a poor first-gen Hispanic girl, a talented writer, who, if she'd gone to a cheaper, less competitive school, could've shined.

Something seems fishy about this. Emory launched its no-loan policy for needy kids in 2007.

This person doesn’t sound like a student that would have to take out any loans.

Np. Here's a gift link to the article. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/23/education/poor-students-struggle-as-class-plays-a-greater-role-in-success.html?unlocked_article_code=1.JE8.W3fQ.ZjPFlN4vpDSp&smid=url-share

Thanks! Gosh, it has been a lot longer than I thought it was, which I hope explains why I had trouble with the details.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Emory, because I am still irate about an article I read, discussing how they'd admitted a poor, relatively high performing first gen kid from Texas and proceeded to ruin her life.

Link?? Never heard about this! (considering Emory for DS)

Don't have the link ready, but story published probably around 2018. Followed around three poor Hispanic girls with pretty good SAT scores.The Emory attendee's SATs were still notably below the Emory average, though. Her fiancee', who worked for an auto dealership, co-signed the (very large) loan freshman year. Student had to get a job, because poor. Student had to work *really* hard in class at the very least because of a lack of preparation in her not very good school district. Combination started burning her out, and left her not enough time to e.g. figure out that there were other sources of money she could've tapped. Relationship with fiancee broke down, but he was still on the hook for $30K or whatever the number was. Lots of social difficulties relating to the other kids. Went back next year. More things went south. Stopped attending classes. Failed out, owing massive sums of money and entirely burnt out on college.

But the important thing is Emory got to feel really good about itself for admitting a poor first-gen Hispanic girl, a talented writer, who, if she'd gone to a cheaper, less competitive school, could've shined.

Something seems fishy about this. Emory launched its no-loan policy for needy kids in 2007.

This person doesn’t sound like a student that would have to take out any loans.

Np. Here's a gift link to the article. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/23/education/poor-students-struggle-as-class-plays-a-greater-role-in-success.html?unlocked_article_code=1.JE8.W3fQ.ZjPFlN4vpDSp&smid=url-share

Thanks! Gosh, it has been a lot longer than I thought it was, which I hope explains why I had trouble with the details.

It’s from 2012…and unfortunately the girl never completed the necessary paperwork for the significant aid that Emory provided (and they emailed 17 times to an email she never checked).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Emory, because I am still irate about an article I read, discussing how they'd admitted a poor, relatively high performing first gen kid from Texas and proceeded to ruin her life.

Harvard, because for decades institutionally they did not care about the education of their undergraduates, and now the undergraduates don't care either, spending all their spare time trying to network with each other.

Howard, which is ineptly run and coasting off a reputation that has been unjustified since at least desegregation, and also sounds too much like "Harvard" for my tastes.

Duke, which has never done any soul searching about how it tried to ruin the lives of its own lacrosse players.

NYU, which is wildly overpriced and full of people who think NYU is a good idea.

Columbia, which even before the latest round of protests was famous for raking in a ton of cash by running scam master's degrees on the gullible.

What would you like Duke to have done. There were lots of lawsuits and the kids got paid and that also likely limits what Duke can say or do. That is a really dumb reason to dislike a school. As are most of your reasons for other schools. Please tell us where you went so we can dislike it for no good reason. If you even went to college.

Well, at the start, the faculty and students could have not gone insane. After that, the admin could've tried to dial down the outrage. And when things started to become even more obvious than they were at the start, they could've backpedaled faster. And in the end, any of the particularly rabid could've shown some sort of sign that they had learned a lesson, or at least been quietly put out to pasture for having caused Duke to have such a black eye. Nope.

Holy revisionist history. And holy long-held grudge about something that had nothing to do with you. There were plenty of people at Duke that did not handle this perfectly. But this is way, way overboard.

Good riddance. Duke doesn't want morons like you anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Emory, because I am still irate about an article I read, discussing how they'd admitted a poor, relatively high performing first gen kid from Texas and proceeded to ruin her life.

Harvard, because for decades institutionally they did not care about the education of their undergraduates, and now the undergraduates don't care either, spending all their spare time trying to network with each other.

Howard, which is ineptly run and coasting off a reputation that has been unjustified since at least desegregation, and also sounds too much like "Harvard" for my tastes.

Duke, which has never done any soul searching about how it tried to ruin the lives of its own lacrosse players.

NYU, which is wildly overpriced and full of people who think NYU is a good idea.

Columbia, which even before the latest round of protests was famous for raking in a ton of cash by running scam master's degrees on the gullible.

What would you like Duke to have done. There were lots of lawsuits and the kids got paid and that also likely limits what Duke can say or do. That is a really dumb reason to dislike a school. As are most of your reasons for other schools. Please tell us where you went so we can dislike it for no good reason. If you even went to college.

Well, at the start, the faculty and students could have not gone insane. After that, the admin could've tried to dial down the outrage. And when things started to become even more obvious than they were at the start, they could've backpedaled faster. And in the end, any of the particularly rabid could've shown some sort of sign that they had learned a lesson, or at least been quietly put out to pasture for having caused Duke to have such a black eye. Nope.

Holy revisionist history. And holy long-held grudge about something that had nothing to do with you. There were plenty of people at Duke that did not handle this perfectly. But this is way, way overboard.

Good riddance. Duke doesn't want morons like you anyway.

They might if he can dunk a basketball.

[Anonymous]

A school can be highly regarded but not a good fit for a specific student...for many reasons.