Reply to Middlebury ranking

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Middlebury ranking"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Absolutely one of the top 10.

Schools like Carleton Harvey Mudd are largely irrelevant but ranked higher.[/quote]

Others have commented on why the Carleton dig is misplaced, but including HMC in an attempt to boost Middlebury is also an interesting choice!  That's probably the top undergraduate-focused school for STEM in the entire country. Says so much about PP and Middlebury![/quote]

Lots of trade schools rejects go to HMC.  If you want engineering, go to a proper school like Georgia tech or Cal![/quote]
What trade school reject is looking to spend their years doing calc, physics, bio, and chem. It has one of the most intense core curriculums in the nation, so those trade school rejects are quite smart.[/quote]

Smart ones go to MIT, CMU, Georgia tech to challenge themselves.  Just saying.[/quote]
Can you work a little harder with your trolling, it’s pretty bad.[/quote]

Yeah yeah.  You can’t refute my points — you were not even going to try.[/quote]
Because you didn’t make a point. You didn’t present cross admit data, so it’s just you listing off schools you like. Harvey Mudd is an objectively high competitive institution with a rigorous core. If you want to learn more: https://www.hmc.edu/academics/common-core-curriculum/[/quote]

Common core, just like high school all over again.  This is an outdated model.  
Smart kids thrive in environment that allows them to do big things.  Do you know how many students found start-ups in MIT, CMU, Georgia tech?[/quote]

MIT and Caltech distribution requirements are very similar to Harvey Mudd. You are required to take not only extensive stem sequences but 20–25% of your course load in humanities, arts, and social sciences.

Common core is typically unappealing to the least well rounded, those who don’t want to develop either their verbal or their quantitative skills.  Sure, you can be successful while avoiding improvement at one or the other. Heck, you can be successful while bad at both! But there are advantages to being good at both, and there are jobs where both in fact help.

No common core means even if a student chooses to take from a broad selection themselves, they are less likely to be surrounded by other similarly curious young intellects. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics