Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These are such different schools. Even before the current disturbances, Columbia has always been a cold, stressful college. Undergraduates are an afterthought. It can be a very lonely school. There's a big international cohort, which largely keeps to themselves. The Core Curriculum is not for everyone. Neither is Morningside Heights. NYC can be a tough place for four years as an undergrad, particularly for those who are not wealthy. When we visited, we did not get a good vibe. Students seemed unhappy. DC quickly dropped it off their list.

Rice and Amherst seem like much better places for undergrad. The thing about Amherst though is that it seems to be having an identity crisis presently. Not just the school, but the entire community - see The New Yorker article about Amherst. Like it's a very privileged community that's been tying themselves into knots for years now. And everyone is walking on eggshells. I think it would be tedious to spend four years in such an environment. Amherst is not big enough to ignore the cloud that seems to be hanging over it.

Of the three, Rice seems to be the most comfortable in its bones. It's a beautiful campus in a nice area. It's always been primarily focused on undergrads. It has the residential college system, which is great. Yale, Notre Dame, and Rice seem to understand how to build communities. The overall vibe seems friendly and nerdy. It's not a Wall Street pipeline kind of school. Students seem to have different interests. The downside would be Houston - not the most interesting city in America. But the weather is nice for most of the school year - except September, when it's a furnace - and Rice Village seems very self contained. What's weird about Rice is that it's like the superstar school in Texas, but nobody seems to know much about it in the northeast. Not a school for the Ivy or bust crowd.

As someone who went to Columbia, know zero people who I graduated with that had an experience like what you describe. “Always been a Cold, stressful college?” Huh? What is this based on exactly?

Anonymous wrote:These are such different schools. Even before the current disturbances, Columbia has always been a cold, stressful college. Undergraduates are an afterthought. It can be a very lonely school. There's a big international cohort, which largely keeps to themselves. The Core Curriculum is not for everyone. Neither is Morningside Heights. NYC can be a tough place for four years as an undergrad, particularly for those who are not wealthy. When we visited, we did not get a good vibe. Students seemed unhappy. DC quickly dropped it off their list.

Rice and Amherst seem like much better places for undergrad. The thing about Amherst though is that it seems to be having an identity crisis presently. Not just the school, but the entire community - see The New Yorker article about Amherst. Like it's a very privileged community that's been tying themselves into knots for years now. And everyone is walking on eggshells. I think it would be tedious to spend four years in such an environment. Amherst is not big enough to ignore the cloud that seems to be hanging over it.

Of the three, Rice seems to be the most comfortable in its bones. It's a beautiful campus in a nice area. It's always been primarily focused on undergrads. It has the residential college system, which is great. Yale, Notre Dame, and Rice seem to understand how to build communities. The overall vibe seems friendly and nerdy. It's not a Wall Street pipeline kind of school. Students seem to have different interests. The downside would be Houston - not the most interesting city in America. But the weather is nice for most of the school year - except September, when it's a furnace - and Rice Village seems very self contained. What's weird about Rice is that it's like the superstar school in Texas, but nobody seems to know much about it in the northeast. Not a school for the Ivy or bust crowd.

Anonymous wrote:These are such different schools. Even before the current disturbances, Columbia has always been a cold, stressful college. Undergraduates are an afterthought. It can be a very lonely school. There's a big international cohort, which largely keeps to themselves. The Core Curriculum is not for everyone. Neither is Morningside Heights. NYC can be a tough place for four years as an undergrad, particularly for those who are not wealthy. When we visited, we did not get a good vibe. Students seemed unhappy. DC quickly dropped it off their list.

Rice and Amherst seem like much better places for undergrad. The thing about Amherst though is that it seems to be having an identity crisis presently. Not just the school, but the entire community - see The New Yorker article about Amherst. Like it's a very privileged community that's been tying themselves into knots for years now. And everyone is walking on eggshells. I think it would be tedious to spend four years in such an environment. Amherst is not big enough to ignore the cloud that seems to be hanging over it.

Of the three, Rice seems to be the most comfortable in its bones. It's a beautiful campus in a nice area. It's always been primarily focused on undergrads. It has the residential college system, which is great. Yale, Notre Dame, and Rice seem to understand how to build communities. The overall vibe seems friendly and nerdy. It's not a Wall Street pipeline kind of school. Students seem to have different interests. The downside would be Houston - not the most interesting city in America. But the weather is nice for most of the school year - except September, when it's a furnace - and Rice Village seems very self contained. What's weird about Rice is that it's like the superstar school in Texas, but nobody seems to know much about it in the northeast. Not a school for the Ivy or bust crowd.

Anonymous wrote:I graduated from Columbia decades ago, enjoyed the NYC adult vibe as that what I was seeking; lots of job opportunities in NYC in my field over weekends during college; since then a lot of jobs come with Columbia contacts (esp at entry level screening for prestigious jobs in finance, media, law). Life consists of classes, nightclubs (hooking up with older twenty-somethings), jobs, our own parties on campus.

If you want a classic college campus life this is not for you - like. greeks, sports teams.

If you already partied hard in high school (i had already gone to many nightclubs etc) abd want to skip college and to to adult socializing, this works.

Not sure if this helps!!! For my own kids, there is 1 that i think would thrive, and obe that would hate Columbia. Probably better for girls right now at Columbia.

Good luck.

Anonymous wrote:Rice. No question.

Amherst second.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think even given the current climate/protests, Columbia is an Ivy and you don’t turn down an Ivy. My second choice would be Rice. I loved Rice when I visited. Amherst is too small and too remote for me.

I hope that you are kidding, but know that you are not.

Really depends upon one's major and upon one's other options.

Stanford, MIT, Caltech, about a dozen schools of engineering, Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, specialty schools (all female, military,drama, music, etc.) = are all good reasons to turn down an Ivu League offer.

I meant you don’t turn down an Ivy for Amherst or Rice. Not that I wouldn’t turn down an Ivy for Stanford or MIT (because in that case I would turn down the Ivy bc I think Stanford and MIT are better).

Why? Simply because it’s an Ivy. That would show a lack of critical thinking.

Because, as has been stated in this thread, of the alumni network/the connections post graduation. Like it or not, being an Ivy grad will open more doors for you than being an Amherst or Rice grad.

Is there any data to show that or is this pure conjecture?

Of course it's pure conjecture. Some people are obsessed with the Ivy League. I'm pretty sure even Notre Dame and Michigan offer a more useful network than Columbia.[b] I'm also pretty confident being a Rice and Amherst grad is going to open more doors going forward than graduating from Columbia[i].

It’s ironic you call the PP “pure conjecture” and then offer your own pure conjecture. 😂

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think even given the current climate/protests, Columbia is an Ivy and you don’t turn down an Ivy. My second choice would be Rice. I loved Rice when I visited. Amherst is too small and too remote for me.

I hope that you are kidding, but know that you are not.

Really depends upon one's major and upon one's other options.

Stanford, MIT, Caltech, about a dozen schools of engineering, Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, specialty schools (all female, military,drama, music, etc.) = are all good reasons to turn down an Ivu League offer.

I meant you don’t turn down an Ivy for Amherst or Rice. Not that I wouldn’t turn down an Ivy for Stanford or MIT (because in that case I would turn down the Ivy bc I think Stanford and MIT are better).

Why? Simply because it’s an Ivy. That would show a lack of critical thinking.

Because, as has been stated in this thread, of the alumni network/the connections post graduation. Like it or not, being an Ivy grad will open more doors for you than being an Amherst or Rice grad.

Is there any data to show that or is this pure conjecture?

Of course it's pure conjecture. Some people are obsessed with the Ivy League. I'm pretty sure even Notre Dame and Michigan offer a more useful network than Columbia.[b] I'm also pretty confident being a Rice and Amherst grad is going to open more doors going forward than graduating from Columbia[i].

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think even given the current climate/protests, Columbia is an Ivy and you don’t turn down an Ivy. My second choice would be Rice. I loved Rice when I visited. Amherst is too small and too remote for me.

I hope that you are kidding, but know that you are not.

Really depends upon one's major and upon one's other options.

Stanford, MIT, Caltech, about a dozen schools of engineering, Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, specialty schools (all female, military,drama, music, etc.) = are all good reasons to turn down an Ivu League offer.

I meant you don’t turn down an Ivy for Amherst or Rice. Not that I wouldn’t turn down an Ivy for Stanford or MIT (because in that case I would turn down the Ivy bc I think Stanford and MIT are better).

Why? Simply because it’s an Ivy. That would show a lack of critical thinking.

Because, as has been stated in this thread, of the alumni network/the connections post graduation. Like it or not, being an Ivy grad will open more doors for you than being an Amherst or Rice grad.

Is there any data to show that or is this pure conjecture?