Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:State schools aren't for everyone. If you came from a sheltered, small private school, the rough & tumble of the wider world is going to be a little jarring.
Ah yes, we all know the true point of college is to go get treated like crap by Ivory Tower bureaucrats, "taught" by foreign GAs who can't speak coherent English, binge drink and do drugs and wake up without panties on and forget how it happened, and stop attending classes for weeks or months and literally nobody notices. The rough and tumble #RealWorld.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:DD is at Michigan. To her, it represents the whole package. Many opportunities, academic and social. Great research to be involved in even as an undergrad. Well respected. Huge alumni network for job opportunities.
She doesn’t like the fierce competition for some classes but she actually said to me, “I took some classes I didn’t think I would like all that much but they turned out to be good. And now I am more interested in X.”
It is true that as a Freshman she could disappear and no one would know. As the kids progress, many of their classes get smaller and it would be much harder to skip classes and such. Even as a sophomore some of her classes like Mandarin had maybe 20 people. She said her Freshman year was the outlier in this respect, and overall academically it was probably the least fun year but most fun socially.
She is very happy with her choice but it’s not for all kids. Other DD is at Colby. Go figure.
Go figure what?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:DC is attending UVA and not doing well. The only appeal is the in-state tuition.
Sorry to hear this. Do you mean to imply DC is not doing well because of the large, impersonal nature of a state university?
That's part of it. DC is not mature and socially adept compared to peers. The drinking and frat culture does not suit DC. A lot of students and professors are not cultivating a collegial environment. DC will graduate in 4 years in a marketable major but it's through sheer hard work and mostly working alone. No friends. No internships.
Obviously DC is mostly responsible for his/her own fortune. But the school didn't provide any lift.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:“ Sure they’re cheaper but the idea of a school where 75% of students come from a single state seems entirely unappealing.”
Especially if that state is one of the tiny ones in the northeastern part of this country.
Not sure that matters
Of course it matters. Texas and California are both huge states with large populations. There is a much larger diversity of students at their state flagships than someone attending the University of Rhode Island.
I attended URI and never ran into high school friends. 15,000 students at URI, 800 at my high school, maybe 5% got into the school and attended.
PP here: and 800 was entire HS, 200 in my class in which 10 were admitted and accepted
Feel better, or were your feelings spared?
That’s because you can drive 25 miles or less and be in a different state. That’s the point.
This is nonsense. I am so happy I live in Mass now, as I don’t miss the “pointedness” of DC, or lack thereof
My comment was in response to the poster who stated that a school which had 75% of its students from one state was unappealing. The URI is 56% instate, which is unusually high for an average public university. California is huge. 85% of UCLA is instate. There is much, much more diversity at UCLA than there is at URI or any state school in the northeast.
Diversity of what, high school friends? Fact is - and back on topic - that state schools aren’t necessarily extensions of high schools. For some it’s a blue proposition (just because it’s further away and costs more doesn’t make it the best choice), for others it’s about flexibility, for others it’s about options after undergrad, etc.
So you agree with the statement, “Sure they’re cheaper but the idea of a school where 75% of students come from a single state seems entirely unappealing..”
No.
Thanks got confirming that you never read why I commented in the first place.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:“ Sure they’re cheaper but the idea of a school where 75% of students come from a single state seems entirely unappealing.”
Especially if that state is one of the tiny ones in the northeastern part of this country.
Not sure that matters
Of course it matters. Texas and California are both huge states with large populations. There is a much larger diversity of students at their state flagships than someone attending the University of Rhode Island.
I attended URI and never ran into high school friends. 15,000 students at URI, 800 at my high school, maybe 5% got into the school and attended.
PP here: and 800 was entire HS, 200 in my class in which 10 were admitted and accepted
That’s because you can drive 25 miles or less and be in a different state. That’s the point.
This is nonsense. I am so happy I live in Mass now, as I don’t miss the “pointedness” of DC, or lack thereof
My comment was in response to the poster who stated that a school which had 75% of its students from one state was unappealing. The URI is 56% instate, which is unusually high for an average public university. California is huge. 85% of UCLA is instate. There is much, much more diversity at UCLA than there is at URI or any state school in the northeast.
Diversity of what, high school friends? Fact is - and back on topic - that state schools aren’t necessarily extensions of high schools. For some it’s a blue proposition (just because it’s further away and costs more doesn’t make it the best choice), for others it’s about flexibility, for others it’s about options after undergrad, etc.
So you agree with the statement, “Sure they’re cheaper but the idea of a school where 75% of students come from a single state seems entirely unappealing..”
No.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:DC is attending UVA and not doing well. The only appeal is the in-state tuition.
Sorry to hear this. Do you mean to imply DC is not doing well because of the large, impersonal nature of a state university?
That's part of it. DC is not mature and socially adept compared to peers. The drinking and frat culture does not suit DC. A lot of students and professors are not cultivating a collegial environment. DC will graduate in 4 years in a marketable major but it's through sheer hard work and mostly working alone. No friends. No internships.
Obviously DC is mostly responsible for his/her own fortune. But the school didn't provide any lift.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:DC is attending UVA and not doing well. The only appeal is the in-state tuition.
Sorry to hear this. Do you mean to imply DC is not doing well because of the large, impersonal nature of a state university?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:DC is attending UVA and not doing well. The only appeal is the in-state tuition.
Sorry to hear this. Do you mean to imply DC is not doing well because of the large, impersonal nature of a state university?
Yes, that environment turned out to be a bad fit for her child. It happens. Why are the public fans so adamant that “their” setting is nirvana for all kids?
I only sense defensiveness coming from that corner, why is that?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I attended a LAC while the majority of my HS classmates (who enrolled in college; the majority did not) attended the two large unis in our state or one of the five regionals. Many returned to our hometown, landed jobs, married, had kids, were active in the local schools, took care of their parents as they aged, and are now grandparents themselves. While my life pretty much doesn't resemble theirs in many ways, I just don't get the vitriol here. It is certainly great for our hometown that folks return, pay taxes, and plow money back into the community. It's not necessarily what I sought in life, but I don't begrudge them for it.
Ditto. Why do people think it's so awful to be attached to your family, friends and community? I did move across the country in my 20s but regret that a bit now that I'm in my 50s and spend as much time as I can going back to my home state to see family and see how some old college friends have been able to have long, close relationships in the friend group I'm no longer a part of.
They don't. Well, I certainly do not think this way. But the argument of public univ. vs. private is not about that, at all. It is wonderful to be connected to your community of origin. I know I am. But I also went away for college from said community where I was exposed to different types of people, backgrounds, regional cultures, traditions etc. etc. College should be about growth both inside the classroom but also inside the dorms and student centers and, well, you get the idea. It is wonderful to have a strong connection to one's family and hometown community but to have that in a vacuum without being also at one point exposed to different types of people, customs and places just does not seem ideal to me.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:State schools aren't for everyone. If you came from a sheltered, small private school, the rough & tumble of the wider world is going to be a little jarring.
Better to have that in college than go to a sheltering college and then face reality after.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I attended a LAC while the majority of my HS classmates (who enrolled in college; the majority did not) attended the two large unis in our state or one of the five regionals. Many returned to our hometown, landed jobs, married, had kids, were active in the local schools, took care of their parents as they aged, and are now grandparents themselves. While my life pretty much doesn't resemble theirs in many ways, I just don't get the vitriol here. It is certainly great for our hometown that folks return, pay taxes, and plow money back into the community. It's not necessarily what I sought in life, but I don't begrudge them for it.
Ditto. Why do people think it's so awful to be attached to your family, friends and community? I did move across the country in my 20s but regret that a bit now that I'm in my 50s and spend as much time as I can going back to my home state to see family and see how some old college friends have been able to have long, close relationships in the friend group I'm no longer a part of.
They don't. Well, I certainly do not think this way. But the argument of public univ. vs. private is not about that, at all. It is wonderful to be connected to your community of origin. I know I am. But I also went away for college from said community where I was exposed to different types of people, backgrounds, regional cultures, traditions etc. etc. College should be about growth both inside the classroom but also inside the dorms and student centers and, well, you get the idea. It is wonderful to have a strong connection to one's family and hometown community but to have that in a vacumn without being also at one point exposed to different types of people, customs and places just does not seem ideal to me.
Anonymous wrote:State schools aren't for everyone. If you came from a sheltered, small private school, the rough & tumble of the wider world is going to be a little jarring.