Anonymous wrote:I don’t get the Dartmouth booster. Dartmouth and it’s alums and marketing material all make it a point to emphasize how similar they are to an LAC.

I am the guy you are referring to as "the Dartmouth booster". I have no affiliation and have visited exactly once. I am not a Dartmouth "booster" in any way.

I am a "facts" booster, and an "easily googled defeater of BS" booster. And I don't care what Dartmouth alumns say. Yes I know they still brand themselves Dartmouth College and tout that they are the smallest of the Ivies with 6,300 undergrads. But they also have 2100 grad students, which is only a few hundred fewer than Princeton (2500 PhD, 333 masters). Plus there is that whole Carnegie classification R1 thing, and the $326 million in funding. lol.... These are FACTS.

In a forum like this FACTS MATTER, because some families may read things here and may make decisions based on it. As an open forum, your opinions, even grossly uninformed ones, are welcome, but so are the responses wchich demonstrate how they are factually inaccurate.

Do you "get it" now?

I don’t get the Dartmouth booster. Dartmouth and it’s alums and marketing material all make it a point to emphasize how similar they are to an LAC.

Anonymous wrote:OK so the fact that Dartmouth falls in and out of the R1 group every couple years sort of supports the idea that it's "middling" when it comes to research.

2017 really is recent. And so few students. I certainly never thought if it as a R1 and still don’t after this idiotic exchange

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK so the fact that Dartmouth falls in and out of the R1 group every couple years sort of supports the idea that it's "middling" when it comes to research.

No, it's just that it's more like a LAC than a research university. It only has a handful of grad programs. It's an unusual school--because it has a couple of PhD programs it gets classified as a research university rather than an LAC in the Carnegie system.

Right. So "middling" seems like an apt descriptor when it comes to grad/research stature.

Yeah they are middling, which is why those Carnegie idiots classified them as R1

Unless you meant middling amount the top 5% of all colleges. Which is a pretty stupid definition of middling!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK so the fact that Dartmouth falls in and out of the R1 group every couple years sort of supports the idea that it's "middling" when it comes to research.

No, it's just that it's more like a LAC than a research university. It only has a handful of grad programs. It's an unusual school--because it has a couple of PhD programs it gets classified as a research university rather than an LAC in the Carnegie system.

Yeah, Those idiots at the Carnegie system. Good thing you know more than them, and all their data and criteria!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK so the fact that Dartmouth falls in and out of the R1 group every couple years sort of supports the idea that it's "middling" when it comes to research.

No, it's just that it's more like a LAC than a research university. It only has a handful of grad programs. It's an unusual school--because it has a couple of PhD programs it gets classified as a research university rather than an LAC in the Carnegie system.

Right. So "middling" seems like an apt descriptor when it comes to grad/research stature.

Anonymous wrote:OK so the fact that Dartmouth falls in and out of the R1 group every couple years sort of supports the idea that it's "middling" when it comes to research.

No, it's just that it's more like a LAC than a research university. It only has a handful of grad programs. It's an unusual school--because it has a couple of PhD programs it gets classified as a research university rather than an LAC in the Carnegie system.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK so the fact that Dartmouth falls in and out of the R1 group every couple years sort of supports the idea that it's "middling" when it comes to research.

More false words! In addition to moved goalposts.

You’ve been beaten up with facts, face it. Just give up. You don’t know what you are talking about. Why is that? Did they reject you or yours?

?? What facts are you referring to? You yourself said that it lost its R1 status in 2015, then gained it in 2017. Also, I'm a NP, not whoever you were having an online cat fight with.

The fact that Dartmouth falls in and out of a grouping of 140+ universities makes it "middling" by its very definition. It's very new to the group currently, and all other data suggests that it doesn't have the research or financial prowess of many of its "peer" institutions.

Is this regarding AAU?

No, R1 accreditation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK so the fact that Dartmouth falls in and out of the R1 group every couple years sort of supports the idea that it's "middling" when it comes to research.

More false words! In addition to moved goalposts.

You’ve been beaten up with facts, face it. Just give up. You don’t know what you are talking about. Why is that? Did they reject you or yours?

?? What facts are you referring to? You yourself said that it lost its R1 status in 2015, then gained it in 2017. Also, I'm a NP, not whoever you were having an online cat fight with.

The fact that Dartmouth falls in and out of a grouping of 140+ universities makes it "middling" by its very definition. It's very new to the group currently, and all other data suggests that it doesn't have the research or financial prowess of many of its "peer" institutions.

Is this regarding AAU?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK so the fact that Dartmouth falls in and out of the R1 group every couple years sort of supports the idea that it's "middling" when it comes to research.

More false words! In addition to moved goalposts.

You’ve been beaten up with facts, face it. Just give up. You don’t know what you are talking about. Why is that? Did they reject you or yours?

?? What facts are you referring to? You yourself said that it lost its R1 status in 2015, then gained it in 2017. Also, I'm a NP, not whoever you were having an online cat fight with.

The fact that Dartmouth falls in and out of a grouping of 140+ universities makes it "middling" by its very definition. It's very new to the group currently, and all other data suggests that it doesn't have the research or financial prowess of many of its "peer" institutions.

Anonymous wrote:OK so the fact that Dartmouth falls in and out of the R1 group every couple years sort of supports the idea that it's "middling" when it comes to research.

More false words! In addition to moved goalposts.

You’ve been beaten up with facts, face it. Just give up. You don’t know what you are talking about. Why is that? Did they reject you or yours?

OK so the fact that Dartmouth falls in and out of the R1 group every couple years sort of supports the idea that it's "middling" when it comes to research.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there anything quite as pathetic as a bunch of status-obsessed strivers proclaiming with absolute confidence that a bunch of universities of which they have no personal knowledge are categorically superior to a bunch of other universities of which they also have no personal knowledge?

This is a clown show.

But it would still be good to know what happened re: Dartmouth's accreditation.

Yeah, it would be good to know what happened. If only it were written about in articles about the event and minutes of Dartmouth board meetings, man if someone only could post those here… or even better, if there were some “magical” engine in which you could type what you are looking for and then it would show up and you could click, read, and learn… but no, we are stuck here in the dark ages curing things with leeches and going outside to poop, and therefore we must say untrue things about Dartmouth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard, Brown, Dartmouth, Berkeley and Cornell have gone down.

Columbia, Hopkins, U Chicago, Stanford, Rice, MIT, CalTech came up.

Oh, you! First by assuming "stature" is a thing that matters and can be put on a scale. Second by starting your list with "Harvard" which literally has been the generic term for the #1 college since it's inception in 1636.

You silly person! Just stop!

Brown, Dartmouth, Berkeley down. Cornell down too (just look at rankings)

UP: JHU, Stanford and Chicago

You silly, silly person!

First, rankings don't matter. But if they did:

Brown has bounced between 10-17 consistently since the inception of USN.
Dartmouth between 6-12
Berkeley between 13-22
Cornell between 11-16 (with one outlier year at 6)

This is out of 3,000 colleges.

You are, as they used to say in my neighborhood, talking out of your ass.

.
Cornell is currently 17, and all of these schools are at the lower end of these ranges. I agree these schools are down while Vanderbilt, washU are up.

I think the LACs and LAC-like schools (like Dartmouth and Brown) lost most grounding vs. research-focused schools like Vandy, WashU, Rice etc.

Again with the "LAC-like schools" Dartmouth and Brown are both R1 research universities.

They both have LACs within them, as does nearly every university on the planet.

To be fair as research institutions Brown and Dartmouth are middling

No, silly, they are R1 research universities, of which there are only 146. "Doctoral Universities – Very high research activity" in the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_research_universities_in_the_United_States

This took two seconds to search for. Why did you not "do your research"?

As for the quality of the research at Brown, Professor Michael Kosterlitz was awarded 2016 Nobel Prize in Physics. Maybe you've heard of it? Kenneth Miller is a famous leading evolutionary biology professor. There's so many others... here's a list:

https://vivo.brown.edu/search

Tell me which one of those is "middling"?

I'll wait.

Dartmouth only became R1 in 2017.

Again, you prove my point that you are too lazy to even read what you think you read.

They were R1, fell out in 2015, and GOT IT BACK in 2017.

Hey, People looking at colleges! Ignore most of what you read here as many of these people are very ignorant of easily researchable facts!

Dartmouth only became R1 in 2017. Dartmouth is substandard. Everyone knows this.

No everyone “doesn’t” know this. You think it, and you are wrong. They lost their classification for 2 years, and got it back two years later. That was linked to. Why didn’t you just read it?

Anonymous wrote:Is there anything quite as pathetic as a bunch of status-obsessed strivers proclaiming with absolute confidence that a bunch of universities of which they have no personal knowledge are categorically superior to a bunch of other universities of which they also have no personal knowledge?

This is a clown show.

But it would still be good to know what happened re: Dartmouth's accreditation.