Anonymous wrote:When I attended, I think Tufts was ranked 24. I've seen it fall over the decades to now be 30. I think it is placed correctly and I think it might fall further. It's a tweener university - it's in between - not a small elite liberal arts college (Tufts is enrollment is 2.0- 2.5x the size of Williams and Amherst) and doesn't have endowments and research capabilities that NYU and Emory have, nor does it have the man-on-the street brand recognition that BC does. I worked in MA for several years after graduation and I worked with people who knew Bridgewater State but had never heard of Tufts. It only has cache in NY, NJ, DC areas.

Anonymous wrote:Tufts is most similar in prestige and academics to Rochester, in my opinion. Both are excellent schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop trying to make Tufts appear to be a better school than it is. It’s odd and makes Tufts people just seem deeply insecure.

What does that mean, "better than it is?" This is such an odd discussion. Better than it is based on USNWR ratings? Better than it is based on what criteria?

Better than it is by denigrating other schools in its peer group and saying things like "it's just below the Ivies".

I’m now convinced that this ignorant poster intent on denigrating Tufts and promoting ridiculously incomparable schools is someone who either has a child who did not get into Tufts or a rival or ex whose child is going to Tufts — or some other agenda. Why else waste so much time and effort on this.

What on earth? This is exactly what I'm talking about. Why are schools like USC, NYU, Emory, and BC "ridiculously incomparable schools"? I'm not promoting them. YOU are the one that keeps insisting that Tufts is better than all those schools and more. Get a hold of reality.

For the record, I have zero affiliation with any of the aforementioned schools, and none of my kids even applied to Tufts. I just think the naked boosterism here is embarrassing for you all and worth calling out.

dp. +1. Tufts boosters have a weird chip on their shoulder. They're not nearly as good as they think they are, and should feel confident about how they're rated by most people. Schools like NYU, Emory, Tulane, and BC are absolutely their peers.

ive read through this thread and find the assertion that there are Tufts boosters denigrating other schools odd. My take away from the thread is there are families who choose Tufts for a variety of reasons and are happy with their choice. The thread does not read that Tufts fan’s are trying to make Tufts anymore than the solid school that it is - but it does read that there are folks choosing to participate in this dialogue and speak ill of Tufts for the sake of it. Says way more about the others than it does about the “Tufts boosters.” As is sometimes/often the case with controversial DCUM posts made worse by the anonymous nature of the forum, motivations for participating are illusory at best and strange at worst….

Agreed.

There’s also something subtler going on here. There are the official rankings that list the common knowledge top schools, like the Ivys and the schools that appeal to people in China, and then there’s a more unspoken ranking that comes from a network of elite private schools and people who work in academics. There’s no way to quantify why colleges are on that list. That’s why places like Tufts, Wesleyan University, Vassar, Swarthmore, Haverford etc. might not be high on the USNews rankings but are still competitive among certain groups of people. That’s a different group than those who might see Emory and Tulane as desirable or BC and Northeastern or any other grouping. It’s cultural. So arguing about Tufts versus Emory or Haverford versus BC doesn’t make sense.

I am from a background that most would consider very WASPy (I cringe at using the term because we hate to be so self-referential), and have strong ties to the Northeast, New England private schools, and all the trappings you would expect of such. Tufts has never had the cachet that you claim it does; if anything, its image has always been one of the aloof, not-quite-elite, not-quite-run-of-the-mill step-sibling to the other schools in the Northeast that have always been conventionally coveted. Tufts is viewed quite differently from Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore et al, as those schools derive their social prestige from being small liberal arts colleges. Tufts is certainly not viewed in the same vein as Harvard, MIT, Yale, or even Dartmouth, Brown, Cornell et al. Its closest peers in the region are BC, BU, Brandeis, and Rochester. Looking further afield, I'd throw in Tulane, Wake Forest, and perhaps William & Mary. All are excellent schools in their own right, but Tufts has never had (and does not currently have) quite the reach and pull some are saying it does.

no one said WASP. What you’re saying might be true of some WASP nastiness.
What they said was academic. Tufts is absolutely in the first tier.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop trying to make Tufts appear to be a better school than it is. It’s odd and makes Tufts people just seem deeply insecure.

What does that mean, "better than it is?" This is such an odd discussion. Better than it is based on USNWR ratings? Better than it is based on what criteria?

Better than it is by denigrating other schools in its peer group and saying things like "it's just below the Ivies".

I’m now convinced that this ignorant poster intent on denigrating Tufts and promoting ridiculously incomparable schools is someone who either has a child who did not get into Tufts or a rival or ex whose child is going to Tufts — or some other agenda. Why else waste so much time and effort on this.

What on earth? This is exactly what I'm talking about. Why are schools like USC, NYU, Emory, and BC "ridiculously incomparable schools"? I'm not promoting them. YOU are the one that keeps insisting that Tufts is better than all those schools and more. Get a hold of reality.

For the record, I have zero affiliation with any of the aforementioned schools, and none of my kids even applied to Tufts. I just think the naked boosterism here is embarrassing for you all and worth calling out.

dp. +1. Tufts boosters have a weird chip on their shoulder. They're not nearly as good as they think they are, and should feel confident about how they're rated by most people. Schools like NYU, Emory, Tulane, and BC are absolutely their peers.

ive read through this thread and find the assertion that there are Tufts boosters denigrating other schools odd. My take away from the thread is there are families who choose Tufts for a variety of reasons and are happy with their choice. The thread does not read that Tufts fan’s are trying to make Tufts anymore than the solid school that it is - but it does read that there are folks choosing to participate in this dialogue and speak ill of Tufts for the sake of it. Says way more about the others than it does about the “Tufts boosters.” As is sometimes/often the case with controversial DCUM posts made worse by the anonymous nature of the forum, motivations for participating are illusory at best and strange at worst….

Agreed.

There’s also something subtler going on here. There are the official rankings that list the common knowledge top schools, like the Ivys and the schools that appeal to people in China, and then there’s a more unspoken ranking that comes from a network of elite private schools and people who work in academics. There’s no way to quantify why colleges are on that list. That’s why places like Tufts, Wesleyan University, Vassar, Swarthmore, Haverford etc. might not be high on the USNews rankings but are still competitive among certain groups of people. That’s a different group than those who might see Emory and Tulane as desirable or BC and Northeastern or any other grouping. It’s cultural. So arguing about Tufts versus Emory or Haverford versus BC doesn’t make sense.

I am from a background that most would consider very WASPy (I cringe at using the term because we hate to be so self-referential), and have strong ties to the Northeast, New England private schools, and all the trappings you would expect of such. Tufts has never had the cachet that you claim it does; if anything, its image has always been one of the aloof, not-quite-elite, not-quite-run-of-the-mill step-sibling to the other schools in the Northeast that have always been conventionally coveted. Tufts is viewed quite differently from Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore et al, as those schools derive their social prestige from being small liberal arts colleges. Tufts is certainly not viewed in the same vein as Harvard, MIT, Yale, or even Dartmouth, Brown, Cornell et al. Its closest peers in the region are BC, BU, Brandeis, and Rochester. Looking further afield, I'd throw in Tulane, Wake Forest, and perhaps William & Mary. All are excellent schools in their own right, but Tufts has never had (and does not currently have) quite the reach and pull some are saying it does.

Anonymous wrote:
Agreed.

There’s also something subtler going on here. There are the official rankings that list the common knowledge top schools, like the Ivys and the schools that appeal to people in China, and then there’s a more unspoken ranking that comes from a network of elite private schools and people who work in academics. There’s no way to quantify why colleges are on that list. That’s why places like Tufts, Wesleyan University, Vassar, Swarthmore, Haverford etc. might not be high on the USNews rankings but are still competitive among certain groups of people. That’s a different group than those who might see Emory and Tulane as desirable or BC and Northeastern or any other grouping. It’s cultural. So arguing about Tufts versus Emory or Haverford versus BC doesn’t make sense.

Anonymous wrote:Ladder up with your own version of reality. Hope we are not at any dinner parties together so we are spared your "interjections."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am from a background that most would consider very WASPy (I cringe at using the term because we hate to be so self-referential), and have strong ties to the Northeast, New England private schools, and all the trappings you would expect of such. Tufts has never had the cachet that you claim it does; if anything, its image has always been one of the aloof, not-quite-elite, not-quite-run-of-the-mill step-sibling to the other schools in the Northeast that have always been conventionally coveted. Tufts is viewed quite differently from Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore et al, as those schools derive their social prestige from being small liberal arts colleges. Tufts is certainly not viewed in the same vein as Harvard, MIT, Yale, or even Dartmouth, Brown, Cornell et al. Its closest peers in the region are BC, BU, Brandeis, and Rochester. Looking further afield, I'd throw in Tulane, Wake Forest, and perhaps William & Mary. All are excellent schools in their own right, but Tufts has never had (and does not currently have) quite the reach and pull some are saying it does.

But to what end is all this college navel-gazing and subtle ranking? Worthier people? Smarter? I don't get it.

Anonymous wrote:

I am from a background that most would consider very WASPy (I cringe at using the term because we hate to be so self-referential), and have strong ties to the Northeast, New England private schools, and all the trappings you would expect of such. Tufts has never had the cachet that you claim it does; if anything, its image has always been one of the aloof, not-quite-elite, not-quite-run-of-the-mill step-sibling to the other schools in the Northeast that have always been conventionally coveted. Tufts is viewed quite differently from Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore et al, as those schools derive their social prestige from being small liberal arts colleges. Tufts is certainly not viewed in the same vein as Harvard, MIT, Yale, or even Dartmouth, Brown, Cornell et al. Its closest peers in the region are BC, BU, Brandeis, and Rochester. Looking further afield, I'd throw in Tulane, Wake Forest, and perhaps William & Mary. All are excellent schools in their own right, but Tufts has never had (and does not currently have) quite the reach and pull some are saying it does.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop trying to make Tufts appear to be a better school than it is. It’s odd and makes Tufts people just seem deeply insecure.

What does that mean, "better than it is?" This is such an odd discussion. Better than it is based on USNWR ratings? Better than it is based on what criteria?

Better than it is by denigrating other schools in its peer group and saying things like "it's just below the Ivies".

I’m now convinced that this ignorant poster intent on denigrating Tufts and promoting ridiculously incomparable schools is someone who either has a child who did not get into Tufts or a rival or ex whose child is going to Tufts — or some other agenda. Why else waste so much time and effort on this.

What on earth? This is exactly what I'm talking about. Why are schools like USC, NYU, Emory, and BC "ridiculously incomparable schools"? I'm not promoting them. YOU are the one that keeps insisting that Tufts is better than all those schools and more. Get a hold of reality.

For the record, I have zero affiliation with any of the aforementioned schools, and none of my kids even applied to Tufts. I just think the naked boosterism here is embarrassing for you all and worth calling out.

dp. +1. Tufts boosters have a weird chip on their shoulder. They're not nearly as good as they think they are, and should feel confident about how they're rated by most people. Schools like NYU, Emory, Tulane, and BC are absolutely their peers.

ive read through this thread and find the assertion that there are Tufts boosters denigrating other schools odd. My take away from the thread is there are families who choose Tufts for a variety of reasons and are happy with their choice. The thread does not read that Tufts fan’s are trying to make Tufts anymore than the solid school that it is - but it does read that there are folks choosing to participate in this dialogue and speak ill of Tufts for the sake of it. Says way more about the others than it does about the “Tufts boosters.” As is sometimes/often the case with controversial DCUM posts made worse by the anonymous nature of the forum, motivations for participating are illusory at best and strange at worst….

Agreed.

There’s also something subtler going on here. There are the official rankings that list the common knowledge top schools, like the Ivys and the schools that appeal to people in China, and then there’s a more unspoken ranking that comes from a network of elite private schools and people who work in academics. There’s no way to quantify why colleges are on that list. That’s why places like Tufts, Wesleyan University, Vassar, Swarthmore, Haverford etc. might not be high on the USNews rankings but are still competitive among certain groups of people. That’s a different group than those who might see Emory and Tulane as desirable or BC and Northeastern or any other grouping. It’s cultural. So arguing about Tufts versus Emory or Haverford versus BC doesn’t make sense.