Anonymous wrote:it’s amazing to me that just because a college admits more than it rejects the DCUM assumption is that there is something fatally wrong with it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Small school, skewed gender ratio, lackluster location. But the education is phenomenal.
There are quite a few small engineering/STEM schools that fit a similar profile. High acceptance rates but also very high ACT/SAT midranges, which means they aren't taking just anyone. The above poster who mentioned self-selection is correct.
This list of CS safety schools mentions some of the schools I'm talking about (as well as Rose). The most interesting one was Colorado School of Mines. I didn't realize that even that school accepts nearly 60% of applicants. I expected it to be a lot lower.
https://collegejaguar.com/the-9-best-safety-schools-for-computer-science/
Good list. Purdue is a glaring error though. Their CS program is direct admit and is very difficult to get into. Not a safety at all.
Anonymous wrote:It's very expensive, and Purdue is a great engineering school. If you're in-state in Indiana and want to study engineering, why not head to Purdue, which is much cheaper (and also cheaper for out-of-state students by a wide margin, too).
Anonymous wrote:Small school, skewed gender ratio, lackluster location. But the education is phenomenal.
There are quite a few small engineering/STEM schools that fit a similar profile. High acceptance rates but also very high ACT/SAT midranges, which means they aren't taking just anyone. The above poster who mentioned self-selection is correct.
This list of CS safety schools mentions some of the schools I'm talking about (as well as Rose). The most interesting one was Colorado School of Mines. I didn't realize that even that school accepts nearly 60% of applicants. I expected it to be a lot lower.
https://collegejaguar.com/the-9-best-safety-schools-for-computer-science/
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Dudes worried about the gender ratio at RHIT should keep in mind that Indiana State is just a few miles down the road, and those second-tier state school chicks love Rose dudes (and their future money!). Easy to smash!
Hey, it is 2022.
Any chance you can not refer to young women enrolled in college as, “chicks” who can be lured into a relationship based upon the male’s future earning potential. That is sexist on so many levels. And also quite dated.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Dudes worried about the gender ratio at RHIT should keep in mind that Indiana State is just a few miles down the road, and those second-tier state school chicks love Rose dudes (and their future money!). Easy to smash!
Hey, it is 2022.
Any chance you can not refer to young women enrolled in college as, “chicks” who can be lured into a relationship based upon the male’s future earning potential. That is sexist on so many levels. And also quite dated.
Jesus Christ.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Mike Pence land OP sure great wonderful idea.
So moronic. I vote Dem 100% of the time but this is stupid. Are Harvard and MIT in Mitt Romney land? Is Princeton in Chris Christie land? UVA, W&M and VT in Youngkin land?
Anonymous wrote:Small school, skewed gender ratio, lackluster location. But the education is phenomenal.
There are quite a few small engineering/STEM schools that fit a similar profile. High acceptance rates but also very high ACT/SAT midranges, which means they aren't taking just anyone. The above poster who mentioned self-selection is correct.
This list of CS safety schools mentions some of the schools I'm talking about (as well as Rose). The most interesting one was Colorado School of Mines. I didn't realize that even that school accepts nearly 60% of applicants. I expected it to be a lot lower.
https://collegejaguar.com/the-9-best-safety-schools-for-computer-science/
Anonymous wrote:Mike Pence land OP sure great wonderful idea.
Anonymous wrote:Mike Pence land OP sure great wonderful idea.
Anonymous wrote:Mike Pence land OP sure great wonderful idea.