Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Vassar and Smith should be lower. Richmond perhaps as well. CMC is a little too close to the sun
Why? We were very impressed with Vassar.
I’m always surprised Vassar is not more popular. I don’t know what I am missing about it.
When Vassar was asked to join Yale, it declined. It is/was never about ranking.
Anonymous wrote:Higher education should allow freedom of speech, respect differing opinions, and encourage intellectual discourse presented from a variety of perspectives. Ultra-liberal, leftist schools are intolerant of opposing thought.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).
Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.
Merit aid is not based on the price of tuition. Merit aid offered by colleges is used to game the rankings. Reed is wholly uninterested in giving money to wealthy, high stats kids to up its rankings on USNews. Also, many, many highly regarded colleges and universities are now charging around $80K for tuition, room, and board--regardless of whether they offer merit aid or not.
That is an unfair assessment of merit aid. All colleges want to attract the best students they can (and climb the rankings). Need blind financial aid is also a tool to attract students who might otherwise feel disadvantaged in the application process. Does merit aid really target the wealthy? All things being equal, a wealthy kid would go to the most prestigious school he gets into, not the one that is providing the largest discount. Merit aid therefore really targets the middle class or upper middle class kid who qualifies for little or no financial aid. In the context of LACs, a family that is borderline for need based aid would probably hesitate to shell out 80k a year (versus much cheaper in state alternatives, for example) and would be wise to do so. So if such a kid wants the LAC experience, merit aid may be the only possibility. Should this kid be denied that opportunity? Only lower middle class and wealthy kids should have access to it?
Your attitude is very snotty. Schools that provide merit aid are doing a tremendous service to families in the middle and appropriately rewarding some of our country's best, hardest working kids.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).
Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.
Merit aid is not based on the price of tuition. Merit aid offered by colleges is used to game the rankings. Reed is wholly uninterested in giving money to wealthy, high stats kids to up its rankings on USNews. Also, many, many highly regarded colleges and universities are now charging around $80K for tuition, room, and board--regardless of whether they offer merit aid or not.
That is an unfair assessment of merit aid. All colleges want to attract the best students they can (and climb the rankings). Need blind financial aid is also a tool to attract students who might otherwise feel disadvantaged in the application process. Does merit aid really target the wealthy? All things being equal, a wealthy kid would go to the most prestigious school he gets into, not the one that is providing the largest discount. Merit aid therefore really targets the middle class or upper middle class kid who qualifies for little or no financial aid. In the context of LACs, a family that is borderline for need based aid would probably hesitate to shell out 80k a year (versus much cheaper in state alternatives, for example) and would be wise to do so. So if such a kid wants the LAC experience, merit aid may be the only possibility. Should this kid be denied that opportunity? Only lower middle class and wealthy kids should have access to it?
Your attitude is very snotty. Schools that provide merit aid are doing a tremendous service to families in the middle and appropriately rewarding some of our country's best, hardest working kids.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).
Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.
Merit aid is not based on the price of tuition. Merit aid offered by colleges is used to game the rankings. Reed is wholly uninterested in giving money to wealthy, high stats kids to up its rankings on USNews. Also, many, many highly regarded colleges and universities are now charging around $80K for tuition, room, and board--regardless of whether they offer merit aid or not.
That is an unfair assessment of merit aid. All colleges want to attract the best students they can (and climb the rankings). Need blind financial aid is also a tool to attract students who might otherwise feel disadvantaged in the application process. Does merit aid really target the wealthy? All things being equal, a wealthy kid would go to the most prestigious school he gets into, not the one that is providing the largest discount. Merit aid therefore really targets the middle class or upper middle class kid who qualifies for little or no financial aid. In the context of LACs, a family that is borderline for need based aid would probably hesitate to shell out 80k a year (versus much cheaper in state alternatives, for example) and would be wise to do so. So if such a kid wants the LAC experience, merit aid may be the only possibility. Should this kid be denied that opportunity? Only lower middle class and wealthy kids should have access to it?
Your attitude is very snotty. Schools that provide merit aid are doing a tremendous service to families in the middle and appropriately rewarding some of our country's best, hardest working kids.
Anonymous wrote:Higher education should allow freedom of speech, respect differing opinions, and encourage intellectual discourse presented from a variety of perspectives. Ultra-liberal, leftist schools are intolerant of opposing thought.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Always funny to see conservatives freak out about Oberlin, Wesleyan, Vassar, and Brown because of reputations forged from the 60s to 80s when the reality is that today they are very middle of the road institutions
LOL if you think that Oberlin is a "very middle of the road institution". More like a narrow-minded nuthouse, than a middle of the road institution.
Haverford is over-rated as is Colorado College, but for different reasons.
The problem that many see with schools like Oberlin, Wesleyan, Vassar, & Haverford is that they are all too narrow-minded and shut-down opposing or different opinions. Too focused on political correctness.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).
Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.
Merit aid is not based on the price of tuition. Merit aid offered by colleges is used to game the rankings. Reed is wholly uninterested in giving money to wealthy, high stats kids to up its rankings on USNews. Also, many, many highly regarded colleges and universities are now charging around $80K for tuition, room, and board--regardless of whether they offer merit aid or not.
Anonymous wrote:Always funny to see conservatives freak out about Oberlin, Wesleyan, Vassar, and Brown because of reputations forged from the 60s to 80s when the reality is that today they are very middle of the road institutions
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Vassar and Smith should be lower. Richmond perhaps as well. CMC is a little too close to the sun
Why? We were very impressed with Vassar.
I’m always surprised Vassar is not more popular. I don’t know what I am missing about it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).
Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.
Merit aid is not based on the price of tuition. Merit aid offered by colleges is used to game the rankings. Reed is wholly uninterested in giving money to wealthy, high stats kids to up its rankings on USNews. Also, many, many highly regarded colleges and universities are now charging around $80K for tuition, room, and board--regardless of whether they offer merit aid or not.
I think the vast majority of students today would choose Midd over Wesleyan. W&L is a different animal and in some ways diametrically opposite Wesleyan culturally. 10 pct of W&L also gets a full ride via Johnson Scholar - that is a tough offer to turn down.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).
Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.