somehow the "like American" is near DC got cut from my post above

Anonymous wrote:Harvard and MIT are just down the road.

One could argue Tufts is better than it should be because of its location. In another city it'd be another Case Western.

On paper Tufts was our child's first choice. After a visit, outright rejected Tufts based on location. Is near Boston like Northwestern is near Chicago and is near DC. Our child wanted to be IN Boston, and will be in the Fall

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tufts is disrespected due to being the poster child for obnoxious, insecure “yield protection” policy that has no purpose other than gaming the USNWR system.

Oh good! OP is the poster whose feelings were hurt by USNWR.

Time to move on, OP.

Nah I am a DP and all I ever hear about Tufts is in connection with yield protection.

I think it has long had the reputation of being a safety school for people who want an Ivy. But it really is so much better than that. Amazing education, campus, college experience. It is, in my option, probably on par or better than Wash U and Emory, but ranking is below I think. Not sure why.

Anonymous wrote:Tufts is disrespected due to being the poster child for obnoxious, insecure “yield protection” policy that has no purpose other than gaming the USNWR system.

Oh good! OP is the poster whose feelings were hurt by USNWR.

Time to move on, OP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because it's an over priced rich kid school?

Is it so bad if it has a high % of UMC students? The class is still highly qualified.

Those rich kids pay for the poor kids, but OP is too stupid to know that.

Somehow the most academically respected schools in the country manage to be need blind. Most manage to be full need met. The very best are full need met without loans. It's hard to take a school that need full tuition students badly enough to be need aware when all of the schools they want to be compare themselves to are need blind

A number of LACs are need aware including high ranked ones like Carelton and Haverford. They meet full need but are choosier with respect to which students they want to give massive aid to. Similarly, few schools are need blind for international. Frankly I don’t see it as a disadvantage and I think so called need blind schools have techniques to avoid busting the financial aid budget. They don’t look at individual applicants but control this with zip codes, public vs private, etc. there is remarkable consistency in terms of percentage that receives aid every year. This is not accidental. They are need blind at the application level but use statistics to control their overall obligation kind of like redlining

Tufts is disrespected due to being the poster child for obnoxious, insecure “yield protection” policy that has no purpose other than gaming the USNWR system.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because it's an over priced rich kid school?

Is it so bad if it has a high % of UMC students? The class is still highly qualified.

Those rich kids pay for the poor kids, but OP is too stupid to know that.

Somehow the most academically respected schools in the country manage to be need blind. Most manage to be full need met. The very best are full need met without loans. It's hard to take a school that need full tuition students badly enough to be need aware when all of the schools they want to be compare themselves to are need blind

You make no sense. That is not how it works.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because it's an over priced rich kid school?

Is it so bad if it has a high % of UMC students? The class is still highly qualified.

Those rich kids pay for the poor kids, but OP is too stupid to know that.

Somehow the most academically respected schools in the country manage to be need blind. Most manage to be full need met. The very best are full need met without loans. It's hard to take a school that need full tuition students badly enough to be need aware when all of the schools they want to be compare themselves to are need blind

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because it's an over priced rich kid school?

Is it so bad if it has a high % of UMC students? The class is still highly qualified.

Those rich kids pay for the poor kids, but OP is too stupid to know that.

That attitude isn’t respectable.

It is true at any school. Did you attend college? At all?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a great 2nd tier option in Boston area as well as BU, BC, NU after the 1st tier MIT and Harvard.

And yet, if it were in any other city, it would be a first tier option. As such, it is a first tier school surrounded by other fabulous schools.

And stop trying to make NU happen. They have gamed the system more than any other north american institution.

Look, we are sorry (not really) that Northeastern rejected you in 1990 and in 2020, but posting your ire on DCUM (19 posts in 3 weeks!!) will change nothing. Take your toys and go home.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because it's an over priced rich kid school?

Is it so bad if it has a high % of UMC students? The class is still highly qualified.

Those rich kids pay for the poor kids, but OP is too stupid to know that.

That attitude isn’t respectable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a great 2nd tier option in Boston area as well as BU, BC, NU after the 1st tier MIT and Harvard.

NU is in IL.

BU and BC are third tier.

Anonymous wrote:It's a great 2nd tier option in Boston area as well as BU, BC, NU after the 1st tier MIT and Harvard.

NU is in IL.

Anonymous wrote:It's a great 2nd tier option in Boston area as well as BU, BC, NU after the 1st tier MIT and Harvard.

And yet, if it were in any other city, it would be a first tier option. As such, it is a first tier school surrounded by other fabulous schools.

And stop trying to make NU happen. They have gamed the system more than any other north american institution.