Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BC and BU are peers.

By what measure? Ranking? US news has BC at 36 and BU at 42. Their proximity to each other in rankings and to each other is the only thing they have in common. BU and BC are nothing alike and don't attract the same type of applicant. BU has a large Jewish and international student population. BC is where parochial school students go if they aren't admitted to Notre Dame or Georgetown.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BC and BU are peers.

By what measure? Ranking? US news has BC at 36 and BU at 42. Their proximity to each other in rankings and to each other is the only thing they have in common. BU and BC are nothing alike and don't attract the same type of applicant. BU has a large Jewish and international student population. BC is where parochial school students go if they aren't admitted to Notre Dame or Georgetown.

BU also has solid engineering and good professional graduate schools - medical, law, etc. BU and BC are different schools. There's not a lot of overlap.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BC and BU are peers.

By what measure? Ranking? US news has BC at 36 and BU at 42. Their proximity to each other in rankings and to each other is the only thing they have in common. BU and BC are nothing alike and don't attract the same type of applicant. BU has a large Jewish and international student population. BC is where parochial school students go if they aren't admitted to Notre Dame or Georgetown.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd take the bottom quartile student from BC, Tufts or Emory over the bottom quartile student at UC San Diego. That much is for sure.

Yup, this push to increase Pell grant eligible combined with using test optional to hid the weakest scores is one of the dumbest things in higher education in decades. Thanks for nothing US News.

Anonymous wrote:I'd take the bottom quartile student from BC, Tufts or Emory over the bottom quartile student at UC San Diego. That much is for sure.

Anonymous wrote:BC and BU are peers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are comfortably full pay, it's all about fit. And BC and Wake in particular are very solid schools and their graduates tend to do very well.

If money is an issue - like it is for the 95 percent of Americans who think 100 grand a year for college is ridiculous - it becomes a different calculation. And it's hard to justify Tulane, BC, or Wake at $90,000 over UMD and UVA at $38,000. None of those private schools are worth going into debt over a couple of very good in-state options.

+1 We technically have the money to send our three kids to these $95K/year schools, but we would really feel it. We would sacrifice to pay for HYPPSM, but these NESCACs and the like just aren't worth it to us. The career outcomes aren't the same.

I could see how it's worth it to families with more money or if they could quality for FA though. We have some very good in-State schools or our kids can chase merit.

I went to Wake Forest. My parents were happy to pay. But if money were an issue, I could have gone to UNC and done just fine. Not everyone is so lucky to live in a state with an excellent flagship.

Places like Wake Forest, Davidson, Richmond, etc. also used to cost $25k/year all in. The cost has increased dramatically relative to incomes.

+1 This is why there are now barbell families like mine. If I'm going to spend $400K for undergrad for each of my kids, then it's going to be a top 20-ish that has superior job placement. Otherwise my kids are going to state schools or privates with significant merit $.

I'm not reducing our lifestyle to send my kids to a tier 2 or 3 private instead of a great State school with equivalent or even better career placement.

So, that’s a lot of pressure on your kids no? Given that T20 is a crapshoot?

Not at all. DC just knows that and handful of small $90-100K privates that don't offer merit are off the table.

There are still dozens of schools that would be a great fit and are either more affordable or offer merit to make it more affordable. Plus around 20 other schools that we'll pay that $400K for if DC gets in.

So you will pay $400K for Harvard, but not for Tufts?

I guess I don't get that. I don't think T10 schools are that great over the others, and if I'm willing to pay for one, I'd pay for all of them

Different poster here, and I am solidly upper class, and I would pay for Tufts, WashU, Emory, Georgetown level, but if my kids don't get into that level, I will expect them to go to our state flagship school. My view is that the top kids at flagships will do well in grad school placement (possibly better actually) and I think alumni networks and jobs are available to kids who rise to the top of their state universities, but I don't think a "no name" school is worth the squeeze when you look at job and grad school outcomes. It's not a money thing - it's more the fact that no hiring manager is going to have any familiarity with say, Rhodes College or Gettysburg College or Augustana College.

Tufts might have similar selectivity, (its still the least selective when compared to Emory, Georgetown, WashU etc.) But academically and prestige wise its not the same prestige level. Its closer to Georgia tech or BC in prestige.

PP here. Why do you think this? I don't this this is true. I think Tufts is a desirable target school for lots of private school and top public school kids - the same if not higher than Emory, Georgetown and WashU. Here is evidence that supports this: https://www.reddit.com/r/ApplyingToCollege/comments/1c6j73v/where_the_elite_study_the_t30_for_selective_prep/

The easiest way to tell prestige is rankings and on campus recruitment. We already know Georgetown, Emory, and WashU are ranked much higher than Tufts. But looking at on campus recruiting events Georgetown, Emory, WashU are also much better. Especially Emory and Georgetown.
https://cpd.emory.edu/events/
Emory- JP Morgan, Centerview Partners, New York Fed, Black Stone, Jeffries all for fall.

Washu-
https://careers.washu.edu/events/
M&T, Microsoft, Capital One, Goldman Sachs, Mastercard

Tufts
https://careers.tufts.edu/resources/career-center-events/
Bain and Co, BCG thats all listed as far as prestigious companies

Georgetown- cannot find

Anonymous wrote:BC has a very strong Catholic identity. It was commuter school for working class Catholics. That identity both hurts and helps in the type of applicants it gets.

Tufts was always the strongest of the Boston schools after MIT and Harvard. Over time, BU and Northeastern have become a more attractive destination relative to where they were 25 years ago (while Tufts has backslid a bit.)

I don't really think employers will look at an Emory graduate that much differently than a Tufts graduate. The students have nearly identical academic statistics.

Anonymous wrote:Tufts was always better than BC. Tufts peers are Wesleyan and Emory. BC peer is Villanova.

Anonymous wrote:Tufts was always better than BC. Tufts peers are Wesleyan and Emory. BC peer is Villanova.

Anonymous wrote:Tufts has a deeper and much longer academic reputation than BC. Tufts produces a lot of doctors and dentists while BC was more middle class vocational teachers, nurses, accountants. The supply of poor working class kids wanting to commute to bc dried up in the 1980s as kids would then opt for UMass big rival of bc in those days. BC transition mirrors that of Marquette, Villanova, Loyola, Providence, Dayton and lots of other Catholic schools.