Agree PP - loved Claremont. DD did not like the level of hyper activism in all the activity posters. Her time at a Big 5 all girls’ school in the DMV has actually turned her against strident feminism.

Grinnell, Kenyon, Notre Dame, Duke, NYU, Columbia

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ds: Very nerdy, science and math oriented, so no LACs.

Dd: No Deep Southern schools. We are northerners and some southern schools can be difficult socially for girls/women. She also disliked Harvey Mudd, but for an entirely different reason - the campus is extremely ugly and in the middle of a very boring, sterile suburban area.

Claremont/Pomona are gorgeous little towns. A littletoo antique shop cutesy for some, but it's not like its in the San Fernando Valley. Perfect SoCal weather and less than an hour off-rush to West LA, beaches, or Palm Springs. And you can even go skiing within 30 minutes at Mt. Baldy.

Pomona the city (population 150,000) is unsafe and in shambles. Sure you're not confusing Pomona College? Despite the name, it's actually not in Pomona the city. They are next door to each other but the colleges/village are well within town limits, not along the border of Pomona/Claremont.

Claremont is gorgeous. I have been to 20+ college towns and Claremont was one of the most impressive I've seen. Beautiful green area with a mountain backdrop, a bustling 4x4 square village with great restaurants/cafes, adjacent to the architecturally interesting Claremont Colleges, surprisingly walkable, doesn't give off the same grittiness and cramped feel of the rest of SoCal. We wandered from one school to the other until we got to the side of Pomona College bordering the Village, and we were blown away by how pretty it all was. Unfortunately, our child wasn't a fan of how quiet it was (so I could understand the boring description...sterile puzzles me since it has a lot of unique charm) and wanted a more active place, but I felt it was the perfect escape from a big city life while offering a train to Los Angeles for all its activity/energy. Whether or not you're interested in those 5 colleges, the town itself is worth a visit if you're ever in the area.

Am hoping with all my heart that DC gets into Brown

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Brown, Yale, Oberlin - far too liberal. We are democrats but moderates and we value free speech and debate.

Chicago - way too nerdy for my kid's personality

Ha ha. You’ll have to scratch 90% of the colleges in the US off your list.

not really, all the top schools are liberal but these three take it to a whole other level.

Our kids are athletes and have sustained injuries. It sucks when your swimmer calls sobbing with a burst eardrum, your kid needs surgery on his finger, he breaks his shoulder, someone gets mugged and you can't fet to them immediately. Call me a helicopter but i think we made a mistake not keeping them closer.

LOL - we have one in boarding school - guess what, they learn to deal with this. The other, not in boarding school, was an exchange student and ended up in a European hospital without us. All okay and they know how to live and take care of themselves as a result.

None of the top 20 for undergraduate studies. No state or private schools with big name sports teams. (drinking culture). Profs are rewarded for publishing and research, not teaching. Most teaching is done by graduate assistants. Small regional liberal arts schools are actual doing a much better job of educating young people and many still take some responsibility for noticing when a young person is going off the rails. You could stop showing up for class at most elite/big schools and no one would even notice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No state schools, no high greek percentage schools, no religiously affiliated schools, no schools that require a plane ride.

Wow. So no Berkeley, UNC, GT ????

No, not even in the ballpark but mind you I'm a huge, unrepentant education snob.

Not much of an *education* snob if you’re making college decisions based on mode of transportation.

NP here. This exchange sounds like what I hear from some friends. "My kid can only go to college within a five-hour drive of home" or whatever. Basically it seems to be their way to say "You have to stay in-state" but signaling that they'd consider somewhere just over a border. It's like they put the point of a compass on their hometown, drew a circle around it and said, "You have to go to college within this circle."

I'm curious to know from the "no schools that require a plane ride" poster why you consider that a factor, unless you just mean you want them to stay in-state for financial reasons but "no plane ride" is your way of saying so--? I ask this as someone who did go to school a plane ride (or one very long drive) away from home, and who has told my DC that staying in-state or in a certain driving distance is not required.

Maybe the concern is that if a kid is in trouble, sick, hurt, it's harder to get to your kid or harder for your kid to get home if they're a plane ride away? I can see that as a reason if a student has health or other issues. Asking this seriously.

Our kids are athletes and have sustained injuries. It sucks when your swimmer calls sobbing with a burst eardrum, your kid needs surgery on his finger, he breaks his shoulder, someone gets mugged and you can't fet to them immediately. Call me a helicopter but i think we made a mistake not keeping them closer.

I went to a school that required a plane ride by my own choice and never admitted how much I regretted it. I love my family and was so jealous of the kids who got to see their parents for long weekends and Thanksgiving and fall and spring break. I had a single Mom and I knew going in that she couldn't afford plane tickets for all the breaks. I came home for summer and half the winter breaks and spent the rest on campus wishing I'd gone to a closer school. I wouldn't require my child to pick a school within a certain distance, but I would make sure they understood exactly how many tickets we could afford.

I understand. I have a very independent DD that still loves spending time with family and feels like she can be as independent and comfortable as she wants to be if her family is at least somewhat nearby. A school 2 hours away was perfect for her.

And she's studying abroad for a semester, so she doesn't feel glued to home.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No state schools, no high greek percentage schools, no religiously affiliated schools, no schools that require a plane ride.

Wow. So no Berkeley, UNC, GT ????

No, not even in the ballpark but mind you I'm a huge, unrepentant education snob.

Not much of an *education* snob if you’re making college decisions based on mode of transportation.

NP here. This exchange sounds like what I hear from some friends. "My kid can only go to college within a five-hour drive of home" or whatever. Basically it seems to be their way to say "You have to stay in-state" but signaling that they'd consider somewhere just over a border. It's like they put the point of a compass on their hometown, drew a circle around it and said, "You have to go to college within this circle."

I'm curious to know from the "no schools that require a plane ride" poster why you consider that a factor, unless you just mean you want them to stay in-state for financial reasons but "no plane ride" is your way of saying so--? I ask this as someone who did go to school a plane ride (or one very long drive) away from home, and who has told my DC that staying in-state or in a certain driving distance is not required.

Maybe the concern is that if a kid is in trouble, sick, hurt, it's harder to get to your kid or harder for your kid to get home if they're a plane ride away? I can see that as a reason if a student has health or other issues. Asking this seriously.

I was born and raised in DC but live in NYC now so my drive ring includes Dartmouth to the north, Cornell to the west and Princeton to the southwest. Our thinking is two-fold.....convenience and safety. I'd much rather just give DC a car and not have to ever worry about booking travel months in advance and Ive had friends that have had serious medical issues with their children in college. I can't imagine getting a call about my child having a health issue and not being able to jump in a car and being at their side in max 4-5 hours. Maybe I'm being paranoid but why take the chance?

You sound super anxious. My parents were Foreign Service and lived 3 plane trips and about 16 hours away from me when I was in college. But I was a self sufficient young adult at 17 when I went to college. If your kid isn't, you failed as a parent.

And you sound like a know it all blowhard. Who gives a crap that your parents were Foreign Service and what does that have to do with how other people choose what's fit?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No state schools, no high greek percentage schools, no religiously affiliated schools, no schools that require a plane ride.

Wow. So no Berkeley, UNC, GT ????

No, not even in the ballpark but mind you I'm a huge, unrepentant education snob.

Not much of an *education* snob if you’re making college decisions based on mode of transportation.

NP here. This exchange sounds like what I hear from some friends. "My kid can only go to college within a five-hour drive of home" or whatever. Basically it seems to be their way to say "You have to stay in-state" but signaling that they'd consider somewhere just over a border. It's like they put the point of a compass on their hometown, drew a circle around it and said, "You have to go to college within this circle."

I'm curious to know from the "no schools that require a plane ride" poster why you consider that a factor, unless you just mean you want them to stay in-state for financial reasons but "no plane ride" is your way of saying so--? I ask this as someone who did go to school a plane ride (or one very long drive) away from home, and who has told my DC that staying in-state or in a certain driving distance is not required.

Maybe the concern is that if a kid is in trouble, sick, hurt, it's harder to get to your kid or harder for your kid to get home if they're a plane ride away? I can see that as a reason if a student has health or other issues. Asking this seriously.

Our kids are athletes and have sustained injuries. It sucks when your swimmer calls sobbing with a burst eardrum, your kid needs surgery on his finger, he breaks his shoulder, someone gets mugged and you can't fet to them immediately. Call me a helicopter but i think we made a mistake not keeping them closer.

I went to a school that required a plane ride by my own choice and never admitted how much I regretted it. I love my family and was so jealous of the kids who got to see their parents for long weekends and Thanksgiving and fall and spring break. I had a single Mom and I knew going in that she couldn't afford plane tickets for all the breaks. I came home for summer and half the winter breaks and spent the rest on campus wishing I'd gone to a closer school. I wouldn't require my child to pick a school within a certain distance, but I would make sure they understood exactly how many tickets we could afford.

Harvard, Princeton, Cornell. Yale.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No state schools, no high greek percentage schools, no religiously affiliated schools, no schools that require a plane ride.

Wow. So no Berkeley, UNC, GT ????

No, not even in the ballpark but mind you I'm a huge, unrepentant education snob.

Not much of an *education* snob if you’re making college decisions based on mode of transportation.

NP here. This exchange sounds like what I hear from some friends. "My kid can only go to college within a five-hour drive of home" or whatever. Basically it seems to be their way to say "You have to stay in-state" but signaling that they'd consider somewhere just over a border. It's like they put the point of a compass on their hometown, drew a circle around it and said, "You have to go to college within this circle."

I'm curious to know from the "no schools that require a plane ride" poster why you consider that a factor, unless you just mean you want them to stay in-state for financial reasons but "no plane ride" is your way of saying so--? I ask this as someone who did go to school a plane ride (or one very long drive) away from home, and who has told my DC that staying in-state or in a certain driving distance is not required.

Maybe the concern is that if a kid is in trouble, sick, hurt, it's harder to get to your kid or harder for your kid to get home if they're a plane ride away? I can see that as a reason if a student has health or other issues. Asking this seriously.

Our kids are athletes and have sustained injuries. It sucks when your swimmer calls sobbing with a burst eardrum, your kid needs surgery on his finger, he breaks his shoulder, someone gets mugged and you can't fet to them immediately. Call me a helicopter but i think we made a mistake not keeping them closer.

Anonymous wrote:I have a kid that goes to school 6.5 hours from home (Colgate) and it’s kind of the WORST of both worlds. Too far to really come home for a weekend and annoying to drive all the way there and back for stuff like parents weekend, thanksgiving, other breaks, etc. And it’s not close to any major airport, so flying would be $$ and a hassle, probably not even saving much time. I feel like I’d almost rather have her be a 2/3 hour plane ride away than a 6.5 hour drive...

(Disclaimer- she’s super happy at Colgate, so this is just a minor annoyance...)

+1

I have a kid in Chicago and a kid in Ithaca and doing a direct flight from ORD to DCA (or vice versa) is actually way less of a hassle than the I81 trek thru Pennsylvania and New York.

Anonymous wrote:Ds: Very nerdy, science and math oriented, so no LACs.

Dd: No Deep Southern schools. We are northerners and some southern schools can be difficult socially for girls/women. She also disliked Harvey Mudd, but for an entirely different reason - the campus is extremely ugly and in the middle of a very boring, sterile suburban area.

Claremont/Pomona are gorgeous little towns. A little too antique shop cutesy for some, but it's not like its in the San Fernando Valley. Perfect SoCal weather and less than an hour off-rush to West LA, beaches, or Palm Springs. And you can even go skiing within 30 minutes at Mt. Baldy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No state schools, no high greek percentage schools, no religiously affiliated schools, no schools that require a plane ride.

Wow. So no Berkeley, UNC, GT ????

No, not even in the ballpark but mind you I'm a huge, unrepentant education snob.

Not much of an *education* snob if you’re making college decisions based on mode of transportation.

NP here. This exchange sounds like what I hear from some friends. "My kid can only go to college within a five-hour drive of home" or whatever. Basically it seems to be their way to say "You have to stay in-state" but signaling that they'd consider somewhere just over a border. It's like they put the point of a compass on their hometown, drew a circle around it and said, "You have to go to college within this circle."

I'm curious to know from the "no schools that require a plane ride" poster why you consider that a factor, unless you just mean you want them to stay in-state for financial reasons but "no plane ride" is your way of saying so--? I ask this as someone who did go to school a plane ride (or one very long drive) away from home, and who has told my DC that staying in-state or in a certain driving distance is not required.

Maybe the concern is that if a kid is in trouble, sick, hurt, it's harder to get to your kid or harder for your kid to get home if they're a plane ride away? I can see that as a reason if a student has health or other issues. Asking this seriously.

I was born and raised in DC but live in NYC now so my drive ring includes Dartmouth to the north, Cornell to the west and Princeton to the southwest. Our thinking is two-fold.....convenience and safety. I'd much rather just give DC a car and not have to ever worry about booking travel months in advance and Ive had friends that have had serious medical issues with their children in college. I can't imagine getting a call about my child having a health issue and not being able to jump in a car and being at their side in max 4-5 hours. Maybe I'm being paranoid but why take the chance?

You sound super anxious. My parents were Foreign Service and lived 3 plane trips and about 16 hours away from me when I was in college. But I was a self sufficient young adult at 17 when I went to college. If your kid isn't, you failed as a parent.