Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All I know is that our state flagship, the University of Virginia, is ranked on the top 25 overall and the top 20 in peer reputation and that my kids went there for a fraction of the price of a private school. Can’t argue with that!

uva boosters continue to be insufferable.

Anonymous wrote:Columbia also has its own line of outdoor apparel and products - Columbia Sportswear.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia is an Ivy + in a rapidly gentrifying part of Manhattan.

There's no shortage of top, wealthy international students that wouldn't rush the opportunity to attend Columbia. By that metric, it's really only behind Harvard since the name brand carries so much weight and Cambridge/Boston is cosmopolitan enough. MIT, Stanford, and for some even Berkeley beat it for engineering-focused internationals.

Wealthy international students, and even wealthy American students today, want to attend school in wealthy metropolises, not a third-rate town like Yale's or a sleepy suburb like Princeton, or worse a rural middle of nowhere like Dartmouth. Not to add these schools reflect the epitome of old-money WASP snobbery with weirdly exclusive clubs, which wealthy internationals would avoid given they have more cosmopolitan options.

Harvard is ironically the most diverse in this aspect, other than perhaps Brown/Cornell.

Penn is in Philadelphia, Chicago in Chicago and Hopkins in Baltimore - none of these cities are particularly attractive to any international or even American students for obvious reasons.

Both UCLA and NYU have received huge boosts in both applicant numbers and general reputation. They are in the most desirable parts of the two largest and most internationally well-known cities in the US.

It’s funny watching you try and make NYC and “wealthy international students” do so much work for Columbia, when you’re clearly a class-obsessed American poseur who wouldn’t belong in any elite settings, much less international ones.

It's unfortunate you feel so much enmity towards the wealthy due to your obvious dirt-trash background. I'm stating facts, not moral judgements.

36% of Columbia students are international. Columbia has one of the highest cost of attendance in the US, especially due to its location, and it does not give the amounts of aid that HYP do. NYC is one of the most attractive cities in the world for internationals and Americans alike. If these two basic facts give you nightmares about your low-class background, perhaps its better to not take part in the forum.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia is an Ivy + in a rapidly gentrifying part of Manhattan.

There's no shortage of top, wealthy international students that wouldn't rush the opportunity to attend Columbia. By that metric, it's really only behind Harvard since the name brand carries so much weight and Cambridge/Boston is cosmopolitan enough. MIT, Stanford, and for some even Berkeley beat it for engineering-focused internationals.

Wealthy international students, and even wealthy American students today, want to attend school in wealthy metropolises, not a third-rate town like Yale's or a sleepy suburb like Princeton, or worse a rural middle of nowhere like Dartmouth. Not to add these schools reflect the epitome of old-money WASP snobbery with weirdly exclusive clubs, which wealthy internationals would avoid given they have more cosmopolitan options.

Harvard is ironically the most diverse in this aspect, other than perhaps Brown/Cornell.

Penn is in Philadelphia, Chicago in Chicago and Hopkins in Baltimore - none of these cities are particularly attractive to any international or even American students for obvious reasons.

Both UCLA and NYU have received huge boosts in both applicant numbers and general reputation. They are in the most desirable parts of the two largest and most internationally well-known cities in the US.

It’s funny watching you try and make NYC and “wealthy international students” do so much work for Columbia, when you’re clearly a class-obsessed American poseur who wouldn’t belong in any elite settings, much less international ones.

It's unfortunate you feel so much enmity towards the wealthy due to your obvious dirt-trash background. I'm stating facts, not moral judgements.

36% of Columbia students are international. Columbia has one of the highest cost of attendance in the US, especially due to its location, and it does not give the amounts of aid that HYP do. NYC is one of the most attractive cities in the world for internationals and Americans alike. If these two basic facts give you nightmares about your low-class background, perhaps its better to not take part in the forum.

Anonymous wrote:All I know is that our state flagship, the University of Virginia, is ranked on the top 25 overall and the top 20 in peer reputation and that my kids went there for a fraction of the price of a private school. Can’t argue with that!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia is an Ivy + in a rapidly gentrifying part of Manhattan.

There's no shortage of top, wealthy international students that wouldn't rush the opportunity to attend Columbia. By that metric, it's really only behind Harvard since the name brand carries so much weight and Cambridge/Boston is cosmopolitan enough. MIT, Stanford, and for some even Berkeley beat it for engineering-focused internationals.

Wealthy international students, and even wealthy American students today, want to attend school in wealthy metropolises, not a third-rate town like Yale's or a sleepy suburb like Princeton, or worse a rural middle of nowhere like Dartmouth. Not to add these schools reflect the epitome of old-money WASP snobbery with weirdly exclusive clubs, which wealthy internationals would avoid given they have more cosmopolitan options.

Harvard is ironically the most diverse in this aspect, other than perhaps Brown/Cornell.

Penn is in Philadelphia, Chicago in Chicago and Hopkins in Baltimore - none of these cities are particularly attractive to any international or even American students for obvious reasons.

Both UCLA and NYU have received huge boosts in both applicant numbers and general reputation. They are in the most desirable parts of the two largest and most internationally well-known cities in the US.

It’s funny watching you try and make NYC and “wealthy international students” do so much work for Columbia, when you’re clearly a class-obsessed American poseur who wouldn’t belong in any elite settings, much less international ones.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The phrase “big three” originated in the 1880s not as a recognition of a particular academic program, but rather when these three colleges reflected the cream of the crop in US football at the time. That’s all.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Three_(colleges)

“The phrase Big Three originated in the 1880s, when these three colleges dominated college football.[1] In 1906, these schools formed a sports compact that formalized a three-way football competition which began in 1878.”

Football was a proxy for WASP men. So, schools that didn’t practice discrimination are not eligible to join. Schools that didn’t discriminate against Jews, for example, will be forever excluded as a disgraceful liberal institution.

It's always a bit of challenge to rail against elitism when your goal is to further enshrine the concept while expanding it just enough to include, say, one more group or one more school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The phrase “big three” originated in the 1880s not as a recognition of a particular academic program, but rather when these three colleges reflected the cream of the crop in US football at the time. That’s all.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Three_(colleges)

“The phrase Big Three originated in the 1880s, when these three colleges dominated college football.[1] In 1906, these schools formed a sports compact that formalized a three-way football competition which began in 1878.”

Football was a proxy for WASP men. So, schools that didn’t practice discrimination are not eligible to join. Schools that didn’t discriminate against Jews, for example, will be forever excluded as a disgraceful liberal institution.

Anonymous wrote:The phrase “big three” originated in the 1880s not as a recognition of a particular academic program, but rather when these three colleges reflected the cream of the crop in US football at the time. That’s all.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Three_(colleges)

“The phrase Big Three originated in the 1880s, when these three colleges dominated college football.[1] In 1906, these schools formed a sports compact that formalized a three-way football competition which began in 1878.”

Anonymous wrote:Yale and Princeton would be more interesting if fewer students were heading off to careers in finance. Pitching Columbia as if its main selling point is its proximity to Wall Street is classic second-tier Ivy.