Agree that they are really different schools. Don’t know Rice well. I would choose Amherst over Columbia as an undergrad as I just think it’s a better undergrad experience. In my view NY is a great city but maybe for after college. I feel college campuses in the city might loose some of the magic of an undergrad education unless there is a reason to be in the city (strong interest in the arts).

Anonymous wrote:I truly don’t understand how a kid who is capable of getting into these three institutions doesn’t have a long list of individualized pros and cons for each college already mapped out. Why in the world would they need to ask randos on a mommy board?

I'm not OP, but I suspect that the type of people who would do exactly what you ask--thoroughly research colleges, make a list of pros and cons, etc.--are also often the type of people to overthink and over analyze things and thus seek the additional counsel of internet randos like us. Anyhow, it's a big investment of time and money involving a particularly anxiety-prone subject (our children's future), so have empathy.

Anonymous wrote:I truly don’t understand how a kid who is capable of getting into these three institutions doesn’t have a long list of individualized pros and cons for each college already mapped out. Why in the world would they need to ask randos on a mommy board?

because OP’s DC didn’t actually apply and get accepted to these three schools and OP is simply soliciting opinions to help with a future cycle or foster discussion…

Anonymous wrote:Columbia, You do not turn down Columbia.

You don’t turn down Stanford or Harvard. Columbia is a fine T20 but nothing special.

I’d go with Amherst.

I think Columbia and NYC are great for grad school but less so for undergrad. You have to be ready for nyc life on top of college life.

Anonymous wrote:Amherst without question!

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia, You do not turn down Columbia.

Yes you do.
Reasons:
1. Core Curriculum
2. Wants a campus life for undergraduate

Core is the gem of Columbia and where undergraduate students get their attention and pamper from the school. So I don't understand why the people who complain Core also say that Columbia doesn't have undergraduate focus.

Anonymous wrote:Rice. The other 2 are overflowing with douchebags. Over. Flowing.

You sound like one of them.

Anonymous wrote:I truly don’t understand how a kid who is capable of getting into these three institutions doesn’t have a long list of individualized pros and cons for each college already mapped out. Why in the world would they need to ask randos on a mommy board?

+1

But often times, an OP will post about several disparate schools, sit back and let posters go at it. This is probably the case here.

I truly don’t understand how a kid who is capable of getting into these three institutions doesn’t have a long list of individualized pros and cons for each college already mapped out. Why in the world would they need to ask randos on a mommy board?

Rice. The other 2 are overflowing with douchebags. Over. Flowing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Definitely Amherst unless Rice is giving a bunch of aid.

I would take Rice over Amherst regardless of aid. It's a more balanced place, whereas Amherst has veered far to the left in all the predictable ways.

You are apparently making things up. Amherst is not in the list of the most liberal colleges in the country (JHU, Chicago, Berkeley, Wesleyan, etc are). And the new president is actually quite moderate willing to have conservative speakers.

Anonymous wrote:Definitely Amherst unless Rice is giving a bunch of aid.

I would take Rice over Amherst regardless of aid. It's a more balanced place, whereas Amherst has veered far to the left in all the predictable ways.

Definitely Amherst unless Rice is giving a bunch of aid.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amherst without question!

+1000. I would not take any other school over Amherst.
- Not an Amherst alum

Parchment on Amherst-Columbia cross-admits:

https://www.parchment.com/c/college/tools/college-cross-admit-comparison.php?compare=Amherst+College&with=Columbia+University+in+the+City+of+New+York

- Not a Columbia alum.

Columbia’s prestige has crumbled over the last couple of years though.

Still ok if a kid is really set in living in NYC and is ok with crowded classes. Outcomes are similar to Cornell, Emory, and other peercachools.

80% of Amherst admits can't be that wrong to forgo Amherst for for Columbia for an outcome that is similar to Emory...

Don’t take parchment cross-admit data as gospel especially when comparing such dissimilar schools. There is no minimum sample size. It works best with very similar schools such as Harvard vs Columbia

Students who apply to SLACs and ivy pluses are often hedging their bets. Ivy pluses are lotteries, as is Amherst. Nevertheless, SLACs often - although not always - give way to ivy pluses when students have the latter option.

It's similar to Yale and Vassar. Choose Vassar in case Yale is not an option. If Yale is in the picture, that changes the dynamics.

If so, this is a somewhat haphazard way of applying to college. Ivies and SLACs are very different schools. It would make more sense to apply to an Ivy and another university that may be a good fit and somewhat higher admit rate.

A high-stats kid can apply to all the ivies and get rejected by every one of them. SLACs are better for risk management. Apply to fewer ivies - add SLACs as fallbacks.

Along that line of thinking, the Ivy “fallback” schools would be Vandy, northwestern, Rice, etc. I’m not saying they are, just using your line of thinking