I went to Reed and there were a lot of smart driven people but not in the competitive rat race asshole way. A lot of really impressive people who have gone on to do cool things in academia but also places like tech, journalism, and non-profits.

"I suppose you enjoy massive classes taught by TAs if you’re lucky enough to get the courses you want."

That generally was not my experience at Michigan, but I admit it is a risk if you take a large number of introductory lecture courses in very popular subjects. I did have a few very large classes. Getting the classes you want is probably easier at large universities because the same or similar classes are offered in multiple time slots.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The top public universities: Michigan, Berkeley, and UCLA. My oldest chose Michigan over Penn and Brown for more or less the reasons OP mentioned. Kids are just as smart and accomplished but there’s less hand-holding, less snootiness and social-climbing pressure, and as far as we can tell, in many industries (outside of the ones for which being extremely wealthy or an Ivy Leaguer are the main qualifications) alumni are equally well regarded.

My concern is those big flagship universities get their top ratings based on their graduate schools. Undergraduate can be a less satisfying experience.

Who says so? Undergrad experience has been awesome! Happy about choosing over Ivy and similar schools.

I suppose you enjoy massive classes taught by TAs if you’re lucky enough to get the courses you want.

Anonymous wrote:Assholes are everywhere in life.

OP has serious issues.

Totally agree. Crazy snowflake with inferiority complex

Anonymous wrote:Pomona

Not Pomona. Many are very competitive.

Anonymous wrote:Pomona

Can you say more about why you think this, and also compare it to NESCAC colleges? I actually have heard about quite a few people turning down HYPS for Pomona, Amherst and Williams, but that makes me wonder whether Pomona, Amherst and Williams are just smaller versions of HYPS.

Pomona

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The top public universities: Michigan, Berkeley, and UCLA. My oldest chose Michigan over Penn and Brown for more or less the reasons OP mentioned. Kids are just as smart and accomplished but there’s less hand-holding, less snootiness and social-climbing pressure, and as far as we can tell, in many industries (outside of the ones for which being extremely wealthy or an Ivy Leaguer are the main qualifications) alumni are equally well regarded.

My concern is those big flagship universities get their top ratings based on their graduate schools. Undergraduate can be a less satisfying experience.

+1

PP omitted UVA which probably has the best undergrad experience out of all the top publics.

Rightly or wrongly, UVA does have a reputation for pretentious a****s, so it may not be the place OP is looking for.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The top public universities: Michigan, Berkeley, and UCLA. My oldest chose Michigan over Penn and Brown for more or less the reasons OP mentioned. Kids are just as smart and accomplished but there’s less hand-holding, less snootiness and social-climbing pressure, and as far as we can tell, in many industries (outside of the ones for which being extremely wealthy or an Ivy Leaguer are the main qualifications) alumni are equally well regarded.

My concern is those big flagship universities get their top ratings based on their graduate schools. Undergraduate can be a less satisfying experience.

+1

PP omitted UVA which probably has the best undergrad experience out of all the top publics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The top public universities: Michigan, Berkeley, and UCLA. My oldest chose Michigan over Penn and Brown for more or less the reasons OP mentioned. Kids are just as smart and accomplished but there’s less hand-holding, less snootiness and social-climbing pressure, and as far as we can tell, in many industries (outside of the ones for which being extremely wealthy or an Ivy Leaguer are the main qualifications) alumni are equally well regarded.

My concern is those big flagship universities get their top ratings based on their graduate schools. Undergraduate can be a less satisfying experience.

Who says so? Undergrad experience has been awesome! Happy about choosing over Ivy and similar schools.

Anonymous wrote:The top public universities: Michigan, Berkeley, and UCLA. My oldest chose Michigan over Penn and Brown for more or less the reasons OP mentioned. Kids are just as smart and accomplished but there’s less hand-holding, less snootiness and social-climbing pressure, and as far as we can tell, in many industries (outside of the ones for which being extremely wealthy or an Ivy Leaguer are the main qualifications) alumni are equally well regarded.

My concern is those big flagship universities get their top ratings based on their graduate schools. Undergraduate can be a less satisfying experience.

My son just graduated from Grinnell, very academic vibe but he said the students, faculty, and the town are all very, very nice. He also considered St. Olaf and it too has a very nice vibe with lots of fun traditions.

The Midwest tends to have a less competitive vibe. If you like small schools, Carleton and Grinnell both have very academic students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DD looking for a similar environment found it at Smith. Not helpful if you have a son, though.

Maybe William and Mary? Or St Mary's College of Md?

So new to looking at women's colleges. Any non-snarky advice re: Smith, Wellesly, Bryn Mawr, Scripps, Barnard, others? Basically what OP was describing with great academics and a nice community of students. Which ones fit (and they don't really have to be mini-HYP)?

Agree with another poster who suggested Mt Holyoke. The other women's colleges we felt had a different vibe. My daughter felt that Smith and Wellesley had a more competitive feel (especially Wellesley). She considered Scripps for a while, but didn't want to go to California. Bryn Mawr felt like a mix between Mt Holyoke and Smith, but not as fun as Smith seemed to be (not as an active a social life) - the students seemed pretty serious, but not competitive with each other, just themselves. Barnard's pretty different too since it's mixed in with Columbia and in the city - so less of a classic women's college feel. We learned that they all really have different strengths/vibes and it's important to visit if you can when/if things open up.

Avoid top competitive admit business schools if you want to avoid ahole types-Wharton, umich ross, Berkeley haas. Apparently ucla is very competitive because every major there that is even slightly employable is ''impacted.'' That means once you pick a major its really hard to switch. I don't know why they can't just admit less people though. Generally at schools with a less preprofessional environment you will have more intellectually focused kids.