Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being from an urban area, I wanted a change and graduated from a rural college. Loved it! Was a peaceful, low crime, nurturing environment with lots of campus activities and instruction from actual professors instead of teaching assistants.

Let's not confuse the thread. You went to a very specific type of rural college...there are hundreds if not thousands of small, rural colleges that are just regional colleges with declining student populations and underfunded programs.

Rural college does not automatically = Williams. In fact the Top SLACs are the exception in terms of the profile of the average small, rural college.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some lovely schools are in distant locations, from Bates and Bowdoin to Grinnell and Oberlin.
Why go to a school like this if you could get into a comparable school with access to more resources? I'm not being snarky. I am genuinely curious about the appeal.

NP. Out of curiosity, were you badly educated? I am having a difficult time figuring out how anyone with a good education would be so limited in their ability to think this through. This is not a difficult thought exercise.

Yeah, next OP will be asking why anyone would want to visit small country towns in England; or little villages in the south of France.

Not visit. Live there. For four years!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with the other posters. There is so much about a remote campus that appeals to me - and also to my kids. Neither had any desire to attend college in a city. They wanted the exact opposite experience.

Certainly was appealing to me - I loved the serenity, the safety and well, collegial atmosphere of being in the middle of nowhere. We had to make our own fun on campus. Plus, I didn’t have a car.

What happens if you're marooned on a campus with people you don't like in the middle of nowhere? That's what gives me pause on a rural campus -- there are no alternatives or outs or diversions (save transferring, if feasible) if you don't find a groove.

you learn the valuable skill of getting along with people.

It's not really that simple, though. You can be the kindest and most open-minded, socially savvy person around. But what if you're on a cold, isolated campus dominated by party life or cliques, feeling alienated and bored? And your entire universe consists of that campus? No opportunities to get a part-time job at an interesting place or to see other faces beyond a bubble that isn't working for you.

I would assume you wouldn't have chosen that school?

I went to one of these, and had never had a sip of alcohol before steppign on campus. I was also very shy. The school at the time was seen as a "party school" but I went because I participated in a somewhat unique club sport and they had a good team. I met people easily, super nice, down to earth people, did my sport but quit after the first year because i didn't like that it often took me off campus on the weekends. I joined a sorority and found my people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some lovely schools are in distant locations, from Bates and Bowdoin to Grinnell and Oberlin.
Why go to a school like this if you could get into a comparable school with access to more resources? I'm not being snarky. I am genuinely curious about the appeal.

DC went to a small college "in the middle of nowhere." DC is an outgoing party girl and was never bored because there was so much going on on campus. In a small school, you make lots of close friends and usually have several friend groups. Everyone knows everyone else. There were always tons of parties and events going on, and DC and her friends often went from one to the next on the weekends. For example, they might watch a friend's basketball match, then attend a talk, then go out for dinner, then watch a friend in a play or musical performance, and then go to parties. There were a variety of parties, from big, noisy events to smaller, more intimate gatherings. Because so much happened on or near campus and many of the students knew one another and looked out for each other, DC was safer than she would have been if she'd been traipsing around a big, anonymous city.

Small cities are a little cheaper, so you get more bang for your buck. DC's school had a few good but relatively inexpensive restaurants within a short distance of the school, so she and her boyfriend were able to eat out fairly frequently. She was also able to buy toiletries, etc., very cheaply, and getting her hair and nails done was inexpensive.

If you're in a small rural town, it's a bonus to have a car (or have a friend with a car). DC had a car and could drive to two major (but not enormous) cities in under an hour, which meant she and her friends could shop at big malls and go to concerts and other events. If you live in a big city, your commute to a major event (for example, to see a popular singer) might take a similar amount of time, even though distance covered might be much smaller. DC was very happy on campus, but it was nice to have the options a car gave her.

Anonymous wrote:Some lovely schools are in distant locations, from Bates and Bowdoin to Grinnell and Oberlin.
Why go to a school like this if you could get into a comparable school with access to more resources? I'm not being snarky. I am genuinely curious about the appeal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being from an urban area, I wanted a change and graduated from a rural college. Loved it! Was a peaceful, low crime, nurturing environment with lots of campus activities and instruction from actual professors instead of teaching assistants.

Let's not confuse the thread. You went to a very specific type of rural college...there are hundreds if not thousands of small, rural colleges that are just regional colleges with declining student populations and underfunded programs.

Rural college does not automatically = Williams. In fact the Top SLACs are the exception in terms of the profile of the average small, rural college.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some lovely schools are in distant locations, from Bates and Bowdoin to Grinnell and Oberlin.
Why go to a school like this if you could get into a comparable school with access to more resources? I'm not being snarky. I am genuinely curious about the appeal.

NP. Out of curiosity, were you badly educated? I am having a difficult time figuring out how anyone with a good education would be so limited in their ability to think this through. This is not a difficult thought exercise.

What a peculiar question. I was asking people why rural colleges appealed to them. I was genuinely curious to read the responses. I did not say, "Rural colleges are horrible, and my enfeebled mind simply cannot fathom why anyone would attend one."

Your question is poorly (badly?) formed.

If your OP had merely said, "what are the advantages of rural colleges?" I don't think you would have gotten the same push back. But your OP clearly showed that you, personally, couldn't imagine why anyone would want such a thing.

+1

The question is formed in such a way as to leave serious questions about OPs ability to work through complex thought scenarios.

No, it seems to be drawing out people who are rather defensive about their penchant for rural locales.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some lovely schools are in distant locations, from Bates and Bowdoin to Grinnell and Oberlin.
Why go to a school like this if you could get into a comparable school with access to more resources? I'm not being snarky. I am genuinely curious about the appeal.

NP. Out of curiosity, were you badly educated? I am having a difficult time figuring out how anyone with a good education would be so limited in their ability to think this through. This is not a difficult thought exercise.

What a peculiar question. I was asking people why rural colleges appealed to them. I was genuinely curious to read the responses. I did not say, "Rural colleges are horrible, and my enfeebled mind simply cannot fathom why anyone would attend one."

Your question is poorly (badly?) formed.

If your OP had merely said, "what are the advantages of rural colleges?" I don't think you would have gotten the same push back. But your OP clearly showed that you, personally, couldn't imagine why anyone would want such a thing.

+1

The question is formed in such a way as to leave serious questions about OPs ability to work through complex thought scenarios.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a kid at a very large and famously remote school. Aside from the academic program, chose the school for the campus and not having to look to off campus for social activities. A nice compromise as the size of the school offers its own resources without the noise of a large town or city.

Penn State?

Anonymous wrote:Being from an urban area, I wanted a change and graduated from a rural college. Loved it! Was a peaceful, low crime, nurturing environment with lots of campus activities and instruction from actual professors instead of teaching assistants.