Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake over the other 2, no doubt. But as between Richmond and Bucknell, that boils down to a personal fit question, as they are basically equivalent in size, ranking, prestige, ROI, and cost. I've visited both more than once, and personally prefer the vibe at Bucknell over that of Richmond. Bucknell seems livelier, the campus "buzzier" (Richmond is a bit staid by comparison), and the kids seemed (at least to me) friendlier and more sociable.

No doubt? For, say, a student who wants an atmosphere blended with Northern and Southern social characteristics, I'd recommend Richmond over Wake Forest.

Anonymous wrote:Wake is a good school, it should have never been ranked in the T30, as its just not there. Theres schools that deserve a T30 ranking that arent like NYU, Gatech, Tufts, even BC. Do you think Wake is better than these schools?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted earlier about UR being unexpectedly generous with merit aid. Would have been happy if DC chose to attend (off to a larger university in fall). People with DCs at Wake and Bucknell say good things. Do not know if those schools offer any/good merit to bring cost down.

Recently? They used to be but have moved to all financial aid except a small number of top scholarships. We got nothing.

Anonymous wrote:I posted earlier about UR being unexpectedly generous with merit aid. Would have been happy if DC chose to attend (off to a larger university in fall). People with DCs at Wake and Bucknell say good things. Do not know if those schools offer any/good merit to bring cost down.

Anonymous wrote:Wake over the other 2, no doubt. But as between Richmond and Bucknell, that boils down to a personal fit question, as they are basically equivalent in size, ranking, prestige, ROI, and cost. I've visited both more than once, and personally prefer the vibe at Bucknell over that of Richmond. Bucknell seems livelier, the campus "buzzier" (Richmond is a bit staid by comparison), and the kids seemed (at least to me) friendlier and more sociable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bucknell is stagnant and located in the middle of nowhere. Not at all popular in our town. Very few apply to Richmond as their biggest problem is expensive vs 2 better publics in UVA and W&M. Wake got crushed by US News recently and their appeal also took a hit. Not a lot of families in our full pay suburb rushing to pay over $95k for a school outside the top 50. Not much interest in any of them.

Not a huge Wake fan but the fact that it "got crushed by US News" is not a bad thing. It weeds out all of the low class, low information, low pedigree strivers who know nothing and make all decisions based on US News. These are not people whose children I want my child to go to college with as their kids are brainless lemmings who will achieve nothing. Good riddance.

If you were half as smart as you think you are, your kids wouldn’t need to go to college at all.

The previous poster's tone is a little strong, sure, but it's hard to argue with the sentiment of the post. Rankings don't add much practical value these days to an informed buyer. US News is particularly screwy now that the "magazine" changed its ranking methodology to benefit public schools at the expense of measuring quality of teaching and the academic experience. Wake is an excellent example of this: it dropped from solidly T30 to I think 51 overnight. The school is the same excellent school it was before.

But now there are posts like "Not a lot of families in our full pay suburb rushing to pay over $95k for a school outside the top 50." People are free to make their own decisions based on whatever they value. But the rankings first approach strikes many people as lazy, uninformed, and harmful.

I agree with the poster. If people don't want to apply to a school based on rankings, great. All the better such folks stay away.

The fewer schools that kiss the US News ring, the better.

In its current form, the U.S. News rankings aren’t worth much—the Pell grant eligible and first gen data they use is nearly a decade old (due to the way grad rates are reported in cds) and based on six year graduation rates. The reputation ratings are a huge part as well, and US News discloses that the response rate for those surveys are horrible.

Class size and the degree held by the person teaching actually were among the useful data they included. I’d take it further and include factors like ease of changing major, access to advisors, availability and cost of upper classmen housing, and percentage of kids who graduate on time — in four as opposed to six years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bucknell is stagnant and located in the middle of nowhere. Not at all popular in our town. Very few apply to Richmond as their biggest problem is expensive vs 2 better publics in UVA and W&M. Wake got crushed by US News recently and their appeal also took a hit. Not a lot of families in our full pay suburb rushing to pay over $95k for a school outside the top 50. Not much interest in any of them.

Not a huge Wake fan but the fact that it "got crushed by US News" is not a bad thing. It weeds out all of the low class, low information, low pedigree strivers who know nothing and make all decisions based on US News. These are not people whose children I want my child to go to college with as their kids are brainless lemmings who will achieve nothing. Good riddance.

If you were half as smart as you think you are, your kids wouldn’t need to go to college at all.

The previous poster's tone is a little strong, sure, but it's hard to argue with the sentiment of the post. Rankings don't add much practical value these days to an informed buyer. US News is particularly screwy now that the "magazine" changed its ranking methodology to benefit public schools at the expense of measuring quality of teaching and the academic experience. Wake is an excellent example of this: it dropped from solidly T30 to I think 51 overnight. The school is the same excellent school it was before.

But now there are posts like "Not a lot of families in our full pay suburb rushing to pay over $95k for a school outside the top 50." People are free to make their own decisions based on whatever they value. But the rankings first approach strikes many people as lazy, uninformed, and harmful.

I agree with the poster. If people don't want to apply to a school based on rankings, great. All the better such folks stay away.

The fewer schools that kiss the US News ring, the better.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are these schools as wealthy and “unserious” as DCUM purports? They are the right size, have the right academic programs, and are the right distance for DD, but she doesn’t want a school with a bunch of full pay kids who don’t prioritize academics. She also doesn’t want a social scene dominated by Greek life.

I know we should beware of stereotypes, but I’ve seen similar comments over and over about the typical kid who goes to these schools. Thoughts?

Wake is serious and much better academic quality than the other two. Wake has smarter peers based on naviance data from our region.

I would take Bucknell for finance over Wake any day.

The Bucknell pipeline poster has arrived.

I know people love to give the Bucknell pipeline poster a hard time, but is she wrong? I'm not suggesting she is or isn't, I don't know. And I'm too lazy to do the work myself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it hard to believe that students at any of these schools don't prioritize academics. College is so much different these days.

I posted before about how the Richmond students weren't esoterically intellectual (they're not taking, like, Sanskrit or modernist opera studies) but they all seemed serious and studious, more so than several colleges we toured.

Well, they're reading Dante in Italian, or at least the student I know has.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it hard to believe that students at any of these schools don't prioritize academics. College is so much different these days.

I posted before about how the Richmond students weren't esoterically intellectual (they're not taking, like, Sanskrit or modernist opera studies) but they all seemed serious and studious, more so than several colleges we toured.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bucknell is stagnant and located in the middle of nowhere. Not at all popular in our town. Very few apply to Richmond as their biggest problem is expensive vs 2 better publics in UVA and W&M. Wake got crushed by US News recently and their appeal also took a hit. Not a lot of families in our full pay suburb rushing to pay over $95k for a school outside the top 50. Not much interest in any of them.

Not a huge Wake fan but the fact that it "got crushed by US News" is not a bad thing. It weeds out all of the low class, low information, low pedigree strivers who know nothing and make all decisions based on US News. These are not people whose children I want my child to go to college with as their kids are brainless lemmings who will achieve nothing. Good riddance.

If you were half as smart as you think you are, your kids wouldn’t need to go to college at all.