Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Public Ivy from wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Ivy

someone needs to edit that list and see how long a school like UVA Wise can stay up

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What are the "lesser" Ivies? I didn't know that was a term.

It isn't, unless you are an imbecile. Your ignorance of the term is proof you are not one.

HYP are in a league of their own. The others are very top schools too but not quite HYP

-Cornell Alum

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to UNC-CH OOS (chose it over MIT, UVA, W&M) & while I know it's one of the "public ivies" I have never heard other Tar Heels or even the school refer to it.

We don't care about the Ivies. We can leave that inferiority complex to UVA and Dook. We are perfectly fine with who we are. Whether you like us or not isn't even on our radar. We sell ourselves.

GDTBATH

Why on earth would you do that?

NP. MIT has a yield rate of 78% while UNC is at 43%, and that's with 80% being in-state. I don't think MIT is losing out to any of the so called public ivies even if they exist. Students decline MIT because they can't handle the rigor.

If you say so, but you don’t speak for me. Nice try that I declined because I couldn’t handle the rigor. I was offered a Morehead scholarship so F yeah I went to Chapel Hill. Some people don’t need to lean their entire life on going to an Ivy or their cousins (Stanford, MIT, whatever).

Your insults say way more about you then anything remotely close to my college choice. I would do it all again the same. have fun being you I guess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What are the "lesser" Ivies? I didn't know that was a term.

It isn't, unless you are an imbecile. Your ignorance of the term is proof you are not one.

The lesser Ivies are Brown and Dartmouth, both schools that are more similar to LACs than research universities.

Interesting that you do know of the term; that makes you an imbecile.

Penn, Columbia, Cornell are not "lesser" Ivies, they are middle tier Ivies.

They are "lesser' because they suck at sports. They consistently ranked at the bottom for all sports.

For example, field hockey:
https://ivyleague.com/standings.aspx?standings=1163

Seriously - no one knows or cares about 95 of college sports other then the team members and their parents. Sorry.

Who won the ivy league ice hockey league in 2019? If you know and you are not affiliated with ivy ice hockey - you are cramming useless info into your brain that is of little interest.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to UNC-CH OOS (chose it over MIT, UVA, W&M) & while I know it's one of the "public ivies" I have never heard other Tar Heels or even the school refer to it.

We don't care about the Ivies. We can leave that inferiority complex to UVA and Dook. We are perfectly fine with who we are. Whether you like us or not isn't even on our radar. We sell ourselves.

GDTBATH

Why on earth would you do that?

NP. MIT has a yield rate of 78% while UNC is at 43%, and that's with 80% being in-state. I don't think MIT is losing out to any of the so called public ivies even if they exist. Students decline MIT because they can't handle the rigor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What are the "lesser" Ivies? I didn't know that was a term.

It isn't, unless you are an imbecile. Your ignorance of the term is proof you are not one.

The lesser Ivies are Brown and Dartmouth, both schools that are more similar to LACs than research universities.

Interesting that you do know of the term; that makes you an imbecile.

Penn, Columbia, Cornell are not "lesser" Ivies, they are middle tier Ivies.

PP here, and I stand by my original statement, with the introduction of additional confirming evidence from you.

Brown and Dartmouth are not "similar to LACs" in any regard. Dartmouth's nomenclature as "Dartmouth College" is based on history and marketing. They are both among the only 131 universities qualified by the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education as R1 research universities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_research_universities_in_the_United_StatesR1

I partly agree with your original statement, since it clearly applies to you.

Dartmouth was not even in the AAU until a few years back, the research university lobbying group, as the AAU has stringent research qualifications required for membership.

And for the vast majority of its history until very recently, it was an R2 university.
Since the past 15 years when it first broke into R1, it has dropped back into R2 multiple times including in 2016: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/02/04/in-new-sorting-of-colleges-dartmouth-falls-out-of-an-exclusive-group/

A school that has less research activity than West Virginia University is more similar to LACs than Harvard or Penn. And they should embrace that, as their strength is in undergraduate studies (and somewhat business school), not research.


So yes they are very similar to LACs, and it has nothing to do with their name (only an imbecile like you would judge a school based on whether its called "College" or "University".
If you disagree with that then you are a moron.

No they are not "very similar to LACs", and all your typing and copypasting above supports that they aren't. They both have thousands of graduate students also. Your strongest point is that until 15 years ago Dartmouth was R2 and not R1? Have you ever even been to an LAC? You could not be more wrong if you said they were like frozen yogurt shops.

Also, I did not "judge a school based on whether its called "College" or "University". I did the opposite and said that didn't matter to pre-empt that canard.

You funny.

Do you not know hw to read? It was dropped back down to R2 in 2016. It constantly shuffles between R2 and R1.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What are the "lesser" Ivies? I didn't know that was a term.

It isn't, unless you are an imbecile. Your ignorance of the term is proof you are not one.

The lesser Ivies are Brown and Dartmouth, both schools that are more similar to LACs than research universities.

Interesting that you do know of the term; that makes you an imbecile.

Penn, Columbia, Cornell are not "lesser" Ivies, they are middle tier Ivies.

If Brown and Dartmouth were "lesser" it should be because they don't provide the similar experiences, outcomes, and opportunities to their undergraduates. I don't think that is the case. I agree there is a big 3 with HYP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What are the "lesser" Ivies? I didn't know that was a term.

It isn't, unless you are an imbecile. Your ignorance of the term is proof you are not one.

The lesser Ivies are Brown and Dartmouth, both schools that are more similar to LACs than research universities.

Interesting that you do know of the term; that makes you an imbecile.

Penn, Columbia, Cornell are not "lesser" Ivies, they are middle tier Ivies.

PP here, and I stand by my original statement, with the introduction of additional confirming evidence from you.

Brown and Dartmouth are not "similar to LACs" in any regard. Dartmouth's nomenclature as "Dartmouth College" is based on history and marketing. They are both among the only 131 universities qualified by the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education as R1 research universities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_research_universities_in_the_United_StatesR1

I partly agree with your original statement, since it clearly applies to you.

Dartmouth was not even in the AAU until a few years back, the research university lobbying group, as the AAU has stringent research qualifications required for membership.

And for the vast majority of its history until very recently, it was an R2 university.
Since the past 15 years when it first broke into R1, it has dropped back into R2 multiple times including in 2016: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/02/04/in-new-sorting-of-colleges-dartmouth-falls-out-of-an-exclusive-group/

A school that has less research activity than West Virginia University is more similar to LACs than Harvard or Penn. And they should embrace that, as their strength is in undergraduate studies (and somewhat business school), not research.


So yes they are very similar to LACs, and it has nothing to do with their name (only an imbecile like you would judge a school based on whether its called "College" or "University".
If you disagree with that then you are a moron.

No they are not "very similar to LACs", and all your typing and copypasting above supports that they aren't. They both have thousands of graduate students also. Your strongest point is that until 15 years ago Dartmouth was R2 and not R1? Have you ever even been to an LAC? You could not be more wrong if you said they were like frozen yogurt shops.

Also, I did not "judge a school based on whether its called "College" or "University". I did the opposite and said that didn't matter to pre-empt that canard.

You funny.

Anonymous wrote:Public Ivy from wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Ivy

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to UNC-CH OOS (chose it over MIT, UVA, W&M) & while I know it's one of the "public ivies" I have never heard other Tar Heels or even the school refer to it.

We don't care about the Ivies. We can leave that inferiority complex to UVA and Dook. We are perfectly fine with who we are. Whether you like us or not isn't even on our radar. We sell ourselves.

GDTBATH

Why on earth would you do that?

NP. MIT has a yield rate of 78% while UNC is at 43%, and that's with 80% being in-state. I don't think MIT is losing out to any of the so called public ivies even if they exist. Students decline MIT because they can't handle the rigor.

Or because even OOS UNC is really affordable. Or because they are basketball fans. Or because they like the south. Or because they want to be close to family.

I can't imagine being so insecure as to post something like your post, and I'm pretty sure MIT will be fine without your efforts to defend the school's honor. Calm down.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to UNC-CH OOS (chose it over MIT, UVA, W&M) & while I know it's one of the "public ivies" I have never heard other Tar Heels or even the school refer to it.

We don't care about the Ivies. We can leave that inferiority complex to UVA and Dook. We are perfectly fine with who we are. Whether you like us or not isn't even on our radar. We sell ourselves.

GDTBATH

Why on earth would you do that?

NP. MIT has a yield rate of 78% while UNC is at 43%, and that's with 80% being in-state. I don't think MIT is losing out to any of the so called public ivies even if they exist. Students decline MIT because they can't handle the rigor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What are the "lesser" Ivies? I didn't know that was a term.

It isn't, unless you are an imbecile. Your ignorance of the term is proof you are not one.

The lesser Ivies are Brown and Dartmouth, both schools that are more similar to LACs than research universities.

Interesting that you do know of the term; that makes you an imbecile.

Penn, Columbia, Cornell are not "lesser" Ivies, they are middle tier Ivies.

If Brown and Dartmouth were "lesser" it should be because they don't provide the similar experiences, outcomes, and opportunities to their undergraduates. I don't think that is the case. I agree there is a big 3 with HYP.