#13 Ugliest College

<p>Not only is it ugly in architecture but girls as well. The double whamee...</p>

<p>"All else equal, why wouldn't you choose the better looking campus to spend 4 years of your life at?" But they aren't equal.</p>

<p>This is Princeton Review's rankings of campuses that are "tiny, unsightly, or both" which is probably the politically correct way of saying ugly. It's probably a more legit list since it's not based off the opinion of just one person.</p>

<p>1 State University of New York at Albany<br>
2 Drexel University<br>
3 State University of New York--Purchase College<br>
4 City University of New York--Hunter College<br>
5 New Jersey Institute of Technology<br>
6 The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art<br>
7 Illinois Institute of Technology<br>
8 North Carolina State University<br>
9 University of Dallas<br>
10 State University of New York--University at Buffalo<br>
11 University of Tennessee--Knoxville<br>
12 University of Massachusetts--Amherst<br>
13 Massachusetts Institute of Technology<br>
14 State University of New York at Binghamton<br>
15 Harvey Mudd College<br>
16 Clarkson University<br>
17 Rider University<br>
18 Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey--New Brunswick/Piscataway Campus<br>
19 State University of New York--Stony Brook University<br>
20 Rochester Institute of Technoloy</p>

<p>That's not my point.</p>

<p>Assuming that you can go to fairly equal universities, let's say UCLA, Cal, and UCSD, why wouldn't you choose one that you can enjoy the aesthetics?</p>

<p>Why would you NOT take into account the aesthetics? You have to LIVE there for four years of your life. There's a good reason why wealthier universities usually take the initiative to design beautiful campuses: beyond the "ooh and ahh" factor, it brings subtle mental benefits to those who spend time there.</p>

<p>ucsd is alright...</p>

<p>but i really hate muir college... it looks so dirty and old</p>

<p>I'm a Pitzer student, and it is a BEAUTIFUL school. Also, Harvey Mudd is NOT an ugly college - the style of architecture is boxy, but the facilities are spacious, clean and modern. </p>

<p>This list was based on visiting websites, not visits, and people shouldn't pay any attention to it.</p>

<p>Well, suffice to say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder (or something close to that, anyway) :)</p>

<p>Stanford regularly makes CC's "Most Beautiful Campus" lists, though I know a number of students who despise its appearance, saying it looks like an "over-sized Taco Bell." I find CMC's campus well-manicured and consistent, but a poster once said that it made her "throw up a little bit in [her] mouth." </p>

<p>To each his own.</p>

<p>I don't think anyone's going to be basing their final decisions off of this guy's list. And hey, maybe enough aesthetic criticism will encourage some of the schools to improve their campuses and facilities. There's no such thing as bad press!</p>

<p>I didn't like Muir upon first moving in, but after a year there the style of the buildings really grew on me. It's especially cool when it's dark and foggy-the HSS building looks like Isengard from "The Lord of the Rings".</p>

<p>The orange lights at night are ugly as hell, though.</p>

<p>I actually attend UMass Amherst and it is a pretty cool campus. Its not crazy elegant looking, but it is pleasing enough to the eye. Also, UMass Dartmouth is an ugly ass school. Easily more ugly than any school on any list.</p>

<p>aesthetics were never a factor in deciding what school i wanted to be at. you'll be spending the "worthwhile" minutes of your education inside anyway, and i imagine lecture halls look the same worldwide. i've always like UCSD's campus because of its many nooks and crannies. sure, some of the buildings (AP&M comes to mind) aren't beautiful, but in the end it doesn't matter. your memories of college will be the good ones (mine were!), not dark musings on how ugly the architecture was.</p>

<p>
[quote]
aesthetics were never a factor in deciding what school i wanted to be at. you'll be spending the "worthwhile" minutes of your education inside anyway

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'm sure this is a comfortable thought-train for some, but not all. I didn't pay much attention to aesthetics while choosing a school (mostly because all of my final choices were decently attractive), but when I wound up at the school I did--absolutely beautiful, inside and out--I was so grateful for it. What I hadn't realized as a prospective student was just the opposite as astrina points out: I'd be spending far more time living on the campus than just going to class there (and I assure you that not all classrooms look the same), so putting "softer" concerns in the back of my mind wasn't necessarily wise. No, I wouldn't have been happy at a well-landscaped/terrible school, but ending up somewhere as beautiful I did was a far greater blessing than I had expected.</p>

<p>A particularly beautiful campus is a luxury, not a necessity, but it's still a valid concern for prospective students. I think it's something that you don't miss too terribly if you don't have, but that you'll be constantly grateful for if you do. For this reason, I think the "Most Beautiful..." lists are, in general, more helpful than this one.</p>

<p>I <em>like</em> the architecture and I heart eucalyptus trees.</p>

<p>If you want to see ugly, go to Cal State San Marcos, half an hour away. It was designed by a prison architect. The landscaping is all concrete and stairs and many buildings look quite similar to Vista County Jail. Blecch!</p>

<p>I sort of agree with the ranking. Sure each building is beautiful when looked at independently, but they're all mismatched and shoved together with interspersed buildings like petterson, warren lecuture, or any of the cheeply built lecture halls. Then that on top of the gloomy grey skies that hang over the school and the eucalyptus trees, GOD the eucalyptus trees. Our school would look a million times nicer if they just chopped all the hideous things down and put grass in their place.</p>

<p>I have to agree that the Claremont colleges especially Pitzer and HM are not my cup of tea. I have been to UCSD on two occasions and did not find it particularly attractive. (I have seen all of the UC's except UCR.) I personally don't care for all of the cement and eucalyptus trees.</p>

<p>There's a reason the trees are there, they serve as windbreaks.</p>

<p>UCSD should import koalas and really give people something to talk about.</p>

<p>I'd imagine the trees are more dangerous than they are helpful though. They have shallow roots, so when it rains, they fall a lot. Then there's the fact that they're actually very flammable, so when we talk about SD having 2 immense firestorms in 4 years time... But I guess Eucalyptus trees are as much a signature for SD in general. They're everywhere o_o;;</p>

<p>Aside from Warren & ERC, UCSD dorms are really crappy.....</p>

<p>It does have somewhat an affect on our academics and living situation ....</p>

<p>i'd really like to see koalas when i walk to class.</p>

<p>Muir dorms look bad but are huge!</p>