<p>@notjoe Historically Harvard gets about 24-37 students from Virginia in their freshman class. <a href=“http://www.chronicle.com/article/interactive-Freshman-Class/129547/#id=166027”>http://www.chronicle.com/article/interactive-Freshman-Class/129547/#id=166027</a></p>
<p>“No one is “indignant.” It is an observation that flies in the face of CC wisdom. That’s all.”</p>
<p>Would you agree, however, that since there are just as good schools outside of the Ivies in other parts of the country, it doesn’t matter either way?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Far be it from me to tell another poster to leave…but you might enjoy it here more if you would take some time to understand where people are coming from.</p>
<p>"Case 3: Regardless of education quality, regional diversity in colleges is in general good</p>
<p>If that is the case, all state universities are inherently flawed in their mission, and all students attending their state university of choice is getting a subpar overall college experience. This is a big indictment which I personally do not agree with."</p>
<p>State universities have the explicit mission of serving the students / taxpayers of that state above all. That’s not “flawed” in the least. It’s just a different mission. </p>
<p>Personally, <em>for me</em> a disadvantage of the excellent state unis (MI, Berkeley, WI, UVA, etc) is the regionality. But other people don’t feel that way. Different strokes. </p>
<p>“State universities have the explicit mission of serving the students / taxpayers of that state above all. That’s not “flawed” in the least. It’s just a different mission.”</p>
<p>But would you say that mission is flawed as it leads to extreme regional focus?</p>
<p>Wait, so now we are evaluating colleges’ mission statements? Good lord. If there was a reason to leave this thread that would be it…</p>
<p>“Far be it from me to tell another poster to leave…but you might enjoy it here more if you would take some time to understand where people are coming from.”</p>
<p>Trust me, I am trying. Hence my question. If no sensible person would interpret a mission statement for international student body as one with 5% US students (in keeping with US population’s share of world population), why would any sensible person interpret a mission statement of a national student body as one with equal representation of all regions in the USA? Where are folks making the latter interpretation coming from? I am genuinely curious.</p>
<p>No, because it’s a state university. Good grief. </p>
<p>Colleges can have whatever mission they like, Catalan. If Harvard explicitly wishes to be a primarily NE school, that’s their prerogative. You are mistaking description for prescription. </p>
<p>Welcome to CC, btw. </p>
<p>“No, because it’s a state university. Good grief.”</p>
<p>That’s a tautology. It doesn’t answer the question if quality of education drops if the student body is uniformly concentrated in a certain region. I would claim that it doesn’t. If you claim otherwise, you must also believe that all the state schools are formed around a mission statement that inherently lowers their quality of education, hence the mission statement is flawed.</p>
<p>Do you?</p>
<p>Non profit Universities are tax exempt. They have to be populated by US citizens by a wide majority if they wish to remain tax exempt. I actually think this contributes to their regionality, as well, since they are also tax exempt in the state and town in which they reside. It’s in their best interest to be seen as serving the community. I’m sure this limits their national reach, at least to some extent.</p>
<p>“Colleges can have whatever mission they like, Catalan. If Harvard explicitly wishes to be a primarily NE school, that’s their prerogative. You are mistaking description for prescription.”</p>
<p>I agree with that, however I believe your analysis is deeply flawed as you do not take into consideration the outreach of Harvard; you merely take into account the final student body which is influenced first by profile of matching students in different parts of the country, and then by yield by region (self-selection).</p>
<p>I understand that you do not have the data to do that, however, that still leaves your analysis fundamentally flawed. Regardless, you would agree that it is no big deal, right? As, clearly, there are just as good schools in the rest of the country as the Ivies? </p>
<p>“Non profit Universities are tax exempt. They have to be populated by US citizens by a wide majority if they wish to remain tax exempt. I actually think this contributes to their regionality, as well, since they are also tax exempt in the state and town in which they reside. It’s in their best interest to be seen as serving the community. I’m sure this limits their national reach, at least to some extent.”</p>
<p>Well said. This is why simple measures such as representation by region adjusted by regional population, as done in this thread, is fundmentally flawed. There are many other conributing factors. In summary, any statistician would agree that the experiement was not well designed by PizzaGirl.</p>
<p>@pizzagirl "So? I still don’t understand the objection. Other than “they’re being uppity.”</p>
<p>It isn’t an objection, and it has nothing to do with “being uppity.” I am just saying that colleges who have large numbers of top students near them, and have high yields, do not need to undertake large marketing efforts to draw the students from other regions. WUSTL is unusual in that it is an excellent school that is not in a location where it can do this, so it has to market heavily. </p>
<p>They do game their rankings a bit, but why shouldn’t they? Isn’t that just smart business? </p>
<p>Actually, it was designed just fine. It revealed what it revealed. It is worth exactly what you paid for it. It either interests you or it does not. </p>
<p>I read through this thread, and I think it merely revealed a lot of personal biases against the Ivies. Which, frankly, surprised me a lot (having attended a couple).</p>
<p>I was kind of waiting for that. you’ll find most of us attended top schools, too, and have kids who have or are.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>While somewhat off point, I don’t believe that to be correct. </p>
<p>Please post a link to the IRS code that clearly states that obtaining the education/school tax exemption requires that a school’s matriculants be a majority US citizens.</p>
<p>Poetgrl, I have no bias against any top school, however. MIT, Stanford, CalTech, UChicago, Duke, Northwestern, Johns Hopkins etc. are all wonderful schools (and by no means this is an exhaustive list, there are many others). All these are standard bearers in US education. The US kids are indeed lucky to have such a wide variety of great academic institutions at their disposal.</p>
<p>this is more of a common sense thing @bluebayou. </p>
<p>The tax exempt status comes under attack from time to time, as you know. Why would the tax code continue to allow this if the voters didn’t support it? </p>
<p><a href=“The Rich University: The Mother of all Tax Breaks | The Fiscal Times”>The Rich University: The Mother of all Tax Breaks | The Fiscal Times;