<p>I agree that everyone here seems dug in. I know this won't be popular, but I have to say, IMO, those of you telling your kids to have a close to home school are not letting them grow up. If they have cold feet, help them get past it, not capitulate to it. Their lives will be limited if you show them fear of the unknown is normal.</p>
<p>As children at home, in small towns and in high schools, we lead very sheltered lives. Just because one goes to college near home doesn't mean that he won't be exposed to the unknown. College is a new atmosphere no matter where it is! You take new classes and learn new things that you'd ideally be able apply to the workplace and life thereafter. We go to college to <em>learn</em> first of all. Unknowns aren't just measured by distance. (just my 2c)</p>
<p>Zagat, can I give you my DW's phone number . . . :)</p>
<p>You're preaching to the choir. If my S wants to stay close to home that's one thing, though I would (and have) told him to at least keep an open mind -- and he's a sophomore, so maybe things will change. But DW's oft-stated mandate to stay somewhat close to home pretty much undercuts my message. Although, to be fair, her comments range from "within a day's drive" to "this side of the Mississippi" -- which is a lot broader than demanding that S stay within an hours drive or someting.</p>
<p>Tufta08: Thanks for your perspective - I appreciate it very much since I come from a background where I commuted to college (which I think could be anathema to many on CC!) and lived at home with my dear old mom & dad!</p>
<p>I certainly feel that I "grew up" fine and received a great education too! I think I view growing up as very separate from receiving a college education - they're just done simultaneously. I did not select my college based on which one I felt would help me "grow up" better. I expected I would grow up regardless of where I went to school!</p>
<p>I did study abroad, as many have suggested, and was able to travel extensively then. My parents were not adverse to encouraging any of their kids to travel & see the world...they did alot of it themselves & knew the value of it, even though neither of them had the benefit of a college education. (And all of my brothers & sisters went to colleges within the hometown environs)</p>
<p>Living in a major city also was a big benefit to me, as you have also indicated. I might have felt differently about need to "explore" or meet different kinds of people during college years if I had lived in a very remote, rural town. But if that was the case, I most likely would have HAD to leave to pursue college. In big metro areas, there are plenty of different types of people to meet and know, even before heading to college ;-)!</p>
<p>I'm not sure who on this board is telling their kids to stay close to home. </p>
<p>What I do hear is that some are telling their kids they have to go away no matter what--which I think is a very rigid position to take, and likely in some cases to backfire--and some are saying simply that it is not necessarily true that kids who choose to go college close to home are hopeless babies and destined to be Peter Pans, I guess, and that a lot depends on the school, the individual kid, etc.</p>
<p>With my first son (as I mentioned before), I strongly encouraged him to look at places NOT in Florida, but I don't think I was being rigid about it. UofR cost a ton back then and I'm not sure it was worth the extra money, but he did get cultural diversity. I agree that so much depends on the kid and looking back at the whole thing, I don't think he turned out much differently than if he had gone to UofF.</p>
<p>Patient, you have a good point about not being too rigid-- though I think any path taken could potentially backfire. If a kid who needs a kick doesn't get it, this can backfire. If a kid who needs to be near home isn't allowed to be, this can backfire. Letting the kids make their own decision entirely free of your input can also backfire. </p>
<p>I think people just need to do the best they can evaluating their specific kid at the specific point in time--keeping options as open as possible, as long as possible-- and then be prepared to regroup if the ultimate choice does not prove to be right. My D has evolved <em>a lot</em> since September, when she was zeroing in only on ONE town very close by where the brand new BF lived. </p>
<p>Now, 5 months later, the BF is long gone. </p>
<p>I started by saying "not within 300 miles." I had several other reasons for this but BF was a huge one; I did not want her to escape her own growth experience by coccooning with a BF off campus... While we did ultimately agree that she could apply to one nearby school (so as not to appear to be "against true love") I am SOOOO glad now that we compelled her to look in many other directions. More importantly, <em>she</em> is glad she got the kick. One of the schools she would not have even considered at first wound up evolving into the great match-- one she's elated to have been admitted to ED 2. What appeared scary in Sept feels exciting now.</p>
<p>So you can see how it might have backfired if we'd let her "do her own thing" completely--she'd now only have schools picked for proximity to the obsolete BF, and not for fit.</p>
<p>Had there been cogent reasons for her to focus her search close to home it might have played out differently. Her reasons were not reasons we felt good about supporting, emotionally or financially. We made a judgement call, which could have backfired, but luckily seems to have panned out-- we'll know more in Sept!</p>
<p>tufta: </p>
<p>I came from a place with lots of nearby resources and dozens of schools (SF Bay area.) The main reason I wanted to go far from home was the opportunity for self-reinvention. </p>
<p>I had been in the same small town, with the same kids, since kindergarten-- with some, even preschool. They saw me as the person they had known (& long since classified) when we were less than 10 years old. I had evolved, but felt frustrated that many of my peers wouldn't reassess me!</p>
<p>When you arrive in a new place where nobody knows you, you can be who you really are in ways you can't when carrying around old baggage, this is very freeing for some small town people.</p>
<p>SB Mom, you and I agree :). Glad things worked out for your D. I agree that the kids change a lot during senior year, and at college too--hence the further scattering or returning that one sees in the transfers and the grad school applications.</p>
<p>SBMom: you bring up an interesting point, and one that one of my friends in particular used when refusing to apply to any school "closer than New York", with Massachusetts, our home state, out of the question. It was the need to "reinvent the self". I can understand wanting to get rid of high school stigmas and perceptions, as I certainly felt that too, coming from a relatively small town. However, in college - far or close - there's hundreds of new people either way. There's people here from my town and high school who I never even see around. And then there are those who have remained my close friends and have been a support. In other words, I find there is a much more fluid association going on, in that you can associate with a variety of people in college that would not have, necessarily, in high school. </p>
<p>I understand the need to change the stigma of high school... it just seems that sometimes kids take that to great lengths and forget why they're going to college. As for my friend (who is having a great time far away, nonetheless), but desperately wanted to change the stigma, would it really have been that different if they had attended a local school? Nobody would still know them. I'm just afraid that a lot of the time a less-than-successful high school experience translates to many kids as "I need to get out of here or I'll be made fun of forever" and they can lose focus, when in fact, a lot of that stuff you grow out of eventually. Especially as you meet new people wherever you go.</p>
<p>yes, tufta, I am sure you are right-- I just meant it really made me ITCH to go far way, not that one would have to go far to accomplish the same thing</p>
<p>S#2 has several friends who have been accepted EA at Harvard. His high school is diverse, and so is Harvard. So it does not bother me that it is within walking distance from our home. With so many colleges within driving distance, you can be 2-3 hours away from home and still be among kids you've known all your life. S#1 found, at freshman orientation, that one girl he'd been in day care with since they were a few months old but who'd moved several towns away later on was at the same college. So were quite a few kids from his hs. But he'd grown out of those friendships and made new ones.</p>
<p>A always thought it best for children to follow their dreams, to whatever college they choose. </p>
<p>I'm not so sure.</p>
<p>I once heard about a family that would not pay for any college for their children if it were outside a 200 mile radius from home. I was horrified. One of the children laughed, and said it was the best thing that ever happened, because most of the siblings now all live within a 200 mile radius of each other. I am envious. My family always said "go where you want", and my family is now scattered all over the US. Each of us settled near where we went to college, for a variety of reasons (job, spouse, etc.). While that brings diversity to our family, it also separates us, and the distances seem greater as we raise our families and age without the gift of each other! </p>
<p>I've also known several families whose children travelled far to college, and had substantial health problems while there. The families felt helpless. Did the student "grow" more independant? Perhaps. But, I'm not sure it was the best experience for anyone. </p>
<p>I no longer think you need to move so far to experience a new way of life. Diversity is everywhere. And, most of us live in an area with excellent schools within a days drive. </p>
<p>But then, if we ALL thought that way, it surely would be hard to experience geographic diversity!</p>
<p>I live 15 minutes from Northwestern and will be enrolling in the fall. It's a little ironic, considering how in September, I made it explicitly clear that I was only applying there because of my parents' pressure. I hated the idea of going to Northwestern then; I felt I need to go away. I'd been across the country visiting colleges, I even looked at St. Andrews in Scotland for a while. So it seems all the more ironic, since I'd been so adamant about getting as far away as possible. </p>
<p>A lot of the parents in this thread seem to be saying that it's a good experience to go away in order to become more worldly, more aware of different people and surroundings, to have the experience of traveling to and living in completely different parts of the world. Well, what's keeping me from meeting people from all over the world at Northwestern? What's keeping me from becoming more aware of different types of people? One parent was talking about how their son got to go to Germany. How is this type of thing any more likely at a school hours away than at a school down the road? </p>
<p>I'd been in love with the idea of discovering new places, like the Bay Area or the East Coast, the glamour of being in California! or Boston!. But what I've realized is, after the initial feeling of wonder at being in a new place, I bet Berkeley is just...Berkeley. Boston is just Boston, NY is just NY. It's just where you go to school, where you live. I've lived in Thailand for a month, I've been around, and I feel like school is school wherever you go. It's the people that make a difference. And I like the people in the midwest; plus, there are so many peopel from around the country at Northwestern. As someone who moved to the suburbs of Chicago before I was old enough to get to know the city a little, I feel like the city's still waiting to be discovered for all it is. </p>
<p>I think college, wherever you go, is what you make of it. I feel like the benefits of being far away are completely irrelevant to the student who won't take advantage of it, and if I'm the type of student who'll be willing to explore new things and go after opportunities, location isn't nearly the most important thing...it's the fit of the school. So if the school fits, I say don't let closeness hold you back. It's only you that can hold yourself back, by being too dependent on home.</p>
<p>Oh also, a couple friends at great schools (Amherst, Columbia) were also pretty adamant about getting away, but now totally wouldn't have minded staying close to home. They say it just becomes a hassle after a while.</p>
<p>My son is a junior but he has a lot of seniors on his team. Throughout the year, I have been asking them where they want to go. At the beginning, many had "high" aspirations. Yet, when the acceptances came in and the FA was never enuf, more and more have found out that they have to stay in-state. Plus, some are probably worried about how they will be able to "manage" everything while being so far away.</p>
<p>This doesn't surprise me. Actually with the costs of in-state schools and r & b rising, it doesn't surprise me that more kids are staying local. Our GC has said that many of the kids are going to the state college in our town just because that is all their parents can really afford - they can't even afford the R & B for the flagship state or its nearby state competitor (Auburn) (both over 100 miles away).</p>