@myyalieboy: Your exact words:
“But I could not say with any certainty that DC’s decision was a big mistake” when talking about Stanford.
That and your comment implying that Stanford isn’t top rank just sounds too daffy. I’m sorry. It makes me wonder what country/world/century you’re living in. I mean, I can easily see a Boston Brahmin from the 19th century sniffing that that newish university in CA just doesn’t have the “it” that Hah-vuhd and/or the Ivies have, but I’m really curious what social circles you frequent where Stanford is seen in a lesser light than at least some of the Ivies. I’m pretty certain that my view that Stanford is at least equal to some of the Ivies and surpasses the rest (by any metric that you care to choose) is closer to the mainstream than yours. I hope it wouldn’t shock you to discover that my view that MSU isn’t on the same tier as NU (again, by any metric that you care to choose) is also pretty mainstream.
In which case, I’m not sure why you feel that your D gave up anything by choosing Stanford when it seems pretty clear that she thought that Stanford fit her best. If prestige wasn’t the reason why you wanted her to go elsewhere, then what was?
@myyalieboy - your posts are internally inconsistent. I’m with PurpleTitan and Pizzagirl on this one. I think you wanted to brag…your posts have nothing to do with the topic at hand.
“…I was talking about picking a school that was NOT the top rank. I intentionally said that my pick was not Harvard just to make the point AGAIN that prestige was NOT the basis of my pick.”
Which school exactly was your pick? Some other top ivy? Your post only referred to Harvard, Stanford and other top ivies as being in the mix.
You and your “DC” were not put to making a choice between prestige vs non-prestige. The ivies and Stanford are all prestigious, so either way – your pick or DC’s pick – was going to be a prestigious one.
This is a thread about one’s child making a college choice that was “disappointing” in comparison to other available choices. The ensuing discussion has been whether that choice should be considered disappointing simply because it lacked the “US News” type prestige of other available choices, even though the fit is good. So what exactly was so “disappointing” to you about your DC’s choice of Stanford that you felt compelled to angst over the choice between Stanford vs. some other top ivy in this particular thread?
I think you actually said, “It will go down as one of the hardest moments in my life where I had to sit on my hands and let DC make the decision [to attend Stanford].” Sorry, but that’s just gloating in the context of the development of this thread.
The OP clarified that the student in question will be going into engineering, where nobody lasts long trying to coast, and that coasting is not the student’s goal. In other words, the parent investigated, and the answers were positive. That’s the point. Parents in this situation should be looking into WHY the child is making the counter-intuitive choice. I don’t believe in the “It’s all up to him, I just sign the checks” philosophy of guidance. I hope that parents speak up if they think a kid may be defaulting to a perceived path of least resistance (like mom’s school, or the one where friends are going) out of fear or laziness.
I stand by my implication that there is such a thing as an unmotivated and non-goal-oriented student, and that you’ll find more of them per capita at Michigan State than at Amherst.
Has anyone considered the positives of attending a school with students who present with a wider range of academic abilities? I have noticed my friends from unassuming state schools are better able to find common ground with people outside of our academically-oriented social circle than many of our classmates. Not the worst thing to have in your back pocket for a doctor, but I imagine that to be true for many other fields, as well.
It was only a matter of time before that claim showed up–it’s the old “Ivy League grads can’t talk to their plumber” argument. Yup, those state schools kids are normal and can interact with others, whereas the elite school students are socially stunted from too much studying alone in their rooms. Good thing the OP’s son chose MSU, then.
The Ivy/Stanford admissions process is extremely competitive with acceptance rates in the single digits. With tens of thousands of applicants to chose from, these schools do not need to accept socially awkward students just because they’re very smart. There are thousands of kids who are extremely bright and academically capable who ALSO have fantastic social skills. In fact, with the emphasis these schools place on leadership–which requires that people be willing to follow you–often these students are highly charismatic and likeable people. And those alleged “slackers” that get in, the recruited athletes, presumably do get out of their rooms and thus by that logic don’t have any more glaring social problems than the average kid either.
If we’re going to stereotype about social ability, then allow me to counter. The more average students who are “good enough” (to coin the phrase from the other thread), most likely have had fewer socially- broadening experiences than the kids headed for top schools. The latter have worked in college labs, have already held internships in professional settings, have run for public office, have served as leaders of national student organizations, and so forth. The “good enough” students, whose parents greatly esteem their ability to have a “normal”, when questioned generally define that life as not being crazy busy. Rather, they have time to sleep in, just hang out at home with the family, and watch TV. I am not convinced those activities necessarily make for a more socially well-adjusted person.
@myyalieboy Even if you never said “I was disappointed” you did say this: “It will go down as one of the hardest moments in my life where I had to sit on my hands and let DC make the decision, even when I knew DC’s decision would not be my pick.” (Post 157) You also said “I am just going to have to get comfortable with the fact that DC and I disagree.” Please accept that to many of the rest of us this sounds much more like disappointment than the more typical reaction of elation that many parents have that their DC has matriculated to Stanford.
You might consider starting a thread, “Parents trying to come to terms with DC’s decision to attend Stanford.” Somewhere in the universe there might be one other person willing to post to it.
@twoinanddone That sounds like Stanford and Harvard? Last H n Y game I I went to was close to 100k, and H has gone to the NCAA tourney more times recently than most D1 programs. I think folks tend to forget that H is a 20000 campus.
I would say, hold all your “dissapointments” for actual performance at college. Just a tiny reminder about the fact that where they attend is very secondary to what they actually do there, academically and beyond. In couple months after they start all these superficial dissapointments about the place will dissapear in thin air. You will question what was the issue altogether. They will have to adjust up their HS academic effots not matter where they attend. And unfortunately not all caliber HS valedictorians realize this.
Since we’re talking about kids who could be going to top schools but who choose a school that parents define as “lesser” in some way, they presumably have the same kind of academic and social skills going into the college experience. So I don’t really understand your point about them having fewer socially-broadening experiences going into college.
I get parents’ comments about being willing to pay more for some college “experiences” than for others. I do wonder, though, about the value of providing opportunities to a student who, for whatever reason, is not prepared to take full advantage of those opportunities. I’m not willing to pay for opportunities that my child had no intention of pursuing, either. For example, with D, I really don’t see the need to pay for a college with fantastic sports facilities OR state-of-the-art engineering labs. For the same reason, I would not take my vegetarian daughter to eat at an expensive steakhouse when all she’d eat would be a salad and a baked potato.
I agree with MiamiDAP. We are counting the days until our son will finish his first year, because it’s been a very rough year for a kid everyone thought would thrive at college. The problem wasn’t the academics, but severe homesickness that we feared would turn to depression. Even if you think you know your child, college is a whole different kind of test for their personality, so if the OP’s son feels good about his decision, that is one less factor in a plethora of things that can lead to a bad experience.
@TheGFG Your list of socially-broadening experiences that includes students who “have worked in college labs, have already held internships in professional settings, have run for public office, have served as leaders of national student organizations, and so forth,” is a good one.
I would also include the student who bags groceries for several hours after school, then goes home to care for 3 younger siblings while her single-parent works a second job, and then finally settles in to do her homework at around 11:00 p.m. That is leadership of a different sort.
@boolaHI, Harvard Stadium holds 30K and the Yale Bowl has had 60K-65K seats since 1994. Granted, maybe you haven’t attended the Harvard-Yale game in decades.
Elliemom, worth2try posited academic diversity as a valid reason for selecting the state school, saying, “I have noticed my friends from unassuming state schools are better able to find common ground with people outside of our academically-oriented social circle than many of our classmates.” So yes, the OP’s son could have gone elsewhere, but presumably the majority of other students attending MSU were not elite school admits and thus do not share his same level of preparation going in…
“The more average students who are “good enough” (to coin the phrase from the other thread), most likely have had fewer socially- broadening experiences than the kids headed for top schools. The latter have worked in college labs, have already held internships in professional settings, have run for public office, have served as leaders of national student organizations, and so forth. The “good enough” students, whose parents greatly esteem their ability to have a “normal”, when questioned generally define that life as not being crazy busy. Rather, they have time to sleep in, just hang out at home with the family, and watch TV. I am not convinced those activities necessarily make for a more socially well-adjusted person.”
Well, I actually think those activities (hanging out) DO make for a more socially well-adjusted person, and frankly at times I wish I had some of the social skills of some of the people who went to “lesser” colleges.
I think the thing is - fit is great and I certainly believe in it, but when certain “thresholds” are crossed, there’s got to be more rationale than a better fit.
Dartmouth vs Duke? Tufts vs Brandeis? Kenyon vs Smith? Wisconsin vs Michigan? Harvey Mudd vs U of Chicago? In the absence of major financial differences or specific-to-one-school programs, I say fit all the way - it’s six of one, half a dozen of the other - and that’s a plenty fine rationale for choosing one school over one another. Heck, at that point choose based on weather or Greek life absence/presence or proximity to skiing - because there aren’t any meaningful tradeoffs in quality.
I do think, however, it’s not sufficient of a rationale *for me and mine * when we’re talking schools that are of appreciably different tiers. BTW, I feel differently about Northwestern vs Michigan than I do Northwestern vs Michigan State.
Well, obviously generalizations are just that, but in my experience and watching that of my children, sometimes the kids who spend more time “hanging out” are kids who are not comfortable being alone for long and need at least some subset of their posse of friends to accompany them wherever they go, or they won’t go. Kids seeking advanced and different activities tend to have to go and do by themselves a lot, and thus they learn to adapt and make friends in new environments. For example, my kids had to leave their home town sports teams and summer camps where they knew people in order to find challenge, and they went by themselves.
The silly thing is, opportunities exist at practically every decent college in the country, depending on the student’s area(s) of interest. If a student has no personal interest in going to an Ivy then why must we insist on shoving “Ivy opportunities” in their face?
If I tell you the best food in town is at a sushi restaurant (highest rated, zagat, the whole nine yards…), but you don’t like sushi, then what is the point of me telling you the best food in town is at a sushi restaurant?
This notion of a one-size-fits-all “best opportunities” school is just absurd… yet these conversations keep persisting. Go figure.
I agree, and also submit that these kids are at Amherst and NU also. The former rather publicly seeks out kids who do the above while also excelling academically.
My concern, as I said a couple of pages back, would be with public Us and budget issues, what classes might be cut, what professors hired, how tuition might rise as public support shrinks, vs wealthy privates where those are not real concerns.
fractalmstr, I think the college decision issue is less about a one-size-fits-all mentality and more about value for the money and determining what value is acceptable for the particular student’s needs and wants. Suppose your D is planning to buy a blouse. What she chooses to buy may differ depending on the style needed, its expected use, and her budget. If the item doesn’t have to be fancy, if she needs it for a one-time concert and will be unlikely to ever wear it again, then perhaps she will decide the $14 one from Forever 21 makes the most sense. If she will need to wear it to work in an office every day in the summer, then maybe she will want to shop at Nordstrom instead and spend $65 for a better quality blouse. However if she only has $35 in her budget but needs that sort of blouse, then maybe she should try to find one similar to the Nordstrom item but at Marshall’s instead.
The same analysis applies to college choice. If it has been determined that MSU’s engineering program is as good or almost as good as that of NU, but costs less, then that’s a good value for that particular student. If there were to be a significant difference in quality, but the cost difference is minimal, then perhaps it’s not such a good choice. Or if his prospective major were journalism instead of engineering, then I’d say the decision should be NU if NU only costs a little bit more…
I just wouldn’t like to see my child buy the Forever 21 blouse when she could get one far, far nicer for the exact same price or only $2 more.
“That sounds like Stanford and Harvard? Last H n Y game I I went to was close to 100k, and H has gone to the NCAA tourney more times recently than most D1 programs. I think folks tend to forget that H is a 20000 campus.”
Where did they hold the Harvard/Yale game that held 100k? Gillette stadium doesn’t hold that many people. It’s still not great football, and not what I meant by wanting big time sports. I don’t think anyone, even the players, are picking the Ivy League for the sports except maybe a few Princeton lacrosse players. The rest are using sports to get into the school they want to attend for academics, as it should be. Stanford sports are in a different league, both literally and figuratively, and perhaps the OP’s son is looking for big time sports, as OP said if he gets into ND or Stanford he may change his mind and give up MSU.
I think many people forget that Harvard is a big school. An argument I’ve heard over and over for picking an expensive LAC over a state school is that the student needs the small school, needs to know everyone on campus, to have a personal relationship with every professor, so picks Colby or St Lawrence over UConn or UMass. But that same student would go to Harvard in a minute if offered a spot and not think about those 8000 undergrads or all the grad students, that the dorms are not modern, that the cafeteria food not gourmet, the climbing wall not state of the art.
Others still don’t want to go to Harvard. Hard to believe for many on CC, but true.