<p>Someoldguy,
Taking every comment personally could be a reflection of dubious moral character.</p>
<p>Re 4 to 5 years.
If you are receiving financial aid at a private school, there is NO attending longer than 4 years.
My daughter who graduated from a top lac, needed to retake a class.
There was no way to retake this class with her next years schedule.
Even if it had been the only class she took for one year, and we paid out of pocket, it would have counted as her 4th year & she would have not been eligible for any aid when she retuned. ( this is a college that meets 100% of need)
So, she came home, retook the class plus some others at a community college and returned to her lac the next year.</p>
<p>She is very intelligent ( finished grad school last year) and a hard worker, but being first gen along with some learning differences made a pretty steep learning curve even if she hadnt been attending one of the toughest schools in the country.</p>
<p>@pinecone. I don’t think people are saying UCB is not a good school. The problem with it is they have such a bad 4 year graduation rate (71%) compared to other top schools (the 150th top school in terms of 4 year graduation rate is about 77%).</p>
<p>There is nothing wrong with an IS public school. However, going to an OOS public school, a student from a middle class family will have to pay more. Therefore, it is not a good option in this case.</p>
<p>Ok SomeOldGuy, here is how i “jump to the conclusion that taking more than four is a sign of sloth.” A top student, whether from a wealthy or poor family, should be able to get need based or merit based aid from many fine institutions. With full ride and summer jobs, a student shouldn’t have to have a full time job while going to school and should be able graduate in 4 years. I did. SO, if someone is not able to graduate in four years, I would want to know why - were you a sloth in high school so you couldn’t get enough money to go to college, and if you were able to afford college why couldn’t you manage to graduate in 4 years.</p>
<p>“Those Midwest “flagship schools” are having financial problems due to reduced state spending subsidies, including Michigan. More recruitment of full-pay foreign students occurring - look at UIUC’s enrollment stats for this Fall’s freshman class - coupled with extremely large lecture hall classes, TA-taught classes, delayed graduations due to inability to access classes, difficulty in attaining enrollment in desired majors, and often rundown facilities, and it’s no surprise that top students are motivated to go to top private colleges instead.”</p>
<p>As a current UIUC student I haven’t experience many of these problems you’re talking. Even as a transfer student (last dibs on classes) I had no problem getting the classes I wanted, and I’m even slated to graduate a semester early. The University is also hiring ~500 new faculty members in the next few years.</p>
<p>Bay, when you make inflammatory statements you should a) not be surprised that people react to them and b) not blame those who react for “making you tired.” Essentially you are saying that UC-Berkeley and the other UCs (not to mention other state schools) are more likely than top privates to be filled with students of dubious moral character. If that is not what you mean to say, perhaps you should be more clear.</p>
<p>Op,
There are many silly and unfounded reasons that some high school students might not regard the top publics as highly as a similarly ranked private school. </p>
<p>However, there is 1 area where a top public is inferior to a similarly ranked private school. Due to funding issues and cutbacks, top publics usually don’t have the niceties of money support. So it might be harder to get certain classes, it might be harder to graduate in 4 years without careful planing, advisors might not do as much hand-holding to help out with options such as semester abroad, internships etc. In a top public, a student may have to navigate these waters with less advising and less support. Of course, top students can navigate these waters just fine, but it takes more “effort” than at a private school. Just remember, tuition is $30K more per year at a private than a public, and some of this money is spent on more staff that smooths out the bumps for the students.</p>
<p>OTOH, there is an area where top publics are superior to a similarly ranked private school. The larger student body gives many more selections of classes, EC, types of students to hang with, more diversity, just more options in general.</p>
<p>Now for silly and unfounded reasons:
Not sure if you attend a private HS, as I didn’t read all responses.
- Private schools may give off a feeling of prestige because it’s more expensive. Expensive things usually give people a feeling of prestige.
- If you attend a private HS, sometimes there is snobbery to public HS and to public college.
- HS students may look to the class above them and to where those kids went to college. Thus they tend to form worn tracks to certain colleges.
- Your HS GC office may have relationships with certain colleges, which results in your HS tending to feed to those colleges and certain attitudes towards specific colleges.</p>
<p>Sally.
What I think is that UC Berkeley is more likely to admit a student of dubious moral character than say, Harvard, because such student doesn’t need any teacher or counselor recs (in fact they are not allowed), in order to apply and be accepted to Cal.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Even for those not getting financial aid or scholarships, the higher cost of private schools provides a significantly stronger financial incentive to graduate on time than the lower cost of in-state public schools.</p>
<p>Of course, 8 semesters at $30,000 per semester still costs more than 9 semesters at $15,000 per semester.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Dubious moral character is not necessarily apparent to recommenders. Or the recommenders might also not define “dubious moral characters” the same as you do.</p>
<p>Many consider the actions of people in elite investment banks to be of dubious moral character, even though these elite investment banks strongly favor recruiting from those elite private schools that use recommendations for admission. Politicians also sometimes graduate from these same schools, but many people consider many of them to be of dubious moral character.</p>
<p>Just started reading some of the previous posts…</p>
<p>"Of course, the democratic values the public universities are expressing are those most of us, even the elitists, would endorse. Do we want faculty to educate as many students as possible, or as few? Do we want to give lots of people chances and see who emerges as the best, or do we want to pre-select the best, declare the contest over, and marvel at their greatness? Is the university a temple of knowledge anyone can approach, or some ultra-hip nightclub where the bouncer has to recognize you from Vanity Fair or Page 6 in order to gain admittance? "</p>
<p>I love JHS’s posts. Where are my greenies/like button?</p>
<p>Of course, 8 semesters at $30,000 per semester still costs more than 9 semesters at $15,000 per semester.</p>
<p>Yes, yes it does.
And even the most coddling lac still has holes that you can fall through.
My D was working with a learning coach & she was doing great, but then he left & the school took its time replacing him.
There are disadvantages to schools so small they don’t have staffing overlap.</p>
<p>I think positive recs are not particularly valuable in sorting for good moral character. Counselors and teachers often don’t know kids well enough to make a meaningful determination. However, if a counselor or teacher dings a kid somehow, or if what is written comes off as deliberately lukewarm, that does help to exclude the kid about whose character there are doubts or negative reports, eg. rumors of cheating. </p>
<p>In addition, a strong work ethic as evidenced by the superb grades, test scores and EC involvements required to be admitted to an Ivy or other elite, speaks to some positive character traits: goal-setting skills, internal motivation and strong work ethic, self-discipline and the ability to defer gratification, and teachability and humility (in that the student submits to the authority of the teacher/class requirements).</p>
<p>The absence of strong grades, test scores and involvements does not necessarily imply character flaws, but it doesn’t suggest any positive qualities either.</p>
<p>@emilybee, I am wondering what your son’s stats are? I am a student and Wash U is my top choice. I live about 20 miles from it and everyone around here talks about how it’s near impossible to get in.</p>
<p>Because people are pretentious</p>
<p>"Collegedad, I think the point is that in CA, we haven’t experienced the disdain for even just applying to public schools that the OP experienced. My own kid has her sights set on private schools in and out of state because they are a better fit for her in particular but she’s applying to 3 in-state publics that she likes, offers what she wants and in areas she feels she can be happy living in. Her classmates are all applying to at least 1 public and there hasn’t been any drama about it. Most kids we know are at private schools but they were proud of getting into the public too… outside the local ones (which are actually more competitive but you know… HOME lol.) "</p>
<p>Turtletime, collegedad, momof3boys,</p>
<p>We are at a CA ubercompetitive private HS. Here there is disdain among the kids for applying to Cal and UCLA because they are public…all for silly and unfounded reasons #1 - #4 that I listed above. They kids will often choose USC over Cal and UCLA, which of course starts another controversy.</p>
<p>I went to MIT. I don’t think poorly of public schools. (Before I knew that MIT existed, I planned on going to UC Davis.)</p>
<p>I think your classmates are dumb and elitist. They don’t speak for all of us at top schools 
Major in something useful and affect society in a positive way, you’re awesome in my book.</p>
<p>Yohoh, yes, I said that in my first post. The 50 grand a year private school kids in our area don’t apply public for the most part. However, this OP sounds like he’s in a public school lol.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I also received a nice scholarship/FA package from my LAC. However, I am also aware that not everyone can for various reasons. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not having a high HS/college GPA does not necessarily signify one’s a sloth. It could alternatively signify adjustment issues early in one’s HS/college career, hitting the academic wall because one’s in a highly rigorous academic academic environment full of highly competitive academic achievers with some G & T folks thrown in, and/or teen/adolescent issues many tend to outgrow by 17-18…or much later. </p>
<p>Having a low HS/College GPA may also be explained by previously undiagnosed learning disabilities not known until the individual has already graduated HS or college.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Incidentally, not everyone…including employers regards those traits as completely positive. In positions where the prospective employee needs to assert authority over others and/or hold his/her own with those at the same/higher levels in the institutional hierarchy as a crucial part of the position, there may be concerns the individual who has those traits may be too passive or afraid to improvise a solution on the fly without asking/waiting for approval from higher-ups as the situation…especially an urgent one may require. Especially when it’s a situation where the “school/institutional solution”/SOP isn’t applicable or woefully lacking.</p>