I fully believe that as long as an institution is accredited, the quality of one’s education will be roughly equal. That being said, my number one criteria in my college search has been location: I need to be able to ski, for the purposes of my emotional health. My extended family doesn’t seem to understand that, and since I am the oldest grandchild, everyone wants to put their two cents in. Suggestions I have had from family members: Stanford (I would be fourth gen), Yale, Princeton (second gen), Harvard, Dartmouth, Columbia, Northwestern, University of Chicago, and Villanova. How do I explain to my well-meaning relatives that I have no interest in these schools (even if my stats could get me in) and that I’d be happier at Syracuse or University of Nevada-Reno, even if they see that as “not meeting my full potential”? I value my happiness, but I also don’t want to disappoint anyone. Any advice would be appreciated.
The quality of education is vastly different if you choose a school like MIT over Syracuse. Your parents are giving you good advice to try to go to the best school you can. Then again, you can get a sub-par education, then get a sub-par job, then get sub-par pay if you want. It’s your life.
Dartmouth and Middlebury are in great skiing areas.
“I fully believe that as long as an institution is accredited, the quality of one’s education will be roughly equal.”
That’s not really true.
And you require way more than stats to get in to those schools you listed. You may not even have a choice.
But don’t live your life for others.
On the other hand, I do wonder if you have a long-term perspective. Yes, short-term happiness matters, but concentrating on your current happiness isn’t going to get you far in life, no matter what your goals.
And yes, there are some elite schools in good skiing areas.
Says someone who likes to ski on ice.
Lots of students find that their ECs that were a huge focus in high school become less important in college. That was true for both of my kids. You need to find other ways to keep your emotional balance besides this one sport. Injury, job obligations, finances, etc could all affect your ability to ski in the future. And frankly, a 40 year old who lives to downhill ski is a bit pathetic (I’ve known a few).
Just the fact that you think accreditation makes all colleges equal shows that you don’t know much about colleges. There are a lot of great schools out there – but thinking there isn’t a difference in the education quality between a school ranked in the top 30 vs one around 300 is wrong.
@intparent
Oh, don’t worry. I’ll be a ski bum after college for a few years, then I’ll move back to a real city, get a job, buy a house, and become a weekend warrior just like the rest of the middle-aged skiers I know. I’ll ski into my 80s, gradually backing off the gnar, until my doc says my bones are too weak to keep going. Happened to my granddad, is happening to my pop, and will happen to me.
@PurpleTitan
And college ranking systems are flawed. They’re based in elitism and student test scores. Why would you rank a college on a test a student took before they even started taking classes there?
Don’t you all think that as long as you don’t go to a known crappy college, you can get a great education at plenty of colleges? Seems everyone says that when the question is the opposite. Can’t OP get a list of schools in great skiing areas - Utah, Boulder, Wyoming, Montana - and just choose among those? Seriously, it seems when the question is about wanting to go to a top school everyone says it’s not about the school, but about what one makes of it. And, of course, I would think field of study and goals are important variables in the equation.
Oh! And more importantly the idea that you want to be happy, but don’t wan to disappoint anyone…ya gotta get over that. Do what’s right for you - and that’s not just the immediate gratification, YOLO right for you - and then don’t consider what other people want for you. That’s a bad, bad trap. Be conscientious, and caring, but you can’t be responsible for others’ expectations for you.
Colorado College, Reed College, Lewis and Clark… no need to sacrifice academic quality for amazing ski resorts.
They are partially flawed, but not useless. You are looking for evidence to bolster your desire to pick a school based on your ECs, not looking at the actual evidence. Gotta say, skiing is an expensive sport. You are going to need a good job to afford it as a lifelong hobby. Someplace like School of Mines will get you a good job, but you will be working your tail off – you won’t have a lot of free time to ski.
College ranking systems definitely are flawed. No question about that. But even if you look at other measures (alumni achievements or difficulty of finals in a certain subject or, honestly, any other metric you care to look at), there are major differences between an Ivy/equivalent and schools around 300.
You can argue that, for your goals, the differences don’t matter, but you can’t argue that there aren’t differences.
So do you think that your dad could have sustained his weekend warrior lifestyle and afforded you your lifestyle growing up if he had gone to UNR instead of HYPSM?
In any case, there are too many hypotheticals involved. Just because your relatives want you to go to certain schools doesn’t mean you’ll have the choice.
@“jesse’sgirl”
Exactly! (Although for personal reasons Utah is not for me) What I’m really looking for is a way to explain to my aunts and uncles, in a way that won’t hurt their feelings, why I’m not going to Yale when I got a 1570 on the SAT. They just don’t seem to get it, and I know there’s no way I’m the only one with this problem.
@PurpleTitan My padre went to Montana State
Then how would you be 4th generation for Stanford and 2nd generation for Princeton? Typically, only undergrad counts for legacy and it’s where the parent actually got a degree. How many parents do you have?
@intparent I actually just visited there and loved it. They have just about everything I’m looking for, but I’m not sure about how narrow their focus is (basically just engineering), and I don’t know how comfortable I am with their gender imbalance. They do have a ski team, and passes at Winter Park would be affordable for me as a college student. I’ve been in contact with students who are on the ski team and plan to apply in the fall. The problem is that it’s not Princeton. I need a way to explain to relatives obsessed with appearances that it’s just as good.
@PurpleTitan Great-granddad, granddad (who is a donor), and childless aunt. It wouldn’t count for admissions, but my family views me as a possible fourth gen Stanford student, which is why I included it like that. The only thing that matters to them is how THEY perceive things, and they perceive me as a fourth gen student, since my aunt has no children of her own.
Not all accredited schools are equal and the rankings are flawed. If you want to ski, you just need to vet your options well. Truth above all else is that those who do the best, make the most of their opportunities…no matter where they go.
What do you want to study?
My son is an avid, lifelong skier, ex racer. He had high stats, but every school he applied to had access to skiing, save one. That’s how important it was to him. Interestingly, he chose the California beach school, but not before he agonized.
He’s an engineer. He got great money at Utah. Their facilities and ME program are solid. He also liked WPI. They have a respectable club race program. He chose Cal Poly. He still coaches over Christmas break. He spent this spring break at Jackson Hole and Alta/Snowbird.
If skiing is important to you, then by all means, make it part of YOUR ranking system.
Mines is better for undergraduate engineering than Princeton, but it’s known as a grind and very unidimensional in what they offer. Boulder is a better option than either of them.
As for Utah, most write it off because of the Mormon Church influence. That’s a big mistake. SLC is less than 50% Mormon. The mayor is a democrat. The student body is very into the athletic teams. You won’t be able to race there unless your FIS points are in the teens (ditto Boulder), but proximity to ski areas makes it easier to ski than it is to golf.
Good luck.
@eyemgh Right now, I’m thinking math or environmental engineering.
Hey, FYI: I’ve heard Utah is not what differently religious people fear it is. Keep an open mind on that. But also, there’s Westminster College - you might be a rockstar there - that is comparatively liberal, and has a successful snowboard and ski team. Right down the hill from Park City.
BUT make sure wherever you want to go has really great progrmas and stats for the things you want to study!!
As for you relatives, I don’t know…“I know it’s hard to understand when so many people chase the brand name schools, and prestige, but you know it’s about the education, not just what people will think… I will be committed to my education wherever I go…I’m passionate about working hard for a stable future, and I promise I won’t choose a totally lame school…but I am passionate about skiing!!! I don’t think I have to sacrifice one passion for another. I intend to find a school where I can do both. I really hope I can have your support. Help me explore schools where I can have it all.”
But I just thought of something as I was thinking of that…could you consider a compromise…a way to have it all…what if you go to a school that you can love, but isn’t in a resort area, and then just make it work to spend your Thanksgiving and/or Christmas, and your Spring Break, and maybe even some time in the summer skiing!!! Plenty of people are happy with that. Lots of adults only get a few ski weeks per year. Anyway, just a thought. Good luck.
Utah is very good at both, plus environmental law is very well regarded there too.
Westminster is a cool little school, but doesn’t offer engineering. As for being on their ski team, that a long shot. There are so few NCAA ski teams, being able to race there (or Boulder or Utah or Dartmouth) is like playing hoops for Duke. You have to be world class. Westminster sent more Olympians to Sochi than any other school, 22.