<p>
</p>
<p>I wouldn’t say this, but I wouldn’t say that Brown has stronger programs either. I think that, in many cases, Brown has programs of equal strength.</p>
<p>Northwestern is “Ivy-like”. We largely agree. However, while your point about a BA being basically what a high school diploma use to be makes it all the more significant where you go to undergrad. It’s not just the degree you get at an Ivy or Ivy equivalent. It’s the critical thinking skills and adaptability you take away from that experience. It’s the alumni network you can tap into in analogous fields of endeavor. Let me let you in on something though. While Northwestern and UNC-Chapel Hill are fine schools, believe me, in the upper circles of New York society, and New York remains the most influential American city, in my opinion, having an Ivy degree is “very” beneficial. Much like the advertisement for Porsche, there is no substitute.</p>
<p>Let me let you in on something, I have a porsche, and there IS no substitute. ;)</p>
<p>As for the upper circles of New York society, one tires of black tie after a certain number of years and prefers a boat in the abacos.</p>
<p>As for the ivies? Go to Dartmouth if that’s all you’re really after. Play a sport, too. At least at the club level if you’re a man. Join a fraternity.</p>
<p>As for international prestige Ivy League is unparalleled. Barely anybody knows Northwestern abroad (except for some people with a MBA) and the same holds true for many other US World News top-ranked institutions.
If we compare prestige we should also consider in what area. Wharton might have a better reputation for I-banking, Harvard has a better reputation for pre-med etc. Yet I strongly believe that Brown is has an unparalleled prestige and reputation for intellectual, independent and moral individuals.<br>
Nobody can compete with that BECAUSE we have the open curriculum, the arguably best system to develop these skills. Rankings can’t acknowledge that, endowment can’t do that either but I urge everybody to visit Brown and see for themselves. Personally I believe that anybody who has a strong urge to be self-determined would never go to Chicago, Princeton or Columbia because such a person would suffocate there (at least that’s how I felt when I was between colleges).</p>
<p>^Whatever. Way to exaggerate the difference between Brown and others. Which foreign countries are you talking about? I came from China and all I know is more people heard of Harvard/Yale/Stanford/MIT/Berkeley/Columbia. Brown? Not really.</p>
<p>
You can’t get more corny than that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s stupid. Obviously, if this were true, Chicago and Columbia wouldn’t be the top two producers of Nobel Laureates, who happen to be the most self-determined individuals in the world. In fact, it’s probably the opposite. (By the way, I don’t know why you’re bringing Princeton into this at all.)</p>
<p>I know this is a ‘Brown circle-jerk’ thread, but seriously. People look for Core Curriculums to enhance their knowledge and put structure to their individualism. The idea of rugged, independent individualism is a dead one. Without some kind of structure for one’s thought, one will get absolutely nowhere. Moreover, the truly intelligent, self-determined individuals know this best.</p>
<p>
Oh believe me, most of us want more, not less, free electives. Who doesn’t like them? Many of us probably wish our schools do the same and many actually fear UChicago core. This is probably the main reason why Brown is so popular despite its lack of prestige (relatively). Brown knows how to play the popularity game. I bet if one day, Duke switches to open curriculum, its application pool will double immediately! And who doesn’t like 3.6 average GPA? It makes everybody sooooo happy and relaxed. You make it sound like this is some rare noble trait that Brown students have. The reality is Brown just happens to be one of the few that meet that “popular demand”. “Self-determined” is just your corny attempt to put it. Nice try to put down other great schools in the process.</p>
<p>^^In Brussels, people knew of BU, Georgetown, and USC but didn’t know of Brown (or many other fantastic schools). Unless you’re looking to leave school and immediately seek a job in a foreign market, these concerns should not be crossing your mind. Certainly, it says nothing about the quality of the schools.</p>
<p>^If you think that the capacity of an institution’s graduate schools to produce Nobel Laureates has anything to do with the self-starting nature of the undergraduate student body, you’re a lost cause. As for this “structure for ones thought” business, you completely misconstrue the idea of an open curriculum. Open curricula are all about admitting that there is no fixed arrangement of subject matter (usually determined, as in Columbia’s case, by reference to the education of yore) to which every educated person needs to be exposed. You see so many examples of college-dropout success stories precisely because traditional curricula are too constraining for those who are ahead of their time.</p>
<p>@Sam Lee: I’d suggest that you read up on the history of Brown’s curricular change before you make it into a popularity stunt.</p>
<p>^Regardless of what the real history is, the end result is the same. Most people love free electives and the majority of us would prefer open curriculum over distribution requirements/core. This is just human nature and there’s nothing unique about that; it’s delusional to think you are more “self-determined” than others.</p>
<p>^First, it is ridiculous to claim that across the board, everyone would prefer free electives and an open curriculum to the alternative. Plenty of people apply to Columbia and not to Brown precisely because the idea of an open curriculum turns them off. To the extent that this represents a self-selection of self-starters (which I think it does), Brown ends up with more self-starters.</p>
<p>Second, you’re discounting the educational value of the open curriculum. When students are forced into the experience of making their own course choices, they learn from that experience. That’s one type of education that people with the crutch of a structured curriculum don’t get. I think it helps build self-starters.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’d second that, and add India to the list.</p>
<p>@phuriku “The idea of rugged, independent individualism is a dead one. Without some kind of structure for one’s thought, one will get absolutely nowhere”
Clearly Brown is not for you. Actually, you should not study in the US at all but go to the UK where you can study one subject straight.
@Sam, you are a ■■■■■, but you probably know that
OK, let us not play the “prestige game”. It is subjective and varies from region from region. HYP is on top and then you can argue night and day about the rest of the schools. </p>
<p>I was admitted to UChicago and Brown and opted for the latter. IMO Chicago is a great school, something you would not say about Brown for some reason…(reject?;))<br>
Yet, these schools are fundamentally different and Brown stands out from most other elite-peer colleges because of a beautiful thing called “open-curriculum”. There are a million haters and if you want to join them I suggest you go to the UPenn board and you guys can all get off about your great research programs and US World News rankings. At some point in my life I will not even bother to discuss the open-curriculum with a hater like you… It’s like convincing Glenn Beck that the democrats will not make America socialist. But I’ll give it a try anyway.</p>
<p>Like mgcsinc already said, it is hard to claim across the board. However, the choice between Brown and other institutions in higher-education is more fundamental simply because we have a different approach to education. If any of the haters in here really cared about it, read up on it on the Brown website. </p>
<p>Sam, obviously you have never been to Brown. What do you want me to tell you what other people haven’t said already Things you can’t give a decent answer to?
It is ridiculous to say people go to Brown because of grade inflation. First, this holds true for all Ivies plus Stanford (except Princeton). Do you honestly want to tell me a sane person would go to Brown because of an average GPA of 3.5 instead of 3.4 at Stanford? Second, because we have S/NC and often no curves in class, grade grubbers are not omnipresent. Seriously, I hear about people at other schools ripping out pages in Library books so that nobody gets the info but them. If people go to Brown because we are not cut-throat, well I believe that is a good thing.</p>
<p>Further I don’t see your point. Less requirements might be more popular amongst students… So? In which perverse world is popular = bad and equals nonacademic?
The open curriculum is not a “popular game” Brown plays. It is our conviction that Brown students are so smart, so self determined and so driven that they will challenge themselves every semester because they don’t have to do it (like in a core curriculum) but because they love what they do. This might sound corny to you, but hey- it’s not my fault that you go to UChicago (where the fun goes to die) and you will never understand that concept.</p>
<p>Steve Jobs summarizes the open curriculum pretty well:
“Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do. If you haven’t found it yet, keep looking, and don’t settle. As with all matters of the heart, you’ll know when you find it.”</p>
<p>That is what Brown is all about. That is the reason why we have the happiest students and not some state school where you can drink and party all day. Brown is the only Ivy where you can live that principle to the full extent- do what you love and if you haven’t found it yet- keep on looking. We get a lot of unique students other schools don’t get because they believe in this “hippie stuff” and I take great pride in this reputation of Brown. If people like you and some pre-professional wannabe I-bankers think that this is “hippie crap” I pity you for the miserable life you will have.</p>
<p>In terms of brand recognition, across the globe, HYPS stand out. However, if you are in the USA and have the privilege of doing your undergrad at Brown, you will not have that problem. The employers who recruit from the top universities know the value of a Brown degree.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I said “most”, not “everyone”. “Plenty” is a vague term. There are plenty of gays and lesbians but they are not the majority, are they? You can keep telling yourself that you guys are more “self-determined”; I think it’s kinda cute. If you are so easily impressed by the mere ability to pick courses out of the catalog without any restriction, power to you. ;)</p>
<p>
I did not say “popular = bad and equals nonacademic”; my point is “popular = not unique”.</p>
<p>"This is probably the main reason why Brown is so popular despite its lack of prestige (relatively). Brown knows how to play the popularity game. I bet if one day, Duke switches to open curriculum, its application pool will double immediately! And who doesn’t like 3.6 average GPA? It makes everybody sooooo happy and relaxed. "</p>
<p>When you have a more thought out idea that hasn’t already been posted by other ■■■■■■, debated, and refuted…let us know.</p>
<p>Popular = not unique? Does that mean not-popular=unique? Anyway, either of those is ridiculous. It might very well be that of of 1500 graduates nobody had the same combination of courses. That is as unique as any education can get. </p>
<p>Further, a core is all about that you subscribe to the view of others what will be important for your life and what makes an intellectual, intellectual. If you think this kind of determination is ridiculous, welcome to Brown.
Studying with a core is like living at your parents house and they plan the whole day for you out. If you think this can even make your self-determined by definition… all power to you</p>
<p>Among the top schools, the only truly unique undergraduate experiences are offered at either Brown (The New Curriculum) or Yale (well developed Residential College system).</p>
<p>Otherwise, while the basic feel of the places might be different, I don’t think that fundamentally Duke is very different from Harvard, or Cornell from UPenn (academic experience wise). They’re all excellent schools, some slightly better than the others, but they don’t offer something radically different.</p>
<p>That is why among the very best, Brown and Yale stand out. (Not comparing them to others, just saying that they offer a very different experience, and hence stand out.)</p>
<p>^I think you make a very good point.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Please don’t digress and change the subject. Please don’t put words into my mouth. You don’t need to be “self-determined” to like open curriculum. You make it sound like picking out 20+ electives outside of your major is a huge challenge. Seriously, really? I did not say core make one self-determined. What I had problem with is that you guys made an indefensible claim that Brown students are “more self-determined” or more of “self-starters”. Show me some metrics/evidence. When Stanford grads were making innovations, what were the self-proclaimed “self-starters” doing?</p>