<p>My only other "contribution" to this discussion is that schools tend to draw students "appropriate" to that school's environments. Lots of Catholics at Notre Dame? Go figure! Like football? You may want to skip Columbia University. So if a student is looking for people who enjoy city activities, a college surrounded by cornfields is probably not the best option. And vice versa of course.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you can't find something to do in Orange County (a place with over 3 million residents) or the greater LA/OC area (something like 15-20 million) you simply aren't trying. For what it's worth, UCI is nearing 45% of students living on campus, not counting the privately-owned apartments in the area. The university has built over 4,000 new student housing "beds" in the last couple of years. With a target student population of 30,000, and 45% on-campus, 13,500 students living on campus is a lot more than live in the Rice area.</p>
<p>When I went to UCI in the 1970s, UCI was a commuter school and Irvine was a sleepy suburb. It's an out-of-date characterization, IMO.</p>
<p>I went to school within spitting distance of a great city (Boston), while I took advantage of the little cafes in Cambridge, I didn't get to the museums or theater or music venues in Boston nearly as much as I could have. There were so many movies, plays, parties etc. on campus it just wasn't that tempting. I did take some classes (architecture mostly) that did make use of the city, but I didn't play in it as much as I might have. I should think as long as the college isn't too small there would be plenty to do on campus.</p>
<p>I've watched the changes of my S over past 3 1/2 years, growing into the city environment. Initially, he seemed content to stay on campus. His college always had activities on weekends. Groups of students would go to Old Town in Pasadena for meals and movies. Over time, he's been all around LA. Last night he went to a movie opening. He's seen all the museums, beaches, etc. This is truly a case of being content with a vibrant campus, and slowly but surely venturing out. </p>
<p>Personally, I'm glad his school has housing all 4 years, whether in a House or a Univ owned apartment.</p>
<p>I hate living in cities. They might be nice to visit but the more I stay in them the more I wish I was deaf. I'm content in my rural location. I don't need city entertainment to keep interested. There's plenty of stuff to do and I don't even do them because I find life here in general to be more than enough.</p>
<p>"The Boston school doesn't have the same appeal for him, but he really likes the city. "</p>
<p>Go to the school that feels right. There is plenty of time to move to Boston after graduation or for grad school.</p>
<p>I echo the sentiment of previous posters that it depends on the kid--however, son is at an insular campus w/o the big city. He really does not have the time to leave campus--he is carrying a full load each semester and has quite a bit of studying to do. In fact, he mentioned recently that he really had no desire at this point to live off-campus. His dorm is very conveniently located to dining halls and on campus restaurants as well as his classes. He seems very comfortable with his surroundings and does not miss the big city life. But----it really does depend on the kid!</p>
<p>Mathmom makes a good point about being in a large city, yet finding herself staying around campus. All my son's friends are saying how great Ohio State and the city of Columbus will be. They imagine themselves going to numerous concerts and pro-sporting events. Only one little problem, I think they'll quickly learn that mommy and daddy aren't going to fund all the wonders of the "big" city.</p>
<p>PHgal, when my son was applying to schools last year, he felt as your friend does, that he wanted an urban campus. Like your friend, I couldn't get S to believe that a campus makes it own events and entertainments. </p>
<p>S's top two choices were in large cities. But he also applied to several LACs pretty much in the middle of nowhere. He ended up at Carleton, which he loves. I think he chose it because it's only 30 minutes or so from Minneapolis-St. Paul, but he's only been into the city once during school, although my H, S, and I made several excursions there when we dropped S off in September. I also think the fact that Northfield, while a small town, has some nice eating places and is easy to get to from campus (like, uh, right next to campus) helps. S enjoys being able to get around without a car.</p>
<p>Panhandlegal-- this location issue was a pivotal quality for my son last year in deciding between Tufts & Colgate. He was accepted to & liked both schools, and was having a very hard time deciding between the two in early April. He had been to Boston the prior summer at a Berklee College music summer session & absolutely loved the city and the freedom of wandering about on the subway, so I honestly thought it was a done deal for Tufts. However, someone said something to him which made him really think....& by the way, he probably would not have thought much about this until actually confronted with such a decision. That person (it certainly wasn't wise Papa Chicken) said something to this effect: "You'll have your whole life probably living in or near a city; why not spend your 4 years of college in spot that you'd likely not have much of a chance to experience again?" That notion, combined with a growing appreciation for a certain school spirit that seems to permeate many rural "bubble" schools like Colgate stuck out in the middle of nowheresville, flipped him over to wanting the rural bubble experience. It was remarkable how the lightbulb went off. He's only a freshman, so we'll see if he gets bored....so far so good with absolutely no regrets.</p>
<p>Mathmom's Cambridge is different from most small towns where LACs are located. Even back in the 1960s, when it was much less bustling than it is now, Cambridge had lots of attractions that are just not available in smaller towns. It was rather a shock to us when we lived for a year in a midwestern college town surrounded by corn fields. When a symphony orchestra visited, everybody dressed for a gala occasion. Over the last ten years, we've visited quite a few towns which our Cambridge-raised kids felt were too small.<br>
It is precisely because Cambridge has so much to offer that students do not feel they have to go into Boston all that often. But it's also nice that it's there.</p>
<p>S and chums are trying to organize an end-of-term outing to a Boston restaurant. And as I hear details, one other attraction of Boston-area colleges comes to mind: the other colleges. Several of the chums have GFs or BFs who are students at nearby schools.</p>
<p>True, Cambridge offers a lot, but I didn't really even take advantage of Cambridge except to a very limited extent. I spent 90% of my time taking advantage of things going on on campus.</p>
<p>S, does, too. Harvard, being larger and more urban (and having a longer history and larger endowment) offers a great deal more than S1's rather large LAC. There's a surfeit of things to do on campus. A great deal more than the very large midwestern uni we were at several decades ago. The symphony orchestras came mostly because the uni had built a wonderful concert hall. But I remember some postdocs and grad students making plans to drive three hours to go a "decent" restaurant. I'm told things have improved since then. We we arrived, we were informed--rightly, it turned out--, that the best food and service was to be had in the restaurant run for the benefit of students in the hotel management school. Restaurants are definitely not lacking in Harvard Square! Nor are good movies, between the Harvard Square and Kendall Square cinemas as well as the Brattle and the Harvard Film Archives.
As for concerts and plays, there is an overabundance of them (especially when S's chums are in the orchestra or choir). I can only be thankful that S does not overindulge!</p>