@TiggerDad - did Harvard Magaine characterize/label them as “failed” Harvard graduates?
I imagine Williams is one of those schools for which kids make a large part of their decision based on its location: you can either take the cold and isolation, or you can’t. But man, academically, is there a better school in the US? The tutorial method they offer – 2 students, 1 prof – seems look it would be so awesome.
There is also the stigma that all LACs face: the relative lack of awareness outside of their state or region.
@TiggerDad , did prestige/awareness of the school play a part in his Princeton decision, or was it all about fit? (was the isolation of Williams, and/or maybe the small size, a con?)
@Hoggirl - Not exactly in that term, “failed,” but why else would they feature all the cases of Harvard graduates washing high rise windows, driving taxis, etc.? To brag what successful graduates they produced? Would you prefer that your child, after all the money, time and effort spent, end up as a hamburger flipper, taxi driver, construction laborer? Is that why you sent your child to whatever the college? There’s a difference between being elitist and wanting your child to succeed. I’m all for the latter but don’t care much for the former. I hope I made my point clear.
@prezbucky - In all honesty, I’d be lying if “prestige” had no role in his decision. I have yet to meet a high school kid who had had chosen the college based strictly on the educational quality alone. They’re naturally impressionable and malleable. Reputations, USNWR rankings, and such seep into their consciousness like ivy. Having said that, though, we’ve had some quality discussions on what’s best for him from all different angles, from his choice of study to his long-term goal. Between Williams and all other colleges, our best compromise is Princeton based on all seriously considered factors. I still feel almost 100% assured of my son’s success if he decided on Williams. I’m a bit anxious with his choice of Princeton. But, as I said, I’m not the one who’s going to college. It’s his choice and he will have to be responsible for his choices he makes throughout his life.
@prezbucky - Williams, oh my… If there’s an ideal college, that’s Williams. You asked, “academically, is there a better school in the US?” I’ve been to arguably the best colleges in the world, but I bow to Williams. It’s extremely unfortunate that such LAC’s don’t get the recognition they absolutely deserve.
Well, I don’t think any university combines academic excellence and undergrad focus quite as well as Princeton. So if it isn’t a LAC, at least he’s at Princeton. 
@prezbucky - Just can’t argue with you, can I?
Why don’t we use a different metric to compare universities. If more people buy a particular brand its probably better than the other brands. Similarly, won’t a school with more applicant be better than one with fewer applying ? UCLA will beat any other university hands down.
@CA94309 - Well, that’s like saying if more people shop at Walmart than Gucci, Walmart is better store. What I prefer is to get rid of all rankings and hype so that college shoppers get to truly evaluate each school’s quality of education and resources that are most conducive to the student’s probably chance at success.
@prezbucky My kid will go to Stanford, but I agree with you. If I am honest, I feel comfortable in saying that in terms of quality of education, Stanford is a top 20 among all colleges (I would say the same for Harvard) and top 5 in the prestige factor. I definitely understand why some would choose P and Y or Williams or Pomona or Rice over H or S. For us, S was ideal due to my kid liking S, not because he thought Stanford was the best school in the world. I encouraged my kid to seriously consider a top Honors College also, but when your kid wants to go to Stanford and we can financially afford to send him, as a parent, you just support him and be happy for him.
I totally agree with penn95
Nowadays, Harvard always compares its stat with Stanford not YP. When I read the crimson, I can feel what school they feel as a rival no matter what other school parents claim.
Some of these threads are like Infinite loops with no break statement. CC should have a contest for how many times the same statements can be recycled?
There are so many fantastic colleges in the United States beyond the handful continually discussed on CC.
False. Higher popularity leads to higher quality. The quality of an undergraduate institution is primarily, if not exclusively, a function of its ability to attract talent. All things being equal, the biggest driving force behind college decisions is peer interaction. Top talent begets more top talent, and so on. If one school attracts better talent than the other, then the former is by definition better than the latter. Stanford wins approximately 60% and 75% of its cross-admit battles against Yale and Princeton, respectively. Basically, this means that Stanford is successfully competing against Yale and Princeton for the same students; consequently, Stanford is getting a greater share of its Plan A students while Yale and Princeton have to settle for a disproportionate share of their Plan B’s, C’s, etc. Not to mention, Stanford has higher yield than either Yale or Princeton, which again implies that it is winning a larger share of its first choice students and losing a smaller share to other schools, whereas the reverse is true for Yale and Princeton.
Also, it should be noted that the reasons for Stanford’s popularity are completely irrelevant when we’re discussing quality. Maybe prospective students prefer California. Maybe they prefer Cardinal over blue or orange and black. Maybe they prefer Trees to bulldogs and tigers. Who knows? At the end of the day, all that matters is that Stanford is actually beating and out-recruiting Yale and Princeton for these students. And insofar as greater talent (derived from popularity) leads to greater quality, S > YP.
Now, of course, you could try to dispute the causal connection between talent and quality. But then the burden is upon you to provide a more objective definition of “quality.” Up-thread, all attempts to define “quality” seem to reflect personal, subjective and idiosyncratic biases that aren’t governed by any general or logically coherent principles.
@TiggerDad “Would you prefer that your child, after all the money, time and effort spent, end up as a hamburger flipper, taxi driver, construction laborer? Is that why you sent your child to whatever the college? There’s a difference between being elitist and wanting your child to succeed. I’m all for the latter but don’t care much for the former. I hope I made my point clear.”
No, probably not, but if that was what he chose to do, I wouldn’t label him a failure as long as he was happy, well-adjusted, self-supporting, and had a good moral character.
I do understand your point. I just think my definitions of success and failure are different than yours.
I think it’s important to remember that ultimately, college is just more “school,” no matter where a student goes. Although a particular school can determine the course of one’s life, it usually doesn’t—the four years come to an end, and students are launched into the “real world” (or further education). For most, which “elite” school they attend won’t matter much. My son had his choice of the very top schools and picked Stanford; I doubt the ultimate outcome of his life would vary much if he’d chosen Harvard, Yale, or Princeton. (For what it’s worth, I always thought a small LAC would be a better fit for him, but I wasn’t the one making the decision.) Whatever school students choose, their lives usually continue far beyond the four years at college. And in this tier of schools, it really doesn’t matter, outcome-wise, which particular one they choose—they all offer great opportunities, experiences, courses, professors, peers, and alumni networks.
Good weather probably helps quality of the school because happier people probably makes the school better. So, yeah, I think good weather is a positive factor in creating a happier or less depressed group of students and professors. Given a similar level of schools, I have no problem choosing the one with a nicer weather.
Re: 33
- How do we define academic talent -- test scores among enrolled students? There, HYP > Stanford. GPA? I'll have to look those up, but I imagine they're pretty even. So how exactly are Stanford students more academically talented -- at least, objectively/quantitatively -- regardless of yield?
- I don't think that the quality of student fundamentally changes the quality of education provided by the school. Academic quality is primarily a function of teaching quality, class size (though it's more of a factor to some than others...), research opportunities in applicable fields, close academic contact with professors, and academic resources available. You might say that smarter students will improve the quality of classroom discussion and academic output, but again, they are paying to be taught. The onus is on the school to teach them, not vice-versa.
Obviously HYPSM are of roughly equal quality regarding students, teachers and resources. I wanted to make that point because I felt you were giving far too much weight to student quality in terms of judging the academic quality of a school. (If I mischaracterized/misunderstood your opinion on the matter, I apologize.)
I agree that there are many reasons why students choose their schools, from sports scene to party scene to academic fit (as they see it…), to many other potential motives; and location and weather may have nothing to do with some kids’ choice of school. But you have to admit, California is hot (and… warm…) these days.
Stanford doesn’t view Princeton as competition. Princeton might though:)
I find it very interesting, a phenomenon in itself, that whenever a college entrant asks a “which college should I choose?” question that pops up quite frequently on top college forums at this time of the year," the responses are quite different from those who are affiliated with Stanford than any from HYP. There are always two or three zealous supporters of Stanford, I noticed, that use such questions as opportunities to promote, gloat and self-aggrandize Stanford instead of offering critical insights based on their knowledge, information and wisdom in guiding the person in the right direction. For them, Stanford is simply THE BEST in everything. For them, it’s all about the question of who has greater prestige and, of course, it’s Stanford, and it has to be. Reading these threads, I can’t help cringing with a sense of embarrassment. It’s the feeling one gets when one encounters nouveau riche, those who have never had tasted ever being on top of something, anything, in their entire lives before suddenly finding this new riche and HAS TO tell someone, anyone, about this overwhelming joy and happiness. They spend inordinate amount of time digging up how many Nobel Prize winners the school is associated with, which on the Fortune billionaire list that graduated from the school, study every school (and department) rankings that ever existed, and how many NCAA National Championships the school won, etc. as the new, all consuming passion.
When someone asks a question about which college he or she choose, please stop embarrassing yourselves and stick to the original topic and offer your best insights, knowledge and experience in guiding the person.
Just my 2 cents.