<p>friedokra,
The tone of your post was that those who want to go to "elite" schools are going only for the prestige, and that an "elite" school (Ivy or otherwise) could NEVER be the best fit for a particular child. This is why you got the backlash that you did.</p>
<p>There are many excellent schools at which students receive superb educations. But please do not try to convince me that all schools are of the same caliber or the same quality. Perhaps the article is misusing the term "elite", and rather should have said "selective". If "elite" was used to mean "the choice or best of anything considered collectively, as of a group or class of persons" then perhaps the word was a poor choice, since "best" is subjective. If "elite" was used to mean that more people are trying to get in, then the article is correct. And it has little to do with which SAT scores are used to fill a class.</p>
<p>There is absolutely no question that a Bucknell education is inferior to a Williams Amherst Swat education. You can come to grips with that now or learn it for certain when it is time to apply to a top graduate school, or interview for a job. You get a wonderful education at Bucknell but seriously it is not the same. I wish my toyota was a rolls but it is not and I will just have to live with it.</p>
<p>I am not sure that there is an increased desire to go to Catholic colleges over other colleges. My sense is that applications are up for all schools. Do you have statistics that back that statement up? </p>
<p>Regarding BC's "national football championship", Doug Flutie made the Hail Mary pass in 1984, the year he won the Heisman trophy. That pass was made in a regular season game against the University of Miami. That is over 20 years ago. The following year BC did experience an increase in applications. However, since that year they have more than doubled their applications.</p>
<p>Over the last 10 years, the period in question, applications to BC have experienced their largest growth. Further, since then they have increased their average SAT scores by quite a bit, something like 200+ points, not the 20-30 points experienced in the last few years. </p>
<p>There are a number of private schools that have seen a surge in applications, not just schools with large athletic programs. The top 5 private schools based upon the number of applications are: USC, NYU, BU, Northeastern, BYU and BC. I do not believe that NYU would be considered a school that is growing their application base through athletics.</p>
<p>Guess we just disagree about the strength of the academics at a school that has athletic scholarships. Athletics can be used to attract high achieving students and athletes alike.</p>
<p>Of course that is always the question. Is an Italian designer dress really any better than the one from Penny's. They both serve the purpose and in many cases the materials used are not that different. At my childs high school 8 wonderful students got accepted at Bucknell, one at Williams, and the kids all understand the difference, not in a mean way or a jealous way but in a pragmatic way. Where you go to school does not dictate where you end up in life, but certain schools are better than others, and in some cases that difference has been created over a couple hundred years.</p>
<p>Eagle, Good post about how athletics can greatly improve a college's reputation, desirability, and selectivity. And not just for athletes. Many kids love the atmosphere of the big game day & seek that when choosing schools. </p>
<p>At d's all-girl Catholic, 20 girls a year used to get into BC, out of a class of 120 or so. I'm curious to know if that many are still successful. One of the school's uber-students with tippy-top stats and four years of varsity letters was just rejected at every ivy to which she applied. She's headed to BC in the fall. This is an anecdote I'm sure is being repeated all over the country. BC is absolutely improving the "competitiveness" of the applicants, both in academic stats & ECs.</p>
<p>Well....I have not been here very long, at least posting...only perusing some popular threads and it just struck me as elitist and all this nervosa about "getting into" elite schools and it all struck me as sort of weird. There is no doubt that had my D had clearly admissable stats for Harvard, Yale, Princeton she would have dropped her name in the hat and seen what they did with it. And I would NEVER criticize an institution on academic grounds. I was criticizing the admissions process. An admissions office is not the same as a department and its faculty.</p>
<p>If I come across as a little edgy, perhaps its my age (I am between 50 and 60 somewhere), and its my upbringing. To help you all understand where I am coming from I will offer this about me:</p>
<p>I come from a lower middle class...working class family. 4 kids in my family growing up: two of us completed college, two did not finish. The two who did also went to graduate school...and I went to a PRESTIGIOUS law school (based entirely on merit.) I served my country in uniform for 6 years and was a non commissioned officer (meaning I enlisted, was not drafted, and did not attend a service academy). I worked three jobs in college while also collecting the GI Bill to pay for it. I still had to take student loans, which I paid off completely and on time. My parents offered me nothing to go to college. I paid for my own car when I got out of the military and paid my own gas, insurance, food etc. I often did without because I simply was broke. But I worked very hard in college and it paid off. I paid for law school with loans and with money I had saved after working a few years after college. I grew up with clean clothes, food on the table, a stable family and good friends. I wouldnt change a thing about it. But I also saw and experienced the wealthy types around me growing up and it left an indelible mark on my persona: how they operate and what they expect and how they treat people. Of course, one cannot over generalize. And there are bad people in all parts of society. I am talking about attitude and arrogance.</p>
<p>My postings were meant to be encouraging to those who did not make the Ivy ranks or the super elite schools, and to tell those in the process that character trumps credentials all through life.</p>
<p>If you are offended by my remarks, then I am sorry. And yes, I admit my bias towards hard working, non privileged kids. But regardless of a person's social status, I look closely at their character. If they are polite, hard working, and treat others with respect and dignity and above all are HONEST, then they get my seal of approval. Whether they drive a BMW or an old Toyota Tercel.</p>
<p>Have a nice day and good luck to all. The sheer numbers of applications is simply staggering and that means for a lot of unhappy campers along the way.</p>
<p>Well said friedokra... It seems that this generation not only expects an elite education, but also expects someone else to pay for it. I am about to turn the big 50 and as I look back on the first half-century of my like I realise the things I value most are those I earned for myself. I don't blame the kids, it's the parents who perpetuate the cycle of self entitlement and greed.</p>
<p>I disagree strongly with your comments. The opportunity to get a great education is more or less equal at many schools, including many of those ranked at or below Bucknell's level and those ranked around Swarthmore, etc. A very competitive admissions environment and a tight job market for professors have reduced the difference in overall quality at these schools. All of these schools have very intelligent students and top professors. Unfortunately, the USNWR rankings foster a tendency to create and exaggerate unimportant statistical differences among colleges, sometimes diistracting us from considering which college would be the best fit for a particular student. The rankings do provide a convenient excuse for some parents and students to brag about themselves at the expense of others, much like some of the threads on this website.</p>
<p>What matters far more to a college student's educational experience at any of these very good colleges is the level of engagement that the student brings to that experience. Many great high school students turn into mediocre college students at top colleges. Those top colleges turned out simply not to be the best schools for them. Graduate and professional schools generally prefer top students at good schools to mediocre students at top ranked schools. </p>
<p>I graduated from an Ivy League university and a top 10 law school. In college, I was struck by the number of kids with great high school credentials who were mediocre college students. Some of them had been very good students at academically inferior high schools. Some of them were spoiled kids with prep school connections who lacked the commitment to achieve in college. Some of them simply lost their sense of direction for reasons that cannot be easily identified. In my law school class, many of the top students came from lesser ranked colleges and universities; those top students landed the top clerkships and jobs even though their colleges were not highly ranked</p>
<p>Boojum, I think it's because college costs are not possible to handle on one's own if you are a kid. I started at NJIT in 1976 & switched to Rutgers after two years. Tuition was $600 per year. Easily doable with part time employment. Today's Rutgers student has to pay $19,000 per year. Not easily doable. Double that $$ and then some for the elites. Virtually impossible for a kid to earn enough.</p>
<p>markr
I think you may have proven my point. To lend credibility to your well stated position you felt compelled to point out that you attended an Ivy and a top 10 law school... thereby lending credence to an argument that could have stood on its own merits. My Rolex tells the time just like a Timex...but its not...I have one child at a flagship state u and one at the top LAC and I love them both more than anything else in the world...however one is getting a better education than the other... you may choose not to believe my opinion because I attended a state U undergrad and a top 10 MBA so your credentials trump mine...well sort of...</p>
<p>sadly they both were not accepted at the top school, however both schools are better than Bucknell, which sounds like where your child is stuck going if as they say in my line of work you are talking your position...</p>
<p>my point was more about "fit" than about "prestige" or "rankings". I am NOT saying that Harvard is on a par with Bucknell. What I am saying is that a person can get a superb education at BOTH schools and fit and character trump credentials, in my view.</p>
<p>If someone gets into an Ivy, I am the first to congratulate them. Not snear at them. But I also congratulate someone who got into Bucknell, or PennState, or Iowa State etc. </p>
<p>My D got into a very good private school and is delighted (though the financial aid is not very good, frankly). Its a superb fit, from what we can glean and "feel". We hope and pray she will survive and thrive.</p>
<p>Our society is far too credentialist. No, that is not a loser's attitude either. I have done very well for myself, thank you very much. I went to a prestigious law school...based ENTIRELY on my own merit, having graduated high honors undergrad, working very hard and also having 4 wonderful years at my undergrad school...which I wouldnt trade for anything. I still have friends from then and professors I keep up with (those still alive).</p>
<p>It is a well known FACT that being top10% getting into college does not necessarily equate to being top 10% at college.....because 90% of those admitted wont be. You know what I mean?</p>
<p>When I hire people I focus on ethics and character. Credentials are only a superficial aspect of the hiring process.</p>
<p>While I will agree that the country could do well to return to an interest in character, I'm wondering if maybe the last time there was a significant interest in that, was maybe the first half of the 20th century. What I'm saying is, I don't think that any one college or category of college in 2007 has more of a claim on character than another does. Despite some of the mission statements of Catholic colleges, for example, I do not observe that they are producing students or accepting students of finer character than the secular colleges. The same goes for the Ivies vs. down-home-State U.</p>
<p>There have been some recent publicized incidents of character-revealing (in the negative) behavior at various Jesuit colleges, for example. </p>
<p>I think that your last paragraph is the key. I think meeting & interviewing & checking a person's record/past is a better way to determine if you have a character component there than looking at the institutional name on the diploma.</p>
<p>While true that it is best to meet people to get the full measure of who they are there is also a lack of time to meet everyone. Companies, colleges and individuals use all sorts of screens on people. SAT scores, GPA, athlete, musician, membership in a certain club or fraternity, college major, etc. Character is a bit more difficult.</p>
<p>Part of the trouble with the "character" discussion is that the definition is not consistent from person to person. Is it placement in a service organization like the Peace Corp? I guess I would ask how you define character? Probably just as difficult as defining prestige and a topic for another thread.</p>
<p>Well I won't argue with you, Eagle, on those points. (LOL, this character business is actually not my fight, but friedokra's.) I was merely taking issue with what I believed was implied by her posts that "status" colleges do not necessarily produce superior character (agreed), but that possibly non-status colleges do. (Do not agree with that.)</p>
<p>Yes, interviewing doesn't show everything, but it has the potential to show more than the institutional name on a diploma.</p>
<p>In my defense and not that I care that much. My points were never personal until the crack about maybe your child chose the wrong school and should transfer. It is hard to have an intellectual discussion with someone who resorts to personal attacks. My child chose the very best education that was available to him, which is the best any of us can hope for. Why is it people think it is fine to denigrate elite institutions to the benefit of other schools. People love to say... well I know many elite school students who went on to fail and I know many public school students who went on to succeed. While both are true, it is an appallingly discriminatory position to take and since there are many many multiples that did not go to elites it is accepted, mob rule. However in general on average over extended periods of time the elites do in fact choose the right students and those students do in fact receive an education that is held in higher esteem, and is more valuable though not always in monetary terms as studies have shown. This year in particular when many many students did not get into their first choice schools there is a ground swell of efforts to enhance the prestige of lesser regarded schools and attempt to diminish the Ivies and the Little Ivies, if it makes one feel better to do that...it is a free country...but it does not make it true and some of us object.</p>
<p>I agree, no school has the corner of the market on virtue. Or, like character, what that is.</p>
<p>It is really about fit and what fits one person may not fit another. Unfortunately too many of the discussions turn into comments about prestige, rankings and ultimately name calling.</p>
<p>Personally I like the rankings as far as they go. Trouble is that too many people stop there without looking behind the numbers. For the college student, looking for the right fit is the interviewing process.</p>