<p>"as monydad would explain, cornell's biggest asset is its diversity"</p>
<p>Nice to be recognized for contributing to something besides SUNY posts, as has been accused in the past. Not that I deny doing that too.</p>
<p>I would say it a bit differently. A central, inescapable feature of Cornell is this diversity. That's an asset in some ways, to some people, and a detriment in other ways, and other people. Obviously some of the people most likely to thrive at Cornell are those who most see the asset side. And vica versa.</p>
<p>So far, my own kids have sought environments (read LACs) where they seemed more likely to share interests and values with a larger percentage of their fellow classmates and housing-mates than they perceived would be the case at Cornell. Not everyone finds diversity to be a great asset in all contexts. Many other people thrive on it.</p>
<p>If you're going to come- or come back- you should definitely make the most of what's available though. Go and take that nutrition course, or HDFS, or wine tasting, or whatever else is great there that you wouldn't get elsewhere.</p>
<p>ctown, is ILR considered a joke by Cornell students? I'd like to know its reputation and what current students say about the value of its curriculum. Thanks.</p>
<p>SAT scores are definitely lower in the contract colleges. That doesn't settle the debate, but you have to remember that many of the majors in those colleges don't really require any special or different skills that can't be measured by SAT--unlike arch or hotel, which are endowed. For example, the ILR program doesn't really require skills that are very different from, say, a govt major in A&S. So the SAT difference is a valid argument. (Although there are some very "particular" majors in the state schools too--TXA comes to mind as something pretty unrelated to SAT scores.) In my experience, the main difference in AEM, ILR, PAM etc. with their counterparts in the endowed is that the state versions are much more applied to the business world whereas A&S is theoretical. Some would say this is a difference in preference; I would say applied subjects are almost certainly easier than theoretical ones.</p>
<p>I've worked with admissions in a contract college for the past year or so, and the SAT difference is more present in the selected pool than the applicant pool. A high verbal score will help you out in something like ILR, but what is MUCH more important to admissions (and to the other students) is experience in related fields through big-time EC's or internships. More weight is placed on things like these than on a standardized test. ILR has found that it essentially creates a smarter and more driven student body when it places a much stronger focus on things like demonstrated interest. Sure a 800 verbal SAT scorer will do well in ILR, or even a 650 SAT ... what can separate these two students in admissions is what they've done OTHER than the SAT that can really help the school and strengthen the student body. This has been confirmed numerous times and as an admissions counselor told me: "it isn't who we admit ... the real story is who we reject"</p>
<p>This is the way it is, and if you don't believe me, just call up some adcoms yourself.</p>
<p>I donno...I guess Dionysus had a bit too much wine when he wrote that post lol</p>
<p>Thanks for defending me tho guys. Good stuff :)</p>
<p>To worrywart: ILR is the top program of it's type (and extremely unique). I don't think many people would ever make fun of it. It even has it's own career fair (so a great degree to have for a job [I guess that's already obvious lol...I mean it is a Cornell]...if you can pull off a really good gpa I can't think of anything stopping u from getting an absolutely amazing job) and is a great major to study if you are interested in it. If it is ur passion definitely follow it. Best of luck in ur search</p>