<p>Alert the media is right,lol…what i am trying to understand is why if all things equal,money,classes,etc…why anyone would pass on an MIT type school for a lesser school…particularly when you know beforehand what each school is all about…and since applications aren’t free,for most cases…now if you tell me these went to another ‘selective’ type school,ok… Or perhaps they couldn’t make the tuition for MIT??? Easy to decide not to go somewhere when u can’t afford it</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Are you suggesting that the way to select from among schools that you’ve been admitted is simply to rank them according to USNWR and select the highest one that you got into, because it’s the highest?</p>
<p>And don’t tell, let me guess, at what rank does a school become “lesser” than an MIT? #10? #15? #20? #30? #50?</p>
<p>I think that the answer is that people don’t always behave “rationally” (whether this is an instance of that is your call)… and that’s OK. We’re people, after all, and life isn’t black and white.</p>
<p>qdogpa, I have long said that if my kids were to (hypothetically) get into all of the top 20 universities and all of the top 20 LAC’s, I would be pretty much indifferent about those choices – they’d all be great choices and they should make decisions based on personal fit and preferences and not whether one is #8 and the other #17. Of course, I have my personal favorites within that group, but that has very little to do with ratings and more about campus styles / cultures that aren’t personally appealing to me.</p>
<p>Are you suggesting there would be a different way? That you’d automatically have to go with the very highest?</p>
<p>Listen ,if they went to a top 100 school, i could care less…what i amtrying to understand is why turn down a school like MIT if everything else is equal…i am assuming from posts these grads went to a state school…and this i don’t understand…</p>
<p>The words “rich”, “snobby” and “elitist” need to be unlinked. I know some “rich” people who are NOT "snobby or “elitist”. They are comfortable in their own skin, and therefore don’t have a need to advertise their wealth. I know some “snobby” and “elitist” people who don’t have two pennies to rub together. “Snobby” and “elitist” people, whether or not they are “rich” need to create a certain appearance for the outside world. They really, really NEED to let you know they have the right stuff. They are NOT comfortable in their own skin. “Snobby” and “elitist” people believe that only the particular brands that they use or believe in are “worthy”.</p>
<p>The words “rich”, “snobby” and “elitist” don’t really describe colleges. They describe people. There are terrific colleges and universities at every price point, and in every area of the country. “Snobby” and “elitist” come into play when snobby/elitist people refuse to recognize that other people, or other parts of the country, have different views of what constitutes a terrific college, or a terrific education.</p>
<p>Yes, I stated in my post, both of these students went to state schools… UVa and GMU. What I don’t understand is why do YOU have to understand THEIR choice?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Because nothing is ever completely equal.</p>
<p>Qdogpa…Our D applied to several of the ivies because there were attributes about each she liked. She applied to two publics (OOS) because there were things she liked about them as well (sports, tradition, Greek scene, etc.). She applied to one LAC because of their repitation of being generous with merit money and location. She applied to several elite privates each for different reasons (location, great science programs, internship opportunities, etc.). She applied to one school because of it’s religious-centered curriculum. Her “ranking” when the acceptances came back, had absolutely nothing to do with USNWR rankings as you seem to think it should; she ranked in terms of what was most important to her (as do many kids). Weather, for example, was a big deal to her; hence, she turned down some cold climate schools simply because she thought, “Yes, I applied, and yes, I could be happy; however, I also got into school A and it’s in a warmer climate and it has X, Y, and Z.” We don’t qualify for F/A of any kind and explained $ needn’t drive or dictate her choice (influence, perhaps, but not dictate 
). My point is that there are LOTS of kids/families like us; I recognize she has to choose where she’ll be most satisfied based upon criteria she’s established for herself.</p>
<p>It’s much more beneficial to attend HYP schools as they open doors that most other schools just can’t.</p>
<p>To be frank, my kids could choose a school they like, if school´s rankings are about the same, but they are not going to go to a school ranked 50 over 15 due to weather, location, sports…People could be dimissive about those rankings, but there is a link between how rigorous a school is vs its ranking. When I am paying 50+K/year for their education, they could suck it up with some of those “fit” issues. I see going to school as getting a good education, everything else is gravy.</p>
<p>I went to a rich LAC many years ago. There were a lot of wealthy kids and I was on FA. Yes, it was uncomfortable at times for me, but I got a great education, and that´s what mattered at the end of day.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is where I and others on this thread would disagree with you. Here in Atlanta, having a UGA degree will get you much further than an HYP degree. The good ole’ boy network still exists in most of mainstream America.</p>
<p>We all like to think we are main stream, and what we do is normal.</p>
<p>^
I should have said non NE or CA people. There seems to be a different mindset between the two groups.</p>
<p>Sorry, but if Everything is equal, choosing either state school mentioned over MIT is ludicrous…they are fantastic schools in their own right,but MIT is significantly better…Why bother applying there? As i mentioned many times, it is isn’t a safety school they passed over,or an equivalent school…there is some important fact missing from their choice…</p>
<p>Jc, i understand your scenario, but if you choose a lesser school(using the term loosely) and KNOWING the climate ,etc, why apply to the better schools if you won’t attend there…as an applicant,you likley know which are serious reaches,which schools are likley, and which are so called safeties…so if you get accepted to the reach,and decline(all things equal), seems like a waste of time</p>
<p>qdogpa, you mentioned upthread that students probably have visited the school before they applied. There are many people who for various reasons do NOT visit beforehand; can’t afford to, or simply choose to wait until acceptances are in hand and then visit. At that point the “fit” factor can come into play. Simply look at the threads here on CC on reasons that students don’t look at/won’t look at schools. One might go to MIT and decide the ugly concrete architecture is something they won’t want to look at for 4 years, and then choose to go to a #25 ranked school instead (GASP!)</p>
<p>The people you described would be in the minority.</p>
<p>^
Maybe for the CC community, but I’m betting NOT as a whole.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Understood that it exists in your mainstream America in the ** United States of Denial **</p>
<p>NE and CA are for Aliens who believe in quality education.</p>
<p>No, this is the norm here as well. If a flight is involved you may visit a handful of top contenders. If it’s a reach you may not visit until you have an admit. Every family is different. If your student is heavily involved in sports, or ECs where their time is limited then trips are even harder and you plan only for top choices. Every student is different and families make the choice that is right for them, but don’t assume that the rest of the world operates on a NY to Boston shuttle.</p>