<p>I think the idea that Cornell should admit less students to improve its prestige is laughable at best and an insult to the founding principles of the university at worst. The endowed colleges are already 'selective' to a degree on par with most of the lower Ivys anyway. </p>
<p>Perhaps you forgot the part where Ezra Cornell wrote ""My greatest care now is how to spend this large income to do the greatest good to those who are properly dependent on me, to the poor and to posterity." And the way he set about doing that was to found an university that would offer a world class education to the most amount of qualified students it could accommodate.</p>
<p>For better or worse, Cornell's basic principles are vastly different from those of rival universities and if one feels that those very principles somehow add up to a worse university, then he should apply elsewhere.</p>
<p>However, Cornell should launch a 'marketing drive', for the lack of a better term. It seems that around here, HYP need no description, Columbia is great because of its location, Penn has Wharton, Brown is super-liberal, Dartmouth is undergraduate focused, while Cornell is the cold place where stressed out students kill themselves. The university does not deserve this reputation.</p>
<p>because of the various colleges. It all gets averaged to be one big 'university acceptance rate.' While the acceptance rate for CALS or Hotel School or ILR etc.. could have been much higher, the acceptance rate for arts and sciences was below 15%..</p>
<p>
[quote]
Come on people !!!! We need to set our ambitions high if we're to remain competitive. I mean ... some Dartmouth kid has already figured out how to chug 6 beers in 10 seconds....
YouTube - Dartmouth student drinks 6 cups of beer in under 10 seconds
Can't we at least try to top that???
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Damn. At least RJD2 (background music to that video) is playing at Cornell.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I can't imagine how anyone could chug 6 beers in 10 seconds. that's .6 seconds per beer...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You mean to say, .6 beers per second. Which is still an impressive feat.</p>
<p>I love Cornell and all, but this thread seems to indicate that the school is stretching its resources too thinly by continually accepting such (comparatively) massive amounts of undergrads. Given this, it is indeed questionable why Cornell chooses to be the least selective of its peers. I know that I'm not alone in my disappointment in regard to financial aid. It also doesn't help Cornell's image that some people in this thread (CayugaRed) seem to think it's sacrilegious to challenge his or her interpretation of the school's motto.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And yet somehow Penn is supposed to have a better social, intellectual, and emotional environment because their students, on average, got 2 more questions right.
[/quote]
Yes, thats exactly why Penn is better than Cornell. I couldn't have said it any better myself :)</p>
<p>There are two schools in the Ivy League, Penn and Columbia, that have been able to revamp their images in the last 10-20 years to attract more students and become more selective. Columbia and Penn were both able to do this through gentrification. Both were in very bad areas years ago but by kicking out the poor people, adding lots to campus security, and spending tons of money to improve the surrounding neighborhoods, Penn and Columbia were able to shake off some of the fears parents and prospective students had about the areas. That led to more applicants and that led to stronger classes and more selectivity.</p>
<p>All Cornell has to do is start a new marketing campaign. Global Warming is helping with the cold thing. The nets under the bridges really scream suicide stereotype though. The increasing prestige of AEM should be helping though.</p>
<p>I agree...everyone knows that cornell right now is at the lower rung of the Ivy league, until it can take the major marketing campaign that some of you are suggesting.</p>
<p>I for one think that, out of eight fabulous schools, one needs to be the worst....so why bicker about the bad and instead focus on the good. Its still the ivy league, even if some people forget.</p>
<p>I really love you,
but you love another Ivy.
When I see you,
I can't close my eyes.
I just want you to say how much you care about me.
But you love another Ivy.
I just want to hear "I love Cornell" out of your mouth.
I hear it in my mind,
It's just like a sound.
But it's just a dream,
Because you love another Ivy...</p>
<p>
[quote]
Yes, thats exactly why Penn is better than Cornell. I couldn't have said it any better myself
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Don't you think your attitude is kind of supercilious?</p>
<p>Yes, I checked my tone before I posted this.</p>
<p>The reason Cornell does not wish to market itself is that it doesn't need to. By marketing itself, it will ultimately attract many students who harbor absolutely no enthusiasm or love for the university. By NOT marketing itself, it will attract zealous students, like me, who truly love this school. Schools are not meant to be business. They don't need to market themselves. Unfortunately, many universities misunderstand their missions, their non-profit missions.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I know that I'm not alone in my disappointment in regard to financial aid. It also doesn't help Cornell's image that some people in this thread (CayugaRed) seem to think it's sacrilegious to challenge his or her interpretation of the school's motto.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Andrew Dickson White set a very deliberate, egalitarian tone for the school under his presidency that was a breath of fresh air relative to the stuffy New England colleges of the day. I consider it one of Cornell's strongest points that this tone -- a tone that shrugs off conversations of 'selectivity' and 'elitism' -- exists strongly on campus to this day.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Andrew Dickson White set a very deliberate, egalitarian tone for the school under his presidency that was a breath of fresh air relative to the stuffy New England colleges of the day. I consider it one of Cornell's strongest points that this tone -- a tone that shrugs off conversations of 'selectivity' and 'elitism' -- exists strongly on campus to this day.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>When Ezra Cornell and Andrew White founded the University, were they really thinking, "Gee, 143 years from now, I want all people to know that I want to accept as many people as possible so that we don't seem elitist even if it means that our resources are spread thing among our students"? Of course not.</p>
<p>What they were thinking is that any person should be able to find instruction in any study without regards to their race, gender, creed, etc. This is the context in which the university was founded, and that was a breath of fresh air relative to the stuffy New England colleges of the day. It was certainly not the idea "We should accept as many people as possible so we don't seem elitist, even if resources get spread too thin" that provided a breath of fresh air. Resources are just getting spread too thin and I don't think we're doing ourselves a favor by accepting as many students as we can. Screw acceptance rate and prestige. Cornell should accept less kids so that more resources get spread among its students. There are tons of students who are unhappy with their financial aid packages and it's just going to come back to bite Cornell in the ass when it comes time for alums to give back to the university.</p>
<p>You can accept less students and not be elitist. Look at Brown. I mean we're already somewhat selective as it is. But does that make us elitist? Of course not. You all are confusing the two. There is a definite difference between being selective and elitist.</p>
<p>I do think it's amazing that Cornell can offer its resources to as many qualified students as possible. I appreciate its mission and its effort, and most importantly, its accessibility.</p>
<p>If the question is-- is Cornell stretching its financial/other resources too thin by admitting too many students?-- idk how we can know this better than the admissions people/whoever's in charge of this.</p>
<p>If the question is --should cornell choose to admit less, despite having adequate resources, in order to boost selectivity-- just, no.</p>