@bernie12 – You are correct re: ND. I had several classmates who went that way – took all of the classes needed to meet med school admissions as well as MCAT topics then added classes around that framework. Wash U essentially allows you to do something somewhat similar but you will have a major. Many wind up as Chemistry, Bio, Biochem, etc. majors but you can go down many different paths – from Art to Engineering. We are watching our student as they navigate this course right now.
Beware of methodology: Some surveys will reflect student bodies’ inclination to critique(or not) their own school and that has always existed, especially at the VERY top schools (Go read the Crimson, Princetonian, Maroon, etc. No matter how awesome academically or QOL those schools are, they push for more improvement and call out every weakness. How often do you see students in the school newspaper of other top schools complaining about more than just common social issues or flat out calling out perceived academic weaknesses such as H undergraduate students complaining when its top ranked econ. department is losing ground to S in terms of faculty recruitment or openly criticizing professors by name on their lack of teaching ability? Those very top schools are in a different stratosphere in comparison to many places and have student bodies that are critical and sometimes self-deprecating). Some will find that sort of intensity and cynicism as undesirable, some don’t and it does indeed show up in student surveys like PR. Like you may notice that some schools have their lab facilities have a good rank or that students felt strongly about the library so gave it rave reviews…different strokes for different folks. If anything, PR reflects what the set of students at each school care about most and there general “mood”.
Good list. Also 13, like my daughter’s… with 5 overlaps. Years ago… before the advent of the Common Application, the norm was to likely apply to many fewer schools. Back in my day, it was common to apply to only 3-5. A decade ago, it seemed like 6-8 was more the norm. But now it has sort of become a vicious circle… with so many qualified applicants applying to many more colleges. Now it seems that everyone needs to do the same thing out of an abundance of caution.
I thought it was insane when my first daughter applied to 17 colleges in 2013-14, but then she got rejected by a whopping 12 schools… all of her reaches and all but one of her matches (USC). With her grades, stats, essays, ECs, etc., we had predicted at least 9 admissions out of the 17. We were ultimately glad that she chose to apply to more than the norm. I have spoken to a # of high school seniors applying to college this cycle, and the range seems to be 9-15 so far. Of course, having an early admission to a quality program could modify the need to keep applying elsewhere dramatically.
@IWannaHelp Sorry if you find my comments confusing. They are of course though my own comments and opinions. And any examples given are by definition specific to my personal perspective and/or to those of the singular examples given. I was not intending to draw any dramatic generalizations.
NU is of course a great school and high on my daughter’s list. By the depth of your descriptions about NU, it seems like you either went there or work there or had family who attended. I live in FL, went to college in MD, DC and Italy and travel extensively. NU’s overall reputation, as I have experienced it being discussed, does not necessarily translate as you are describing it however. Yes… its reputation is very strong in the midwest and northeast, but it is much less well known or thought of in the southwest, southeast and northwest. Abroad, it is not very well known at all. Meanwhile, VU’s reputation is consistently on the rise… especially in the southeast. I often hear Vanderbilt, Duke and Rice now mentioned together as being in the same elite category of colleges. Unless you are in the midwest or northeast, NU is likely, and unfairly so, considered a tier below those 3 now. When I do hear about NU, it is usually when people are describing those specialty schools that you mentioned… like the one my daughter is applying to as well. Those schools, especially communication/journalism, drama/theatre and radio/tv/film.
To me, there is also a lot more potentially meant by Technology than just Engineering. As I said above, VU and NU may be a wash in terms of Engineering programs, with VU maybe only being considered stronger in Mathematics. I do consider NU stronger in the natural and biological sciences and with a greater diversity in program offerings involving a # of technological programs. You may personally consider NU stronger across the board in STEM programs. That may even be how it is ranked vs VU. I have just not experienced its reputation as such.
I did not say that NU is similar to JHU per se. I was mainly describing JHU and then drawing comparisons to it in terms of NU and VU. I still contend that NU is more similar to JHU than VU is. It is, in my opinion, simply closer on the spectrum to JHU in a # of areas… and again, I was not just discussing academics. If you read any of my comments above, you will quickly see that I was addressing far more than just the desire to pursue a singular academic program. To me, there is far more to a college selection than just rating or ranking your preferred major there. I am instead evaluating these schools on a host of criteria… from the type of students who choose to attend there, to the campus feel / isolation, to social life in and around campus, to athletics, to greek life, to students being pre-professional in scope, etc. I can certainly say that the people who I have known who attended NU are far more similar in a # of ways to the people I knew at Hopkins versus those that I have known who attended VU.
@bernie12 Exactly… in terms of your NU/JHU description regarding the “feel” there, impact of STEM programs, emphasis on pre-professional, etc. It simple permeates into the college culture at schools like JHU and NU far more than at other elite colleges like Vandy, Duke, Rice, etc.
Rice is weird lol. Very Stanfordesque with kind of a fuzzies vs. non-thing going on but in some senses feels more like a Duke, Rice, and Vanderbilt though (happy and relatively laid back). But I guess that is just the students’ attitude toward the others. To me, basically all of the other D-3 schools “feel” closer to those two though. My school doesn’t have engineering but STEM influence is quite rampant (especially pre-med and now the “entrepreneurship” culture is there, so there are huge hack-a-thons, and things like sustainable technologies have always been big. ALL life sciences departments have their own separate UG research symposia and this didn’t seem common at schools with less STEM majors). WUSTL has a big share of this sort of culture as well. Again, these places tend to simply feel more “STEMy” and academic than some other comparable caliber places. It’s just who they tended to attract and how their programs are organized.
@bernie12 Rice is on my list for sure. I love what people have said about the environment there, and they have some really good STEM offerings. Not too thrilled with the location (humidity is the devil), but it is what it is.
This might sound like a stupid question, but is there a way for me to apply ED to two schools? I know it seems kind of contradictory…
No! You’ll have to pay lots to pull out of a contract with another if you get into either one. Go find an ED1 and ED2 option. Or even test the waters with schools who have non-binding EA plans.
You can do ED1 at rice and ED2 at vandy if you want
@XCjunior2016 What I was intending to do was ED1 at Northwestern and ED2 at Rice. I don’t know if that’s possible. I think I’m just going to apply RD to Vandy since it’s not one of my clear top choices.
EDs do tend to be restrictive… just read the description. Unless you are a questbrdge finalist, where you can apply ED to up to 12 schools (but it is binding if matched), the EA or at least the non-binding ED route may be preferable. Leave yourself options… unless you become 100% certain.
Your experience with NU’s reputation vs Rice/Vanderbilt doesn’t match mine or any international rankings. How would people in Italy know the comparison outside of international rankings is beyond me. Northwestern has a top-10 business school in the world for quite some time whereas R/V don’t really have any world-renowned schools. Also in engineering, NU is top-5 in industrial engineering and management sciences, top-3 in material sciences and top-10 in BME. In civil engineering, its transportation center is considered the best research center in the country. For VU, I am not aware of any engineering department in the top-20. In mathematics, USN has NU at 17th and VU 46th. But somehow you consider their engineering as “wash” and VU may be stronger in math. I went to grad school in engineering, worked as an engineer before switching to finance. But my professional experience has told me nothing on how programs are compared. None of my colleague talk about how programs in different schools are compared even in their fields, let alone others. It’s interesting to me that you have the kind of experience that would let you form an opinion that is so different from published rankings. By the way, published rankings are largely based on reputation rankings among experts in the fields.
The last person that mentioned to me recruiting preferentially out of VU for mathematics was a very high ranking official within Standard & Poor’s Financial Services. He also spoke highly of their economics programs. Everyone develops their own preferences over time. Who knows how those are generated… but they are. Clearly, when people like him are providing their opinion, I am not going to argue and talk about counter-intuitive rankings that show other programs may be better. He is just one industry expert that prefers VU and their training. It is not like he mentioned NU negatively. NU was not even brought up.
In your case, your preference for NU seems to be tied to attending NU… and that is fine. You should be proud of your alma mater. I respect certain aspects and specific programs of mine… JHU, but clearly not to the extent that you do towards Northwestern.
Nothing related to my opinions or perspectives are driven by rankings. I put very little stock in them vs real world experience and the perspectives of those that I know or who attended certain programs, or recruits out of them, etc.
Your approach and manner though in defending NU’s reputation reminds me of many conversations that I had back at Hopkins. You likely would have fit in well there. It also reminds me of prior in-person conversations with an NU alum I know. Many there back at JHU, especially those in STEM programs, enjoyed being intellectually competitive or generally argumentative/combative on a host of intellectual topics. I personally did not.
I recall very negatively the initial onslaught of prep school kids there all saying things like… Well, I went to Choate or Andover or Exeter etc… and my IB scores were… and my SAT was… It got old very fast, especially for those of us who had attended public high schools. I actually had a great deal of trouble finding normal kids in my freshman class to hang out with and was looking to transfer out of JHU early on. And of course none of those kids coming from elite prep schools were among our class’ elites in terms of final class rank or GPA. They all faded away fairly quickly from an academic perspective once at Hopkins. Many even changed their majors because they could not muster the challenge of their chosen program. But none of that stopped them from arguing incessantly about various academic subjects. People like them there at JHU is why I was not there around campus much… why I road-tripped often, and why I left early to enter a JHU BA/MA graduate program.
While I have been to 34 other countries, I cannot recall Northwestern ever being mentioned by anyone when the subject of U.S. universities ever came up. That itself means little though. UChicago has, for example, been brought up often, but I would not recommend it to the OP. I have spoken to many leaders of various industries abroad specifically about their goals to send their children to U.S. colleges. In those conversations, the questioning was driven by them. They were the ones mentioning colleges and various programs within them & asking me and others with me our opinions. It may be disappointing or confusing to you that NU was not among the 10-15 schools brought up or discussed, but that is the simple reality of my own experiences. And it is of course limited to the 50 or so conversations like such over the past 30 years. JHU was of course brought up, and I was very honest about my overall impressions and details about specific programs there too.
But none of this should really impact you or your own impressions derived from personal experience or your research into rankings. NU is certainly a top 10-15 university regardless of those encounters or perspectives and well deserving of your admiration. If my D2 ends up there, I would have no issue with that - especially for the program she would be admitted into.
I am not sure though why you are consistently attempting to belittle VU within a VU thread by trying to negatively compare it with NU and its perceived higher rankings. I merely offered my opinion and the perspective that I have gained over time, including those garnered through others whom I respect. It was initially offered as a comparison among the two schools for someone interested in studying STEM at either.
But maybe you have helped in hidden ways by how you have defended NU. As I said before, my impression of people who studied STEM at NU, albeit a limited sample, seems far more similar to the people I knew studying STEM at JHU than to those studying similar programs at Vandy, Rice and Duke. If this is at all accurate, maybe the OP should consider what type of person they are and want to be around. Clearly, different schools attract certain types of people.
Be thankful that your own experience there at Northwestern left you proud and willing to share your experiences and admiration for NU. Believe me… I wish my alma mater had the same impact on me…
I will leave you with this thought…
I was at an event recently where there were a handful of current Harvard undergrads sitting around and complaining about a variety of issues there. Basically, their consensus opinion was that they thought it was a joke that Harvard was ranked as a top 3 college program, especially when the focus is not on undergraduate education there. It reminded me of all the complaints that my friends and I had about Hopkins while we were there. From a diploma-status perspective, we were glad that JHU was ranked 11th (at the time), but we did not really like or respect the college then and most of us wish we had gone elsewhere. The same is likely true for these Harvard kids. They will be proud of being Harvard alumni eventually, but at least 1/2 of them said that they wish they went elsewhere.
These rankings seem to factor in the perceived quality of graduate programs, research grants, government contracts, etc. into their analysis. None of that really impacts undergraduates. The list should truly focus on the overall undergrad experience/education.
To me… kids disappointed with their college choice is all very sad. College should be the best 4 years of your life. You should truly enjoy your time there. My D1 loves it at USC. Her friends at NYU, Cornell, Dartmouth, UChicago, & Northwestern all seem unhappy or at least discontent so far. At least those at Brown, Duke, Clemson, UNC, Vanderbilt, Rice, Auburn, Yale, Princeton and Stanford seem happy though.
This overall focus on Rank is what is truly silly. Visit these schools, make a true connection and hopefully find a quality school where you fit in and can shine. Decide for yourself. That’s what should be important. Or at least that’s how I see it…
@WWWard @IWannaHelp Regardless of your opinions, I want to thank you guys for your input! What you said, WWWard, was spot on - everyone else, both on this site and not, is going to have their opinions, but I just have to accept the fact that the only one who can truly make this decision is me. Which is slightly terrifying because I know that if I regret my decision, there’ll be no one else to blame but me. So for right now, I’ll just have to sit back, work on my essays, and wait for 3 weeks until i visit NU and Wash U, and see what my impression is!
You’re welcome. Good luck with the process and hopefully these visits help to secure a final decision for you…
@WWWard One final question - is it possible for me to visit a college by myself? My parents are finding it difficult to make time for this, and I also have a little sister who needs to be watched.
Of course. I did so back in the 1980s. I do not see why things would be any different now. You may actually find it easier to do so and explore more effectively and gain real feedback from current students, etc. while solo. As long as your parents allow it (assuming you are not yet 18), I doubt that any college would have an issue with it. Even those visiting with their parents often break off on their own and explore without the parents with them at each step in the process. When I took my D1 to USC, for example, I was only actually with her maybe a third of the time…
@WWWard : I am convinced that Princeton is some magical sweet spot for unusually high academic rigor (as in higher than most peers outside of its immediate company) and quality of life. At first seeing that one in your happy list was weird, but it actually kind of makes sense. It has the benefit of being a relatively small undergraduate focused program, so students have a lot of support and 1 on 1 faculty contact while progressing. Furthermore, teaching may be better when courses are small because more active engagement is facilitated. Some others are good academically but have a happiness partially facilitated by very high grade inflation (Brown, Yale, and Stanford are both worse than Harvard for example).
There are some differences in academics (at least in departments known for strong undergraduate teaching) that stress students out at some schools more than others and that largely contributes to unhappiness. Unless you’re an LAC or a true LAC like university, the fact is that students in the post grade inflation era do not like to have to worry about their grades too much knowing how competitive the job market and professional school access is today along with how much the schools charge. Under so much pressure, being truly academically challenged can be very uncomfortable (anything that may provide the possibility of failure) and some programs at certain schools pride themselves on the ability to induce this discomfort. In addition, the fact that we are in an era where students at top schools have ridiculous board scores is also counter intuitive to such educational paradigms.
I of course believe it has value, but is just kind out-dated and unproductive in higher ed’s (AND the economy’s) current climate (which likely existed since the 80s lol but may be on a different level now). You’ll honestly just tick off the folks who are paying lots of money for a strong education (good teaching, but not “this teacher will kick my behind” and make me pour in sweat for just a decent grade), good quality of life, and the supposed pay-off in the end (easier access to more prestigious career pathways). Bruised egos don’t help either. Most elite schools can easily have this effect in STEM departments (and often econ as well), but some departments at certain schools take it to a different level. Specifically, in such cases, many instructors are so demanding that if that instructor is the only remotely demanding person taken in a term, it would impede or discourage engagement in extracurricular at the same level as one would have if they chose not to take them. Imagine schools where taking 1 or 2 of these instructors along with other like medium level teachers is the norm.
It is a reason why the top tier engineering and sciences schools have a HUGE “whining” culture. It isn’t completely unjustified either. They are almost all STEM, so on average receive lower grades than normal. In addition to that, many instructors are pushing students harder than analogous instructors at other elites. One would worry for their future constantly or at least reflect on how it would be if they went elsewhere. That and the weather at some of these places is the ultimate combo for unhappy (or even depressed) periods. It’s not even half fun and games in certain programs. The students who joined them thought they wouldn’t mind this extra level of intensity and then realize that they would have rather done without it.
*Note that I also see “whining” cultures develop at schools known to be decently challenging but not overwhelming, but then the students underestimated the courses and over-estimate themselves. If the campus life is only “meh” at such places, you’ll see more mixed reviews because students did not get what was anticipated in any arena.
Some schools have struck a balance much better than others relative to the current climate.
^ many good points, @bernie12
Over time, I have put a lot more stock into the notion of and value in happy and well-adjusted students, especially as a means of promoting a healthier and possibly less-competitive or combative learning environment. My daughter’s top wish list of schools seems to mirror that… USC, Stanford, Yale, Brown. They all seem to have a healthy happiness quotient built-in. If Princeton offered a film major, she should have ranked it 3rd due to the points you raise above.
I firmly believe that a happy and well-adjusted student at an excellent school… even if it is not necessarily a top-5 school in that discipline… may actually be able to perform better and possibly learn more. It may be why many top execs now prefer to recruit from such places too… like Rice, Duke and Vanderbilt. Maybe they just got tired of interviewing or dealing with kids who have been overly stressed out and put through the ringer for four straight years. Ultimately… they want to higher quality individuals who can handle the assignments and perform well. And that does not always mean the angst-filled STEM candidate who suffered through what was perceived to be the most rigorous or challenging program. Again… it is four years or your life. You might as well enjoy it some while learning, earning your degree and making networking contacts for your future…
@WWWard " Sadly. the recruit thing isn’t that true unless you are in a fortuitous location (that has easy access to the school, like a Stanford for example). Duke made its top programs more rigorous as it was solidified in the top ranks, so some speculate that Duke is becoming more like some of its hard-edged Ivy peers with a nice campus and a high performing sports programs atmosphere wise. It is a nice mix. But generally, Rice and Vanderbilt are only performing post-grad as well as say Emory, Georgetown, etc (schools in their vicinity). However, admittedly those places are generally comparatively “happy” to some Ivies and more “stressful” schools as well, but what cannot be explained is why they continue to perform as well or better and are less selective. It is definitely because they recruit individuals more interested in co-curricular (can be internships, but are definitely inclusive of many internal fellowship programs hosted by departments, research opps, etc that are more academic leaning) academic engagements that make them more competitive than one would predict based on incoming stats. So I guess two models are to mix “pushing the student” and “getting students who really push themselves” ((and then offer a plethora of options that focus on that outside of traditional socializing, clubs/organizations- Stanford seems to really push this model) then optimize it with their perhaps being more emphasis on academic/co-curricular engagement and/or a more healthy integration of academics and social life. By healthy, I mean, decent intellectual climate that is not too stuffy (as in pretentious and stuck up to the point where it is clear that students are literally attempting to sound “intellectual” because they attend that particular school. We know what some of these schools are), and an integration that doesn’t occur simply because people are too busy with academics to separate the two spheres (basically forcing the students to integrate the two or neglect social life).
As I’ve been saying on here, I think it is more important for students to be informed on what types of difficulties they may be in for when they matriculate these top schools (any of them), because they will differ.
For example, if I am choosing by notoriety of a program, I may want to at least find out what it does beyond being a pipeline. If said programs have a reputation for being very rigorous (as in even more than at peers with smaller or less notarized programs), do they all handle that the exact same way? How supportive is the environment toward your academic success? If it is a hard program, do you at least have good access and mentoring by faculty? Do they just throw you in giant lecture halls, lecture at you (perhaps these schools make use of very successful and too busy research track professors for the “weeder” courses in these types of majors), make you learn problem solving with graduate students and then give insane exams unapologetically or is the classroom period with the actual instructor more pleasant where that instructor is really engaging the students and mentoring them (perhaps these programs employ lecturers to teach to most students in “weeder” courses. Lecturers have more time because their only focus is teaching and undergraduates. They make their courses VERY challenging, but provide support and easy mentoring for those who want it and actively encourage it) outside of it. Their preparedness for either (yes, many thrive off of pressure and competition) scenario can determine whether being challenged is sometimes/often a pleasant experience at a school or if it makes them wonder about the choice.
I think the reality is that many more student like the latter better but don’t know that there is a difference in how instruction is typically run at certain schools and certainly do not care when applying (they visit the school, buy everything the tourguide says, judge the campus on beauty, and do not step foot into a classroom. If STEM, where retention is often linked to perceived teaching quality and effectiveness as well as ability. I would go visit some top instructor’s courses in the area to see what each student body and administration considers “top” teaching. It won’t look the same in all departments I promise you), so what happens is: They go to a school with a rigorous program(s) in case a) in their areas of interest but still expected to relatively cruise socially and academically almost as they did in HS (or in some cases a school they transferred from), realize its a whole different ballgame in terms of lifestyle and access to help and faculty and are naturally displeased in the result. they aren’t as tough as they thought. If I’m not gonna “cruise”, I’d at least be sure to choose a place where I get lots of support and access to faculty even if I am not the top of the class (this is likely what creates the competitive environments at some very stressful schools. The favoritism to those at the top of a course is almost too obvious and most students know they won’t attain that status)
Note that I don’t define cruise as 4.0 or anything particularly high. In this case, I simply mean that academic performance exactly reflects what you put into courses in said department. There are not as many “surprises” or cases where lots of luck and fortune is involved as is the case with many courses in stronger depts where classes are generally much worse than the case in this paper which simulates the effect of curve grading at more selective institutions (with academically elite students) :http://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1101&context=ij-sotl . One could kind of extrapolate that when a course is very hard, raw talent in a subject and luck play a larger role than normal…and can outweigh amount put in. Imagine multiple courses with 60-70% averages and sometimes lower and 75% in the paper, being considered “pleasant” or fair. That’s frustrating, and if the teaching seems mediocre, more frustrating, competitive atmosphere, maddening, low access to instructors, “what the heck am I paying for exactly?”.
And yes, I’ve kind of heard mixed things about STEM (and other elite programs) at your alma mater, but since I’m into this topic matter, I looked up that they are trying to invest in and fix it in many ways. But what I would hear and I saw based on some course materials is that it is more “struggle-fest” (more very hard instructors- and I checked the content of some basic courses like general chemistry there, and they do place content that isn’t present at many/most peer schools, but would instead only show up in the honors courses of those who have them) than “happier” places AND course sections are large size (as in the same size as peers with larger undergraduate populations, if not much larger) at lower division and intermediate courses. Then there is competition (not cut-throat or anything). Point is, there were things to fix and they knew/now know it. I think its a bit late as places like Rice, WUSTL, and Emory have been actually successfully done such initiatives (and they’ve worked) for a decade or 2. Again, I think JHU prided itself on being “strugglefest” kind of like Chicago. The other three have similar caliber/intensity undergraduate programs in certain areas, but have a more “pleasant” teaching and learning environment in said departments because of the efforts they’ve made to have things like smaller class sizes, more innovative teaching (usage of lecturers helps here because they have time to SUCCESSFULLY adopt such methods and not half-step them and tick off students), more effective support services linked to weeder courses, etc, basically things that allow instructors to keep courses at very high levels but to promote success. That way, it can be a “struggle” that students aren’t mad at.