job and professional school placements are absolutely NOT all that matters.
a good, preferably liberal arts, education teaches a young adult how to be a good person, in touch with history, literature and thought, and gives him or her a platform to build on, in terms of writing, reading, trying new things.
if we all had liberal arts education, Trump would certainly not be president. More people would understand what he is and the damage he does to nations. For example. Worth a lot.
Thats why Williams and Middlebury are far more competitive to get into than Harvard and MIT?
You can about what you think SHOULD matter but the preferences of students and employers make it clear what DOES matter currently.
Didn’t you go to Swarthmore? And Rockefeller? Would it have gone better for you had you gone MIT undergrad and Harvard PhD?
I'm not sure what we are really arguing about anymore at this point.
We’re not arguing. Go back to page one of this thread and read Sam Callan’s posts and then read your first post at the very bottom of the thread. It’s not about being “right.” It’s about calling you out on your incessant hubris, arrogance, snarkiness, and condescension (all traits that would work well in NY and the Northeast to be sure).
It's completely fair to say that kids that don't prioritize rigor, academics, research, and quality of faculty above all else should go somewhere besides the top-tier universities.
It's GOOD that people are sorting to where their priorities lie.
Not everyone is going to be a surgeon, big law lawyer, work in PE, or be a R1 research prof.
Why has this thread disintegrated into pages on the prestige of Duke? It's one of the best schools in the US. Is it one of the 5 very best? No. Is it one of the couple literally right behind? Yes. End of story.
Maybe people in duh South East call it the North East, but here in the Northeast we spell it as one word. You obviously have a google machine, so start typing and report back.
This happened with my son and his friend group here in the North East.
All of them picked southern colleges despite almost all of the parents being alums from North East schools.
Big selling point were the actual tours we went on.
Northeast college tour guides were either 1) Obese 2) Purple haired and talked about their sexual preference more than the actual school 3) Talked about politics and protests.
Southern college tour guides were 1) bubbly blonde girls and a 2) frat bro student athlete who was fun to be around. 3) Talked about the fun stuff that happens on campus.
No surprise that southern schools are more popular. Job market post graduation is so much better for southern schools as well.
Stop lying. Most southern universities still lag behind plenty of schools in the northeast academically.
Don't really care about the politics of this thread but this only makes sense if you think the elite northeast schools are in need of applicants. By most markers, applications are up & acceptance rates are down. Lots of really smart kids are getting rejected by strong academic schools. I don't think it's a secret that mobility is more common today than 20-30 years ago and that schools like to diversify by geography. So if the argument is more kids from the northeast are heading south then, sure, but more kids from the south are heading to the northeast. Northeast schools want those kids instead of another smart kid from a private school within an hour radius. There are plenty of good schools in the south, especially the state schools. It's plausible that a smart kid from MA got rejected from a small liberal arts school but got into UT Austin or UNC or something like that. It has nothing to do with their political leanings. In fact, classrooms will be more diversified in both places with students being socialized in different ways. Seems like a good thing.
To make the jump and get into liberal/conservative politics is dishonest.
This happened with my son and his friend group here in the North East.
All of them picked southern colleges despite almost all of the parents being alums from North East schools.
Big selling point were the actual tours we went on.
Northeast college tour guides were either 1) Obese 2) Purple haired and talked about their sexual preference more than the actual school 3) Talked about politics and protests.
Southern college tour guides were 1) bubbly blonde girls and a 2) frat bro student athlete who was fun to be around. 3) Talked about the fun stuff that happens on campus.
No surprise that southern schools are more popular. Job market post graduation is so much better for southern schools as well.
F--plagiarism. you just repeated exactly what the article said. see me after class
Don't really care about the politics of this thread but this only makes sense if you think the elite northeast schools are in need of applicants. By most markers, applications are up & acceptance rates are down. Lots of really smart kids are getting rejected by strong academic schools. I don't think it's a secret that mobility is more common today than 20-30 years ago and that schools like to diversify by geography. So if the argument is more kids from the northeast are heading south then, sure, but more kids from the south are heading to the northeast. Northeast schools want those kids instead of another smart kid from a private school within an hour radius. There are plenty of good schools in the south, especially the state schools. It's plausible that a smart kid from MA got rejected from a small liberal arts school but got into UT Austin or UNC or something like that. It has nothing to do with their political leanings. In fact, classrooms will be more diversified in both places with students being socialized in different ways. Seems like a good thing.
To make the jump and get into liberal/conservative politics is dishonest.
I honestly think the politics are a major factor
the woke nature of NE education is really strong. If you get sick of having race and gender and 'proper' ways of thinking thrown in your face every day...you might think going to a more relaxed political environment is appealing.
I am in a big blue city with lots of progressive education and let me tell you there is a pushback starting to catch fire. Kids are part of that pushback.
We’re not arguing. Go back to page one of this thread and read Sam Callan’s posts and then read your first post at the very bottom of the thread. It’s not about being “right.” It’s about calling you out on your incessant hubris, arrogance, snarkiness, and condescension (all traits that would work well in NY and the Northeast to be sure).
It's completely fair to say that kids that don't prioritize rigor, academics, research, and quality of faculty above all else should go somewhere besides the top-tier universities.
It's GOOD that people are sorting to where their priorities lie.
Not everyone is going to be a surgeon, big law lawyer, work in PE, or be a R1 research prof.
But that is not how you presented it. I guess the word “productive” was the operative word. You come off as an arrogant prick. Perhaps be aware of it maybe?
Moreover, top-tier universities don’t just include HYPMS, and perhaps that is the point. Nobody is arguing that HYPMS aren’t the best. The debate is that kids can go to good or even “elite” schools just about anywhere, even in the south, and still reach the upper echelons of academia, research, private practice, etc.
Just look at yourself (your alter ego) in one David Baltimore. He attended Swarthmore College for undergrad and The Rockefeller University for his PhD. Is it because he (you) couldn’t get into HYPMS? Was he (you) disadvantaged relative to HYPMS? Was his (your) career trajectory worse because he went to lowly Swarthmore? No, it wasn’t. And Swarthmore is a damn good school, an elite school even and a more well rounded education.
Just like your hero in Anthony Fauci went to Holy Cross and studied classics. Didn’t hinder his career. Again, probably made him a more well rounded person. That’s the point. So, maybe stop with the LOL and gotcha about some schools finally returning to “not test optional” when nobody ever asserted that Duke was better than HYPMS in the first place.
Swarthmore/Rockefeller is just fine. I would’ve preferred that path next to Harvard/Yale. LOL LOL
When two highly-rated NE sports talk hosts, availed their college bound kids to a school, they sent them to Tulane and Northwestern.
you can tell they are pandering by what their kids actually end up doing. trump's kids are penn and NYU. your kids are the ones who don't need college.
Just brutal for the northeast. Turns out kids prefer a fun community atmosphere, not activism and drama. No doubt the prettier girls make a difference too(southern belles that look like women vs blue haired activists at columbia)
A growing number of high-school seniors in the North are making an unexpected choice for college: They are heading to Clemson, Georgia Tech, South Carolina, Alabama and other universities in the South.
Students say they are searching for the fun and school spirit emanating from the South on their social-media feeds. Their parents cite lower tuition and less debt, and warmer weather. College counselors also say many teens are eager to trade the political polarization ripping apart campuses in New England and New York for the sense of community epitomized by the South’s football Saturdays. Promising job prospects after graduation can sweeten the pot.
The number of Northerners going to Southern public schools went up 84% over the past two decades, and jumped 30% from 2018 to 2022, a Wall Street Journal analysis of the latest available Education Department data found.
The WSJ has turned into a right wing rag. That's just bullsh*t.
The reason kids go south from the northeast is:
1. Sports
2. The weather
3. They can't get into a decent school up here because they have standards.
It's completely fair to say that kids that don't prioritize rigor, academics, research, and quality of faculty above all else should go somewhere besides the top-tier universities.
It's GOOD that people are sorting to where their priorities lie.
Not everyone is going to be a surgeon, big law lawyer, work in PE, or be a R1 research prof.
But that is not how you presented it. I guess the word “productive” was the operative word. You come off as an arrogant prick. Perhaps be aware of it maybe?
Moreover, top-tier universities don’t just include HYPMS, and perhaps that is the point. Nobody is arguing that HYPMS aren’t the best. The debate is that kids can go to good or even “elite” schools just about anywhere, even in the south, and still reach the upper echelons of academia, research, private practice, etc.
Just look at yourself (your alter ego) in one David Baltimore. He attended Swarthmore College for undergrad and The Rockefeller University for his PhD. Is it because he (you) couldn’t get into HYPMS? Was he (you) disadvantaged relative to HYPMS? Was his (your) career trajectory worse because he went to lowly Swarthmore? No, it wasn’t. And Swarthmore is a damn good school, an elite school even and a more well rounded education.
Just like your hero in Anthony Fauci went to Holy Cross and studied classics. Didn’t hinder his career. Again, probably made him a more well rounded person. That’s the point. So, maybe stop with the LOL and gotcha about some schools finally returning to “not test optional” when nobody ever asserted that Duke was better than HYPMS in the first place.
Swarthmore/Rockefeller is just fine. I would’ve preferred that path next to Harvard/Yale. LOL LOL
everyone would have counted duke or rice as ivy plus for decades. this is not new. strictly speaking they'd be ranked a notch below the best.
this article is part of WSJ continuing to pimp a set of mostly southern state schools as equivalents of the ivies or ivy plus, and not just the really good ones like UT, but now it's clemson or bama or something. i do think the standards at the lesser flagships has picked up, and there are more and more people in this country for fewer schools, including up north. those two may be working together to make third tier southern state schools more appealing. but at least part of it, to me, is WSJ reflecting conservative bias and continuing to pimp a particular type of emerging quality state school hard even when it's not the equivalent of rice or duke, much less harvard.
yes, bama or florida may have changed from being easy admits or party schools to having solid student bodies. this may help them compete for kids who don't want to pay for villanova but want a D1 name to wave around. but the overselling where duke is ivy level and clemson is as good as duke, the reputations and numbers don't bear that out.
that being said, UT keeps pushing its class rank admit standard up and up and up and you could see with these forces continuing that maybe they start to catch up to the ivy plus. but then there are top 50 LAC that barely existed or didn't even exist when i was in college.
one thing i'd say is there have been some republican judges banning clerk hiring from certain schools, and if you don't take these type rankings or articles from WSJ completely literally as universal rank, but instead as conservative signaling, they could be taken as like trying to promote a list of acceptable conservative schools. there have been a few, but a lot are mediocre academic and known more for being christian, eg, liberty. the few sort of regulars include places like chicago. this drumbeat could be taken as trying to grow that list. and they won't be accepted by the traditional rankings list until the numbers merit it, but they can try and jab the ivies and then promote their own idea of the ivy pluses.
to me those efforts tend to mix trying to take known lefty schools down a peg while pushing conservative critiques, eg, a lot of the UC schools get omitted from their lists, excuse given, test optional. as though the kids got dumber or their GPA numbers aren't known.
i say this because at this point clemson is almost as expensive as the UC schools. would i rather go to some small town southern town with little else to offer or, say, be on the beach in santa barbara or santa cruz. or LA. hmmmm. better schools, better weather, probably just as fun. perhaps politics in this, then, no? and to me a slightly better state school, more like UNC or UVa or UT.
at minimum, one sees where if someone flees the crowded north for a state school, and picks the south, that's a loaded choice and not pure analytics.
This happened with my son and his friend group here in the North East.
All of them picked southern colleges despite almost all of the parents being alums from North East schools.
Big selling point were the actual tours we went on.
Northeast college tour guides were either 1) Obese 2) Purple haired and talked about their sexual preference more than the actual school 3) Talked about politics and protests.
Southern college tour guides were 1) bubbly blonde girls and a 2) frat bro student athlete who was fun to be around. 3) Talked about the fun stuff that happens on campus.
No surprise that southern schools are more popular. Job market post graduation is so much better for southern schools as well.
Stop lying. Most southern universities still lag behind plenty of schools in the northeast academically.
Where in my post did I say Southern schools are better academically? I literally made no reference to academics in my post. What am I lying about?
to put numbers to it, out of state tuition, clemson is $39k, UCLA $43k, Cal $44k, UCSC $46k, UCSB $47k. Cal is then better academics on numbers and rep.
southern schools are cheaper for in-state. for out-of-state they are starting to converge with big name schools on the coasts.
i pointed out most of these northern states would have their own state schools, with mixed outcomes on whether tuition is cheap or not, say, NJ is expensive, NY is not.