There seems to be some dialogue as to "what is a better school". The mixture of sports life, class work and your own student's desire is an almost impossible equation that if you hit on all three I applaud you. But to single out a particluiar school, such as Boston College or Northwestern (NW in particular carries a lot of passion on this board) is ignorant.
In years past large schools were able to recruit below their acceptance levels due too scale. You have a 40,000 student body so recruiting 500 students below the acceptance levels was OK--especially in money sports (men's football and basketball). But it carried over to other sports for "prestige".
The Ivies and Little Ivies were the exception. You still needed to meet the acceptance standards. But not long ago that changed--again in the money sports but for the Ivies it was men's basketball. I'm not saying they reduced the standards like other schools (lets face it, Kentucky has no standards for its basketball program; they only stay a year), but they tweaked it just enough to get a qualit's player (Lin). That network money come tournament time was nice!
So you see t his now through all levels of college sports. The Ivies are still tough, don't get me wrong, but they have a bit of flexibility. NESCAC schools on the D3 level are the same way. You still need to in the top 10 percentile, good test scores, etc.
Jobs! That's why we send our students to the same schools, right? I'm a Villanova graduate and in my day went to Haverford down the road for some parties. Became friendly with a Haverford student who said, with a bit of superiority, "You go to Villanova? You'll work for me someday". Funny thing is I did and it worked out for both of us. Friend to this day.
My point is you have a student that wants to be a doctor, engineer, etc they better be extraordinary to make it as a D1 student. That's why you see a lot of Communication majors in D1. Slide over to D3, and the NESCAC (which I know well) and you have pre-law, pre-med, finance, graduate school candidates--it's a different deal. So if you want your student to have a good job maybe a finance degree from Middlebury will get them that Wall Street job better than a communications degree from Northwestern (just using NW because it's such a target on this thread!).
The worst school is not a school by name but when a student picks a school for all the wrong reasons.
Middlebury? You could have used a better example. That school and students are a total disgrace. And those students as our future is killing this once great country. Snowflakes!
I need examples to your reply. I think you are thinking of a different school.
Originally Posted by baldbear
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by baldbear
There seems to be some dialogue as to "what is a better school". The mixture of sports life, class work and your own student's desire is an almost impossible equation that if you hit on all three I applaud you. But to single out a particluiar school, such as Boston College or Northwestern (NW in particular carries a lot of passion on this board) is ignorant.
In years past large schools were able to recruit below their acceptance levels due too scale. You have a 40,000 student body so recruiting 500 students below the acceptance levels was OK--especially in money sports (men's football and basketball). But it carried over to other sports for "prestige".
The Ivies and Little Ivies were the exception. You still needed to meet the acceptance standards. But not long ago that changed--again in the money sports but for the Ivies it was men's basketball. I'm not saying they reduced the standards like other schools (lets face it, Kentucky has no standards for its basketball program; they only stay a year), but they tweaked it just enough to get a qualit's player (Lin). That network money come tournament time was nice!
So you see t his now through all levels of college sports. The Ivies are still tough, don't get me wrong, but they have a bit of flexibility. NESCAC schools on the D3 level are the same way. You still need to in the top 10 percentile, good test scores, etc.
Jobs! That's why we send our students to the same schools, right? I'm a Villanova graduate and in my day went to Haverford down the road for some parties. Became friendly with a Haverford student who said, with a bit of superiority, "You go to Villanova? You'll work for me someday". Funny thing is I did and it worked out for both of us. Friend to this day.
My point is you have a student that wants to be a doctor, engineer, etc they better be extraordinary to make it as a D1 student. That's why you see a lot of Communication majors in D1. Slide over to D3, and the NESCAC (which I know well) and you have pre-law, pre-med, finance, graduate school candidates--it's a different deal. So if you want your student to have a good job maybe a finance degree from Middlebury will get them that Wall Street job better than a communications degree from Northwestern (just using NW because it's such a target on this thread!).
The worst school is not a school by name but when a student picks a school for all the wrong reasons.
Middlebury? You could have used a better example. That school and students are a total disgrace. And those students as our future is killing this once great country. Snowflakes!
I need examples to your reply. I think you are thinking of a different school.
Originally Posted by baldbear
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by baldbear
There seems to be some dialogue as to "what is a better school". The mixture of sports life, class work and your own student's desire is an almost impossible equation that if you hit on all three I applaud you. But to single out a particluiar school, such as Boston College or Northwestern (NW in particular carries a lot of passion on this board) is ignorant.
In years past large schools were able to recruit below their acceptance levels due too scale. You have a 40,000 student body so recruiting 500 students below the acceptance levels was OK--especially in money sports (men's football and basketball). But it carried over to other sports for "prestige".
The Ivies and Little Ivies were the exception. You still needed to meet the acceptance standards. But not long ago that changed--again in the money sports but for the Ivies it was men's basketball. I'm not saying they reduced the standards like other schools (lets face it, Kentucky has no standards for its basketball program; they only stay a year), but they tweaked it just enough to get a qualit's player (Lin). That network money come tournament time was nice!
So you see t his now through all levels of college sports. The Ivies are still tough, don't get me wrong, but they have a bit of flexibility. NESCAC schools on the D3 level are the same way. You still need to in the top 10 percentile, good test scores, etc.
Jobs! That's why we send our students to the same schools, right? I'm a Villanova graduate and in my day went to Haverford down the road for some parties. Became friendly with a Haverford student who said, with a bit of superiority, "You go to Villanova? You'll work for me someday". Funny thing is I did and it worked out for both of us. Friend to this day.
My point is you have a student that wants to be a doctor, engineer, etc they better be extraordinary to make it as a D1 student. That's why you see a lot of Communication majors in D1. Slide over to D3, and the NESCAC (which I know well) and you have pre-law, pre-med, finance, graduate school candidates--it's a different deal. So if you want your student to have a good job maybe a finance degree from Middlebury will get them that Wall Street job better than a communications degree from Northwestern (just using NW because it's such a target on this thread!).
The worst school is not a school by name but when a student picks a school for all the wrong reasons.
Middlebury? You could have used a better example. That school and students are a total disgrace. And those students as our future is killing this once great country. Snowflakes!
I need examples to your reply. I think you are thinking of a different school.
Originally Posted by baldbear
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by baldbear
There seems to be some dialogue as to "what is a better school". The mixture of sports life, class work and your own student's desire is an almost impossible equation that if you hit on all three I applaud you. But to single out a particluiar school, such as Boston College or Northwestern (NW in particular carries a lot of passion on this board) is ignorant.
In years past large schools were able to recruit below their acceptance levels due too scale. You have a 40,000 student body so recruiting 500 students below the acceptance levels was OK--especially in money sports (men's football and basketball). But it carried over to other sports for "prestige".
The Ivies and Little Ivies were the exception. You still needed to meet the acceptance standards. But not long ago that changed--again in the money sports but for the Ivies it was men's basketball. I'm not saying they reduced the standards like other schools (lets face it, Kentucky has no standards for its basketball program; they only stay a year), but they tweaked it just enough to get a qualit's player (Lin). That network money come tournament time was nice!
So you see t his now through all levels of college sports. The Ivies are still tough, don't get me wrong, but they have a bit of flexibility. NESCAC schools on the D3 level are the same way. You still need to in the top 10 percentile, good test scores, etc.
Jobs! That's why we send our students to the same schools, right? I'm a Villanova graduate and in my day went to Haverford down the road for some parties. Became friendly with a Haverford student who said, with a bit of superiority, "You go to Villanova? You'll work for me someday". Funny thing is I did and it worked out for both of us. Friend to this day.
My point is you have a student that wants to be a doctor, engineer, etc they better be extraordinary to make it as a D1 student. That's why you see a lot of Communication majors in D1. Slide over to D3, and the NESCAC (which I know well) and you have pre-law, pre-med, finance, graduate school candidates--it's a different deal. So if you want your student to have a good job maybe a finance degree from Middlebury will get them that Wall Street job better than a communications degree from Northwestern (just using NW because it's such a target on this thread!).
The worst school is not a school by name but when a student picks a school for all the wrong reasons.
Middlebury? You could have used a better example. That school and students are a total disgrace. And those students as our future is killing this once great country. Snowflakes!
I need examples to your reply. I think you are thinking of a different school.
All you have to do is google it. Student protest shuts down free speech and assaults teacher sending her to the hospital. You must watch CNN and MSNBC where they choose not to report on matters unflatterIng to their view of the world.
Actually a Fox guy. Found an Op Ed from the professor in the New [lacrosse] Times on the matter. He seemed to take the injury in context to the protest better than you did.
All schools are liberal at its base. Yale gave out coloring books and the day off after the election. Princeton brought in puppies. Cal did significant damage during a protest. Don't let the militant minority drive you nuts.
Forbes ranks Middlebury as the 4th best school in terms of tuition cost versus real world earnings.
Perhaps you need to read the op ed again, the professor that was injured is a female. If that is what the 4th best tuition to earnings ratio is giving you in terms of an education they failed. You should read a dozen or so of the reports, gives a broader perspective. The irony is that the injured professor was apparently one of the faculty protesting in the audience preventing the session from occurring in clear violation of school policy. The issue is that students and faculty are all being given a pass from school rules even though they were reinforced by the administration before the speaker took the stage. Middlebury has completely mis-handled this situation because they all wanted to suppress free speech because they do not support what they believe the speaker stands for but could not find a way other than this and still maintain a shred of pretend credibility on the subject.
