U of Michigan Law Library addition. I spent a summer at U of M and it’s the only building that made an impression on me.
http://www.michiganmodern.org/buildings/university-of-michigan-law-school-allan-and-alene-smith-law-library-addition
A lot of the weirdly-shaped newer buildings mentioned in the “ugliest buildings” thread, I actually liked.
I prefer clean, contemporary lines to that ugly old/traditional/red brick/gothic (especially gothic) look prevalent on too many campuses. Dislike brutalism- the name is self descriptive. I appreciate a campus that moves forward with the times instead of attempting to be stuck in the past- especially when the past emulated old European or Colonial designs.
Just visited London, UK and fortunately they have some modern buildings instead of living in the past only. Likewise college campuses should reflect modern times. A blend of styles is so much more interesting than being stuck with someone’s idea of what a campus should look like before better building ideas and materials existed.
The Beinecke Rare Book library at Yale is stunning when you see it in person. No windows. The egg-crate look is all marble and when you’re inside the marble walls glow from the outdoor light. The filtered light also protects the books. It’s all kinds of gorgeous. This photo makes it look hideous though. https://beinecke.library.yale.edu/visit
The Bard concert hall designed by Gehry is also stunning in context. It shimmers against the backdrop of the Hudson River, like sails on a sailboat. – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QV8wei2shAw
In general I like the mix of old New England clapboard house-type architecture, red Vermont barn-esque architecture and sheer modern structures of Bennington College.
I like the Giesel Library at UCSD. Funky but cool.
The Janet Wallace Fine Arts Center at Macalester, affectionately known by students as “JWall”:
https://hga.com/projects/macalester-college-janet-wallace-fine-arts-center/
No.
I prefer all buildings on all campuses to adhere to Federalist architecture or, better, look like Gothic castles (I will give West Point kudos for that) – dream spaces with lots of manicured lawns and gardens. If I were choosing a college today, this would be my main criteria and was at the top of our list when choosing boarding schools for our son. If you’re going to spend four years in a place, pick a gorgeous one and that, for me, means no glass/steel/concrete monstrosities. I loved that part of Choate’s mission statement at the time emphasized that the school “inspires students to appreciate the importance of beauty and grace in their lives,” and the campus architecture certainly reflected that. To us, this was so much more important than the mundane metrics most here consider.
I think that these privileged educations in beautiful places should be doing much more than preparing kids for careers. Along the way, they should be reaching deep inside, touching students’ finer selves and stirring young souls to appreciate, well, “the importance of beauty and grace” in their lives. A school that understands this is a school that has its priorities straight in my book. I say, choose the school that values these finer things and whispers them into the curriculum among buildings that conjure the ghosts of places past. These are halcyon days; plenty of time for hardscape later.
We were so sad when Choate chose the site of the beautiful old headmaster’s home to replace with the new math and computer science center, the ugliest building on campus in my book:
https://www.choate.edu/academics/academic-facilities/lanphier-center
I know there are many people who find modern architecture just as stimulating and dream-worthy, but I’m not one of them. My answer to the OP is an emphatic, “NO!”
The Weatherhead School of Management building (Peter B. Lewis Building) at Case Western, done by Frank Gehry.
Northwestern’s Segal Visitor’s Center, and the Kellogg Building
https://www.northwestern.edu/campus-life/visiting-campus/segal-visitors.html
@choatiemom , we can disagree with the specifics, but, it seems to me that architecture is an art form, not an ideology. It’s either done well or done badly. As I pointed out upstream, trying to square the circle of a campus of a certain age, with buildings reflecting the latest methods and materials presents a particular challenge. IMO, the Choate example you cite fails because, in trying to straddle the ideological divide, it actually winds up pleasing no one.
I would compare the Wesleyan Cinema Studies complex as a successful attempt to round out the starker elements of the 1973 arts center with a nod toward the traditional:
Not exactly a “campus” building, but the LBJ Presidential Library is on the campus of U Texas at Austin:
We were there last month and it was pretty impressive.
IMO, it’s ugly. Architecture done well or badly is in the eye of the beholder; I don’t believe in absolutes in any form of art (a lifelong debate with my artist FIL). The OP is asking for opinions:
My opinion is that the latest buildings on the Choate campus do not harmonize with existing buildings and surroundings. Plenty of Choate students and parents disagree with me, and that’s OK. I just don’t see beauty in any form of modern architecture on or off campuses.
@@choatiemom wrote:
Ouch. You get brownie points for honesty. 
Noyes House at Vassar, Hill College House at U Penn,
I like the Robarts Library at University of Toronto although it usually makes the list of ugliest university buildings.
I dislike most modern architecture, but the exception is that I am a sucker for Eero Saarinen. Morse/Stiles at Yale, Hill House at UPenn, , Noyes at Vassar, I love all of them even if they look different from the buildings around them. Heck, I’m even fond of Dulles Airport and Gateway Arch.
^I always liked Hill House because, at the time, the mid-seventies, it was one of the few contemporary buildings being constructed with an exterior sheath of masonry on the Penn campus. I guess, technically, it belongs in the brutalist school, but, at the time, I can remember thinking how conservative it looked compared to some of the other things being built further West of 33rd Street (Grad Center, Super Block, etc.) Just goes to show you that no one historical fashion has a monopoly on good design.
Unfortunately, Penn may be in danger overdoing a good thing with so many recent Hill House knockoffs in close proximity to it.
Don’t Morse/Stiles have somewhat pie shaped dorm rooms? As I recall there was only one position you could really put a bed in. I like the way they look from the outside, but thought they were pretty unfriendly on the inside.
I like the idea behind Stiles et al. The shapes and courtyards are meant to suggest medieval castles. Unfortunately, Saarinen’s oeuvre represents something of a high water mark for reinforced concrete as both a structural and decorative element. His use of it in TWA’s air terminal at JFK still has the ability to stir the imagination. His use of it at Yale makes me wish he’d used something a little more elegant.
re post # 26. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. You may like that architecture- I hate it. Thank goodness being a top quality college/university does not require adhering to any one architecture style. I appreciate a school that can move beyond old fashioned buildings built just because that was the way things were once done. Don’t be stuck in the past!
@ChoatieMom I actually did not mind the modern science building when we visited. I did not like the I.M. Pei arts center at all. It seems stuck out back of the admissions building if I recall. Just odd placement to me.