^^At least Middlebury and Hamilton.
Yale? http://gendronlab.yale.edu/contacts
Princeton? https://www.emporis.com/buildings/124083/fine-hall-princeton-nj-usa
@circuitrider , fair point.
but Exley is in a spot making it a meaningful part of campus and it defines many view corridors. If it were a few more blocks away, it might not matter so much.
at any rate, go back and look again at the renderings. I believe those plans contemplated keeping the tower and adjoining it to the new structure, but it also contemplated, I think, completely re-cladding it with materials that would help it fit more harmoniously with the buildings nearby and make it overall more aesthetically pleasing.
I hear you … architecture styles change, and I know that brutalist and related mondern styles were all the rage in the 60s and 70s, and even the 80s. But I have had a hard time talking myself into liking it. Architecture, for me, is two things: function and aesthetic emotion. The first we can evaluate critically and logically. The second is, I’m afraid, too subjective for that.
I would add that Conn’s newer life sciences tower/building is pretty nice, and fits beautifully with the campus.
Middlebury’s Bicentennial Hall is an attractive building, although a bit massive for such a bucolic campus.
http://www.middlebury.edu/system/files/media/CO40-10-06-sunrise-011_0.jpg
Vassar’s new science bridge is very cool. Recladding Exley is an interesting idea. It is well-built. I always liked Hall-Atwater and Shanklin. It was in those buildings that I spent most of my time at Wesleyan. I would much rather have been over at the CFA. By the way, does anyone know where COL relocated to? I walked to its old headquarters in Butterfield last fall and it has apparently moved (a good thing–hopefully they got one of those awesome houses that surround Wesleyan).
Bowdoin has really attractive science buildings, including good-old Searle, which they fairly gutted, I think, to bring it up to date.
^ I think it was relocated to the new Boger Hall.
Not to be mean, of course, but you do realize that if you add up all the R&D budgets of just the LACs mentioned with the prettiest science buildings, they more or less equal Wesleyan’s for one fiscal year? This begs the question, whether a science center has to be ugly in order to be successful?
^ no doubt, substance is more important.
but there must’ve been a reason they were looking into a new science building. I understand they took care of some deferred maintenance and refurbed some labs etc. more than a band aid, yes, I’m sure. but I’m guessing at some point it will become more economic to raze and build.
circuitrider, Wesleyan has a graduate science program, a small one, but that still makes the school a different animal from the other LACs.
@MiddleburyDad2 - the most acute problems were with Hall-Atwater, a somewhat older building where many of the bio classes are taught. It would have been flattened under the old plan. Josh brought it up to code when those plans got shelved. There’s a nice Hogwarts style colonnade underneath it, but, otherwise it is one of my least favorite buildings at Wesleyan (sorry, @wesleyan97.) As far as Exley is concerned, the main rap that I hear most often from the people who work there involve the long hallways and physical barriers between departments, a general lack of flexibility in the floor plans.
I have warm memories of Hall-Atwater, which makes me forgive the nondescript design (nondescript beats the visual blight of Exley).
Vassar appears to share this latter aspect of its architecture with parts of SUNY New Paltz across the river. In the suggested sense above, both of these schools would depend on other elements of their campuses for their aesthetic appeal.
Re #93, tag intended as @ThankYouforHelp.
Beauty truly is in the eye of the beholder. 
Although my daughter is a Vassar alumna, when I first visited the college many decades ago I thought the quad was stunning.
http://www.collegerank.net/beautiful-campus-quads/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/28/beautiful-college-campuses-2015_n_6374822.html
http://www.architecturendesign.net/the-most-beautiful-college-campuses-in-america/
http://www.bestcollegereviews.org/features/most-beautiful-college-campuses/
Regarding Vassar, the chapel, the library, Blodgett, the new science building – as well as the large central lawn itself – appear as distinctive, collegiate elements, and the perimeter of the campus aligns well with the surrounding area. The scale and relative uniformity of the northern quad area, though, would seem to offer somewhat of a Rorschach test for those experiencing it – perhaps suggesting a quality derived from settings the individual had previously experienced.
Speaking of snow, hills, fantastic views, mid-century modern architecture and Exley, it’s all on display here: