<p>
This is also a duke student. Wow!
This is really funny. I’m sure D(o)u(k->ch)e is a good school and these students are no way representative of the school.</p>
<p>Update, just received a PM from innocent
I’m going to report you to cc authories for using the word dbag. =)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Absolutely agree with you. The overemphasis on competition, the overreliance on USNWR ratings, the continued insistence in making sure that people who go to other schools Know Their Place, and the definition of “success” as i-banking/mgt consulting/doctor (academic or specialist only, please!)/lawyer/MBA is just pathetic.</p>
<p>^Makes you wonder how current students would select or evaluate schools before the days of USNWR rankings, which were not very long ago.</p>
<p>Also an ironic post since I would consider Amherst to be equal to a slightly more impressive school than Duke. Humility is something people don’t have a lot of on here, which is probably going to impair most in the longer run.</p>
<p>middsmith and the few others out there… it’s a shame u can’t tell a ■■■■■ from a real student… devilknight is clearly not a real student, and i really doubt innocent is as well… </p>
<p>i do agree that duke students are very competitive with other schools… but we aren’t the only ones…</p>
<p>maybe, i should go and make up a user name then post unbelievable statements about johns hopkins or stanford or columbia or any other GREAT school (i’m not going to)… but would all of you bash those schools then?</p>
<p>we’re all smart people… those who are ■■■■■■ should be quite apparent…</p>
<p>thank you for those who recognize that devilknight and probably innocent are fake…</p>
<p>Wow this thread has gone crazy-</p>
<p>First off, I think we need to realize that students at Duke are not necessarily bad people. I think Duke students just feel overwhelming pride about their school, but that sense of school pride is one of the few aspects of the university that makes it so unique (just look at the cameron crazies at home basketball games- bet you won’t find that at HYP). Yes, people on here have phrased many arguments poorly (myself included), but I don’t think that this is even close to a representation of the student body at Duke. There are many intelligent, articulate, and rational students who just enjoy learning there, and though I haven’t even sat through a complete class yet, most of the students I know there would fit the mold of student which I have just described.</p>
<p>Also, pizzagirl- you posted a while back about gender possibly playing an issue. I had never thought of that, and I suspect that you’re right about most of us being men. kudos on pointing that out. </p>
<p>I still, however, stick to my points that many HYP students still strive to be superstars in whatever field they choose. I’m not saying that all of them will, but it’s just that those 3 schools attract a lot of stellar students who want to do stellar things with their lives. Define that whatever way you want to, but I think that innate drive to succeed that has brought them to those prestigious schools will remain intact.</p>
<p>^^ This DanielHSTennis surely doesn’t know what he is talking about. You were among those who backed Devil Knight’s incessant rampage against Johns Hopkins alleged “Tufts Syndrome”. Sure enough, it warranted a rebuttal from AdmissionsDaniels just a few days ago. You were among those very people saying how Duke is financially more sound in every respect relative to Hopkins except the PA scores. As if you were saying Hopkins was in no way comparable to Duke in anyways shape or form.</p>
<p>Tisk Tisk, Why are you criticizing Devil Knight and Innocent now that the tides has turned?</p>
<p>I have just been tracking this thread for a while and would like to say that the students who have put Duke in a bad light do not represent the student body at Duke as a whole AT ALL. I am a class of 2012er here and although I am not a student until next month, I can say that the student body is truly fun spirited, intellectual and courteous (something that comes with the southern hospitality I suppose) Don’t let a few posts on this thread change your opinion of a school that has garnered terrific prestige in the real world. Btw, I’m a Duke student and I think that both Duke and Columbia are equal in terms of prestige, in fact Columbia may have a little more prestige. That is just my 2 cents.</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/johns-hopkins-university/527629-note-future-freshmen.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/johns-hopkins-university/527629-note-future-freshmen.html</a></p>
<p>i will post the thread for everyone who is interested to read… i started out simply stating that it IS, in fact, a possibility… then, a hopkins student decides to say that duke engineering is “god awful” and that duke inflates gpa for premeds… those are two ridiculous statements that made me upset… i didn’t say anything unreasonable nor did i say that “Hopkins was in no way comparable to Duke in anyways shape or form”</p>
<p>once i realized that devilknight was not real, i stopped posting because he was just bringing my argument down… and admissionsdaniel addressed his statements, not mine… all i did was give some examples that supported the notion… which admissionsdaniel clearly said was not true… and i believe him</p>
<p>so no, phead, the tides have not turned…</p>
<p>
What does this mean? Since when is a “perfect applicant” not a fit for any top school. I’m sure he/she is more fit than say someone who couldn’t manage the work and ultimately will not graduate. (i.e. the bottom 10%)
How are you convinced that it was true or not true? Of course no school will admit to Tuft’s Syndrome practice.</p>
<p>I’ve always found this sort of thread endlessly amusing. It’s always so interesting to see intelligent and articulate posters reduced to “mine’s bigger than yours” statements. </p>
<p>The majority of the posters on this thread have mentioned prestige, without really defining or explaining what they mean by it (surprise, surprise). I think the_prestige always sums it up rather well.</p>
<p>
[quote=the_prestige]
I always like bringing this back to my “hamburger” analogy to illuminate this point:</p>
<p>99.9% of the American public will readily recognize (read: familiarity) Micky D’s Big Mac or Quarter Pounder (over a billion served!) vs., say, the “21” burger at the 21 Club (New York)… but does that Ronald McDonald more prestigious? Hardly.</p>
<p>Many people know (shop) at Wal-Mart vs. Bergdorf Goodman, but that hardly qualifies Wal-Mart to be categorized as “prestigious”.</p>
<p>Simply put, not anyone can afford to shop at Bergdorf or eat at the 21 Club, and conversely, nearly everyone “can” shop at Wal-Mart or eat at McDonald’s.</p>
<p>Similarly, not anyone can enroll into Harvard, but nearly anyone can enroll into a Community College - that’s what makes Harvard prestigious - and, more importantly, why it remains so (i.e. being founded nearly 150 years before America was even a country certainly has its “head start” advantages in building up your prestige level). For instance, if Harvard all of the sudden decided to increase its class size to 500,000 per year (say, by offering bonafide Harvard degrees online) i.e. admitting nearly anyone who applied - its “prestige” would drop like a stone overnight - people from Joe Blow Community College would just transfer to Harvard and pick up a degree. </p>
<p>This is what happens to certain “luxury” or “prestige” goods all the time - dilution of a brand which gets over-sold, over-licensed or discounted at mainstream department / warehouse stores (read: the Coach brand and even Armani to a certain extent).</p>
<p>Now to be certain, some brands have both “familiarity” AND “prestige” (e.g. Harvard, Yale, Princeton, MIT) and some have “prestige” and less “familiarity” (e.g. Dartmouth, Brown, Caltech, Amherst) - but don’t confuse the two terms - less familiarity doesn’t = less prestige. Just because your neighbor hasn’t heard of Ch</p>
<p>good point middsmith… no school will admit to tuft’s syndrome… and i don’t agree with it, but it would make sense for JHU to waitlist/reject students to the school if they don’t get into the extremely competitive BME program… yield is important to schools, and usually a student won’t attend a school when they don’t get accepted into the major they intend to study… for a student who wants to study biomedical engineering, material science and engineering usually doesn’t cut it…</p>
<p>Out of all people, I am a victim of Tufts syndrome. I’ve actually applied to Tufts, had a ridiculous really good interview with a women Tufts alumnus, and still got rejected. Whereas other students of clearly lesser level and intelligence and of lesser caliber got into Tufts. Of course, I got into plenty of good schools, better than Tufts.</p>
<p>Again, “It would make sense that XYZ would want to raise matriculation rates and increase yield” simply doesn’t cut it. Observations based on a collective small sample of “good friends” doesn’t cut it either. True, no school would ever admit to the practice of Tufts Syndrome, but similarly, this accusation could be applied to a whole range of schools. </p>
<p>Obviously, BME is very competitive at Hopkins. Some students gave up Stanford for Hopkins BME. Others gave up MIT to come to Hopkins for the entrepreneurialship program. Its impossible to predict whether or not a student would only come for the BME program or not. Not everyone in the real world are like CCers, they don’t follow every single trend based on USNews report says or what Times says.</p>
<p>EDIT: What AdmissionsDaniels said about the ‘perfect applicant’…that was kinda sketchy, I agree. What makes a perfect applicant? lol Thats what I like to know. What does fit in mean? Each school has its own interpretation of a good student body. Maybe high overachievers with great test scores is not what Hopkins is all about? Its easy to sense a ulterior motive here…bt thats just me.</p>
<p>
There’s nothing “pathetic” about considering all those things you mentioned. Basing observations based on the most credible ranking out there, differentiating between schools that are not at the same level and defining “success” with regards to most lucrative/prestigious careers is just another, more common way to look at things. It’s a shame you can’t at least acknowledge different POVs.</p>
<p>^^Just because one has a lower SAT and GPA does not necessarily make them a lesser caliber applicant.</p>
<p>SAT and GPA have been proven to be the best indicators of success in college. You are kidding yourself if you think GPA (a measure of high school academic performance) and SAT (a measure of basic mathematic skills and reading comprehension) does not measure an applicant’s academic merit.</p>
<p>I’m sorry to hear gellino had lower SAT and GPA.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So, let’s take NU and Duke, since they are comparable schools academically.</p>
<p>I’m willing to bet that a larger proportion of Duke students go on to i-banking and mgt consulting – simply because NU has a significant faction of journalists, musicians, actors, etc. who <em>aren’t interested</em> in pursuing IB/MC careers. Does that make Duke students more successful than NU students? What’s “unsuccessful” about not being something you don’t want to be in the first place? My classmate Stephen Colbert is hardly “unsuccessful” because he didn’t walk out of NU into an i-banking job on Wall Street.</p>
<p>^ I see your point but I don’t necessarily think it’s best to use NU, simply for the fact that they have several pre-professional schools tailored to those interests (music, theater, journalism), while Duke doesn’t. Furthermore, I would hardly label Stephen Colbert as a failure. His job is obvioulsy extremely lucrative, and while nobody would argue that, I don’t think it sticks to the realm of what we are arguing with in the sense that he’s in showbusiness, which doesn’t necessarily rely on academic merit as much as, say, a researcher or a surgeon.</p>