<p>shellz, thank you. It’s great that your daughter is managing so well on her own. It sounds as though even at a large university without a total nut ban she is able to protect herself while still being part of campus life. If I were in your shoes this is just what I would want for my child–a growing sense of independence for her and the confidence for me that she was making good choices.</p>
<p>Cobrat if you are seriously convinced that your experience of being able to a attend a magnet school and going to a selective college on a full ride scholarship is typical and attainable for most college bound high school students then I would strongly suggest that you repost your last two statements on this thread in the financial aid & college admissions section of this forum.</p>
<p>@cobrat When did you attend college?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you got a near full ride scholarship with crappy grades, that makes you even more an exception than the rule, and you know it.</p>
<p>cobrat is not nearly of the generation of current students, so his experience is not comparable at all.</p>
<p>To put it in context, niquii… when he was in college, it was considered bourgeois to have a laptop. Only the really rich kids did and since they despised the rich and anything that even hinted of money (apparently every single one of them), there were no laptops.</p>
<p>Yes, because he went to a school which is so non-conformist that you HAD to be non-conformist, otherwise you’d be snickered at. And there really is nothing worse than having other people think ill of you, because goodness knows it’s still of utmost importance what your high school classmates think of your choices. I know I can hardly decide what to eat for breakfast without polling my high school classmates to ensure that I have a handle on what they think of people who make these kinds of breakfast choices.</p>
<p>Lol, PG, you almost made me snort out my Mountain Dew (which I should NOT be drinking at 10 AM…)</p>
<p>Several of my cousins drink Mountain Dew every day for breakfast, and they are fine.</p>
<p>You know what schools could ban that would benefit the majority of students? Energy drinks. They have way too much caffeine and other additives, and students guzzle them like water especially during midterms and finals.</p>
<p>Edited to add: I just polled all my friends, cousins, and coworkers and they all agreed that the ban would be a good thing.</p>
<p>Ban as in not offer them in the cafeteria as part of the meal plan, ban as in not selling them at the campus store / convenience center / vending machines, or ban as in not permit them to be brought on campus?</p>
<p>I believe there have been discussions about schools that banned bottled water - in the sense that they won’t sell bottled water in the campus store / convenience center in an attempt to be environmentally friendly, but they certainly can’t prohibit someone from going off campus and buying a case and bringing it back onto campus.</p>
<p>Wash u has banned bottled water for five or so years now. It has become increasingly common.</p>
<p>But there’s plenty of water fountains.</p>
<p>If a school were to ban energy drinks, I would hope for Monster fountains or the like :p</p>
<p>I meant ban the availability of it. If they want to go out of their way to get it they can.</p>
<p>Well, that’s a whole other ball of wax. Banning something because it could literally kill someone if ingested even once and banning things because they are viewed as “unhealthy” would need its own thread to debate the “nanny” issue involved. Or maybe there already is one along the lines of the NYC large soda ban.</p>
<p>^ There was. I believe it’s locked now though.</p>
<p>
Which attribute makes it “not surprising”? The fact that she is a big girl, or the fact that she goes to Stanford?</p>
<p>The fact that she’s a really smart cookie :), CTTC</p>
<p>^Right. You can trust your daughter because she is smart. It would be nice to believe everyone with life-threatening allergies is equally (and constantly) smart about their health, but of course that is unlikely. Tragic incidents like the one with the CA girl wouldn’t happen if human error wasn’t a constant risk.</p>
<p>Financegrad, you posted this:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Your statements above implied in absolutist terms that only folks of great financial means(Certain financial means in your words) could attend. I was pointing out exceptions like myself and others I’ve known of who weren’t as well off as you implied. </p>
<p>I’m also amused by your extension of red herring posts like this:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>to imply that high grades/test scores are definitive proof of giftedness or there’s something wrong with colleges/institutions which exclude/don’t consider students who don’t meet markers of high academic achievement.</p>
<p>The former would be regarded as dubious by many educational professionals I know without further investigation as many academic high achievers may have achieved those because of consistent persistent hard work, being good at figuring out what teachers/test makers want and following through on it, and arguably some element of luck without necessarily being “gifted”.</p>
<p>Regarding the latter, exclusion of the academically average unless they were scions of wealthy families in a select number of private colleges was the norm even here in the US 50+ years ago and to varying extents, is still the norm in many other parts of the world. </p>
<p>Even with the greater inclusion of a much larger proportion of US high school graduates after the mid-'60s, some companies and grad schools with some exceptions still factor in prestige of undergrad institutions when making hiring/admission decisions. </p>
<p>One factor of that prestige is based on admission selectivity along with GPA/test scores of admitted freshmen. </p>
<p>Another is perception of the graduates’ academic preparation. One company I used to work for refused to hire undergrad business school grads from all except the very top tier represented by schools like Wharton, NYU-Stern, etc. </p>
<p>They did so because they were burned by prior graduates from lower-tiered undergrad b-schools. In their view, it was the only way to ensure they’re hiring fresh grads who won’t have difficulties with basic arithmetic/math and written communication skills to the point of embarrassing them in front of senior management/clients as had happened before they instituted that policy.</p>
<p>^^^Amazing to know that business grads from all manner of non “very top tier” schools like Wharton are actually working productively in this great country of ours and displaying perfectly adequate basic math/arithmetic and communication skills. Many of these same graduates are making top salaries, enjoying productive relationships, and contributing to their communities in meaningful ways. Who woulda’ thunk?</p>
<p>And you know what? I bet they are not the exception, either. ;)</p>