<p>
BrooklynBornDad, I’m not convinced that a school that is less than an hour from the Ohio border can be described as being in the Northeast. That said, while I think it is undervalued, I think it’s structure does lead to it being undervalued especially since it’s greatest strengths are in the pre-professional/pre-occupational fields like Computer Science, Engineering, Architecture and Art. But it has a perfectly decent liberal arts school and very good science.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Duke had similar shirts (Harvard of the South) and NU has had similar shirts (Harvard of the Midwest). Plenty of schools have done this type of thing, so I think that means nothing. </p>
<p>But more importantly, your use of the words “Ivy substitute” is betraying your bias. Brooklynborndad, in places where the Ivies aren’t exalted as the second-coming, the Vandys and Dukes and Northwesterners and whatevers don’t need to be seen as “Ivy substitutes,” because Ivies aren’t seen as the platonic forms of colleges that other colleges aspire to. Indeed, frankly, they aren’t talked about as “Ivies” (as in this select group of 8 that always go together) but they are talked about individually as simply some other excellent schools that could be on a top student’s list.</p>
<p>mathmom is correct,BBD. I am from Pittsburgh and husband and his father were CMU (Carnegie Tech) grads. Pittsburgh is not in the Northeast. I think you’ve also mentioned northern Virginia as being in the Northeast ?(or maybe you’re implying northern Virginia has more Northeast sensibilities). However, I don’t believe northern Va or DC are truly considered to be in the Northeast either. In Virginia, many kids aspire to UVa , William and Mary or Virginia Tech and are quite happy with those choices.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>The “Harvard of the South” is Harvard. Same for the Harvard of the Midwest, West, and everywhere else.</p>
<p>Why do these schools not have the confidence to stand on their own name and reputation? They should proudly promote themselves as themselves and forget about likening themselves to another school. I mean, can you imagine say the Los Angeles Dodgers billing themselves as “The Yankees of the National League?” Or Chevrolet selling Corvettes as “The Ferrari of the US?” Never in a million years would they be caught doing such a thing.</p>
<p>^We have a t-shirt that says “Harvard, The University of Chicago of the East.” :)</p>
<p>I agree, coureur. I never would have bought such a t shirt.</p>
<p>But to be fair, such t shirts are not really expressions of how the school markets or thinks about itself. Anyone can make up a saying or a t shirt. My point was more to BBD that if someone at Vandy called it the H of the South – well, that’s not Vandy trying to promote itself as an Ivy substitute. It’s just some random misplaced school pride.</p>
<p>^^You’re right. It’s probably the schools’ boosters much more than the schools themselves who promote the “The Harvard of the ______” terminology. But why should they want to do that? Using my earlier example, I can’t imagine Dodger fans calling the team “The Yankees of the National League” any more than the team itself would.</p>
<p>Isn’t the argument about Ivy superiority more about possible connections in academia, business, etc. than a truly superior education? Ivy league schools clearly enjoy extraordinarily talented student bodies which can enhance the educational experience for attendees, but I doubt there is any real difference in ability between the Harvard student body and the Northwestern student body, and the Oberlin student body. Moreover, some extremely bright kids choose the best economic deal for their education, not the most prestigious option. The value added by Ivies is arguably who you meet, not what you learn, and even the former will only benefit a very few. I have nothing against Ivy league schools, but the rising tide of brilliant students and faculty members has caused talent to flow elsewhere lifting many other boats.</p>
<p>At S1’s selective math/science public HS program his senior year, 38% went to a T-20, 7% to a T-10 LAC, 37% to the flagship and the rest to other colleges and universities (Berkeley, UMBC, Michigan, Rochester, et al.). </p>
<p>Jay Mathews has cited research (and maybe done some of it himself, I don’t remember off the top of my head) stating that kids who attend the selective admit HSs do not necessarily fare better in admissions because of the hit they take on grades and rank. Both of S’s schools made clear in the materials they send to colleges that the kids in this program have taken a huge academic risk to attend and make clear that the coursework and standards are at a very high level. What we observed in the admissions process is that the programs S1 and S2 attended were very well known to colleges and that “brand” gives colleges a relatively reliable basis of knowing what kind of preparation that student has had. Of course, that can be a blessing or a burden for an applicant. </p>
<p>Both of my kids took hits on the GPA side that likely contributed to not being accepted at some schools. We knew that going into high school and came to the conclusion that for our family, the current opportunity to be challenged and engaged was more important than whether or not it got them into School X.</p>
<p>And yeah, we feel darned lucky that we live in an area that has those options (and we pay plenty of taxes for it, too). One of my kids is quite specific about how he would have turned out in a different academic environment, and it would not have been pretty. Having seen what was done to him in the neighborhood school earlier in his education, we felt S’s assessment was right on the mark.</p>
<p>^CountingDown, my D also goes to a selective math/science school, and the situation there is exactly as you describe it at your son’s - lower GPAs that cause problems with admissions at some colleges but “the current opportunity to be challenged and engaged was more important than whether or not it got them into School X.”</p>
<p>Even within a particular region, the prestige or name recognition strength of a school varies depending on the social class/group or career perspective. For example, when I was in high school in suburban southeastern PA, St. Joe’s was the cat’s pajamas for many people, presumably because of basketball publicity? I’ve been on CC for years and don’t recall ever seeing that school mentioned by anyone. Where I live now, I’ve met a number of businessmen who think Northeastern is THE place. They call it a “name school” when referring to recruitment. While that university is viewed by the average CCer as solid, especially for someone interested in a co-op experience, I don’t think it falls in the realm of enviable elite.</p>
<p>Our county does not have a STEM HS, so those few kids with real aptitude are few and far between. There were no math clubs, science fairs, nor bridges to national contests. </p>
<p>However, we do have a magnet school for the arts. I’ve met many of those kids, and they are soooo talented. The competition for the best colleges will be stiffer, but they’ve been competing with each other for years. Any one of the actors would probably have been a theater star in their local HS. My g/f’s DD wanted only Tisch, and didn’t get in. She went to local college, but has since has been working steadily on TV shows filmed in this area. Her magnet HS prepared her well.</p>
<p>It has been suggested that we have moved from an era where admissions to top schools was based on hand shakes between wealthy, exclusive prep schools and the dean of admission. In part thats true-that was the case before WW1.
What happened was that enlightened colleges said thats not fair we need to design a system where we promote equal opportunity for access to these schools. From that idea began the design of a test to test a kids potential regardless of race, sex, or wealth which was the SAT. Especially after WW2 elite schools were looking for “objective” measures that allowed them to judge the potential of public school students so that they would have equal opportunity with prep school kids. Over time a series of objective, merit based tests were devised to help top schools objectively determine the best of the best, including the PSAT and AP tests.
Today virtually every form of merit based, objective valuation of performance is under attack. Don’t care about PSAT or wether you qualified for NMSF, don’t want to know what you scored on your AP tests, Private schools no longer publishing class rank information. The last vestige of objective information still used-the SAT-is under attack and more and more schools are eliminating that in the name of subjective, holistic admissions.
Compare that with England where you take a battery of AP type tests and that pretty much determines whether you go to Oxford, Manchester, or Polytechnic.
Compare the 2 and I don’t know how you can disagree with Mr. Steele’s contention that Merit is becoming a joke here.</p>
<p>The standardized tests have always benefitted the rich, so they are not objective measures of merit.</p>
<p>SM 74- have you read Karabel’s book? And the women who were finally admitted to Princeton and Yale would find your comment hysterically funny “after WW2”. Although technically, the 1970’s WERE after WW2. But an entire generation of social change, protest, etc. had to happen first!</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Since the Ivy League is the topic of this thread, name one Ivy League school that has eliminated objective academic stats from admissions consideration. I know first hand that the Ivy League schools still care VERY MUCH about applicants’ GPA, class rank, NMSF status, PSAT, SAT, SAT Subject tests, ACT, and AP scores and other objective academic achievements. They ask all this on their apps and they brag about how high the average stats are for each year’s incoming class. And a quick glance at the Ivy accepted/rejected threads on CC will give you an idea of the sky-high stats it takes to get in. </p>
<p>What the ECs, hooks, essays, and other subjective factors offer is a way to distinguish and choose among the many high-stat kids. They get apps from way more than they can possibly admit. The subjective achievements are important but only after your academic stats have earned you a seat at the table, so to speak. To say that the Ivy League doesn’t care about academic stats is just plain nonsense.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly. For some data on the subject, see Brown’s admissions’ website. A 2400/36 is admitted at 1.5-2x that of just slightly lower scoring applicants (miss ONE bubble?). Of course, that is only one piece of admissions data. There is no reason to believe that Dartmouth – which has numbers similar to Brown – would be much different.</p>
<p>[Brown</a> Admission: Facts & Figures](<a href=“Undergraduate Admission | Brown University”>Undergraduate Admission | Brown University)</p>
<p>In my neck of the woods, the kids admitted to one of the military academies are viewed as super stars. With the exception of a small number of kids who parents are Asian, East Asian or Middle Eastern immigrants; and professors at one of the near by colleges name recognition for elite colleges is virtually non existent. Everyone has heard of H & Y but PMS and the rest of the Ivies have probably less than 10% name recognition. Schools such as Duke and other BB and FB powerhouses are known, but Lacs (even Amherst and Williams) are unheard of.</p>
<p>A few years ago a kid from Ds hs was named a Presidential Scholar candidate and was accepted at Princeton. He is a really nice kid and his mother and I became friends while D and her middle child were in Montessori. The spring before he left for P, my husband and I were selling concessions during intermission at the schools play. We overheard a parent telling other parents this kid was going to P in fall and how she hoped he packed his long underwear because it gets very cold in Princeton. She of course was referring to Princeton, Alaska.</p>
<p>sm74</p>
<p>How do you square the idea that ‘merit is becoming a joke’–which, for you, means doing well on tests such as the SAT and ACT–with the published test scores of Ivy League institutions?</p>
<p>If it were just a ‘free for all’, then why do the enrolled students at these institutions tend to cluster in the upper 5% of all test takers?</p>
<p>I think colleges are free to question the value of such a test as a measure of academic merit, or of future academic success, and are free to openly discuss this. Critically examining the value of such a test should not be seen as ‘making an attack’.</p>
<p>SM74 - is it your position that the Ivies (etc) should admit solely or primarily based on SAT scores - that they should, in essence, line up their candidates top to bottom and take the first X?</p>