<p>I post only with the hope that it might be that extra little oomph that tips the scales in favor of Brown for someone on the fence. (And because – as I’ve told many a high-schooler – you can always go to Harvard for grad school, where it’s, like, pleasant.):</p>
<p>[A</a> Visitas Guide to Social Life | Opinion | The Harvard Crimson](<a href=“http://www.thecrimson.com/column/stein-club/article/2011/4/4/social-final-clubs-harvard/]A”>A Visitas Guide to Social Life | Opinion | The Harvard Crimson)</p>
<p>I don’t care one way or the other about throwing Harvard under the bus. I mostly liked the social life there, but that was back in the dark ages, when Harvard acted in loco parentis and let undergraduates drink what they could get. And I like Harvard a lot less now than I did back then.</p>
<p>But I have to take exception to this advice: “you can always go to Harvard for grad school…”</p>
<p>Years ago, I had a student who’d done that junior-year tour of colleges, including Harvard and some top LACs. She repeated what somebody at Amherst (or maybe Swarthmore) had told her: “…class size…blahblahblah…teaching fellows…blahblahblah…you should really go to Harvard for grad school.”</p>
<p>I listened, and then I told her, “I’ve heard that before, but I have to tell you, my advice is different. If you really want to go to Harvard, you should go every time they admit you, because you can’t be sure it will ever happen again.”</p>
<p>It more in the vein of damning with faint praise. the article seems written with the intent of rebutting the bad rap the finals clubs get in “The Social Network”, but, in doing so only draws attention to their weaknesses.</p>
<p>“I listened, and then I told her, ‘I’ve heard that before, but I have to tell you, my advice is different. If you really want to go to Harvard, you should go every time they admit you, because you can’t be sure it will ever happen again.’”</p>
<p>I suppose that if an applicant really does understand the opportunity to attend HARVARD as a gift from on high, then they should heed this advice.</p>
<p>My advice was more in this vain: Harvard is actually a collection of many schools – weirdly separate little fiefdoms. Some of them, like the college, offer a kinda sucky experience from all I’ve heard. Some of them, like the law school, offer a great experience. There’s no reason to attend the former over a place like Brown, but look forward to your future opportunity to attend the latter.</p>
<p>From the sound of the article, the problem is with the administration’s inability to keep in touch with the students. Just something to note (which I really like REGARDLESS of how the ROTC debate ends up), Brown is one of, if not the only Ivy (including Stanford) that, upon DaDT being repealed, didn’t have the administration automatically call for ROTC to be reinstated. Rather, we’ve had a committee which includes students, as well as open-to-the-public debates to figure out where we actually should stand. Brown’s corporation may not always listen to the undergrads, but we have numerous open-house events, and Ruth holds office hours and actually attends undergrad events (for instance, she’s judging in the final round of an on-campus, sophomore-and junior only debate tournament we hold). Brown is one of the few places I know of where more changes seem to be student-pushed rather than administration-pushed.</p>
<p>Also, for instance with debate, we’re one of the only schools on the circuit that the administration lets serve alcohol at a party held in a university-building (NOT a dorm or apartment) during the tournament. This doesn’t happen elsewhere. And you’re nearly guaranteed admission into any fraternity you want to join (might be one or two exceptions), and the frat parties are open-admission, first-come first-in, so there is almost inevitably an equitable gender ratio.</p>