Ah. I was using a stat for graduate-school students at Cornell and did not include professional-school students. Thanks for the correction.
That would put Cornell and Princeton at almost precisely the same percentages, then: ~5400 undergrads and ~2850 grad students at PU. Seems to be nearly the same percentage at Dartmouth, as well. So as you're using the term, all three would be "grad focused." Stanford and Harvard even more so, of course.
heh fair enough.
I'm mostly going on reputation rather than just numbers....My sense is that Dartmouth and Princeton have institutionally decided to put an emphasis on undergraduate education, while other schools like Cornell and Harvard have not made that commitment. I'm not sure about Stanford.
You used 63% undergrad as your definition of "grad focused": "I see Cornell's student body as just 63% undergrad. 15,507+8,877. Which is quite grad focused."
Given that operational definition, Princeton and Stanford and Harvard (and likely Dartmouth) would perforce be grad focused as well.
I'll agree that Dartmouth's reputation of primarily concerning itself with undergraduates is widespread. But, having spent some of my undergrad years and my first graduate program at Cornell, I certainly never had the feeling that undergraduate students were secondary there...somewhat (though mildly) the opposite, in fact.
But I'm not intending to hijack the thread, so this will be my final post on this particular sub-topic and you can have the last word! Be well.
I think you pick the most prestigious school in the area of the country you want to live. So if you want to live on the west coast, UC Berkley or Stanford.
I'd go to the best school I could for my major. In my case that would be MIT or Carnegie Mellon and I'd choose that over any D1 school including Stanford 1,000,000 times out of 1,000,000.
Why are there so many elitists here who think going to an elitist school is a good life choice?
To me, it is better to go to a state school and help them build a team. You will gain leadership skills, learn how to overcome challenges, and get to know the common people. You won't have that dynamic of looking down on the janitors or the townspeople, you will be equal to them. It is much more fulfilling to become a part of a community by building it up than to pretend you are an elite who deserves elitist treatment.
Why are there so many elitists here who think going to an elitist school is a good life choice?
To me, it is better to go to a state school and help them build a team. You will gain leadership skills, learn how to overcome challenges, and get to know the common people. You won't have that dynamic of looking down on the janitors or the townspeople, you will be equal to them. It is much more fulfilling to become a part of a community by building it up than to pretend you are an elite who deserves elitist treatment.
In other words, don't choose the better education because it will turn you into a bad person.
You have all jumped to academics without considering athletic or price. Are you all saying that Tuohy should have chosen MIT or Cornell or Harvard? How about Nico? The schools that you are listing cost $320k for 50% of the students. It would be a dumb decision for an elite runner to pass on a free Stanford education in favor of aMIT education at $320k.
What the title says. Not just for running, but also depending how much you care about academics/location/team environment, etc.
Personally, I think Stanford is probably the smartest choice because having an undergraduate degree from there opens up so many career options.
I would opt for CU Boulder. It has everything, excellent running program, history of success, altitude. Plus, you can't beat the natural beauty. Some of you might say their academics are not stellar and that's true but if you plan on earning an advanced degree where you go for undergrad doesn't matter that much.
Stats are what they are. 50% pay full price. Most runners are better off than the average. hat means more than 50% of top distance runners would pay $320k to attend an Ivy while they could attend Stanford or Notre Dame or Michigan or Duke for free. Those are pretty straight forward stats.
No, that's not what it means that most runners are better off than the average. The average in that expression is not a moveable term applicable to any institution or group. If the average family income nationwide is around $65k now, runners might have a family income of $80-90k (no idea whether that is true). At Stanford or Harvard, average family income is probably more like $200k. That wouldn't mean at all that runners at Stanford or Harvard would average more than that, apart from someone like Hicks.
Grad focus is not defined solely by # or proportion of grad students. Where the faculty is heavily research-based, and there are stout graduate programs, their hearts and attention will be primarily with the graduate students with whom they conduct research or at least teach and supervise theses and help get jobs in the field. All that is certainly the case with places like Cornell, MIT, Cal Tech, Stanford, and U.C. Berkeley (which has truly outstanding graduate programs in more areas than any other school in my previous research on this question).
I was a top athlete in the league, won some stuff, went to regionals, set some school records and started making 200k upon graduation with minimal - zero debt bc I got a big scholarship
maybe not as academically or athletically elite as other places but for us non- super stars it’s a good option
Why would you assume that wealthy people smart people wouldn't produce a high percentage of distance runners? What would cause the elite distance runners to be in a lower proportion in Ivy caliber kids? I absolutely disagree.
Obviously ivies are great schools but it’s a bit disingenuous to say that they are the best place to make connections and have great job placement. For many of the rich students who attend it really does not matter where they attend school, they will have the same connections/opportunities anywhere. If you are a rich, paying full freight, kid who grew up vacationing in the Hamptons Harvard is a great school but you/your parents/family will still get you a great job through their connections if you attend the University of Vermont or some other random school because you enjoy the setting and the team when you went on a visit… yes Stanford is the best athletics/academics school but there are many schools that would be a great choice for many top runners that would never make this “list of the best”. Elite schools are great but many studies have shown that driven people who have the credentials to get into elite schools and do not attend and instead chose a less elite school succeed at much the same rate as those who did attend an elite school. Much like fast kids are fast wherever they go, smart kid will be smart wherever they go.
Just a reminder that the thread asks "where would YOU go." It's soliciting individual opinions, not a debate about what school might be the platonic "best."