Quote:
Originally posted by ilikehazing
You are arguing quality?
The richest houses, with the most social activities, with the strongest reputation of being the top tier have always been in the south. I could name off the top houses in the nation, all in the south.
Phi Gam at UT-Austin, KA at Bama, The Fabulous Xi Chapter of Kappa Sig at Arkansas or LSU, SAE at Auburn, Sigma Chi at LSU and Arkansas (maybe.), Pike at.... well I guess Florida State if they are actually good anywhere, it is the biggest fraternity house in the nation. Beta's better than normal at Florida. Apparently they're better than average at Baylor too. I could probably go on and on.
|
Interesting evaluations. After I read that, I wondered if there happen to be any "top houses," in your estimation, at any private universities? Or maybe at any universities that are in the top 50 of U.S. News and World Report's 2006 listing of "America's Best Colleges and Universities"? I see that U. of Texas - Austin is #52 for U.S. News, Baylor is #78, Auburn is #85, Bama is #104, Florida State is #109, and then LSU and Arkansas are simply ranked as "third tier."
Now I have nothing against major state universities. Students can get excellent educations there. But I'm just wondering -- does it seem that students going to some private universities (or some very competitive public ones) are at a disadvantage if they want to be in a truly "top house"?
If so, I guess it's too bad -- all that work to get high SATs or have outstanding talents, to have lots of activities, to do well in interviews, and (at privates) to be prepared to pay tuition, fees, room and board ranging from the mid - $30,000 area to well over $40,000 -- and still not even have a chance at being in a "top house."
I guess it's a choice some students and their families have to make. Just hope they know what they're doing.
Threaded Mode