Why I made the questionable decision to join a 'startup' university
Written over a year ago; my views may have moved.
I’m often asked to explain my undergraduate background. That’s fair. My alma mater - Minerva University - is a small liberal arts institution with three glowing red exclamation marks around it: its first class graduated in 2019!; all classes are fully online!; and you spend each semester in a different city, from San Francisco to Seoul to Berlin (!).
Each of those factoids already require some explanation in polite company. But then there are the funny factoids that don’t sound plausible at all. Lowest acceptance rate in the US, so “harder to get into than Harvard?” Obviously not. What’s this nonsense? Mysterious puzzles mailed to US high schoolers as an application hook? They’re definitely successful at getting attention.
And yet, Minerva was my top choice for undergrad. My 18-year-old self was incredibly naive, but I still believe he made a borderline rational decision. I’m conflicted on whether I’d make the same decision today, and this series of posts aims to help any prospective student to carefully weigh their options. Since I’m trying to expose both my rationale for choosing Minerva and its strengths and weaknesses, I urge you to be alert to my potential biases - especially confirmation and hindsight.
Minerva is a product of the early 2010s, and many of its early decisions reflect the startup culture of the time. It seems to be drifting from that vision, for good and ill.