I think she's ranking schools: Lowest to highest- Wisconsin UGA UF Michigan Maybe it's the crazy Wisconsin troll lol |
They are all top flagships so the ranking doesn’t matter. |
| Definitely Wisconsin. Our child chose it over UGA and Miami and Syracuse. He is doing real estate there and it's the highest ranked real estate program in the country. |
What did he like about the most? I know real estate is really good there. Is that why? |
Also was he direct admit to business school or pre-business? Its getting hard to get in the business school and they only give you one try. |
Mostly full professors. It would be useful if you're applying to graduate schools with one of the best professors in the country writing it. It should be noted in terms of recognition, Wisconsin still has more famous professors than Michigan does, thanks to the fact that many of these professors were hired in the 1980s and 90s (when Michigan entire college of LSA sucked). |
Not really, it's the professors who can change you and teach you in four years. After all, isn't that what you are paying for? Furthermore, Wisconsin students are smarter by every measurable standardized test score of admitted students (see wikipedia). Even if you reject all that information, if you check notable alumni, you will see Wisconsin is producing far more accomplished alumni. |
Wait who are you comparing Wisconsin to? |
Are you a professor at Wisconsin? This exact claim has been posted in several threads recently. |
Presumably UMD and UGA, since those are the schools this thread is about. |
Undergrad students don’t need famous professors to change and teach them. Do you really think the marginal differences between UW and UGA students are meaningful when compared to thousands of colleges? That is like the 1% arguing with each other about who is the most wealthy. |
I have a knowledge of academia; but you don't need to have knowledge of academia to understand that Michigan is a university built off of trade schools, not off of being a university. To understand this, simply compare Nobel laureates and notable alumni and their impact. With Michigan you never see any distinct schools of thought in their academics or Nobel laureates; their Nobel laureates come per chance in random, unrelated, fields. At Wisconsin, we see that their Nobel laureates and famous alumni come directly from school of thought in their actual university departments (like at Harvard or Berkeley). For example, from John Bascom influenced Lafollete (future governor and progressive), while also influencing Frederick Jackson Turner who, in turn, influenced several notable academics, progressives, and judges such as Merle Curti, Harvard Judge Henry Friendly, and the economist John Rogers Commons. Commons, in fact, produced several Nobel laureates under his tutelage, most famously Theodore Schultz. And don't think these schools of thought have no influence today. One of the most recent Pulitzer Prize winners was David Blight (UW alumnus) and student of Merle Curti (and thus of Turner and Bascom) and current professor at Yale. The point is Michigan lacks this kind of structure at all; no schools of thought have ever emerged from there and their academic influence is forgettable. Any attempt by a Michigan booster to explain exactly why Michigan is such a good school eventually falls under a.) citing fluke contemporary rankings b.) law school. Neither of which Michigan can really take credit for (in terms of academics) as it's clear what's creating those things: a.) football b). rich out of state students |
|
Why is this about Michigan? That school is not being considered here.
The caliber of UGA students has improved tremendously. It is just as hard to get into as Wisconsin. |
You sound unhinged |
One doesn't have to be a Nobel laureate to know that "football" is the only word in this post that kids care about. |