Is there any academic reason to pick George Mason over W&M?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So we are only allowed to praise universities based on false characteristics now?

The school has an "illustrious" history is this was 1776. It's not. The past 244 years of American history have gone by and again nothing illustrious has happened at the school, other than shutting down multiple times due to multiple bankruptcies, then being re-opened years later by the state as a school for schoolteachers.

This is simply stating facts, rather than embellishing a magical history that does not exist. We are not talking about Harvard, Yale, Princeton here, which were great in colonial times and have contributed ever more to American history since.

To say W&M has been quiet and irrelevant, to be frank, is an understatement. Multiple bankruptcies and closures, then being reopened as a state school for schoolteachers, are embarrassments.

How ignorant you are. Do you realize that there was a small conflict that occurred between 1861-1865? In the post war period Virginia was not even a state, but Military District No. 1. Virginia and the South were punished by destitution for their secession. HYP were on the winning side, flush with money from the newly industrialized North.

William and Mary had been a small, Anglican institution, providing a classical education thought to be essential for a Gentleman. With industrialization Northern institutions quickly became trade schools. It was Southern education that provided the great statesmen of the revolutionary period.

You spend a great deal of time railing against an institution of understated irrelevance. Guess you never received the kind of well rounded liberal education that William and Mary provides.

All that to just come back to talk about the "great statesmen of the revolutionary period"?

Again, no one denies the college produced a large number of great statesmen in the colonial period. That's largely because it was one of the few colleges that existed outside of NE and there was no other college to attend in the South.

Since then, it hasn't.

You sure sound like a broken record in light of the evidence others have posted. Sorry you couldn't get in.

The evidence others have posted consists repeated bleating about its colonial history.

Don't worry, you can continue to compare the school to prestigious privates to make yourself feel better for having it as your best option.

PP above just listed the many prestigious recent alumni including Jen Psaki. Maybe your reading comprehension needs some work?

Are you seriously comparing a press secretary to the current alumni of schools like Columbia and Harvard in government?

Is Ouachita Baptist University a prestigious school now? Colorado State University at Pueblo? Connecticut College?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So we are only allowed to praise universities based on false characteristics now?

The school has an "illustrious" history is this was 1776. It's not. The past 244 years of American history have gone by and again nothing illustrious has happened at the school, other than shutting down multiple times due to multiple bankruptcies, then being re-opened years later by the state as a school for schoolteachers.

This is simply stating facts, rather than embellishing a magical history that does not exist. We are not talking about Harvard, Yale, Princeton here, which were great in colonial times and have contributed ever more to American history since.

To say W&M has been quiet and irrelevant, to be frank, is an understatement. Multiple bankruptcies and closures, then being reopened as a state school for schoolteachers, are embarrassments.

How ignorant you are. Do you realize that there was a small conflict that occurred between 1861-1865? In the post war period Virginia was not even a state, but Military District No. 1. Virginia and the South were punished by destitution for their secession. HYP were on the winning side, flush with money from the newly industrialized North.

William and Mary had been a small, Anglican institution, providing a classical education thought to be essential for a Gentleman. With industrialization Northern institutions quickly became trade schools. It was Southern education that provided the great statesmen of the revolutionary period.

You spend a great deal of time railing against an institution of understated irrelevance. Guess you never received the kind of well rounded liberal education that William and Mary provides.

All that to just come back to talk about the "great statesmen of the revolutionary period"?

Again, no one denies the college produced a large number of great statesmen in the colonial period. That's largely because it was one of the few colleges that existed outside of NE and there was no other college to attend in the South.

Since then, it hasn't.

You sure sound like a broken record in light of the evidence others have posted. Sorry you couldn't get in.

The evidence others have posted consists repeated bleating about its colonial history.

Don't worry, you can continue to compare the school to prestigious privates to make yourself feel better for having it as your best option.

PP above just listed the many prestigious recent alumni including Jen Psaki. Maybe your reading comprehension needs some work?

Are you seriously comparing a press secretary to the current alumni of schools like Columbia and Harvard in government?

Is Ouachita Baptist University a prestigious school now? Colorado State University at Pueblo? Connecticut College?

Trump family: Wharton
Jared Kushner: Harvard
GW Bush: Yale, Harvard

Are you seriously comparing the eloquent press secretary to one of these dumb, ignorant clowns?

[Anonymous]

P

lenty of Southern colleges struggled during the Civil War, including Duke, UNC, UVA, etc.

None went bankrupt multiple times and were absorbed by the state as a school for educating teachers.

You really should read a little before you post stupid stuff. UVA and UNC are and were public, even so UNC closed during reconstruction between 1871-1875. W&M was private until 1906. Duke wasn't even Duke during the period, not yet having received huge amounts of money from it's namesake industrialist benefactors. It survived the war as Trinity College, basically a seminary for the Methodist Church. Oh and btw, there were other choices in the South by the 18th and early 19th century. Ever heard of the College of South Carolina or the College of Charleston?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:P

lenty of Southern colleges struggled during the Civil War, including Duke, UNC, UVA, etc.

None went bankrupt multiple times and were absorbed by the state as a school for educating teachers.

You really should read a little before you post stupid stuff. UVA and UNC are and were public, even so UNC closed during reconstruction between 1871-1875. W&M was private until 1906. Duke wasn't even Duke during the period, not yet having received huge amounts of money from it's namesake industrialist benefactors. It survived the war as Trinity College, basically a seminary for the Methodist Church. Oh and btw, there were other choices in the South by the 18th and early 19th century. Ever heard of the College of South Carolina or the College of Charleston?

Yes, not much historical context. Duke was not Duke and was not in Durham. It was Trinity College in Trinity, North Carolina, and didn't move to Durham until 1892. It didn't start to look like what became present day Duke until the the Duke Endowment funds came in the 1920s. UNC as noted had to close during Reconstruction.

UVA was occupied by the Union (Generals Custer and Sheridan), but was spared being burned. In this regard, it was more fortunate than other schools like William & Mary, the University of Alabama, and VMI, which were burned by the occupiers. Still UVA only graduated 5 students at the lowest points and only reached pre-war enrollment again in 1904, nearly 40 years after the end of the Civil War.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good grief! Yes, GMU has come a long way in 20 years and good for the school and its students. I received a
masters from GMU and it was a supportive environment and the degree has served me well. But make no mistake. For an undergraduate experience there is little that can compare to W&M. The history, the gorgeous campus, the teaching quality, alumni network, student teacher ratio... the list goes on. I think it is a magical place if you are looking for an exceptional liberal arts experience. But I think most people know that already and just like to be annoying.

I think you are overselling the history, alumni network and campus quite a bit.

Yes it has a long history...but an illustrious one only for the colonial period 240 years ago. Since then, the school has been quiet and frankly irrelevant. It was private and went bankrupt and closed, was later re-opened as a public teaching school (as in, a school to teach teachers similar to Mary Washington).

As for the alumni network...does it even have one? I don't think old people being impressed by the school's name can be considered a network.

The campus is great for a tourist visit. You shouldn't pick a college based on how pretty the campus is, more so the opportunities in the surrounding area.

Obviously the undergraduate student education is likely going to be better there than GMU for many subjects. I don't think anyone here is disputing that, they are just providing fields where GMU may be better (i.e. IT) and degrees that GMU provides than W&M doesn't (engineering).

DP. Your words “frankly irrelevant” suggest that you have a chip on your shoulder.

So we are only allowed to praise universities based on false characteristics now?

The school has an "illustrious" history is this was 1776. It's not. The past 244 years of American history have gone by and again nothing illustrious has happened at the school, other than shutting down multiple times due to multiple bankruptcies, then being re-opened years later by the state as a school for schoolteachers.

This is simply stating facts, rather than embellishing a magical history that does not exist. We are not talking about Harvard, Yale, Princeton here, which were great in colonial times and have contributed ever more to American history since.

To say W&M has been quiet and irrelevant, to be frank, is an understatement. Multiple bankruptcies and closures, then being reopened as a state school for schoolteachers, are embarrassments.

+1

W&M STILL touts Thomas Jefferson and people from that era among its "famous alumni" because there hasn't been anyone of that caliber since. It is resting on its laurels and an old reputation among older people, like another PP said.

More recent undergraduate alumni include Jon Stewart, Glenn Close (3X Emmy, 3X Tony, 3X Golden Globe), Robert Gates (Secretary of Defense under Bush and Obama, CIA Director), Jen Psaki (Press Secretary to President Mike Tomlin (head coach of the Steelers), Sean McDermott (head coach of the Buffalo Bills), Patton Oswalt (comedian and actor), Jill Ellis (2X Women's World Cup Champion Coach), Weijia Jiang (White House Correspondent for CBS News), Paula Reid (Chief Legal Correspondent for CNN), Ellen Stofan (NASA Chief Scientist), Beth Comstock (co-founder of Hulu and former Vice Chair of GE), James Comey (former FBI Director), Jacob Frey (Mayor of Minneapolis), U.S. Representative Stephanie Murphy, U.S. Representative Dina Titus, Martin Jurow (Producer of Breakfast at Tiffany's, The Pink Panther, Terms of Endearment), Henry Rosovsky (former Dean and Acting President of Harvard), Bill Lawrence (creator of Scrubs, Cougartown, Spin City), actor/musician Chip Esten (Nashville), actress Stephanie Szostak, actress Linda Lavin, designer Perry Ellis, Kelly Choi (Top Chef Masters), author Alexandra Bracken, Pulitzer Prize winner Joseph Ellis, Pulitzer Prize winner and Silver Star recipient Lewis Puller, Jr., William Ivey Long (6X Tony winner), J.D. Gibbs (President of Joe Gibbs Racing), Todd Boehly, co-owner of the Dodgers, Mary Jo White (Chair of the SEC), (Michael Powell), Chair of the FCC, Christina Romer (Chair, Council of Economic Advisors) and others.

Well played.

[Anonymous]

Answer to original question is a categorical resounding NO!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So we are only allowed to praise universities based on false characteristics now?

The school has an "illustrious" history is this was 1776. It's not. The past 244 years of American history have gone by and again nothing illustrious has happened at the school, other than shutting down multiple times due to multiple bankruptcies, then being re-opened years later by the state as a school for schoolteachers.

This is simply stating facts, rather than embellishing a magical history that does not exist. We are not talking about Harvard, Yale, Princeton here, which were great in colonial times and have contributed ever more to American history since.

To say W&M has been quiet and irrelevant, to be frank, is an understatement. Multiple bankruptcies and closures, then being reopened as a state school for schoolteachers, are embarrassments.

How ignorant you are. Do you realize that there was a small conflict that occurred between 1861-1865? In the post war period Virginia was not even a state, but Military District No. 1. Virginia and the South were punished by destitution for their secession. HYP were on the winning side, flush with money from the newly industrialized North.

William and Mary had been a small, Anglican institution, providing a classical education thought to be essential for a Gentleman. With industrialization Northern institutions quickly became trade schools. It was Southern education that provided the great statesmen of the revolutionary period.

You spend a great deal of time railing against an institution of understated irrelevance. Guess you never received the kind of well rounded liberal education that William and Mary provides.

All that to just come back to talk about the "great statesmen of the revolutionary period"?

Again, no one denies the college produced a large number of great statesmen in the colonial period. That's largely because it was one of the few colleges that existed outside of NE and there was no other college to attend in the South.

Since then, it hasn't.

You sure sound like a broken record in light of the evidence others have posted. Sorry you couldn't get in.

The evidence others have posted consists repeated bleating about its colonial history.

Don't worry, you can continue to compare the school to prestigious privates to make yourself feel better for having it as your best option.

PP above just listed the many prestigious recent alumni including Jen Psaki. Maybe your reading comprehension needs some work?

NP, but she was listed in response to "there haven't been any alumni of Thomas Jefferson's caliber recently." Jen Psaki is NOT on his level.

Geez. Jefferson is one of four on Mount Rushmore and one of the five presidential memorials in D.C. Perhaps that bar is a bit unfair.

Hi Jen. Sorry the Press Secretary thing isn’t going as planned. Perhaps you should have gone to Yale.

[Anonymous]

Yes, if you plan on majoring in engineering, computer science, Game Design or Cyber Security

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, if you plan on majoring in engineering, computer science, Game Design or Cyber Security

USNews actually has William and Mary ranked higher for computer science than GMU.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For a student who has no personal need to stay in Northern Virginia and will be living in a dorm the first year (and will try to for future years), does Mason offer any advantages? In anything? (I am not going to tell kid where to go; I've just been asking "Well, which do you think would be better as far as X?" questions. And I think a kid can have a good experience anywhere. But I don't know if I'm asking the right questions.)

Obviously W&M is more prestigious and competitive, and more of a "classic" college experience in terms of the dorm life and the relative isolation of the student body, but there are many reasons to choose Mason as well. For one, Mason is in a better location, making it easier to get internships and experiences directly related to a future career. It also has a lot of programs that are well integrated into the community and into local businesses and institutions, especially govt and education. And it's hard to look for a job when you are far away on a small college campus like W&M, so I think that for many careers Mason will lead to an easier transition to the workforce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a student who has no personal need to stay in Northern Virginia and will be living in a dorm the first year (and will try to for future years), does Mason offer any advantages? In anything? (I am not going to tell kid where to go; I've just been asking "Well, which do you think would be better as far as X?" questions. And I think a kid can have a good experience anywhere. But I don't know if I'm asking the right questions.)

Obviously W&M is more prestigious and competitive, and more of a "classic" college experience in terms of the dorm life and the relative isolation of the student body, but there are many reasons to choose Mason as well. For one, Mason is in a better location, making it easier to get internships and experiences directly related to a future career. It also has a lot of programs that are well integrated into the community and into local businesses and institutions, especially govt and education. And it's hard to look for a job when you are far away on a small college campus like W&M, so I think that for many careers Mason will lead to an easier transition to the workforce.

Princeton Review ranks W&M #1 for public schools for internships.

https://www.princetonreview.com/college-rankings?rankings=top-20-best-schools-for-internships-public-schools

[Anonymous]

Student survey. I didn't see W&M on USNWR rankings.
I was upset to read about student mental health issues recently. My child didn't like the cuts made to assistant professorships in favour of adjuncts, either.

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/internship-programs

https://flathatnews.com/2021/05/03/84-forced-hospitalizations-in-six-years-students-detail-negative-experiences-with-mental-health-services/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a student who has no personal need to stay in Northern Virginia and will be living in a dorm the first year (and will try to for future years), does Mason offer any advantages? In anything? (I am not going to tell kid where to go; I've just been asking "Well, which do you think would be better as far as X?" questions. And I think a kid can have a good experience anywhere. But I don't know if I'm asking the right questions.)

Obviously W&M is more prestigious and competitive, and more of a "classic" college experience in terms of the dorm life and the relative isolation of the student body, but there are many reasons to choose Mason as well. For one, Mason is in a better location, making it easier to get internships and experiences directly related to a future career. It also has a lot of programs that are well integrated into the community and into local businesses and institutions, especially govt and education. And it's hard to look for a job when you are far away on a small college campus like W&M, so I think that for many careers Mason will lead to an easier transition to the workforce.

Princeton Review ranks W&M #1 for public schools for internships.

https://www.princetonreview.com/college-rankings?rankings=top-20-best-schools-for-internships-public-schools

I mean, perhaps it is but this list certainly does not seem very accurate.

Berkeley and UCLA, two major schools in major metropolitan areas not even being ranked is a sign. Are recruiters really going to go to the middle of Missouri instead of across the street to recruit students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a student who has no personal need to stay in Northern Virginia and will be living in a dorm the first year (and will try to for future years), does Mason offer any advantages? In anything? (I am not going to tell kid where to go; I've just been asking "Well, which do you think would be better as far as X?" questions. And I think a kid can have a good experience anywhere. But I don't know if I'm asking the right questions.)

Obviously W&M is more prestigious and competitive, and more of a "classic" college experience in terms of the dorm life and the relative isolation of the student body, but there are many reasons to choose Mason as well. For one, Mason is in a better location, making it easier to get internships and experiences directly related to a future career. It also has a lot of programs that are well integrated into the community and into local businesses and institutions, especially govt and education. And it's hard to look for a job when you are far away on a small college campus like W&M, so I think that for many careers Mason will lead to an easier transition to the workforce.

A “better” location in the sense only that it’s close to DC? I mean, William and Mary has a DC program. I’m not sure that mere proximity to DC is worth spending four to seven years on that glorified commuter college campus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Answer to original question is a categorical resounding NO!

I’d say, Nooooooooooooooo!!!!