Reputation and prestige with public vs. private universities

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Prestige and rankings are important criteria for many. It influences the school's perception, causing a self-fulfilling prophecy of more people applying, lowering admissions, attracting potentially better candidates, and maybe climbing in rankings even more.

UVA must admit 2/3 Virginians by state law[u]. Michigan has about 50% OOS. UNC can't have more more than 18% OOS.

Looking into the crystal ball with the approaching population cliff and as we have fewer kids, can the obligation of public schools to take a large percentage of in-state students dilute the student body, creating another self-fulfilling prophecy, but on the other side causing public schools to fall in rankings compared to privates who can pick who they want?

If we look at UNC, the acceptance rate was 8.2% for OOS and 43% for in-state. The OOS student would be at the very top of the class and work much harder to get in, whereas the in-state student could be weaker and yet have a much higher and easier chance to get accepted. Why go to a public school then as OOS and not a private? Is having 2/3 Virginians sustainable to keep UVA in the top 25 in the future? UVA is incredibly competitive now, even for in-state. As the college age population decreases, will UVA have to admit weaker candidates to meet the 2/3 in-state mandate?

UVA is barely holding on to the T25 and is currently tied with CMU. I feel like private schools might overtake the top 30 with publics falling lower because of their ability to pick-and-choose.

What do you think?

No law about 2/3 in state for UVA. I would say if state reduces funding, this can change quickly to compensate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prestige and rankings are important criteria for many. It influences the school's perception, causing a self-fulfilling prophecy of more people applying, lowering admissions, attracting potentially better candidates, and maybe climbing in rankings even more.

UVA must admit 2/3 Virginians by state law. Michigan has about 50% OOS. UNC can't have more more than 18% OOS.

Looking into the crystal ball with the approaching population cliff and as we have fewer kids, can the obligation of public schools to take a large percentage of in-state students dilute the student body, creating another self-fulfilling prophecy, but on the other side causing public schools to fall in rankings compared to privates who can pick who they want?

If we look at UNC, the acceptance rate was 8.2% for OOS and 43% for in-state. The OOS student would be at the very top of the class and work much harder to get in, whereas the in-state student could be weaker and yet have a much higher and easier chance to get accepted. Why go to a public school then as OOS and not a private? Is having 2/3 Virginians sustainable to keep UVA in the top 25 in the future? UVA is incredibly competitive now, even for in-state. As the college age population decreases, will UVA have to admit weaker candidates to meet the 2/3 in-state mandate?

UVA is barely holding on to the T25 and is currently tied with CMU. I feel like private schools might overtake the top 30 with publics falling lower because of their ability to pick-and-choose.

What do you think?

I think you should watch the Super Bowl, rather than having people try to parse through your writing to extract the points you are trying to make.

It’s the NEU booster trolling for more validation that their school aka ‘a private’ is going to rise above UVA UNC and Mich ‘the falling publics’. Am I right OP?

Your obsession with NEU is crazy.
Seek help.

[Anonymous]

You guys are so lame on this board. So rankings obsessed. It is really sad. Also, Northeastern will never ever be prestigious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You guys are so lame on this board. So rankings obsessed. It is really sad. Also, Northeastern will never ever be prestigious.

pres·tige
noun
widespread respect and admiration felt for someone or something on the basis of a perception of their achievements or quality.

According to the definition, Northeastern is already prestigious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys are so lame on this board. So rankings obsessed. It is really sad. Also, Northeastern will never ever be prestigious.

pres·tige
noun
widespread respect and admiration felt for someone or something on the basis of a perception of their achievements or quality.

According to the definition, Northeastern is already prestigious.

Here we go again!!!!!!
Delusion
Noun false belief or judgment about external reality, held despite incontrovertible evidence to the contrary, occurring especially in mental conditions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prestige and rankings are important criteria for many. It influences the school's perception, causing a self-fulfilling prophecy of more people applying, lowering admissions, attracting potentially better candidates, and maybe climbing in rankings even more.

UVA must admit 2/3 Virginians by state law[u]. Michigan has about 50% OOS. UNC can't have more more than 18% OOS.

Looking into the crystal ball with the approaching population cliff and as we have fewer kids, can the obligation of public schools to take a large percentage of in-state students dilute the student body, creating another self-fulfilling prophecy, but on the other side causing public schools to fall in rankings compared to privates who can pick who they want?

If we look at UNC, the acceptance rate was 8.2% for OOS and 43% for in-state. The OOS student would be at the very top of the class and work much harder to get in, whereas the in-state student could be weaker and yet have a much higher and easier chance to get accepted. Why go to a public school then as OOS and not a private? Is having 2/3 Virginians sustainable to keep UVA in the top 25 in the future? UVA is incredibly competitive now, even for in-state. As the college age population decreases, will UVA have to admit weaker candidates to meet the 2/3 in-state mandate?

UVA is barely holding on to the T25 and is currently tied with CMU. I feel like private schools might overtake the top 30 with publics falling lower because of their ability to pick-and-choose.

What do you think?

No law about 2/3 in state for UVA. I would say if state reduces funding, this can change quickly to compensate.

According to Wikipedia: "UVA is required, by Virginia state law, to matriculate two-thirds of its undergraduate student body from its pool of in-state applicants."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prestige and rankings are important criteria for many. It influences the school's perception, causing a self-fulfilling prophecy of more people applying, lowering admissions, attracting potentially better candidates, and maybe climbing in rankings even more.

UVA must admit 2/3 Virginians by state law. Michigan has about 50% OOS. UNC can't have more more than 18% OOS.

Looking into the crystal ball with the approaching population cliff and as we have fewer kids, can the obligation of public schools to take a large percentage of in-state students dilute the student body, creating another self-fulfilling prophecy, but on the other side causing public schools to fall in rankings compared to privates who can pick who they want?

If we look at UNC, the acceptance rate was 8.2% for OOS and 43% for in-state. The OOS student would be at the very top of the class and work much harder to get in, whereas the in-state student could be weaker and yet have a much higher and easier chance to get accepted. Why go to a public school then as OOS and not a private? Is having 2/3 Virginians sustainable to keep UVA in the top 25 in the future? UVA is incredibly competitive now, even for in-state. As the college age population decreases, will UVA have to admit weaker candidates to meet the 2/3 in-state mandate?

UVA is barely holding on to the T25 and is currently tied with CMU. I feel like private schools might overtake the top 30 with publics falling lower because of their ability to pick-and-choose.

What do you think?

I think you should watch the Super Bowl, rather than having people try to parse through your writing to extract the points you are trying to make.

It’s the NEU booster trolling for more validation that their school aka ‘a private’ is going to rise above UVA UNC and Mich ‘the falling publics’. Am I right OP?

Stop injecting NEU to every single thread and trolling.
This must be a mental disorder.
Mod, you should ban this person please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prestige and rankings are important criteria for many. It influences the school's perception, causing a self-fulfilling prophecy of more people applying, lowering admissions, attracting potentially better candidates, and maybe climbing in rankings even more.

UVA must admit 2/3 Virginians by state law. Michigan has about 50% OOS. UNC can't have more more than 18% OOS.

Looking into the crystal ball with the approaching population cliff and as we have fewer kids, can the obligation of public schools to take a large percentage of in-state students dilute the student body, creating another self-fulfilling prophecy, but on the other side causing public schools to fall in rankings compared to privates who can pick who they want?

If we look at UNC, the acceptance rate was 8.2% for OOS and 43% for in-state. The OOS student would be at the very top of the class and work much harder to get in, whereas the in-state student could be weaker and yet have a much higher and easier chance to get accepted. Why go to a public school then as OOS and not a private? Is having 2/3 Virginians sustainable to keep UVA in the top 25 in the future? UVA is incredibly competitive now, even for in-state. As the college age population decreases, will UVA have to admit weaker candidates to meet the 2/3 in-state mandate?

UVA is barely holding on to the T25 and is currently tied with CMU. I feel like private schools might overtake the top 30 with publics falling lower because of their ability to pick-and-choose.

What do you think?

I think you should watch the Super Bowl, rather than having people try to parse through your writing to extract the points you are trying to make.

It’s the NEU booster trolling for more validation that their school aka ‘a private’ is going to rise above UVA UNC and Mich ‘the falling publics’. Am I right OP?

Stop injecting NEU to every single thread and trolling.
This must be a mental disorder.
Mod, you should ban this person please.

I agree. Mod does not want to hear it, because the NEU hater is telling the mod that he is a "lawyer", and is trying to take measures to take loopholes (which are not working, obviously). Other posters are keeping evidence (I will leave it at that), and are on it, thankfully. Wonder what those who are tired of the NEU hater are going to do with all that juicy information. Should be interesting.

[Anonymous]

Hmm. Maybe this is OK because publicly funded state institutions are intended to educate the citizens of that state. Admitting out of staters is fine but their mission is different from private institutions. So of course the pool of applicants, accepted students and enrolled students should be different.

[Anonymous]

State schools should serve their residents first. The problem is international student attendance is only going to increase making it increasingly difficult to get OOS spots at any selective public like UVA, Michigan, Cal, UNC, UGA, Florida, UCLA

[Anonymous]

Drinking game! Everyone take two drinks— “prestige” is in the title.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hmm. Maybe this is OK because publicly funded state institutions are intended to educate the citizens of that state. Admitting out of staters is fine but their mission is different from private institutions. So of course the pool of applicants, accepted students and enrolled students should be different.

With the updated methodology, it makes sense to rank publics and privates separately.

[Anonymous]

First, congrats to OP for being able to type so many words while in a straightjacket.

Second, I know there is a perception that the in-state students at Michigan & UNC are far inferior to OOS, but don’t get carried away with the contrast. I lived in Michigan for decades & I can assure you that only the top students from most high schools are applying to U of M. If you’re not a real standout, you know your place is at Michigan State or a directional. I’m not saying there isn’t a slight difference in quality between in-state & OOS, but it’s not like the in-staters are drooling idiots like some people claim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Prestige and rankings are important criteria for many. It influences the school's perception, causing a self-fulfilling prophecy of more people applying, lowering admissions, attracting potentially better candidates, and maybe climbing in rankings even more.

UVA must admit 2/3 Virginians by state law. Michigan has about 50% OOS. UNC can't have more more than 18% OOS.

Looking into the crystal ball with the approaching population cliff and as we have fewer kids, can the obligation of public schools to take a large percentage of in-state students dilute the student body, creating another self-fulfilling prophecy, but on the other side causing public schools to fall in rankings compared to privates who can pick who they want?

If we look at UNC, the acceptance rate was 8.2% for OOS and 43% for in-state. The OOS student would be at the very top of the class and work much harder to get in, whereas the in-state student could be weaker and yet have a much higher and easier chance to get accepted. Why go to a public school then as OOS and not a private? Is having 2/3 Virginians sustainable to keep UVA in the top 25 in the future? UVA is incredibly competitive now, even for in-state. As the college age population decreases, will UVA have to admit weaker candidates to meet the 2/3 in-state mandate?

UVA is barely holding on to the T25 and is currently tied with CMU. I feel like private schools might overtake the top 30 with publics falling lower because of their ability to pick-and-choose.

What do you think?

Why are folks so certain that the in-state students are weaker?

[Anonymous]

Yes, OP, your kid that couldn’t get into UVA in-state so is going to Michigan instead (twice the size, btw-can take more kids) is superior to UVA grads. Does that make you feel better?

Look the Nc kids that don’t get into UNC CH, the VA kids that don’t get into UVA, the Michigan kids that don’t get into UM AA—often apply and end up at other state’s flagships.