Was UM, UVA, and UW Madison considered more “prestigious” back in the day?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Back when I graduated high school( in the eighties), these were the schools people talked about. They weren’t Harvard, but I’d put them analogous to Notre Dame or Vanderbilt today. What happened? Is it all because they say “public” or “land-grant”, kind of how the ultra pretentious rip on Cornell.

I'm confused as to your point, OP. UVA has become especially difficult to get into. Are you trying to say it is "less" than it was "back in the day".? Today, it takes 4.52 weighted GPA, a 1510 and/or a 34 ACT to get in. That's the 75th percentile, which you need if applying unhooked from no. virginia.

[Anonymous]

The US News rank reflects that perfectly. Notre Dame, Vanderbilt, and Michigan, are considered slightly more prestigious (for undergraduate). Then comes UVA with Wisconsin a bit behind

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back when I graduated high school( in the eighties), these were the schools people talked about. They weren’t Harvard, but I’d put them analogous to Notre Dame or Vanderbilt today. What happened? Is it all because they say “public” or “land-grant”, kind of how the ultra pretentious rip on Cornell.

I'm confused as to your point, OP. UVA has become especially difficult to get into. Are you trying to say it is "less" than it was "back in the day".? Today, it takes 4.52 weighted GPA, a 1510 and/or a 34 ACT to get in. That's the 75th percentile, which you need if applying unhooked from no. virginia.

And Michigan is far more difficult as well. Out of state, don’t count on 1500+ SATs and perfect GPAs to do it. It’s as much of a crapshoot as the T-10.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think they were ever equivalent to Vanderbilt.

Until recently, Vanderbilt was hardly a thing. Robust marketing department for sure. My high stats kid received multiple weekly glossy marketing material from the school for at least two years. Once they mailed my kid that as a national merit finalist she qualified for a 65k merit scholarship if she listed Vanderbilt as her first choice in the NMS portal. The 65k was a mistake (it’s 5k instead). They had to mail over 15k corrected letters to the parents of NMF students informing them of the error. My kid had no interest in the school or Tennessee…even if in Nashville.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think they were ever equivalent to Vanderbilt.

Until recently, Vanderbilt was hardly a thing. Robust marketing department for sure. My high stats kid received multiple weekly glossy marketing material from the school for at least two years. Once they mailed my kid that as a national merit finalist she qualified for a 65k merit scholarship if she listed Vanderbilt as her first choice in the NMS portal. The 65k was a mistake (it’s 5k instead). They had to mail over 15k corrected letters to the parents of NMF students informing them of the error. My kid had no interest in the school or Tennessee…even if in Nashville.

Sounds like they blew a Nor'easter…..

[Anonymous]

In 1984/85 UVA was on my family's radar. We had not heard of the other two you mention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think they were ever equivalent to Vanderbilt.

Michigan (USN 21) and UVA (24) are absolutely in the same tier as Vanderbilt (18).

Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Back when I graduated high school( in the eighties), these were the schools people talked about. They weren’t Harvard, but I’d put them analogous to Notre Dame or Vanderbilt today. What happened? Is it all because they say “public” or “land-grant”, kind of how the ultra pretentious rip on Cornell.

The only one of those that was prestigious was UVA, as a carolina high school kid in the 90s. Out of state it was a big deal. The others no, mostly thought of as their state’s NCState. Which was meh and still is. Currently my kids assess the same. Vanderbilt and Duke are more popular than ivies from here, and UVA out of state is highly coveted. Not the others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It feels like mich and wisc are higher now, and uva may have fallen a bit, than 25 years ago.

lol. No

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back when I graduated high school( in the eighties), these were the schools people talked about. They weren’t Harvard, but I’d put them analogous to Notre Dame or Vanderbilt today. What happened? Is it all because they say “public” or “land-grant”, kind of how the ultra pretentious rip on Cornell.

The only one of those that was prestigious was UVA, as a carolina high school kid in the 90s. Out of state it was a big deal. The others no, mostly thought of as their state’s NCState. Which was meh and still is. Currently my kids assess the same. Vanderbilt and Duke are more popular than ivies from here, and UVA out of state is highly coveted. Not the others.

I grew up in the midwest and UVA wasn’t ever considered by any of my peers. ND was respected and Vanderbilt was an afterthought. The only other public university in the country, at that time, with a rep to match ours locally was Berkeley. That’s it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back when I graduated high school( in the eighties), these were the schools people talked about. They weren’t Harvard, but I’d put them analogous to Notre Dame or Vanderbilt today. What happened? Is it all because they say “public” or “land-grant”, kind of how the ultra pretentious rip on Cornell.

The answer is that universities began to compete like firms starting in the Reagan Era. Notre Dame and Vanderbilt built up their endowments and invested in their resources to attract talented students. Michigan and Virginia, while public, did similar things, with Michigan allowing its sports teams to market and bring in revenue. They also have top graduate professional schools (mba/JD).

Wisconsin, one of the few land grants with great academics, did not become more market oriented. It hasn’t changed, in fact quite the opposite. While the others privatized, Wisconsin remained an old fashioned state university which cared more about graduate research than undergraduate education.

The US News rank reflects that perfectly. Notre Dame and Vanderbilt are considered slightly more prestigious ( for undergraduate), UVA and Michigan are tied, and Wisconsin is a bit behind. It’s not rocket science.

It was all about competing in and gaming the USNWR rankings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA was not a big deal when I went to college in 1997.

+1
Neither was Vanderbilt, for that matter.

UM was the only notable one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back when I graduated high school( in the eighties), these were the schools people talked about. They weren’t Harvard, but I’d put them analogous to Notre Dame or Vanderbilt today. What happened? Is it all because they say “public” or “land-grant”, kind of how the ultra pretentious rip on Cornell.

The answer is that universities began to compete like firms starting in the Reagan Era. Notre Dame and Vanderbilt built up their endowments and invested in their resources to attract talented students. Michigan and Virginia, while public, did similar things, with Michigan allowing its sports teams to market and bring in revenue. They also have top graduate professional schools (mba/JD).

Wisconsin, one of the few land grants with great academics, did not become more market oriented. It hasn’t changed, in fact quite the opposite. While the others privatized, Wisconsin remained an old fashioned state university which cared more about graduate research than undergraduate education.

The US News rank reflects that perfectly. Notre Dame and Vanderbilt are considered slightly more prestigious ( for undergraduate), UVA and Michigan are tied, and Wisconsin is a bit behind. It’s not rocket science.

It was all about competing in and gaming the USNWR rankings.

+1 Still is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Back when I graduated high school( in the eighties), these were the schools people talked about. They weren’t Harvard, but I’d put them analogous to Notre Dame or Vanderbilt today. What happened? Is it all because they say “public” or “land-grant”, kind of how the ultra pretentious rip on Cornell.

There have been a lot of changes over the past forty years. In 1980, Wisconsin was probably the most prestigious of this bunch. Vanderbilt was a regional school for rich southerners. Notre Dame was a niche school for Catholic school kids. And UVA and Michigan were decent state schools but nothing exceptional.

And today everything is different. Obviously having responsive management to changing trends and demographics has been critical. Both Vanderbilt and Notre Dame have had great chancellors over the past few decades. And both schools developed outstanding brands with smart investing in infrastructure and key programs. Both schools also now have enormous endowments that allow them to get top students and faculty and pretty much do as they please. And sports revenue certainly helps. Notre Dame is Notre Dame. And Vanderbilt is part of the SEC and getting a cool billion per ten years just through revenue sharing alone. Both Vanderbilt and Notre Dame are now among the most desirable schools in the country.

Michigan did two things great - football. And engineering. Most of the Ivies are decades behind the smart public flagship universities when it comes to engineering. As engineering became more critical, more in demand, more desirable, and more competitive there was an enormous opportunity for certain schools with the resources to invest to really make a name for themselves. And Michigan did just that. Combined with overall excellence and a football program that inspired immense passion and loyalty - not to mention revenue - and Michigan became a cool school. Also, Ann Arbor is a great college town. Plus, Michigan is nearly 50 percent OOS, which gives it both national stature and a high quality student body.

I think the source of UVA's prestige remains the same as always - it's one of the oldest schools, founded by TJ, in a pleasant part of the country. It is a genteel school with a long list of famous alumni. Darden has helped keep it modern and lucrative. But UVA has a preppy vibe that's long been appealing to many. Plus sports and school spirit. And generally being good academically, particularly in liberal arts.

Wisconsin, meanwhile, has done everything wrong. They've remained focused on graduate programs instead of undergrad. They've had terrible political interference from state politicians that drove away both funding and talent. They're not particularly good at sports. And it's too cold, which is a no-no with this generation of students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is this a troll post? "What happened?" Nothing happened. Michigan got over 110,000 applications for this incoming class and is hugely popular and "prestigious" - always has been. UVA is one of the best public colleges in the country, and Wisconsin is very popular and well respected.

Indeed, Michigan,UCLA, Virginia are THE top publics in America. https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/top-public