Why hasn't GMU surpassed UVA, W&M, VT?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a commuter school with an ugly campus.

UVA is a thing of beauty created by a founding father.

W&M is about to leap frog UVA for campus beauty. Once the new dorms are finished and the old 70’s ones are torn down, it will be the prettiest campus in the state by far.

Honestly, UVa's small Lawn area is nice, but most of grounds frankly is ugly. Gilmer Hall and other 1970s buildings desperately need an invisibility cloak.

UVa's newer replacement dorms are not as hideous as the 1970s dorms they are replacing, but are just not that attractive overall.

Both VT and WM have much more consistent architecture than UVa. Part of the problem is that egotistical architects like to design "signature" buildings for UVa, most of which are hideous. The other part is UVa allowing these egotists to run wild.

Gilmer hall was renovated and much improved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a commuter school with an ugly campus.

UVA is a thing of beauty created by a founding father.

W&M is about to leap frog UVA for campus beauty. Once the new dorms are finished and the old 70’s ones are torn down, it will be the prettiest campus in the state by far.

Honestly, UVa's small Lawn area is nice, but most of grounds frankly is ugly. Gilmer Hall and other 1970s buildings desperately need an invisibility cloak.

UVa's newer replacement dorms are not as hideous as the 1970s dorms they are replacing, but are just not that attractive overall.

Both VT and WM have much more consistent architecture than UVa. Part of the problem is that egotistical architects like to design "signature" buildings for UVa, most of which are hideous. The other part is UVa allowing these egotists to run wild.

The campuses all have good, indifferent, and bad parts. GMU doesn't really have signature spots.
That is the difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a commuter school with an ugly campus.

UVA is a thing of beauty created by a founding father.

Didn't take long for the dopey UVA booster to show up.

Less cringe than someone trying to hype GMU. Nothing wrong with GMU at all but the premise of this thread is absurd. It's a large, suburban public university with a history of being a commuter school. It has some great academics in some departments, sure, and some good professional schools. But it lacks the trappings of traditional university life -- no football, campus life is affected by the commuter school aspect, the Greek system just isn't quite as integral as in other places (which I realize is a plus for many, but it's definitely less traditional) and the suburban location itself just isn't appealing to many, especially those in the DCUM readership that regard "going away" to school as part of the experience (even if "away" is only 100 miles down 29 to Charlottesville).

I say this as someone who got their master's degree at GMU and has taken other classes there. It really is a good school, but I'm under no illusion that it's on par experientially with the others OP is comparing it to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prestige. Plain and simple. Look at this forum. The constant Ivy League, T10, T20, etc.

All parents want prestige, but it’s a college education that is most important. That degree. Really, any degree is fine. For most careers, that is all that matters. Where they receive it is rather moot.

I recently went to a presentation and the attorney graduated from Towson pre-law and University of Baltimore School of Law. Not prestigious, but he is doing fabulous and happy.

Okay, but by this logic GMU should never “surpass” anyone. At best it is equivalent.

Correct. There is not much history of a run of the mill state school overtaking a flagship. I actually can’t think of any examples.

UCLA was the Los Angeles division of Berkeley and is now ranked higher, I believe.

? ranked higher where and for what?

To me, Cal = STEM, and UCLA is more for humanities and/or premed.

I have friends/family who went to both, in state.

DP. I was at UCLA recently; they have banners up all over the place that its the #1 ranked public school. Berkeley held that spot for decades.

University of Florida used to have number one public university banners when they were ranked #1 by Wall Street journal. Just because UCLA is good at patting themselves on the back, doesn’t mean they’re ranked higher.

Berkeley is ranked #1 public by WSJ, Forbes, Washington monthly, Times, QS, usnews global, arwu, not to mention ranked top three in undergrad CS, business, psychology, economics, and engineering. They have like 28 top five graduate programs.

Don’t let the banners fool you.

They put the banners up because of US News. UCLA is 15 and UCB is 17. No dog in this fight. UCLA is proud let them be proud.

What's with the pro-Berkeley reply on a GMU thread? As far as I'm concerned count yourself lucky to get accepted into either: UCLA or Berkeley.

Also - No banners at Berkeley only a few signs for reserved parking just for: Nobel Laurates. That's how you put banners up. Still no dog in this fight just calling them as I see them.

No pro-Berkeley or pro-ucla comments here, just calling it AS I SEE THEM. Not saying LA can’t be proud. They can put up a banner on top of the Hollywood sign for all I care. I just find it odd to make a general statement “ucla has surpassed…” based on banners and one magazine’s opinion, no matter how popular it is. Berkeley earned its reputation through generations of remarkable achievements, and it continues to beat UcLA today in almost every measurable academic achievement and student outcome.

But if you’re saying it’s Berkeley’s fault for not having UCLA’s Joseph goebbel-esque propaganda machine, then I agree with you. Berkeley’s marketing has always sucked. They can literally drape that university with #1 banners from like six different rankings. Their college of chemistry, CS, engineering, English, history, economics, etc can put up #1 or top 3 banners. It would certainly help their application count and yield rate. I mean, it certainly help shape one perception of one person on this thread.

Ok. Berkeley is better. Now do - Stanford vs Berkeley.

[Anonymous]

I think what the original poster is asking is why hasn't GMU become the next Northeastern?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think what the original poster is asking is why hasn't GMU become the next Northeastern?

Because of UVA, William and Mary, and VaTech.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a commuter school with an ugly campus.

UVA is a thing of beauty created by a founding father.

Didn't take long for the dopey UVA booster to show up.

Less cringe than someone trying to hype GMU. Nothing wrong with GMU at all but the premise of this thread is absurd. It's a large, suburban public university with a history of being a commuter school. It has some great academics in some departments, sure, and some good professional schools. But it lacks the trappings of traditional university life -- no football, campus life is affected by the commuter school aspect, the Greek system just isn't quite as integral as in other places (which I realize is a plus for many, but it's definitely less traditional) and the suburban location itself just isn't appealing to many, especially those in the DCUM readership that regard "going away" to school as part of the experience (even if "away" is only 100 miles down 29 to Charlottesville).

I say this as someone who got their master's degree at GMU and has taken other classes there. It really is a good school, but I'm under no illusion that it's on par experientially with the others OP is comparing it to.

Op asked a question, given GMU's size and location why hasn't it become one of the flagship schools. And as one who attended 3 out 4 schools mentioned (including graduate and transfer). I can tell you GMU was a good fit for me - no one compared grades, whenever I met with friends after class we made it count. We all had jobs and knew the value of school time, friend time, and work time. The "traditional" college experience wasn't for me just felt down all the time that everyone around you was always judging. Arrive at GMU and the guy sitting next to me got into Cambridge (but couldn't afford it), a kid that couldn't get in anywhere else, and a working 30 something finally getting a BS. We're all the same.

[Anonymous]

It's still viewed as largely a commuter school. It doesn't have the beautiful campus of a VT or UVA. It's boring Fairfax County.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a commuter school with an ugly campus.

UVA is a thing of beauty created by a founding father.

W&M is about to leap frog UVA for campus beauty. Once the new dorms are finished and the old 70’s ones are torn down, it will be the prettiest campus in the state by far.

DP. I do find either of those campuses beautiful. UVA just has the lawn area - the rest of the campus is mediocre at best. And W&M is so dull and “flat.” New dorms aren’t going to help that.

The VERVE Charlottesville, UVA’s latest student housing complex, is slated to open spring/summer 27. Looks awesome!

It's just not that attractive compared to new off campus housing developments at other colleges
https://www.wmoffcampus.com/housing/property/governors-on-north-henry/3x4xrhd

https://offcampus.vt.edu/housing/property/the-edge-apartments/ocpzvdcvjw

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's still viewed as largely a commuter school. It doesn't have the beautiful campus of a VT or UVA. It's boring Fairfax County.

VT is not beautiful! Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's still viewed as largely a commuter school. It doesn't have the beautiful campus of a VT or UVA. It's boring Fairfax County.

VT is not beautiful! Thanks.

DP. VT is definitely beautiful, weirdo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prestige. Plain and simple. Look at this forum. The constant Ivy League, T10, T20, etc.

All parents want prestige, but it’s a college education that is most important. That degree. Really, any degree is fine. For most careers, that is all that matters. Where they receive it is rather moot.

I recently went to a presentation and the attorney graduated from Towson pre-law and University of Baltimore School of Law. Not prestigious, but he is doing fabulous and happy.

Okay, but by this logic GMU should never “surpass” anyone. At best it is equivalent.

Correct. There is not much history of a run of the mill state school overtaking a flagship. I actually can’t think of any examples.

UCLA was the Los Angeles division of Berkeley and is now ranked higher, I believe.

? ranked higher where and for what?

To me, Cal = STEM, and UCLA is more for humanities and/or premed.

I have friends/family who went to both, in state.

DP. I was at UCLA recently; they have banners up all over the place that its the #1 ranked public school. Berkeley held that spot for decades.

University of Florida used to have number one public university banners when they were ranked #1 by Wall Street journal. Just because UCLA is good at patting themselves on the back, doesn’t mean they’re ranked higher.

Berkeley is ranked #1 public by WSJ, Forbes, Washington monthly, Times, QS, usnews global, arwu, not to mention ranked top three in undergrad CS, business, psychology, economics, and engineering. They have like 28 top five graduate programs.

Don’t let the banners fool you.

They put the banners up because of US News. UCLA is 15 and UCB is 17. No dog in this fight. UCLA is proud let them be proud.

What's with the pro-Berkeley reply on a GMU thread? As far as I'm concerned count yourself lucky to get accepted into either: UCLA or Berkeley.

Also - No banners at Berkeley only a few signs for reserved parking just for: Nobel Laurates. That's how you put banners up. Still no dog in this fight just calling them as I see them.

No pro-Berkeley or pro-ucla comments here, just calling it AS I SEE THEM. Not saying LA can’t be proud. They can put up a banner on top of the Hollywood sign for all I care. I just find it odd to make a general statement “ucla has surpassed…” based on banners and one magazine’s opinion, no matter how popular it is. Berkeley earned its reputation through generations of remarkable achievements, and it continues to beat UcLA today in almost every measurable academic achievement and student outcome.

But if you’re saying it’s Berkeley’s fault for not having UCLA’s Joseph goebbel-esque propaganda machine, then I agree with you. Berkeley’s marketing has always sucked. They can literally drape that university with #1 banners from like six different rankings. Their college of chemistry, CS, engineering, English, history, economics, etc can put up #1 or top 3 banners. It would certainly help their application count and yield rate. I mean, it certainly help shape one perception of one person on this thread.

Ok. Berkeley is better. Now do - Stanford vs Berkeley.

I’ll give it to Stanford by a hair. I’ll give berkeley the nod for having more top 10/5 programs, more Nobel prize, richer history. But Stanford is imo the world’s greatest university today because of its well-roundedness, impact on tech (which is what’s changing the world today), etc. Stanford is what you get if you take Berkeley and turned it into a private school.

Final CA match-up Berkeley vs CalTech

For undergraduate, Caltech easily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's still viewed as largely a commuter school. It doesn't have the beautiful campus of a VT or UVA. It's boring Fairfax County.

VT is not beautiful! Thanks.

DP. VT is definitely beautiful, weirdo.

NP.
No, it isn't. UVA, William and Mary, even Richmond and W&L are prettier than VT.

Something like this in my view:

Richmond/W&M
W&L/UVA
VT
GMU

But I'd still say VT has quite a nice campus.

Wow. Very clear you're jealous and were probably not offered admission to UVA. Very telling of those who aren't offered spots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It attracts the righter side Econ department

And law. It's law school is right leaning. No thanks!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's still viewed as largely a commuter school. It doesn't have the beautiful campus of a VT or UVA. It's boring Fairfax County.

VT is not beautiful! Thanks.

DP. VT is definitely beautiful, weirdo.

NP.
No, it isn't. UVA, William and Mary, even Richmond and W&L are prettier than VT.

Something like this in my view:

Richmond/W&M
W&L/UVA
VT
GMU

But I'd still say VT has quite a nice campus.

Wow. Very clear you're jealous and were probably not offered admission to UVA. Very telling of those who aren't offered spots.

DP. WTF?