Which universities have gone DOWN in stature over the years?

[Anonymous]

W&M is an obvious answer.

Ranking drop from 32 -> 38.
Acceptance rate went from 33% to 42%, higher than large publics like UT Austin and UMD. While large publics like Berkeley are reaching single-digit acceptance rates, W&M's is increasing.

Student enrollment has increased.

Their law school has gone completely downhill.

W&M used to be more difficult to get into than UVA, due to a smaller number seats. It had higher SAT scores than UVA, the highest among publics comparable to Berkley. It was compared to the smaller Ivies like Dartmouth/Brown and SLACs like Swarthmore. It attracted out-of-staters and wealthy internationals that would never consider a large public for OOS tuition, but would consider W&M due to the size and feel.

Nowadays, UVA is far more tougher to get in, has far higher SAT scores and far great national and international reach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:W&M is an obvious answer.

Ranking drop from 32 -> 38.
Acceptance rate went from 33% to 42%, higher than large publics like UT Austin and UMD. While large publics like Berkeley are reaching single-digit acceptance rates, W&M's is increasing.

Student enrollment has increased.

Their law school has gone completely downhill.

W&M used to be more difficult to get into than UVA, due to a smaller number seats. It had higher SAT scores than UVA, the highest among publics comparable to Berkley. It was compared to the smaller Ivies like Dartmouth/Brown and SLACs like Swarthmore. It attracted out-of-staters and wealthy internationals that would never consider a large public for OOS tuition, but would consider W&M due to the size and feel.

Nowadays, UVA is far more tougher to get in, has far higher SAT scores and far great national and international reach.

Why though? I agree W&M has decreased in desirability. My DD was completely uninterested - a kid who wanted a smaller, top academic school. Most of her private school friends felt the same. W&M has lost it’s way somehow.

[Anonymous]

^Also, a lot of people blame W&M's decreasing stature on it's reputation as an all work-no play school for grinds. That was an actually positive thing, because it attracted the studious kids, made sure the dumb ones avoided the place, and increased the degree's value among employers.

Schools like U. Chicago, Hopkins and Swarthmore are known to be far more demanding, filled with grinds and places where fun goes to die. All three of those schools have increased in stature greatly over the past 20 years. Because their reputation brought additional academic prestige, better students, better professors, and better employers to the school.

Meanwhile W&M tried to become more like UVA, putting money into Greek Life and sports stadiums. The result was UVA-lite, at a higher cost than UVA, with a lower ranking, worse job prospects, worse professors, fewer resources, etc. etc. Plain mismanagement by the administration.

Compare the reputation of the school among the older generations now in their 60s to those in their 20s today. The older generation thinks it's one of the best schools in the country for undergraduate rigor. The younger generation thinks it's an oversized middling liberal arts college similar to so many other oversized middling liberal arts colleges in the country today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think UMD has gone down recently. I remember a few years ago it was something like 35% acceptance rate and it's shot up to 45%

Wrong direction when applications are at an all time high and the Ivies are in single digits.

Opposite is true. It's gotten more prestigious and competitive. Previous 10 years, admit rate was 40s/50s%. In the 30s this year.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^Also, a lot of people blame W&M's decreasing stature on it's reputation as an all work-no play school for grinds. That was an actually positive thing, because it attracted the studious kids, made sure the dumb ones avoided the place, and increased the degree's value among employers.

Schools like U. Chicago, Hopkins and Swarthmore are known to be far more demanding, filled with grinds and places where fun goes to die. All three of those schools have increased in stature greatly over the past 20 years. Because their reputation brought additional academic prestige, better students, better professors, and better employers to the school.

Meanwhile W&M tried to become more like UVA, putting money into Greek Life and sports stadiums. The result was UVA-lite, at a higher cost than UVA, with a lower ranking, worse job prospects, worse professors, fewer resources, etc. etc. Plain mismanagement by the administration.

Compare the reputation of the school among the older generations now in their 60s to those in their 20s today. The older generation thinks it's one of the best schools in the country for undergraduate rigor. The younger generation thinks it's an oversized middling liberal arts college similar to so many other oversized middling liberal arts colleges in the country today.

You do know that liberal arts colleges are very rigorous, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^Also, a lot of people blame W&M's decreasing stature on it's reputation as an all work-no play school for grinds. That was an actually positive thing, because it attracted the studious kids, made sure the dumb ones avoided the place, and increased the degree's value among employers.

Schools like U. Chicago, Hopkins and Swarthmore are known to be far more demanding, filled with grinds and places where fun goes to die. All three of those schools have increased in stature greatly over the past 20 years. Because their reputation brought additional academic prestige, better students, better professors, and better employers to the school.

Meanwhile W&M tried to become more like UVA, putting money into Greek Life and sports stadiums. The result was UVA-lite, at a higher cost than UVA, with a lower ranking, worse job prospects, worse professors, fewer resources, etc. etc. Plain mismanagement by the administration.

Compare the reputation of the school among the older generations now in their 60s to those in their 20s today. The older generation thinks it's one of the best schools in the country for undergraduate rigor. The younger generation thinks it's an oversized middling liberal arts college similar to so many other oversized middling liberal arts colleges in the country today.

Ironically I feel as though Emory has similar identity issues but somehow figures it out and is highly ranked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Also, a lot of people blame W&M's decreasing stature on it's reputation as an all work-no play school for grinds. That was an actually positive thing, because it attracted the studious kids, made sure the dumb ones avoided the place, and increased the degree's value among employers.

Schools like U. Chicago, Hopkins and Swarthmore are known to be far more demanding, filled with grinds and places where fun goes to die. All three of those schools have increased in stature greatly over the past 20 years. Because their reputation brought additional academic prestige, better students, better professors, and better employers to the school.

Meanwhile W&M tried to become more like UVA, putting money into Greek Life and sports stadiums. The result was UVA-lite, at a higher cost than UVA, with a lower ranking, worse job prospects, worse professors, fewer resources, etc. etc. Plain mismanagement by the administration.

Compare the reputation of the school among the older generations now in their 60s to those in their 20s today. The older generation thinks it's one of the best schools in the country for undergraduate rigor. The younger generation thinks it's an oversized middling liberal arts college similar to so many other oversized middling liberal arts colleges in the country today.

Ironically I feel as though Emory has similar identity issues but somehow figures it out and is highly ranked.

I think that Emory, Tufts, Rochester, Case Western, Brandeis and Boston University all need to step up their PR game. USC, NYU and Northeastern are outcompeting them.

[Anonymous]

I grew up on the East Coast and thought W&M was a private school. VA has a lot of great public schools and is a small state. It will be interesting to see what will happen to UVA and W&M if the state begins restricting out-of-state admits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:W&M is an obvious answer.

Ranking drop from 32 -> 38.
Acceptance rate went from 33% to 42%, higher than large publics like UT Austin and UMD. While large publics like Berkeley are reaching single-digit acceptance rates, W&M's is increasing.

Student enrollment has increased.

Their law school has gone completely downhill.

W&M used to be more difficult to get into than UVA, due to a smaller number seats. It had higher SAT scores than UVA, the highest among publics comparable to Berkley. It was compared to the smaller Ivies like Dartmouth/Brown and SLACs like Swarthmore. It attracted out-of-staters and wealthy internationals that would never consider a large public for OOS tuition, but would consider W&M due to the size and feel.

Nowadays, UVA is far more tougher to get in, has far higher SAT scores and far great national and international reach.

I wouldn’t be bragging about UVA’s international reach. Being in the 200+ range isn’t exactly noteworthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:W&M is an obvious answer.

Ranking drop from 32 -> 38.
Acceptance rate went from 33% to 42%, higher than large publics like UT Austin and UMD. While large publics like Berkeley are reaching single-digit acceptance rates, W&M's is increasing.

Student enrollment has increased.

Their law school has gone completely downhill.

W&M used to be more difficult to get into than UVA, due to a smaller number seats. It had higher SAT scores than UVA, the highest among publics comparable to Berkley. It was compared to the smaller Ivies like Dartmouth/Brown and SLACs like Swarthmore. It attracted out-of-staters and wealthy internationals that would never consider a large public for OOS tuition, but would consider W&M due to the size and feel.

Nowadays, UVA is far more tougher to get in, has far higher SAT scores and far great national and international reach.

Per most recent CDS:

UVA 25th/75th percentile SAT - 1330-1490
W&M 25th/75th percentile SAT - 1360-1520

both have average GPAs of 4.3.

Perhaps W&M’s higher acceptance rate is a function of some other factor other than the caliber of students they attract. Maybe since UVA and has more prominent sports and a better college town and is bigger it appeals to more kids who apply that are more borderline. W&M is bit more niche in that it a very small public, so more like a SLAC. Williamsburg is pretty sleepy too.

Maybe, just maybe, acceptance rate is not a good indication of how good a school is at any rate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^Also, a lot of people blame W&M's decreasing stature on it's reputation as an all work-no play school for grinds. That was an actually positive thing, because it attracted the studious kids, made sure the dumb ones avoided the place, and increased the degree's value among employers.

Schools like U. Chicago, Hopkins and Swarthmore are known to be far more demanding, filled with grinds and places where fun goes to die. All three of those schools have increased in stature greatly over the past 20 years. Because their reputation brought additional academic prestige, better students, better professors, and better employers to the school.

Meanwhile W&M tried to become more like UVA, putting money into Greek Life and sports stadiums. The result was UVA-lite, at a higher cost than UVA, with a lower ranking, worse job prospects, worse professors, fewer resources, etc. etc. Plain mismanagement by the administration.

Compare the reputation of the school among the older generations now in their 60s to those in their 20s today. The older generation thinks it's one of the best schools in the country for undergraduate rigor. The younger generation thinks it's an oversized middling liberal arts college similar to so many other oversized middling liberal arts colleges in the country today.

I think the major contributing factor is that it is a state school so it is stuck relying on and being governed by the commonwealth. My understanding is that the state has been tightening its belt financially since the 90s - and UVA wins in a zero sum game as the state flagship - but the college still relies on state funds too heavily to break away, not to mention the legislature would never let that happen as it would be a real blow to Virginians who live in the only state I know of to have two amazing in-state options. I wish it could take more OOS. Would increase available funds and likely improve the caliber of candidate (clearly I am not a Virginian).

Despite all this, it is still an overlooked gem, particularly if you are in-state. Ironically, it is seen as more prestigious elsewhere in the country/outside the DMV where they don’t know Virginians see it as a back up to UVA bc those considering it are looking at schools with comparable size and philosophy and likely are weighing it against Notre Dame, for example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:W&M is an obvious answer.

Ranking drop from 32 -> 38.
Acceptance rate went from 33% to 42%, higher than large publics like UT Austin and UMD. While large publics like Berkeley are reaching single-digit acceptance rates, W&M's is increasing.

Student enrollment has increased.

Their law school has gone completely downhill.

W&M used to be more difficult to get into than UVA, due to a smaller number seats. It had higher SAT scores than UVA, the highest among publics comparable to Berkley. It was compared to the smaller Ivies like Dartmouth/Brown and SLACs like Swarthmore. It attracted out-of-staters and wealthy internationals that would never consider a large public for OOS tuition, but would consider W&M due to the size and feel.

Nowadays, UVA is far more tougher to get in, has far higher SAT scores and far great national and international reach.

For the UCs, applying in state you can just check a box to apply to one. It leads to very high numbers applying in state because there is no effort or cost.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Also, a lot of people blame W&M's decreasing stature on it's reputation as an all work-no play school for grinds. That was an actually positive thing, because it attracted the studious kids, made sure the dumb ones avoided the place, and increased the degree's value among employers.

Schools like U. Chicago, Hopkins and Swarthmore are known to be far more demanding, filled with grinds and places where fun goes to die. All three of those schools have increased in stature greatly over the past 20 years. Because their reputation brought additional academic prestige, better students, better professors, and better employers to the school.

Meanwhile W&M tried to become more like UVA, putting money into Greek Life and sports stadiums. The result was UVA-lite, at a higher cost than UVA, with a lower ranking, worse job prospects, worse professors, fewer resources, etc. etc. Plain mismanagement by the administration.

Compare the reputation of the school among the older generations now in their 60s to those in their 20s today. The older generation thinks it's one of the best schools in the country for undergraduate rigor. The younger generation thinks it's an oversized middling liberal arts college similar to so many other oversized middling liberal arts colleges in the country today.

I think the major contributing factor is that it is a state school so it is stuck relying on and being governed by the commonwealth. My understanding is that the state has been tightening its belt financially since the 90s - and UVA wins in a zero sum game as the state flagship - but the college still relies on state funds too heavily to break away, not to mention the legislature would never let that happen as it would be a real blow to Virginians who live in the only state I know of to have two amazing in-state options. I wish it could take more OOS. Would increase available funds and likely improve the caliber of candidate (clearly I am not a Virginian).

Despite all this, it is still an overlooked gem, particularly if you are in-state. Ironically, it is seen as more prestigious elsewhere in the country/outside the DMV where they don’t know Virginians see it as a back up to UVA bc those considering it are looking at schools with comparable size and philosophy and likely are weighing it against Notre Dame, for example.

Um, have you heard of UCLA and UC-Berkeley?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:W&M is an obvious answer.

Ranking drop from 32 -> 38.
Acceptance rate went from 33% to 42%, higher than large publics like UT Austin and UMD. While large publics like Berkeley are reaching single-digit acceptance rates, W&M's is increasing.

Student enrollment has increased.

Their law school has gone completely downhill.

W&M used to be more difficult to get into than UVA, due to a smaller number seats. It had higher SAT scores than UVA, the highest among publics comparable to Berkley. It was compared to the smaller Ivies like Dartmouth/Brown and SLACs like Swarthmore. It attracted out-of-staters and wealthy internationals that would never consider a large public for OOS tuition, but would consider W&M due to the size and feel.

Nowadays, UVA is far more tougher to get in, has far higher SAT scores and far great national and international reach.

Per most recent CDS:

UVA 25th/75th percentile SAT - 1330-1490
W&M 25th/75th percentile SAT - 1360-1520

both have average GPAs of 4.3.

Perhaps W&M’s higher acceptance rate is a function of some other factor other than the caliber of students they attract. Maybe since UVA and has more prominent sports and a better college town and is bigger it appeals to more kids who apply that are more borderline. W&M is bit more niche in that it a very small public, so more like a SLAC. Williamsburg is pretty sleepy too.

Maybe, just maybe, acceptance rate is not a good indication of how good a school is at any rate.

NNo they don't., the GPA of the actual class that enrolled at UVA last fall had a 4.52 at the 75th percentile, a 4.39 at the median and a 4.23 for the bottom 25th percentile. W&M's student profile runs lower: 4.50 at the 75th, 4.30 at the 50th and a 4.08 at the bottom 25th.


UVA also beats W&M wiht ACT scores, the 74th/50th/30th percentiles are 35/34/32 for UVA and for W&M the ACTSare 34/33/31

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:W&M is an obvious answer.

Ranking drop from 32 -> 38.
Acceptance rate went from 33% to 42%, higher than large publics like UT Austin and UMD. While large publics like Berkeley are reaching single-digit acceptance rates, W&M's is increasing.

Student enrollment has increased.

Their law school has gone completely downhill.

W&M used to be more difficult to get into than UVA, due to a smaller number seats. It had higher SAT scores than UVA, the highest among publics comparable to Berkley. It was compared to the smaller Ivies like Dartmouth/Brown and SLACs like Swarthmore. It attracted out-of-staters and wealthy internationals that would never consider a large public for OOS tuition, but would consider W&M due to the size and feel.

Nowadays, UVA is far more tougher to get in, has far higher SAT scores and far great national and international reach.

Per most recent CDS:

UVA 25th/75th percentile SAT - 1330-1490
W&M 25th/75th percentile SAT - 1360-1520

both have average GPAs of 4.3.

Perhaps W&M’s higher acceptance rate is a function of some other factor other than the caliber of students they attract. Maybe since UVA and has more prominent sports and a better college town and is bigger it appeals to more kids who apply that are more borderline. W&M is bit more niche in that it a very small public, so more like a SLAC. Williamsburg is pretty sleepy too.

Maybe, just maybe, acceptance rate is not a good indication of how good a school is at any rate.

Seen so many "W&M is going downhill posts", no, it just dosen't fit into the two boxes that do well in rankings these days - large publics with lots of research and prestigious expensive privates. Applications are self selecting and W&M as a public does need to expand their social life and STEM to compete. Making it like Hopkins or Swarthmore like a PP suggested is unrealistic. W&M will stay around where it is and not drop further. Also, anyone with a brain knows its a much more rigorous undergrad education then say, U of F, which is "ranked higher".