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

[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.

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.

U Mich was ranked as high as 8th in USNews in the mid-to-late 80s. It was ranked higher than a couple of Ivies.

You need to read more. UVA has produced more Rhodes Scholars than any other public school in the U.S. with the exception of the US Military Academy. After the obvious Ivies like Harvard, UVA is no. 8 in production of Rhodes Scholars (started in 1902). No other public university in America can claim that. https://uvamagazine.org/articles/from_the_president_uvas_road_to_rhodes_and_why_it_matters

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

U Mich was ranked as high as 8th in USNews in the mid-to-late 80s. It was ranked higher than a couple of Ivies.

You need to read more. UVA has produced more Rhodes Scholars than any other public school in the U.S. with the exception of the US Military Academy. After the obvious Ivies like Harvard, UVA is no. 8 in production of Rhodes Scholars (started in 1902). No other public university in America can claim that. https://uvamagazine.org/articles/from_the_president_uvas_road_to_rhodes_and_why_it_matters

:lol: There you are! Just like clockwork.
DP

[Anonymous]

In 1990, here were the rankings for some of the schools mentioned by OP:

Vanderbilt - 24
UVA - 21
Michigan - 17
Wisconsin - was not rated in 1990, but was rated 32 in 1996 when USNWR expanded their ratings
Notre Dame - 23

Frankly, it doesn’t look like much has changed.

All of these schools have been excellent for many years, though I know personally that a number of them have gotten much better over the past 30 years, though hopefully all institutions strive for the same.

Some posters have noted that these schools weren’t as rigorous or were much easier to attend in the past, but that is also true of even the best schools. In 1990, Chicago had a 45% admit rate, UPenn 47%, Stanford and Yale 19%, etc.

[Anonymous]

UVA is unique among publics for the combination of its founders, its architecture, its age, its quality education, including its professional schools, and its strong connections with Ivies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UVA is unique among publics for the combination of its founders, its architecture, its age, its quality education, including its professional schools, and its strong connections with Ivies.

UVA is actually not as old as Michigan. It was founded 183 years after Harvard. I know of no real connection with Ivies. It is not in the Ivy League. I also don't think UVA is ranked particularly high in areas like quality of undergraduate teaching.

[Anonymous]

I just looked at the rankings from 1983 to 2007 at this site:

https://publicuniversityhonors.com/2017/09/13/u-s-news-rankings-for-57-leading-universities-1983-2007/

Seems like after the few first rankings, the T25 or so is very consistent. The schools that seemed to do a lot better are UCLA, Wash U, and Penn from the early 90s, but not huge jumps. None of the schools had a drastic fall.

Then after the Top 25, it seems there are more big movers with schools like Texas, UCs, USC, and Florida making big jumps. And schools like Brandeis, Pepperdine, RPI, Tulane, falling quite a bit. Yeshiva seems like it took a huge fall from the 40s to the 105.

[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.

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.

U Mich was ranked as high as 8th in USNews in the mid-to-late 80s. It was ranked higher than a couple of Ivies.

Well since there are only 8 Ivies, I’m certain it was ranked higher by more than just two of them. Back in the 80’s USNWR only used peer assessment scoring to rank undergraduate schools. Michigan’s PA score is still one the the highest in the country. In academia it has not diminished.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just looked at the rankings from 1983 to 2007 at this site:

https://publicuniversityhonors.com/2017/09/13/u-s-news-rankings-for-57-leading-universities-1983-2007/

Seems like after the few first rankings, the T25 or so is very consistent. The schools that seemed to do a lot better are UCLA, Wash U, and Penn from the early 90s, but not huge jumps. None of the schools had a drastic fall.

Then after the Top 25, it seems there are more big movers with schools like Texas, UCs, USC, and Florida making big jumps. And schools like Brandeis, Pepperdine, RPI, Tulane, falling quite a bit. Yeshiva seems like it took a huge fall from the 40s to the 105.

The rating criteria has changed significantly recently. It favors the larger, public, research universities compared to past criteria.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In 1990, here were the rankings for some of the schools mentioned by OP:

Vanderbilt - 24
UVA - 21
Michigan - 17
Wisconsin - was not rated in 1990, but was rated 32 in 1996 when USNWR expanded their ratings
Notre Dame - 23

Frankly, it doesn’t look like much has changed.

All of these schools have been excellent for many years, though I know personally that a number of them have gotten much better over the past 30 years, though hopefully all institutions strive for the same.

Some posters have noted that these schools weren’t as rigorous or were much easier to attend in the past, but that is also true of even the best schools. In 1990, Chicago had a 45% admit rate, UPenn 47%, Stanford and Yale 19%, etc.

The number of hours studied in college overall has been going down and GPAs have been going up rapidly. I don't think rigor is higher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA is unique among publics for the combination of its founders, its architecture, its age, its quality education, including its professional schools, and its strong connections with Ivies.

UVA is actually not as old as Michigan. It was founded 183 years after Harvard. I know of no real connection with Ivies. It is not in the Ivy League. I also don't think UVA is ranked particularly high in areas like quality of undergraduate teaching.

Come on, get real. Michigan was founded in1817, UVA in 1819.

[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.

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.

U Mich was ranked as high as 8th in USNews in the mid-to-late 80s. It was ranked higher than a couple of Ivies.

Irrelevant since Michigan is now 21.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UVA is unique among publics for the combination of its founders, its architecture, its age, its quality education, including its professional schools, and its strong connections with Ivies. [/quot

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UVA is unique among publics for the combination of its founders, its architecture, its age, its quality education, including its professional schools, and its strong connections with Ivies.

UVA is absolutely superior to the other schools listed here. However, what is unique about the architecture? Other colleges have nice buildings too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA is unique among publics for the combination of its founders, its architecture, its age, its quality education, including its professional schools, and its strong connections with Ivies.

UVA is actually not as old as Michigan. It was founded 183 years after Harvard. I know of no real connection with Ivies. It is not in the Ivy League. I also don't think UVA is ranked particularly high in areas like quality of undergraduate teaching.

Come on, get real. Michigan was founded in1817, UVA in 1819.

Which means UVA is not as old as Michigan . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UVA is unique among publics for the combination of its founders, its architecture, its age, its quality education, including its professional schools, and its strong connections with Ivies.

….and its inability to graduate even one student who went on to win a Nobel Prize. Shockingly embarrassing!