Rankings won't cause schools to radically change in quality, especially WM

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Sure WM will continue to be the 2nd/3rd choice for VA In-State

Really nothing changes for WM

It's my kid's first choice. Best for International Relations/policy. Former heads of FBI, CIA are alum. Robert Gates is current Chancellor.

W&M was my kid's first choice as well. It just fit their idea of what they were looking for in a school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I consider myself a liberal but I’m getting really tired of the focus on first gen students. I can do full pay for my kid, but that doesn’t mean it’s peanuts. It’s borderline obnoxious when you go to college visits and half of what they focus on is how affordable it’s going to be for kids who can’t pay and I know I’m paying full price and it’s going to cost a fortune.

Are you really liberal? I’m moderate and will be full pay and I don’t care that schools focus on first gen students or that other families will get financial aid. The real issue is that higher education costs are out of control.

Liberals are some of the biggest hypocrites out there! Everything changes when it affects your kids. SMH

This. It's crystal clear reading their reactions to the new ratings.
DP

[Anonymous]

W&M is so overrated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:W&M is so overrated.

+1
I have always thought this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What a fortuitous coincidence that exactly when W&M could greatly benefit from helping the downtrodden, the country finds itself with an abundance of ambitious first-generation college-age immigrants whom the progressives in Williamsburg would probably welcome with open arms.

The do. WM is now tuition free for Pell grant students, and these students graduate at a high rate. They are welcome and supported.

The question is, should WM do soft/hard DEI targets like VT, even at the expense of taking more qualified students? I have a kid who went through TJ during the admissions criteria change, and am inclined to say no.

That's one hell of a weird conspiracy theory you have there. It almost sounds ... *checks notes* ... RACIST.

I understood it more along the lines, see what UVA does right in that sense. They have a higher ethnic diversity than Tech or W&M, while keeping their stats high. Sure, as the state flagship their visibility is higher and their appeal to a broader group makes it easier.

Try to find the diamonds out there in those groups and get them interested. They are there.

UVA undergraduate Black + Hispanic is only 15% of enrollment in a state where Black + Hispanic is 30% of the population. VT is 16.2% and W&M is 15.5%. I don't think any of them is particularly diverse from that perspective. GMU is 30.5%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What a fortuitous coincidence that exactly when W&M could greatly benefit from helping the downtrodden, the country finds itself with an abundance of ambitious first-generation college-age immigrants whom the progressives in Williamsburg would probably welcome with open arms.

The do. WM is now tuition free for Pell grant students, and these students graduate at a high rate. They are welcome and supported.

The question is, should WM do soft/hard DEI targets like VT, even at the expense of taking more qualified students? I have a kid who went through TJ during the admissions criteria change, and am inclined to say no.

That's one hell of a weird conspiracy theory you have there. It almost sounds ... *checks notes* ... RACIST.

I understood it more along the lines, see what UVA does right in that sense. They have a higher ethnic diversity than Tech or W&M, while keeping their stats high. Sure, as the state flagship their visibility is higher and their appeal to a broader group makes it easier.

Try to find the diamonds out there in those groups and get them interested. They are there.

UVA undergraduate Black + Hispanic is only 15% of enrollment in a state where Black + Hispanic is 30% of the population. VT is 16.2% and W&M is 15.5%. I don't think any of them is particularly diverse from that perspective. GMU is 30.5%.

True, however the post you replied to was in response to someone else seemingly asking if admission standards should be lowered for greater diversity. The discussion was specifically around Pell Grant & First Gen.

GMU has a greater ethnic diversity, but their admission criteria are lower, and their graduation rate of Pell/First Gen is also much lower. However, it was enough to score higher on the social mobility, nevertheless.

Now if GMU could graduate them at the rate of UVA, they would rock it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What a fortuitous coincidence that exactly when W&M could greatly benefit from helping the downtrodden, the country finds itself with an abundance of ambitious first-generation college-age immigrants whom the progressives in Williamsburg would probably welcome with open arms.

The do. WM is now tuition free for Pell grant students, and these students graduate at a high rate. They are welcome and supported.

The question is, should WM do soft/hard DEI targets like VT, even at the expense of taking more qualified students? I have a kid who went through TJ during the admissions criteria change, and am inclined to say no.

That's one hell of a weird conspiracy theory you have there. It almost sounds ... *checks notes* ... RACIST.

I understood it more along the lines, see what UVA does right in that sense. They have a higher ethnic diversity than Tech or W&M, while keeping their stats high. Sure, as the state flagship their visibility is higher and their appeal to a broader group makes it easier.

Try to find the diamonds out there in those groups and get them interested. They are there.

UVA undergraduate Black + Hispanic is only 15% of enrollment in a state where Black + Hispanic is 30% of the population. VT is 16.2% and W&M is 15.5%. I don't think any of them is particularly diverse from that perspective. GMU is 30.5%.

True, however the post you replied to was in response to someone else seemingly asking if admission standards should be lowered for greater diversity. The discussion was specifically around Pell Grant & First Gen.

GMU has a greater ethnic diversity, but their admission criteria are lower, and their graduation rate of Pell/First Gen is also much lower. However, it was enough to score higher on the social mobility, nevertheless.

Now if GMU could graduate them at the rate of UVA, they would rock it.

GMU is quite far ahead of UVA, VT, and W&M on the USNews Social Mobility component, where it ranks #72 vs UVA at 198, VT at 207, and W&M at 280. It is other factors that hold it down. GMU has 29% Pell Grant eligible students vs. 15% at UVA and VT and 13% at W&M. Still, it looks like all of the UC schools are well above GMU.

I think most Virginia schools have made significant concessions in admissions to boost diversity. There was a study a few years ago that showed big disparities in stats between admitted White, Black, Hispanic, and Asian students at Virginia public universities. This may change with the Supreme Court ruling.

https://www.ceousa.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Preferences20in20Virginia20Higher20Education20-20September202019.pdf