Is there any academic reason to pick George Mason over W&M?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think W&M has more opportunities - including their prestigious overseas program.

And it has a lot more kudos, generally.

George Mason - high 87% acceptance rate
William & Mary - 37%

..."prestigious overseas program?" Do you mean study abroad?

Perhaps referring to joint degree program with University of St Andrews.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think W&M has more opportunities - including their prestigious overseas program.

And it has a lot more kudos, generally.

George Mason - high 87% acceptance rate
William & Mary - 37%

..."prestigious overseas program?" Do you mean study abroad?

Perhaps referring to joint degree program with University of St Andrews.

Oh goodness, I hope not! That program is such an overpriced joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good grief! Yes, GMU has come a long way in 20 years and good for the school and its students. I received a
masters from GMU and it was a supportive environment and the degree has served me well. But make no mistake. For an undergraduate experience there is little that can compare to W&M. The history, the gorgeous campus, the teaching quality, alumni network, student teacher ratio... the list goes on. I think it is a magical place if you are looking for an exceptional liberal arts experience. But I think most people know that already and just like to be annoying.

I think you are overselling the history, alumni network and campus quite a bit.

Yes it has a long history...but an illustrious one only for the colonial period 240 years ago. Since then, the school has been quiet and frankly irrelevant. It was private and went bankrupt and closed, was later re-opened as a public teaching school (as in, a school to teach teachers similar to Mary Washington).

As for the alumni network...does it even have one? I don't think old people being impressed by the school's name can be considered a network.

The campus is great for a tourist visit. You shouldn't pick a college based on how pretty the campus is, more so the opportunities in the surrounding area.

Obviously the undergraduate student education is likely going to be better there than GMU for many subjects. I don't think anyone here is disputing that, they are just providing fields where GMU may be better (i.e. IT) and degrees that GMU provides than W&M doesn't (engineering).

DP. Your words “frankly irrelevant” suggest that you have a chip on your shoulder.

So we are only allowed to praise universities based on false characteristics now?

The school has an "illustrious" history is this was 1776. It's not. The past 244 years of American history have gone by and again nothing illustrious has happened at the school, other than shutting down multiple times due to multiple bankruptcies, then being re-opened years later by the state as a school for schoolteachers.

This is simply stating facts, rather than embellishing a magical history that does not exist. We are not talking about Harvard, Yale, Princeton here, which were great in colonial times and have contributed ever more to American history since.

To say W&M has been quiet and irrelevant, to be frank, is an understatement. Multiple bankruptcies and closures, then being reopened as a state school for schoolteachers, are embarrassments.

+1

W&M STILL touts Thomas Jefferson and people from that era among its "famous alumni" because there hasn't been anyone of that caliber since. It is resting on its laurels and an old reputation among older people, like another PP said.

More recent undergraduate alumni include Jon Stewart, Glenn Close (3X Emmy, 3X Tony, 3X Golden Globe), Robert Gates (Secretary of Defense under Bush and Obama, CIA Director), Jen Psaki (Press Secretary to President Mike Tomlin (head coach of the Steelers), Sean McDermott (head coach of the Buffalo Bills), Patton Oswalt (comedian and actor), Jill Ellis (2X Women's World Cup Champion Coach), Weijia Jiang (White House Correspondent for CBS News), Paula Reid (Chief Legal Correspondent for CNN), Ellen Stofan (NASA Chief Scientist), Beth Comstock (co-founder of Hulu and former Vice Chair of GE), James Comey (former FBI Director), Jacob Frey (Mayor of Minneapolis), U.S. Representative Stephanie Murphy, U.S. Representative Dina Titus, Martin Jurow (Producer of Breakfast at Tiffany's, The Pink Panther, Terms of Endearment), Henry Rosovsky (former Dean and Acting President of Harvard), Bill Lawrence (creator of Scrubs, Cougartown, Spin City), actor/musician Chip Esten (Nashville), actress Stephanie Szostak, actress Linda Lavin, designer Perry Ellis, Kelly Choi (Top Chef Masters), author Alexandra Bracken, Pulitzer Prize winner Joseph Ellis, Pulitzer Prize winner and Silver Star recipient Lewis Puller, Jr., William Ivey Long (6X Tony winner), J.D. Gibbs (President of Joe Gibbs Racing), Todd Boehly, co-owner of the Dodgers, Mary Jo White (Chair of the SEC), (Michael Powell), Chair of the FCC, Christina Romer (Chair, Council of Economic Advisors) and others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good grief! Yes, GMU has come a long way in 20 years and good for the school and its students. I received a
masters from GMU and it was a supportive environment and the degree has served me well. But make no mistake. For an undergraduate experience there is little that can compare to W&M. The history, the gorgeous campus, the teaching quality, alumni network, student teacher ratio... the list goes on. I think it is a magical place if you are looking for an exceptional liberal arts experience. But I think most people know that already and just like to be annoying.

I think you are overselling the history, alumni network and campus quite a bit.

Yes it has a long history...but an illustrious one only for the colonial period 240 years ago. Since then, the school has been quiet and frankly irrelevant. It was private and went bankrupt and closed, was later re-opened as a public teaching school (as in, a school to teach teachers similar to Mary Washington).

As for the alumni network...does it even have one? I don't think old people being impressed by the school's name can be considered a network.

The campus is great for a tourist visit. You shouldn't pick a college based on how pretty the campus is, more so the opportunities in the surrounding area.

Obviously the undergraduate student education is likely going to be better there than GMU for many subjects. I don't think anyone here is disputing that, they are just providing fields where GMU may be better (i.e. IT) and degrees that GMU provides than W&M doesn't (engineering).

DP. Your words “frankly irrelevant” suggest that you have a chip on your shoulder.

So we are only allowed to praise universities based on false characteristics now?

The school has an "illustrious" history is this was 1776. It's not. The past 244 years of American history have gone by and again nothing illustrious has happened at the school, other than shutting down multiple times due to multiple bankruptcies, then being re-opened years later by the state as a school for schoolteachers.

This is simply stating facts, rather than embellishing a magical history that does not exist. We are not talking about Harvard, Yale, Princeton here, which were great in colonial times and have contributed ever more to American history since.

To say W&M has been quiet and irrelevant, to be frank, is an understatement. Multiple bankruptcies and closures, then being reopened as a state school for schoolteachers, are embarrassments.

+1

W&M STILL touts Thomas Jefferson and people from that era among its "famous alumni" because there hasn't been anyone of that caliber since. It is resting on its laurels and an old reputation among older people, like another PP said.

Well, we have to continue to tout notable alumni who go on to found world-renowned universities. . . With that in mind, I'd like to give a shout out to William Barton Rogers, the W&M alum who founded MIT!

[Anonymous]

You need to choose what fits for you, if you look at Princeton Review ratings (which uses student survey data), you can see that there is a big contrast between these schools is pretty big:

George Mason:

Financial Aid Not So Great #9
Least Beautiful Campus #9
Professors Get Low Marks #19

William and Mary:

Top 20 Best Value Colleges w/o Aid (Public Schools) #8
Top 50 Best Value Colleges (Public Schools) #12
Best Career Services #14
Best College Library #8
Best Quality of Life #15
Best Science Lab Facilities #10
Happiest Students #4
LGBTQ-Friendly #18
Lots of Race/Class Interaction #3
Most Engaged in Community Service #7
Most Popular Study Abroad Program #8
Their Students Love These Colleges #14
Top 20 Best Alumni Networks (Public Schools) #16
Top 20 Best Career Placement (Public Schools) #14
Top 20 Best Schools for Internships (Public Schools) #1
Top 20 Best Schools for Making an Impact (Public Schools) #1

[Anonymous]

For computer science, sure. For anything else, nope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

So we are only allowed to praise universities based on false characteristics now?

The school has an "illustrious" history is this was 1776. It's not. The past 244 years of American history have gone by and again nothing illustrious has happened at the school, other than shutting down multiple times due to multiple bankruptcies, then being re-opened years later by the state as a school for schoolteachers.

This is simply stating facts, rather than embellishing a magical history that does not exist. We are not talking about Harvard, Yale, Princeton here, which were great in colonial times and have contributed ever more to American history since.

To say W&M has been quiet and irrelevant, to be frank, is an understatement. Multiple bankruptcies and closures, then being reopened as a state school for schoolteachers, are embarrassments.

How ignorant you are. Do you realize that there was a small conflict that occurred between 1861-1865? In the post war period Virginia was not even a state, but Military District No. 1. Virginia and the South were punished by destitution for their secession. HYP were on the winning side, flush with money from the newly industrialized North.

William and Mary had been a small, Anglican institution, providing a classical education thought to be essential for a Gentleman. With industrialization Northern institutions quickly became trade schools. It was Southern education that provided the great statesmen of the revolutionary period.

You spend a great deal of time railing against an institution of understated irrelevance. Guess you never received the kind of well rounded liberal education that William and Mary provides.

All that to just come back to talk about the "great statesmen of the revolutionary period"?

Again, no one denies the college produced a large number of great statesmen in the colonial period. That's largely because it was one of the few colleges that existed outside of NE and there was no other college to attend in the South.

Since then, it hasn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So we are only allowed to praise universities based on false characteristics now?

The school has an "illustrious" history is this was 1776. It's not. The past 244 years of American history have gone by and again nothing illustrious has happened at the school, other than shutting down multiple times due to multiple bankruptcies, then being re-opened years later by the state as a school for schoolteachers.

This is simply stating facts, rather than embellishing a magical history that does not exist. We are not talking about Harvard, Yale, Princeton here, which were great in colonial times and have contributed ever more to American history since.

To say W&M has been quiet and irrelevant, to be frank, is an understatement. Multiple bankruptcies and closures, then being reopened as a state school for schoolteachers, are embarrassments.

How ignorant you are. Do you realize that there was a small conflict that occurred between 1861-1865? In the post war period Virginia was not even a state, but Military District No. 1. Virginia and the South were punished by destitution for their secession. HYP were on the winning side, flush with money from the newly industrialized North.

William and Mary had been a small, Anglican institution, providing a classical education thought to be essential for a Gentleman. With industrialization Northern institutions quickly became trade schools. It was Southern education that provided the great statesmen of the revolutionary period.

You spend a great deal of time railing against an institution of understated irrelevance. Guess you never received the kind of well rounded liberal education that William and Mary provides.

I+1000. I was just about to post the PP was really disingenuous, since the bankruptcy occurred as a result of the Civil War, which left VA economically devastated.
That poster clearly has an axe to grind.

Plenty of Southern colleges struggled during the Civil War, including Duke, UNC, UVA, etc.

None went bankrupt multiple times and were absorbed by the state as a school for educating teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So we are only allowed to praise universities based on false characteristics now?

The school has an "illustrious" history is this was 1776. It's not. The past 244 years of American history have gone by and again nothing illustrious has happened at the school, other than shutting down multiple times due to multiple bankruptcies, then being re-opened years later by the state as a school for schoolteachers.

This is simply stating facts, rather than embellishing a magical history that does not exist. We are not talking about Harvard, Yale, Princeton here, which were great in colonial times and have contributed ever more to American history since.

To say W&M has been quiet and irrelevant, to be frank, is an understatement. Multiple bankruptcies and closures, then being reopened as a state school for schoolteachers, are embarrassments.

How ignorant you are. Do you realize that there was a small conflict that occurred between 1861-1865? In the post war period Virginia was not even a state, but Military District No. 1. Virginia and the South were punished by destitution for their secession. HYP were on the winning side, flush with money from the newly industrialized North.

William and Mary had been a small, Anglican institution, providing a classical education thought to be essential for a Gentleman. With industrialization Northern institutions quickly became trade schools. It was Southern education that provided the great statesmen of the revolutionary period.

You spend a great deal of time railing against an institution of understated irrelevance. Guess you never received the kind of well rounded liberal education that William and Mary provides.

I+1000. I was just about to post the PP was really disingenuous, since the bankruptcy occurred as a result of the Civil War, which left VA economically devastated.
That poster clearly has an axe to grind.

Plenty of Southern colleges struggled during the Civil War, including Duke, UNC, UVA, etc.

None went bankrupt multiple times and were absorbed by the state as a school for educating teachers.

Since MWU and JMU were also teachers’ colleges, where did W&M’s “prestige” come from? Legit question, not being snarky.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So we are only allowed to praise universities based on false characteristics now?

The school has an "illustrious" history is this was 1776. It's not. The past 244 years of American history have gone by and again nothing illustrious has happened at the school, other than shutting down multiple times due to multiple bankruptcies, then being re-opened years later by the state as a school for schoolteachers.

This is simply stating facts, rather than embellishing a magical history that does not exist. We are not talking about Harvard, Yale, Princeton here, which were great in colonial times and have contributed ever more to American history since.

To say W&M has been quiet and irrelevant, to be frank, is an understatement. Multiple bankruptcies and closures, then being reopened as a state school for schoolteachers, are embarrassments.

How ignorant you are. Do you realize that there was a small conflict that occurred between 1861-1865? In the post war period Virginia was not even a state, but Military District No. 1. Virginia and the South were punished by destitution for their secession. HYP were on the winning side, flush with money from the newly industrialized North.

William and Mary had been a small, Anglican institution, providing a classical education thought to be essential for a Gentleman. With industrialization Northern institutions quickly became trade schools. It was Southern education that provided the great statesmen of the revolutionary period.

You spend a great deal of time railing against an institution of understated irrelevance. Guess you never received the kind of well rounded liberal education that William and Mary provides.

All that to just come back to talk about the "great statesmen of the revolutionary period"?

Again, no one denies the college produced a large number of great statesmen in the colonial period. That's largely because it was one of the few colleges that existed outside of NE and there was no other college to attend in the South.

Since then, it hasn't.

You sure sound like a broken record in light of the evidence others have posted. Sorry you couldn't get in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So we are only allowed to praise universities based on false characteristics now?

The school has an "illustrious" history is this was 1776. It's not. The past 244 years of American history have gone by and again nothing illustrious has happened at the school, other than shutting down multiple times due to multiple bankruptcies, then being re-opened years later by the state as a school for schoolteachers.

This is simply stating facts, rather than embellishing a magical history that does not exist. We are not talking about Harvard, Yale, Princeton here, which were great in colonial times and have contributed ever more to American history since.

To say W&M has been quiet and irrelevant, to be frank, is an understatement. Multiple bankruptcies and closures, then being reopened as a state school for schoolteachers, are embarrassments.

How ignorant you are. Do you realize that there was a small conflict that occurred between 1861-1865? In the post war period Virginia was not even a state, but Military District No. 1. Virginia and the South were punished by destitution for their secession. HYP were on the winning side, flush with money from the newly industrialized North.

William and Mary had been a small, Anglican institution, providing a classical education thought to be essential for a Gentleman. With industrialization Northern institutions quickly became trade schools. It was Southern education that provided the great statesmen of the revolutionary period.

You spend a great deal of time railing against an institution of understated irrelevance. Guess you never received the kind of well rounded liberal education that William and Mary provides.

All that to just come back to talk about the "great statesmen of the revolutionary period"?

Again, no one denies the college produced a large number of great statesmen in the colonial period. That's largely because it was one of the few colleges that existed outside of NE and there was no other college to attend in the South.

Since then, it hasn't.

You sure sound like a broken record in light of the evidence others have posted. Sorry you couldn't get in.

The evidence others have posted consists repeated bleating about its colonial history.

Don't worry, you can continue to compare the school to prestigious privates to make yourself feel better for having it as your best option.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So we are only allowed to praise universities based on false characteristics now?

The school has an "illustrious" history is this was 1776. It's not. The past 244 years of American history have gone by and again nothing illustrious has happened at the school, other than shutting down multiple times due to multiple bankruptcies, then being re-opened years later by the state as a school for schoolteachers.

This is simply stating facts, rather than embellishing a magical history that does not exist. We are not talking about Harvard, Yale, Princeton here, which were great in colonial times and have contributed ever more to American history since.

To say W&M has been quiet and irrelevant, to be frank, is an understatement. Multiple bankruptcies and closures, then being reopened as a state school for schoolteachers, are embarrassments.

How ignorant you are. Do you realize that there was a small conflict that occurred between 1861-1865? In the post war period Virginia was not even a state, but Military District No. 1. Virginia and the South were punished by destitution for their secession. HYP were on the winning side, flush with money from the newly industrialized North.

William and Mary had been a small, Anglican institution, providing a classical education thought to be essential for a Gentleman. With industrialization Northern institutions quickly became trade schools. It was Southern education that provided the great statesmen of the revolutionary period.

You spend a great deal of time railing against an institution of understated irrelevance. Guess you never received the kind of well rounded liberal education that William and Mary provides.

All that to just come back to talk about the "great statesmen of the revolutionary period"?

Again, no one denies the college produced a large number of great statesmen in the colonial period. That's largely because it was one of the few colleges that existed outside of NE and there was no other college to attend in the South.

Since then, it hasn't.

You sure sound like a broken record in light of the evidence others have posted. Sorry you couldn't get in.

The evidence others have posted consists repeated bleating about its colonial history.

Don't worry, you can continue to compare the school to prestigious privates to make yourself feel better for having it as your best option.

PP above just listed the many prestigious recent alumni including Jen Psaki. Maybe your reading comprehension needs some work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So we are only allowed to praise universities based on false characteristics now?

The school has an "illustrious" history is this was 1776. It's not. The past 244 years of American history have gone by and again nothing illustrious has happened at the school, other than shutting down multiple times due to multiple bankruptcies, then being re-opened years later by the state as a school for schoolteachers.

This is simply stating facts, rather than embellishing a magical history that does not exist. We are not talking about Harvard, Yale, Princeton here, which were great in colonial times and have contributed ever more to American history since.

To say W&M has been quiet and irrelevant, to be frank, is an understatement. Multiple bankruptcies and closures, then being reopened as a state school for schoolteachers, are embarrassments.

How ignorant you are. Do you realize that there was a small conflict that occurred between 1861-1865? In the post war period Virginia was not even a state, but Military District No. 1. Virginia and the South were punished by destitution for their secession. HYP were on the winning side, flush with money from the newly industrialized North.

William and Mary had been a small, Anglican institution, providing a classical education thought to be essential for a Gentleman. With industrialization Northern institutions quickly became trade schools. It was Southern education that provided the great statesmen of the revolutionary period.

You spend a great deal of time railing against an institution of understated irrelevance. Guess you never received the kind of well rounded liberal education that William and Mary provides.

All that to just come back to talk about the "great statesmen of the revolutionary period"?

Again, no one denies the college produced a large number of great statesmen in the colonial period. That's largely because it was one of the few colleges that existed outside of NE and there was no other college to attend in the South.

Since then, it hasn't.

You sure sound like a broken record in light of the evidence others have posted. Sorry you couldn't get in.

The evidence others have posted consists repeated bleating about its colonial history.

Don't worry, you can continue to compare the school to prestigious privates to make yourself feel better for having it as your best option.

PP above just listed the many prestigious recent alumni including Jen Psaki. Maybe your reading comprehension needs some work?

NP, but she was listed in response to "there haven't been any alumni of Thomas Jefferson's caliber recently." Jen Psaki is NOT on his level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So we are only allowed to praise universities based on false characteristics now?

The school has an "illustrious" history is this was 1776. It's not. The past 244 years of American history have gone by and again nothing illustrious has happened at the school, other than shutting down multiple times due to multiple bankruptcies, then being re-opened years later by the state as a school for schoolteachers.

This is simply stating facts, rather than embellishing a magical history that does not exist. We are not talking about Harvard, Yale, Princeton here, which were great in colonial times and have contributed ever more to American history since.

To say W&M has been quiet and irrelevant, to be frank, is an understatement. Multiple bankruptcies and closures, then being reopened as a state school for schoolteachers, are embarrassments.

How ignorant you are. Do you realize that there was a small conflict that occurred between 1861-1865? In the post war period Virginia was not even a state, but Military District No. 1. Virginia and the South were punished by destitution for their secession. HYP were on the winning side, flush with money from the newly industrialized North.

William and Mary had been a small, Anglican institution, providing a classical education thought to be essential for a Gentleman. With industrialization Northern institutions quickly became trade schools. It was Southern education that provided the great statesmen of the revolutionary period.

You spend a great deal of time railing against an institution of understated irrelevance. Guess you never received the kind of well rounded liberal education that William and Mary provides.

All that to just come back to talk about the "great statesmen of the revolutionary period"?

Again, no one denies the college produced a large number of great statesmen in the colonial period. That's largely because it was one of the few colleges that existed outside of NE and there was no other college to attend in the South.

Since then, it hasn't.

You sure sound like a broken record in light of the evidence others have posted. Sorry you couldn't get in.

The evidence others have posted consists repeated bleating about its colonial history.

Don't worry, you can continue to compare the school to prestigious privates to make yourself feel better for having it as your best option.

PP above just listed the many prestigious recent alumni including Jen Psaki. Maybe your reading comprehension needs some work?

NP, but she was listed in response to "there haven't been any alumni of Thomas Jefferson's caliber recently." Jen Psaki is NOT on his level.

Geez. Jefferson is one of four on Mount Rushmore and one of the five presidential memorials in D.C. Perhaps that bar is a bit unfair.

[Anonymous]

Meh. W&M is still light years better than GMU. Fewer RWNJs.