Anonymous
10/31/2024 12:53
Subject: Re:Was UM, UVA, and UW Madison considered more “prestigious” back in the day?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.
That’s a myth. Michigan was founded in 1841, that was the first day of classes. The 1817 myth was made up in the 1910s when Wisconsin was more prestigious; Michigan felt they had to identify with the “Cathelopistimiad”, a high school founded in Detroit in 1817. It closed in 1827.
Old seals of Michigan often show the date “1837”, marking the university’s establishment in Ann Arbor, but the first day of classes did not begin until the appointment of the first professor, Asa Gray, in 1841.
See, even in the 1910s Michigan students were insecure….
Duke University was founded in 1838 as the Brown School. After 4 name changes, it became Duke University in 1924. So that point about Michigan just starting in 1841 is ridiculous.
It’s also funny that the above poster mentions Michigan students being insecure after a sentence where he/she/it mentions the first professor at the university. That’s the definition of insecurity looking up such an esoteric fact.
Wisconsin booster still can’t accept that Michigan overtook Wiscy decades ago. Wisconsin has also been overtaken by dozens of schools since 1910 through today. Wisconsin backer should be proud that a public school located in a state with a smaller population did as well as it did so many years ago.
Anonymous
10/31/2024 12:25
Subject: Was UM, UVA, and UW Madison considered more “prestigious” back in the day?
UW-Madison has always had a world class reputation and still does. But it’s never been particularly selective.
UVA has been more selective than UW-Madison since forever. The poster who said UVA wasn’t a “big deal” in 1997 is off the mark. I had kids in a NOVA public high schools in the late 90s and UVA admissions was viewed as just as much of a golden ticket then as it is now.
UVA has been more selective than UW-Madison since forever. The poster who said UVA wasn’t a “big deal” in 1997 is off the mark. I had kids in a NOVA public high schools in the late 90s and UVA admissions was viewed as just as much of a golden ticket then as it is now.
Anonymous
10/31/2024 12:19
Subject: Was UM, UVA, and UW Madison considered more “prestigious” back in the day?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Michigan was considered a good school back in the 1980s UVA was a tier below and Wisconsin a tier below that. UVA and Wisconsin have closed the gap considerably but I think the rank order is about the same
I’d say it’s the opposite. Michigan has widened the gap since the 80’s with both of these schools.
Cool story... everyone is better off for hearing your expert analysis and anonymous opinion.
Anonymous
10/31/2024 11:55
Subject: Re:Was UM, UVA, and UW Madison considered more “prestigious” back in the day?
Anonymous wrote: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.
That’s a myth. Michigan was founded in 1841, that was the first day of classes. The 1817 myth was made up in the 1910s when Wisconsin was more prestigious; Michigan felt they had to identify with the “Cathelopistimiad”, a high school founded in Detroit in 1817. It closed in 1827.
Old seals of Michigan often show the date “1837”, marking the university’s establishment in Ann Arbor, but the first day of classes did not begin until the appointment of the first professor, Asa Gray, in 1841.
See, even in the 1910s Michigan students were insecure….
Anonymous
10/31/2024 11:55
Subject: Was UM, UVA, and UW Madison considered more “prestigious” back in the day?
Anonymous wrote:Michigan was considered a good school back in the 1980s UVA was a tier below and Wisconsin a tier below that. UVA and Wisconsin have closed the gap considerably but I think the rank order is about the same
I’d say it’s the opposite. Michigan has widened the gap since the 80’s with both of these schools.
Anonymous
10/31/2024 09:48
Subject: Was UM, UVA, and UW Madison considered more “prestigious” back in the day?
Michigan was considered a good school back in the 1980s UVA was a tier below and Wisconsin a tier below that. UVA and Wisconsin have closed the gap considerably but I think the rank order is about the same
Anonymous
10/30/2024 21:31
Subject: Was UM, UVA, and UW Madison considered more “prestigious” back in the day?
Anonymous wrote:For all the supposedly relevant objective data, you rarely meet a Michigan grad who is anything but super happy to have attended. Can’t say the same for Cornell, Hopkins, Penn, Columbia, Northwestern….
why are you reactivating an old july thread?
Anonymous
10/30/2024 21:26
Subject: Re:Was UM, UVA, and UW Madison considered more “prestigious” back in the day?
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.
That’s a myth. Michigan was founded in 1841, that was the first day of classes. The 1817 myth was made up in the 1910s when Wisconsin was more prestigious; Michigan felt they had to identify with the “Cathelopistimiad”, a high school founded in Detroit in 1817. It closed in 1827.
Old seals of Michigan often show the date “1837”, marking the university’s establishment in Ann Arbor, but the first day of classes did not begin until the appointment of the first professor, Asa Gray, in 1841.
See, even in the 1910s Michigan students were insecure….
Anonymous
08/30/2024 10:06
Subject: Was UM, UVA, and UW Madison considered more “prestigious” back in the day?
I am not going to scan this entire thread but here is actual data as opposed to speculation or people’s fuzzy and skewed memories. https://publicuniversityhonors.com/2017/09/13/u-s-news-rankings-for-57-leading-universities-1983-2007/
Anonymous
08/30/2024 08:30
Subject: Was UM, UVA, and UW Madison considered more “prestigious” back in the day?
For all the supposedly relevant objective data, you rarely meet a Michigan grad who is anything but super happy to have attended. Can’t say the same for Cornell, Hopkins, Penn, Columbia, Northwestern….
Anonymous
07/14/2024 17:43
Subject: Was UM, UVA, and UW Madison considered more “prestigious” back in the day?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Imagine paying out of state tuition for michigan. Few if any with a top private option do so.
Source? That is not supported by the data.
Show me data otherwise. UMich has bad yield and even worse freshman stats. Lower aid vs top privates for out of state too. You go if you were a reject.
You made a claim with no evidence. We can all just dismiss it as a junk post. The data says otherwise.
what data?
Michigan cross-admit data. Any claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
the data is michigan’s out of state yield which is sub 30%. lol at them winning any cross admits against lower ivies or other top privates especially with lower freshman stats too
Anonymous
07/14/2024 13:41
Subject: Was UM, UVA, and UW Madison considered more “prestigious” back in the day?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Imagine paying out of state tuition for michigan. Few if any with a top private option do so.
Source? That is not supported by the data.
Show me data otherwise. UMich has bad yield and even worse freshman stats. Lower aid vs top privates for out of state too. You go if you were a reject.
You made a claim with no evidence. We can all just dismiss it as a junk post. The data says otherwise.
what data?
Michigan cross-admit data. Any claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Anonymous
07/14/2024 11:45
Subject: Was UM, UVA, and UW Madison considered more “prestigious” back in the day?
enjoy being a reject
Anonymous
07/14/2024 11:45
Subject: Was UM, UVA, and UW Madison considered more “prestigious” back in the day?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Imagine paying out of state tuition for michigan. Few if any with a top private option do so.
Source? That is not supported by the data.
Show me data otherwise. UMich has bad yield and even worse freshman stats. Lower aid vs top privates for out of state too. You go if you were a reject.
You made a claim with no evidence. We can all just dismiss it as a junk post. The data says otherwise.
what data?
Anonymous
07/14/2024 06:30
Subject: Was UM, UVA, and UW Madison considered more “prestigious” back in the day?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Imagine paying out of state tuition for michigan. Few if any with a top private option do so.
Source? That is not supported by the data.
Show me data otherwise. UMich has bad yield and even worse freshman stats. Lower aid vs top privates for out of state too. You go if you were a reject.
You made a claim with no evidence. We can all just dismiss it as a junk post. The data says otherwise.