Anonymous wrote:Can you win the Jefferson without committing to UVA? I figured once they flew in the 100 finalists for interviews they would want to suss out who would actually accept before making the actual award.

Anonymous wrote:Can you win the Jefferson without committing to UVA? I figured once they flew in the 100 finalists for interviews they would want to suss out who would actually accept before making the actual award.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would go with UVA. If DC can get into Harvard, they will succeed most anywhere. Save your money for grad school (if needed) or gift it back to them for a down payment after graduation.

My friend from UVa got into Harvard where his biological dad was an alum. He went to UVa because he believed he got there on his own. He ended up leaving his <$50K (below average) job and working for his mother within a month. His UVa girlfriend dumped him that week and he didn't have sex for 6 years. At UVa, they will succeed working for his mother, not anywhere else.

Similar story with Harvard Law alum graduating with no friends and oodles of debt and incurring more by losing elections and burning bridges. Never heard this with Harvard undergrads though. DC should do Harvard undergrad and UVa Law.

Anonymous wrote:Undergrad? No. Some of the richest people in the world aren’t sending their kids to Harvard for undergrad.

I’d send my kid to UVA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is Harvard worth the difference? DC would major in business at UVA and economics at Harvard.

A scholar studies a trade subject such as business? How many Jefferson scholars end up studying business at UVA?

UVA has an exceptionally strong Econ department

No, it doesn't. The Econ department is ranked in the 30s for graduate studies, and in the 40s for research productivity of the professors.

Without looking it up, what are the criteria your cited ranking uses?

This. https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/university-of-virginia-main-campus/academic-life/academic-majors/social-sciences/economics/#rankings

In other words, you don't know. Not a good way to make decisions.

I do know. My DD was an Econ major and went to Wall Street. I gave you the link to the ranking of UVA's Econ program, which is what you asked for

You need to read more carefully. I asked you to, without looking it up, name the criteria those rankings use. Millions of people (you included apparently) use rankings without even understanding how they were generated. Again, it's a poor way to make decisions.

You aren’t worth the time to respond to. Go take your need to split hairs and argue somewhere else.

Just trying to help. But okay.

Please. You’re not trying to help anyone.

You're mistaken. I am trying to help, and I'm not splitting hairs. The criteria that are used to create rankings matter. Just taking someone's word for it that anything is better than another thing without knowing how they arrived at that conclusion is a poor way to make decisions. When I see millions of people using a flawed method of making important decisions, I'm motivated to help them understand the mistake they're making.

Given the fact that you're not seeing this, though, I'll admit that I apparently need to work on my delivery.

DP. Most people don't have the means to decide on their own how good each college's economics or biology or CS....department it. They therefore look at available rankings, which, even if imperfect, is likely better than just picking a school out of a hat. I look at as many as I can find to get some idea of a program's quality from a broad range of sources. You lecturing people essentially how dumb they are is condescending and unhelpful.

Thank you for pointing out that it's coming across as lecturing people about how dumb they are. I need to choose my words better. My intent is to point out that rankings are driven by the criteria used by their creators, and that presenting them as absolute fact on these message boards makes the assumption that those criteria are what's most important for everyone.

The original post that got me started was this: "The Econ department [at UVa] is ranked in the 30s for graduate studies, and in the 40s for research productivity of the professors." This was presented in response to the statement (not made by me) that "UVA has an exceptionally strong Econ department", the implication being that this ranking definitively shows that UVa's econ department is not exceptionally strong. I was hoping to get the poster (you?) to realize that the 'evidence' they were presenting had underlying assumptions that might not be useful for everyone's needs. I apologize that the manner in which I did this came across as condescending. I will work on that.

I'm the person that pointed out UVA's rankings for graduate studies and research. Looks like you have been arguing with other people regarding the ranking for little reason.

The US News ranking in the 30s for graduate studies is based on peer feedback from professors - those in the know. The research ranking in the 40s is based on research publications by professors into top Econ journals.

So while a ranking in the 30s and 40s is not bad by any means, it's certainly not exceptionally strong.

You might argue that reputation among professors and research publications are not sufficient metrics for judging undergraduate degree quality.

It may or may not be, but that's irrelevant. Harvard Econ would blow UVA out of the water in any other metric. Class sizes? Resources? Peer quality? World-renowned professors? Post-career opportunities? Recommendation letters? Undergraduate research? Location? Harvard would be stronger in all.

Research and the resulting reputation of the department among academics are two factors where a large public university like UVA could compete with against the top privates, that in some ways in fact can favor large publics due to sheer size and direct government backing. Case in point, Berkeley Econ department goes toe-to-toe with MIT and Harvard.

But UVA is not that, so saying the UVA Econ department is exceptionally strong is wrong. It's good, no doubt. But it's not exceptionally strong.

And on what do you base that opinion? You are clearly not even familiar with UVAs program and you even have the rank wrong. It’s 29 in the nation … if some 4,000 institutions which places it in the top 5 percent of all Econ programs and no 1 in the Commonwealth The question is not which is the better program -which you just guess at - but whether a free ride and the benefits of the Jefferson (which even includes a monthly stipend for spending on top of free tuition and free room and board -but whether the financial trade off is worth the $300k* that Harvard will cost. Only the family can make that decision. And yes I went to Harvard; there are many very unhappy undergrads there in some so-so programs. It’s not what it’s cracked up to be.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is Harvard worth the difference? DC would major in business at UVA and economics at Harvard.

A scholar studies a trade subject such as business? How many Jefferson scholars end up studying business at UVA?

UVA has an exceptionally strong Econ department

No, it doesn't. The Econ department is ranked in the 30s for graduate studies, and in the 40s for research productivity of the professors.

Without looking it up, what are the criteria your cited ranking uses?

This. https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/university-of-virginia-main-campus/academic-life/academic-majors/social-sciences/economics/#rankings

In other words, you don't know. Not a good way to make decisions.

I do know. My DD was an Econ major and went to Wall Street. I gave you the link to the ranking of UVA's Econ program, which is what you asked for

You need to read more carefully. I asked you to, without looking it up, name the criteria those rankings use. Millions of people (you included apparently) use rankings without even understanding how they were generated. Again, it's a poor way to make decisions.

You aren’t worth the time to respond to. Go take your need to split hairs and argue somewhere else.

Just trying to help. But okay.

Please. You’re not trying to help anyone.

You're mistaken. I am trying to help, and I'm not splitting hairs. The criteria that are used to create rankings matter. Just taking someone's word for it that anything is better than another thing without knowing how they arrived at that conclusion is a poor way to make decisions. When I see millions of people using a flawed method of making important decisions, I'm motivated to help them understand the mistake they're making.

Given the fact that you're not seeing this, though, I'll admit that I apparently need to work on my delivery.

DP. Most people don't have the means to decide on their own how good each college's economics or biology or CS....department it. They therefore look at available rankings, which, even if imperfect, is likely better than just picking a school out of a hat. I look at as many as I can find to get some idea of a program's quality from a broad range of sources. You lecturing people essentially how dumb they are is condescending and unhelpful.

Thank you for pointing out that it's coming across as lecturing people about how dumb they are. I need to choose my words better. My intent is to point out that rankings are driven by the criteria used by their creators, and that presenting them as absolute fact on these message boards makes the assumption that those criteria are what's most important for everyone.

The original post that got me started was this: "The Econ department [at UVa] is ranked in the 30s for graduate studies, and in the 40s for research productivity of the professors." This was presented in response to the statement (not made by me) that "UVA has an exceptionally strong Econ department", the implication being that this ranking definitively shows that UVa's econ department is not exceptionally strong. I was hoping to get the poster (you?) to realize that the 'evidence' they were presenting had underlying assumptions that might not be useful for everyone's needs. I apologize that the manner in which I did this came across as condescending. I will work on that.

I'm the person that pointed out UVA's rankings for graduate studies and research. Looks like you have been arguing with other people regarding the ranking for little reason.

The US News ranking in the 30s for graduate studies is based on peer feedback from professors - those in the know. The research ranking in the 40s is based on research publications by professors into top Econ journals.

So while a ranking in the 30s and 40s is not bad by any means, it's certainly not exceptionally strong.

You might argue that reputation among professors and research publications are not sufficient metrics for judging undergraduate degree quality.

It may or may not be, but that's irrelevant. Harvard Econ would blow UVA out of the water in any other metric. Class sizes? Resources? Peer quality? World-renowned professors? Post-career opportunities? Recommendation letters? Undergraduate research? Location? Harvard would be stronger in all.

Research and the resulting reputation of the department among academics are two factors where a large public university like UVA could compete with against the top privates, that in some ways in fact can favor large publics due to sheer size and direct government backing. Case in point, Berkeley Econ department goes toe-to-toe with MIT and Harvard.

But UVA is not that, so saying the UVA Econ department is exceptionally strong is wrong. It's good, no doubt. But it's not exceptionally strong.

And on what do you base that opinion? You are clearly not even familiar with UVAs program and you even have the rank wrong. It’s 29 in the nation … if some 4,000 institutions which places it in the top 5 percent of all Econ programs and no 1 in the Commonwealth The question is not which is the better program -which you just guess at - but whether a free ride and the benefits of the Jefferson (which even includes a monthly stipend for spending on top of free tuition and free room and board -but whether the financial trade off is worth the $300k* that Harvard will cost. Only the family can make that decision. And yes I went to Harvard; there are many very unhappy undergrads there in some so-so programs. It’s not what it’s cracked up to be.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is Harvard worth the difference? DC would major in business at UVA and economics at Harvard.

A scholar studies a trade subject such as business? How many Jefferson scholars end up studying business at UVA?

UVA has an exceptionally strong Econ department

No, it doesn't. The Econ department is ranked in the 30s for graduate studies, and in the 40s for research productivity of the professors.

Without looking it up, what are the criteria your cited ranking uses?

This. https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/university-of-virginia-main-campus/academic-life/academic-majors/social-sciences/economics/#rankings

In other words, you don't know. Not a good way to make decisions.

I do know. My DD was an Econ major and went to Wall Street. I gave you the link to the ranking of UVA's Econ program, which is what you asked for

You need to read more carefully. I asked you to, without looking it up, name the criteria those rankings use. Millions of people (you included apparently) use rankings without even understanding how they were generated. Again, it's a poor way to make decisions.

You aren’t worth the time to respond to. Go take your need to split hairs and argue somewhere else.

Just trying to help. But okay.

Please. You’re not trying to help anyone.

You're mistaken. I am trying to help, and I'm not splitting hairs. The criteria that are used to create rankings matter. Just taking someone's word for it that anything is better than another thing without knowing how they arrived at that conclusion is a poor way to make decisions. When I see millions of people using a flawed method of making important decisions, I'm motivated to help them understand the mistake they're making.

Given the fact that you're not seeing this, though, I'll admit that I apparently need to work on my delivery.

DP. Most people don't have the means to decide on their own how good each college's economics or biology or CS....department it. They therefore look at available rankings, which, even if imperfect, is likely better than just picking a school out of a hat. I look at as many as I can find to get some idea of a program's quality from a broad range of sources. You lecturing people essentially how dumb they are is condescending and unhelpful.

Thank you for pointing out that it's coming across as lecturing people about how dumb they are. I need to choose my words better. My intent is to point out that rankings are driven by the criteria used by their creators, and that presenting them as absolute fact on these message boards makes the assumption that those criteria are what's most important for everyone.

The original post that got me started was this: "The Econ department [at UVa] is ranked in the 30s for graduate studies, and in the 40s for research productivity of the professors." This was presented in response to the statement (not made by me) that "UVA has an exceptionally strong Econ department", the implication being that this ranking definitively shows that UVa's econ department is not exceptionally strong. I was hoping to get the poster (you?) to realize that the 'evidence' they were presenting had underlying assumptions that might not be useful for everyone's needs. I apologize that the manner in which I did this came across as condescending. I will work on that.

I'm the person that pointed out UVA's rankings for graduate studies and research. Looks like you have been arguing with other people regarding the ranking for little reason.

The US News ranking in the 30s for graduate studies is based on peer feedback from professors - those in the know. The research ranking in the 40s is based on research publications by professors into top Econ journals.

So while a ranking in the 30s and 40s is not bad by any means, it's certainly not exceptionally strong.

You might argue that reputation among professors and research publications are not sufficient metrics for judging undergraduate degree quality.

It may or may not be, but that's irrelevant. Harvard Econ would blow UVA out of the water in any other metric. Class sizes? Resources? Peer quality? World-renowned professors? Post-career opportunities? Recommendation letters? Undergraduate research? Location? Harvard would be stronger in all.

Research and the resulting reputation of the department among academics are two factors where a large public university like UVA could compete with against the top privates, that in some ways in fact can favor large publics due to sheer size and direct government backing. Case in point, Berkeley Econ department goes toe-to-toe with MIT and Harvard.

But UVA is not that, so saying the UVA Econ department is exceptionally strong is wrong. It's good, no doubt. But it's not exceptionally strong.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is Harvard worth the difference? DC would major in business at UVA and economics at Harvard.

A scholar studies a trade subject such as business? How many Jefferson scholars end up studying business at UVA?

UVA has an exceptionally strong Econ department

No, it doesn't. The Econ department is ranked in the 30s for graduate studies, and in the 40s for research productivity of the professors.

Without looking it up, what are the criteria your cited ranking uses?

This. https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/university-of-virginia-main-campus/academic-life/academic-majors/social-sciences/economics/#rankings

In other words, you don't know. Not a good way to make decisions.

I do know. My DD was an Econ major and went to Wall Street. I gave you the link to the ranking of UVA's Econ program, which is what you asked for

You need to read more carefully. I asked you to, without looking it up, name the criteria those rankings use. Millions of people (you included apparently) use rankings without even understanding how they were generated. Again, it's a poor way to make decisions.

You aren’t worth the time to respond to. Go take your need to split hairs and argue somewhere else.

Just trying to help. But okay.

Please. You’re not trying to help anyone.

You're mistaken. I am trying to help, and I'm not splitting hairs. The criteria that are used to create rankings matter. Just taking someone's word for it that anything is better than another thing without knowing how they arrived at that conclusion is a poor way to make decisions. When I see millions of people using a flawed method of making important decisions, I'm motivated to help them understand the mistake they're making.

Given the fact that you're not seeing this, though, I'll admit that I apparently need to work on my delivery.

DP. Most people don't have the means to decide on their own how good each college's economics or biology or CS....department it. They therefore look at available rankings, which, even if imperfect, is likely better than just picking a school out of a hat. I look at as many as I can find to get some idea of a program's quality from a broad range of sources. You lecturing people essentially how dumb they are is condescending and unhelpful.

Thank you for pointing out that it's coming across as lecturing people about how dumb they are. I need to choose my words better. My intent is to point out that rankings are driven by the criteria used by their creators, and that presenting them as absolute fact on these message boards makes the assumption that those criteria are what's most important for everyone.

The original post that got me started was this: "The Econ department [at UVa] is ranked in the 30s for graduate studies, and in the 40s for research productivity of the professors." This was presented in response to the statement (not made by me) that "UVA has an exceptionally strong Econ department", the implication being that this ranking definitively shows that UVa's econ department is not exceptionally strong. I was hoping to get the poster (you?) to realize that the 'evidence' they were presenting had underlying assumptions that might not be useful for everyone's needs. I apologize that the manner in which I did this came across as condescending. I will work on that.