Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everything in the middle west, especially cold weather northern states is in decline. Smart middle west 12th graders can go to places like Alabama, Auburn and Ole Miss for less than in-state Big Ten. The southern universities are recruiting smart out of state kids very aggressively and it's working.

False.

NP. In what way is that false?

It is not false, it is echoed throughout this thread. Colleges rising in stature are on the coasts or in the warm clime south. While colleges losing prestige frequently tend to be cold, stagnant regions, notably the middle west. In Michigan, it was just reported by the Detroit News that a dozen of their public universities have lost upwards of 40% of their students — "plummeting enrollment" fueled by brain drain. From October to April, which is about 90% of the school year, the upper middle west is so miserable and grey. With the internet and social media, teens see their peers having fun in the sun and living in bustling regions, who the heck wants to wear a parka to class all school year in a region you have to flee after graduation? Like, what's the point? Logical people go to college in a region or side of the country they see themselves beginning a career in after college.

https://www.mlive.com/weather/2022/04/numbers-show-just-how-cloudy-it-has-been-in-michigan.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everything in the middle west, especially cold weather northern states is in decline. Smart middle west 12th graders can go to places like Alabama, Auburn and Ole Miss for less than in-state Big Ten. The southern universities are recruiting smart out of state kids very aggressively and it's working.

False.

NP. In what way is that false?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there anything quite as pathetic as a bunch of status-obsessed strivers proclaiming with absolute confidence that a bunch of universities of which they have no personal knowledge are categorically superior to a bunch of other universities of which they also have no personal knowledge?

This is a clown show.

+1 . This is hilarious. I also had no idea that I have to impress Bob from accounting in order to maintain the school's reputation.

Agree that this is all a little silly. These are all great schools. It just depends on the kid. The right fit is the right fit. However...

The poster who mentioned Georgetown and Dartmouth. Yes.

A lot of SLACs too. Sarah Lawrence in particular. I would add Wiliams and Amherst. The traditional top ones, Great schools, but not really relevant when it comes to engineering or computer science. It's the same with a lot of the ivies. Maryland is better than Yale when it comes to engineering.The University of Illinois - Urbana Champaign is better than Harvard when it comes to computer science. Georgia Tech is a better school than most of the big traditional brand schools

So much of the "prestige" thing seems really antiquated. No one is going to say Princeton sucks. But generally speaking, schools in New England, Pennsylvania, and Ohio aren't regarded as favorably as they used to be, Obviously there are exceptions, MIT, Bowdoin, Colby. Very desirable. But a lot of smart kids seem to look more favorably towards the South and the West these days. Things are changing. Northeastern SLACs are generally out of favor. The University of Florida is in. IB and consulting recruitment will eventually follow. There's definitely a change going on

Not sure about your generalization of NE, Pennsylvania and Ohio schools. Case in point, MIT, Cornell, CMU attract top STEM talent and CWRU is on the rise.

No, that’s not what pp meant. There are tens if not hundreds of tiny private colleges in Pa that aren’t close to as popular as they once were.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there anything quite as pathetic as a bunch of status-obsessed strivers proclaiming with absolute confidence that a bunch of universities of which they have no personal knowledge are categorically superior to a bunch of other universities of which they also have no personal knowledge?

This is a clown show.

+1 . This is hilarious. I also had no idea that I have to impress Bob from accounting in order to maintain the school's reputation.

Agree that this is all a little silly. These are all great schools. It just depends on the kid. The right fit is the right fit. However...

The poster who mentioned Georgetown and Dartmouth. Yes.

A lot of SLACs too. Sarah Lawrence in particular. I would add Wiliams and Amherst. The traditional top ones, Great schools, but not really relevant when it comes to engineering or computer science. It's the same with a lot of the ivies. Maryland is better than Yale when it comes to engineering.The University of Illinois - Urbana Champaign is better than Harvard when it comes to computer science. Georgia Tech is a better school than most of the big traditional brand schools

So much of the "prestige" thing seems really antiquated. No one is going to say Princeton sucks. But generally speaking, schools in New England, Pennsylvania, and Ohio aren't regarded as favorably as they used to be, Obviously there are exceptions, MIT, Bowdoin, Colby. Very desirable. But a lot of smart kids seem to look more favorably towards the South and the West these days. Things are changing. Northeastern SLACs are generally out of favor. The University of Florida is in. IB and consulting recruitment will eventually follow. There's definitely a change going on

Not sure about your generalization of NE, Pennsylvania and Ohio schools. Case in point, MIT, Cornell, CMU attract top STEM talent and CWRU is on the rise.

Anonymous wrote:^
Tufts is near Boston and I agree that they could probably up their ranking game. I don't see why Rice and Tufts would be separate by 10 spots considering they are very similar schools.
.

Rice is a top STEM school, Tufts is pretty mediocre. I am surprised there are only 10 schools separating them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there anything quite as pathetic as a bunch of status-obsessed strivers proclaiming with absolute confidence that a bunch of universities of which they have no personal knowledge are categorically superior to a bunch of other universities of which they also have no personal knowledge?

This is a clown show.

+1 . This is hilarious. I also had no idea that I have to impress Bob from accounting in order to maintain the school's reputation.

Agree that this is all a little silly. These are all great schools. It just depends on the kid. The right fit is the right fit. However...

The poster who mentioned Georgetown and Dartmouth. Yes.

A lot of SLACs too. Sarah Lawrence in particular. I would add Wiliams and Amherst. The traditional top ones, Great schools, but not really relevant when it comes to engineering or computer science. It's the same with a lot of the ivies. Maryland is better than Yale when it comes to engineering.The University of Illinois - Urbana Champaign is better than Harvard when it comes to computer science. Georgia Tech is a better school than most of the big traditional brand schools

So much of the "prestige" thing seems really antiquated. No one is going to say Princeton sucks. But generally speaking, schools in New England, Pennsylvania, and Ohio aren't regarded as favorably as they used to be, Obviously there are exceptions, MIT, Bowdoin, Colby. Very desirable. But a lot of smart kids seem to look more favorably towards the South and the West these days. Things are changing. Northeastern SLACs are generally out of favor. The University of Florida is in. IB and consulting recruitment will eventually follow. There's definitely a change going on

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone saying UVA i just trolling or has sour grapes. Not going to address that further.

Real fall to me is UVM. Back when I was applying 30 years ago, it was very well regarded and difficult to get into. Now its am underfunded safety school.

UVM alum and sadly, I agree. They have major money issues and recently tried to cut their classics and other small liberal arts departments because they don't make enough money. My well-regarded but small master's program is among the cuts and it is heartbreaking to see how standards have been lowered and poorly the school has been managed. Meanwhile its OOS tuition is through the roof!

It's because of the incredible number of administrative positions. The amount of Deans is astounding and each makes 6 figure salary. Meanwhile students are taught by adjuncts who are paid 5k per class per year.

An eventual outcome for any university, especially public universities that have union'd or tenured administrative staff that are extremely difficult to remove.

The main function that university bureaucracies serve is to feed on the university's finances to further expand itself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:W&M is an obvious answer.

Ranking drop from 32 -> 38.
Acceptance rate went from 33% to 42%, higher than large publics like UT Austin and UMD. While large publics like Berkeley are reaching single-digit acceptance rates, W&M's is increasing.

Student enrollment has increased.

Their law school has gone completely downhill.

W&M used to be more difficult to get into than UVA, due to a smaller number seats. It had higher SAT scores than UVA, the highest among publics comparable to Berkley. It was compared to the smaller Ivies like Dartmouth/Brown and SLACs like Swarthmore. It attracted out-of-staters and wealthy internationals that would never consider a large public for OOS tuition, but would consider W&M due to the size and feel.


Nowadays, UVA is far more tougher to get in, has far higher SAT scores and far great national and international reach.

Per most recent CDS:

UVA 25th/75th percentile SAT - 1330-1490
W&M 25th/75th percentile SAT - 1360-1520

both have average GPAs of 4.3.

Perhaps W&M’s higher acceptance rate is a function of some other factor other than the caliber of students they attract. Maybe since UVA and has more prominent sports and a better college town and is bigger it appeals to more kids who apply that are more borderline. W&M is bit more niche in that it a very small public, so more like a SLAC. Williamsburg is pretty sleepy too.

Maybe, just maybe, acceptance rate is not a good indication of how good a school is at any rate.

Those SAT scores and GPA are either wrong or outdated. As I stated, W&M had higher SAT/ACT scores and GPA than UVA, but that is no longer the case.

This is not regarding W&M being niche or not or its acceptance rate at any given time compared to UVA. W&M has had a higher acceptance rate than UVA for more than a decade now.

It's about the trend.

A decade ago, UVA had an acceptance rate of 29-30% while W&M's was 32-33%. In Fall 2020, UVA's acceptance rate had dropped to 23% and W&M's had increased to 42%. Meanwhile acceptance rates across the country have decreased due to increased applications.

At the same time, W&M's yield has decreased to mid-20's. Yield at all schools has decreased but not to the same extent, and schools with decreasing yields have also seen decreasing acceptance rates, not the opposite.

W&M has not become any more of a niche school than it was before. The number of students preferring a niche academic-focused school over a large sports-focused school has not decreased in proportion, and if anything has increased in proportion when looking at the popularity of schools like U. Chicago, Rice, Tufts, Swarthmore, etc.

Rather, W&M has become less of a niche, academic-focused school. They tried to become a more Greek, sports-focused school instead to attract the type of students that prefer UVA-type school. In the process it lost the students that preferred the Tufts-type school while clearly not gaining any of the former.

When did W&M try to become a "more Greek, sports-focused school" and less academic? The recent renovation/addition to the football stadium was the first in 90 years. The basketball arena hasn't had a major upgrade since it was constructed over 50 years ago (although one is planned). These improvements are all through private funds and not school funds. The size of Greek system hasn't really changed in many, many years. Meanwhile, the library, business school, science facilities and other academic buildings got major upgrades well before these were initiated.

W&M literally spent $26 million+ building fraternity housing on campus less than a decade ago using university funds, not donations: https://www.wm.edu/news/stories/2011/site-for-new-fraternity-housing-announced.php

The project is estimated at a cost of $26 million and will be funded principally through room fees

“As the birthplace of the American college fraternity (Phi Beta Kappa was founded here in 1776), W&M has an important role to play as an advocate for and host to a thriving undergraduate fraternity experience,” said Virginia Ambler, vice president for student affairs. “These new chapter houses will affirm and strengthen fraternity life at the College, celebrating a rich tradition in which our students and alumni feel a deep sense of pride.”

BTW, Phi Beta Kappa is an academic honors fraternity, not a social fraternity. The first social fraternities were founded at Union College in NY. These houses that W&M built are for social fraternities, not academic fraternities.

So ironically, despite having actual academic credibility and prestige being associated with the oldest and foremost academic fraternity in the US, W&M tried to use it to peddle a non-existent social fraternity pedigree that it never had in order to build housing for social fraternities using university funds.

Every university that has fraternities have fraternity housing built and maintained by the fraternity organizations themselves through donations directly to the fraternity, not the university.

Spending $26 million of university funds building a total of 187 beds is not only financial mismanagement, but also shows terrible prioritization by the administration.
Each house, which is the size of a regular McMansion, cost $2.1 million+ to build, on land they already owned.

At the time W&M had less than a $500m endowment, so they spent 5% value of their whole endowment in a hopeless bid to attract social fraternities, for some reason.

As for the football stadium construction, this is another matter of prioritization by the university. The university itself had another half-baked plan to extend the stadium and specifically sought out past donors for that purpose: https://www.wm.edu/news/stories/2016/wm-dedicates-renovated-zable-stadium.php

The project broke ground in the spring of 2015 and was wrapped up before the start of the 2016 season. The renovation places Zable Stadium in line with the recommendations of the Committee on Competitive Excellence Report, which states that high-quality facilities are necessary to provide Tribe athletes with the best environment for competitive success.

Competitive success in football? Why does the school care about competitive success in a school team that very few students follow competing in a league that doesn't even broadcast on TV and is actually a net negative to the school's finances? They should shut down the football program and focus on basketball, a sport that smaller colleges can actually compete in with a level of success.

The main donor on that project has a major academic building named after him on campus, a building that was failing apart inside at the time of the stadium construction. You don't think that donor would prefer to use his funds towards renovating a building already named after him into a state-of-the-art facility, instead of adding seats to a stadium that is already always empty?

Money is fungible, and money from willing donors should be diverted towards academic causes, not extending an already empty stadium.


Also BTW, to add on to the clown show:

The William & Mary community believes that such a prominent landmark on campus should reflect the university’s status as one of the country’s top institutions.

Yes, having a prominent sports stadium on campus reflects well on a university's status as a top academic institution. This is why schools like Harvard and MIT spend all their funds on building sports stadiums and why the Ivy League is the most prominent college sports league in the country. What are these administrators drinking?

Worse, that stadium extension is an eyesore and looks extremely out of place on the campus.

So yes, the school administration has doubled down on Greek Life and sports in the past decade, to the detriment of the school. No prospective student sees brand new university-built social fraternity houses along with an oversized extension on an empty sports stadium next to decrepit academic buildings and thinks that the school is in good hands and in an upward academic trajectory.

Anonymous wrote:Is there anything quite as pathetic as a bunch of status-obsessed strivers proclaiming with absolute confidence that a bunch of universities of which they have no personal knowledge are categorically superior to a bunch of other universities of which they also have no personal knowledge?

This is a clown show.

+1 . This is hilarious. I also had no idea that I have to impress Bob from accounting in order to maintain the school's reputation.

Anonymous wrote:Everything in the middle west, especially cold weather northern states is in decline. Smart middle west 12th graders can go to places like Alabama, Auburn and Ole Miss for less than in-state Big Ten. The southern universities are recruiting smart out of state kids very aggressively and it's working.

False.

Anonymous wrote:Everything in the middle west, especially cold weather northern states is in decline. Smart middle west 12th graders can go to places like Alabama, Auburn and Ole Miss for less than in-state Big Ten. The southern universities are recruiting smart out of state kids very aggressively and it's working.

"Middle west"? Back to the troll academy.

Everything in the middle west, especially cold weather northern states is in decline. Smart middle west 12th graders can go to places like Alabama, Auburn and Ole Miss for less than in-state Big Ten. The southern universities are recruiting smart out of state kids very aggressively and it's working.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone saying UVA i just trolling or has sour grapes. Not going to address that further.

Real fall to me is UVM. Back when I was applying 30 years ago, it was very well regarded and difficult to get into. Now its am underfunded safety school.

UVM alum and sadly, I agree. They have major money issues and recently tried to cut their classics and other small liberal arts departments because they don't make enough money. My well-regarded but small master's program is among the cuts and it is heartbreaking to see how standards have been lowered and poorly the school has been managed. Meanwhile its OOS tuition is through the roof!

It's because of the incredible number of administrative positions. The amount of Deans is astounding and each makes 6 figure salary. Meanwhile students are taught by adjuncts who are paid 5k per class per year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:W&M is an obvious answer.

Ranking drop from 32 -> 38.
Acceptance rate went from 33% to 42%, higher than large publics like UT Austin and UMD. While large publics like Berkeley are reaching single-digit acceptance rates, W&M's is increasing.

Student enrollment has increased.

Their law school has gone completely downhill.

W&M used to be more difficult to get into than UVA, due to a smaller number seats. It had higher SAT scores than UVA, the highest among publics comparable to Berkley. It was compared to the smaller Ivies like Dartmouth/Brown and SLACs like Swarthmore. It attracted out-of-staters and wealthy internationals that would never consider a large public for OOS tuition, but would consider W&M due to the size and feel.


Nowadays, UVA is far more tougher to get in, has far higher SAT scores and far great national and international reach.

Per most recent CDS:

UVA 25th/75th percentile SAT - 1330-1490
W&M 25th/75th percentile SAT - 1360-1520

both have average GPAs of 4.3.

Perhaps W&M’s higher acceptance rate is a function of some other factor other than the caliber of students they attract. Maybe since UVA and has more prominent sports and a better college town and is bigger it appeals to more kids who apply that are more borderline. W&M is bit more niche in that it a very small public, so more like a SLAC. Williamsburg is pretty sleepy too.

Maybe, just maybe, acceptance rate is not a good indication of how good a school is at any rate.

Those SAT scores and GPA are either wrong or outdated. As I stated, W&M had higher SAT/ACT scores and GPA than UVA, but that is no longer the case.

This is not regarding W&M being niche or not or its acceptance rate at any given time compared to UVA. W&M has had a higher acceptance rate than UVA for more than a decade now.

It's about the trend.

A decade ago, UVA had an acceptance rate of 29-30% while W&M's was 32-33%. In Fall 2020, UVA's acceptance rate had dropped to 23% and W&M's had increased to 42%. Meanwhile acceptance rates across the country have decreased due to increased applications.

At the same time, W&M's yield has decreased to mid-20's. Yield at all schools has decreased but not to the same extent, and schools with decreasing yields have also seen decreasing acceptance rates, not the opposite.

W&M has not become any more of a niche school than it was before. The number of students preferring a niche academic-focused school over a large sports-focused school has not decreased in proportion, and if anything has increased in proportion when looking at the popularity of schools like U. Chicago, Rice, Tufts, Swarthmore, etc.

Rather, W&M has become less of a niche, academic-focused school. They tried to become a more Greek, sports-focused school instead to attract the type of students that prefer UVA-type school. In the process it lost the students that preferred the Tufts-type school while clearly not gaining any of the former.

When did W&M try to become a "more Greek, sports-focused school" and less academic? The recent renovation/addition to the football stadium was the first in 90 years. The basketball arena hasn't had a major upgrade since it was constructed over 50 years ago (although one is planned). These improvements are all through private funds and not school funds. The size of Greek system hasn't really changed in many, many years. Meanwhile, the library, business school, science facilities and other academic buildings got major upgrades well before these were initiated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:W&M is an obvious answer.

Ranking drop from 32 -> 38.
Acceptance rate went from 33% to 42%, higher than large publics like UT Austin and UMD. While large publics like Berkeley are reaching single-digit acceptance rates, W&M's is increasing.

Student enrollment has increased.

Their law school has gone completely downhill.

W&M used to be more difficult to get into than UVA, due to a smaller number seats. It had higher SAT scores than UVA, the highest among publics comparable to Berkley. It was compared to the smaller Ivies like Dartmouth/Brown and SLACs like Swarthmore. It attracted out-of-staters and wealthy internationals that would never consider a large public for OOS tuition, but would consider W&M due to the size and feel.

Nowadays, UVA is far more tougher to get in, has far higher SAT scores and far great national and international reach.

For the UCs, applying in state you can just check a box to apply to one. It leads to very high numbers applying in state because there is no effort or cost.

UC Berkeley's out-of-state admissions rate is sub-10%.

The UC's also require a separate application rather than the Common App, unlike W&M which allows students to mass-apply.

For the UC's, you can just check a box to apply to one if you have done the UC application. That helps drive up the number of applicants.