Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is an earlier thread on W& M. I don’t disagree that it is in a worse position than a generation ago. But I think it has unique attributes that could save it. First, I think the history and tradition can’t be replaced (oldest academic building in the US) and lots of kids are looking for that sweet spot size in a temperate climate. Plus, close to DC/still on the east coast corridor. And, you still need good stats to get in (much better than Miami of Ohio).

I think the Commonwealth should allow it to take more OOS kids and I think you could compete with midsize schools, either Notre Dame/Vandy/Northwestern/Tulane/BC or bigger SLACs such as Middlebury or Bowdoin. They should lean in to the teaching college/liberal arts curriculum and really focus on grad school outcomes etc.

The top 25 are really hard to be admitted to these days. Only follows that 25-50 should get the kids who get shut out of the top but are still impressive.

I agree W&M will remain in good shape. The in state student pool from DC area will continue to support them well. Even if it was just everyone's second in state choice that still works with how selective UVA is. Many from out of state will continue to be interested in a top 50 school - especially those not on a STEM track. Frankly the non STEM focus could be a nice differentiator. W&M also has a small enrollment so doesn't need that many top students to fill out each class.

The issue is that maintaining one's place in the rankings requires constant improvement, because every other university above and below are investing heavily in order to improve rapidly as well.

W&M was once considered the more serious school for top academic Virginia students compared to UVA. Then it became about equivalent to UVA. Now it's firmly cemented as second-choice for top Virginia in-state students.

If W&M just stays the course, as it has done for the past 30+ years, it will decline further. There are plenty of universities ranked between 40-70 that have risen greatly in popularity and will only rise further - Boston University, Case Western, Tulane, Northeastern, Pepperdine, RPI, Santa Clara, Miami, George Washington, WPI, Southern Methodist, etc. These schools embody the current favorable trends for colleges as well: all of them are in or near major cities, many have inherent advantages in STEM, and most of them are in sunbelt states. W&M conversely, has none of those three traits.

Rankings are a self-fulfilling prophecy - good schools have higher rankings, and high rankings attracts better students and faculties which make the school better. The opposite also holds true.

ah, yes, my favorite major cities of *checks notes* Worcester, MA, and Troy, NY.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Declining state funding.

In such a government environment, the only public universities that can survive and maintain a high reputation are large research universities.

Federal research funding brings them plenty of money (the schools take a cut out of research grants won by professors) and the large student population keeps the state government happy (they are educating more people on a lower budget due to fixed costs).

Federal research grants DO NOT cover all costs. Far from it. The university often has to cover a significant percentage with institutional (its own) funds in order to get the grants. The source of these funds can and does include undergraduate tuition. So large research universities often do a lot of cross-subsidizing from undergraduate programs (partucularly the humanities) to fund STEM research. This benefits the professors that do the research and graduate students, but certainly NOT undergraduates from a quality of education perspective. If you look at a school like Virginia Tech, which does $556M in total research a year, but notably has more of it coming from Institutional Sources ($231M) than from any other source including the Federal government ($211M), you can see that this can be a huge percentage that the university is funding in that case.

USNWR doesn't care about actual quality of education, though. They primarily measure inputs, and research increases the overall university budget, so if the university can somehow attribute some of it to USNWR resource categories, it benefits them in rankings.

https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/profiles/site?method=report&tin=U3525001&id=h2

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is an earlier thread on W& M. I don’t disagree that it is in a worse position than a generation ago. But I think it has unique attributes that could save it. First, I think the history and tradition can’t be replaced (oldest academic building in the US) and lots of kids are looking for that sweet spot size in a temperate climate. Plus, close to DC/still on the east coast corridor. And, you still need good stats to get in (much better than Miami of Ohio).

I think the Commonwealth should allow it to take more OOS kids and I think you could compete with midsize schools, either Notre Dame/Vandy/Northwestern/Tulane/BC or bigger SLACs such as Middlebury or Bowdoin. They should lean in to the teaching college/liberal arts curriculum and really focus on grad school outcomes etc.

The top 25 are really hard to be admitted to these days. Only follows that 25-50 should get the kids who get shut out of the top but are still impressive.

I agree W&M will remain in good shape. The in state student pool from DC area will continue to support them well. Even if it was just everyone's second in state choice that still works with how selective UVA is. Many from out of state will continue to be interested in a top 50 school - especially those not on a STEM track. Frankly the non STEM focus could be a nice differentiator. W&M also has a small enrollment so doesn't need that many top students to fill out each class.

The issue is that maintaining one's place in the rankings requires constant improvement, because every other university above and below are investing heavily in order to improve rapidly as well.

W&M was once considered the more serious school for top academic Virginia students compared to UVA. Then it became about equivalent to UVA. Now it's firmly cemented as second-choice for top Virginia in-state students.

If W&M just stays the course, as it has done for the past 30+ years, it will decline further. There are plenty of universities ranked between 40-70 that have risen greatly in popularity and will only rise further - Boston University, Case Western, Tulane, Northeastern, Pepperdine, RPI, Santa Clara, Miami, George Washington, WPI, Southern Methodist, etc. These schools embody the current favorable trends for colleges as well: all of them are in or near major cities, many have inherent advantages in STEM, and most of them are in sunbelt states. W&M conversely, has none of those three traits.

Rankings are a self-fulfilling prophecy - good schools have higher rankings, and high rankings attracts better students and faculties which make the school better. The opposite also holds true.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is an earlier thread on W& M. I don’t disagree that it is in a worse position than a generation ago. But I think it has unique attributes that could save it. First, I think the history and tradition can’t be replaced (oldest academic building in the US) and lots of kids are looking for that sweet spot size in a temperate climate. Plus, close to DC/still on the east coast corridor. And, you still need good stats to get in (much better than Miami of Ohio).

I think the Commonwealth should allow it to take more OOS kids and I think you could compete with midsize schools, either Notre Dame/Vandy/Northwestern/Tulane/BC or bigger SLACs such as Middlebury or Bowdoin. They should lean in to the teaching college/liberal arts curriculum and really focus on grad school outcomes etc.

The top 25 are really hard to be admitted to these days. Only follows that 25-50 should get the kids who get shut out of the top but are still impressive.

I agree W&M will remain in good shape. The in state student pool from DC area will continue to support them well. Even if it was just everyone's second in state choice that still works with how selective UVA is. Many from out of state will continue to be interested in a top 50 school - especially those not on a STEM track. Frankly the non STEM focus could be a nice differentiator. W&M also has a small enrollment so doesn't need that many top students to fill out each class.

Anonymous wrote:There is an earlier thread on W& M. I don’t disagree that it is in a worse position than a generation ago. But I think it has unique attributes that could save it. First, I think the history and tradition can’t be replaced (oldest academic building in the US) and lots of kids are looking for that sweet spot size in a temperate climate. Plus, close to DC/still on the east coast corridor. And, you still need good stats to get in (much better than Miami of Ohio).

I think the Commonwealth should allow it to take more OOS kids and I think you could compete with midsize schools, either Notre Dame/Vandy/Northwestern/Tulane/BC or bigger SLACs such as Middlebury or Bowdoin. They should lean in to the teaching college/liberal arts curriculum and really focus on grad school outcomes etc.

The top 25 are really hard to be admitted to these days. Only follows that 25-50 should get the kids who get shut out of the top but are still impressive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The demand seems to be for big warm climate schools.

+1. Presumably rich preppy kids don't want to live in the isolated, cold, grey, and declining Rust Belt? It's not like you can keep it a secret how awesome the warm weather South and coasts are from sheltered Midwest kids anymore. They have snapchat, tiktok, youtube, and instagram.

For goodness sake, the South was never any kind of "secret." I grew up in suburban Chicago and did not know one kid who hadn't been to Florida at least once on vacation (most had gone many times). Granted, I didn't know anyone who had gone on vacation to Alabama or Mississippi, but then again, why the heck would they have? We knew how backwards they were.

Visiting grandma's retirement condo in Fort Myers is not the same as access to millions of first-person vlogs from attractive kids at SEC, ACC, and California schools. Kids are wiser than ever. Southern college kids are not seen as "backwards," they're attractive and soaking up the sun and distinct fun culture of their location and university. Backwards is willingly spending four years of the prime of your life in the depressing Rust Belt where you have to wear a $800 parka until April. If you're not going to live in Ohio (or Michigan or Indiana) after college, why in the hell would you go to college there?

Never understood why the south boosters need to push their case so hard. Are you trying to convince yourself that the south is actually good?

Uh the south is great. It’s growing rapidly.

agreed (except for auburn because the auburn booster on this board is a annoying)

It had a 150% increase in applications

Anonymous wrote:Declining state funding.

In such a government environment, the only public universities that can survive and maintain a high reputation are large research universities.

Federal research funding brings them plenty of money (the schools take a cut out of research grants won by professors) and the large student population keeps the state government happy (they are educating more people on a lower budget due to fixed costs).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The demand seems to be for big warm climate schools.

+1. Presumably rich preppy kids don't want to live in the isolated, cold, grey, and declining Rust Belt? It's not like you can keep it a secret how awesome the warm weather South and coasts are from sheltered Midwest kids anymore. They have snapchat, tiktok, youtube, and instagram.

For goodness sake, the South was never any kind of "secret." I grew up in suburban Chicago and did not know one kid who hadn't been to Florida at least once on vacation (most had gone many times). Granted, I didn't know anyone who had gone on vacation to Alabama or Mississippi, but then again, why the heck would they have? We knew how backwards they were.

Visiting grandma's retirement condo in Fort Myers is not the same as access to millions of first-person vlogs from attractive kids at SEC, ACC, and California schools. Kids are wiser than ever. Southern college kids are not seen as "backwards," they're attractive and soaking up the sun and distinct fun culture of their location and university. Backwards is willingly spending four years of the prime of your life in the depressing Rust Belt where you have to wear a $800 parka until April. If you're not going to live in Ohio (or Michigan or Indiana) after college, why in the hell would you go to college there?

Never understood why the south boosters need to push their case so hard. Are you trying to convince yourself that the south is actually good?

Uh the south is great. It’s growing rapidly.

agreed (except for auburn because the auburn booster on this board is a annoying)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The demand seems to be for big warm climate schools.

+1. Presumably rich preppy kids don't want to live in the isolated, cold, grey, and declining Rust Belt? It's not like you can keep it a secret how awesome the warm weather South and coasts are from sheltered Midwest kids anymore. They have snapchat, tiktok, youtube, and instagram.

For goodness sake, the South was never any kind of "secret." I grew up in suburban Chicago and did not know one kid who hadn't been to Florida at least once on vacation (most had gone many times). Granted, I didn't know anyone who had gone on vacation to Alabama or Mississippi, but then again, why the heck would they have? We knew how backwards they were.

Visiting grandma's retirement condo in Fort Myers is not the same as access to millions of first-person vlogs from attractive kids at SEC, ACC, and California schools. Kids are wiser than ever. Southern college kids are not seen as "backwards," they're attractive and soaking up the sun and distinct fun culture of their location and university. Backwards is willingly spending four years of the prime of your life in the depressing Rust Belt where you have to wear a $800 parka until April. If you're not going to live in Ohio (or Michigan or Indiana) after college, why in the hell would you go to college there?

Never understood why the south boosters need to push their case so hard. Are you trying to convince yourself that the south is actually good?

Uh the south is great. It’s growing rapidly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The demand seems to be for big warm climate schools.

+1. Presumably rich preppy kids don't want to live in the isolated, cold, grey, and declining Rust Belt? It's not like you can keep it a secret how awesome the warm weather South and coasts are from sheltered Midwest kids anymore. They have snapchat, tiktok, youtube, and instagram.

For goodness sake, the South was never any kind of "secret." I grew up in suburban Chicago and did not know one kid who hadn't been to Florida at least once on vacation (most had gone many times). Granted, I didn't know anyone who had gone on vacation to Alabama or Mississippi, but then again, why the heck would they have? We knew how backwards they were.

Visiting grandma's retirement condo in Fort Myers is not the same as access to millions of first-person vlogs from attractive kids at SEC, ACC, and California schools. Kids are wiser than ever. Southern college kids are not seen as "backwards," they're attractive and soaking up the sun and distinct fun culture of their location and university. Backwards is willingly spending four years of the prime of your life in the depressing Rust Belt where you have to wear a $800 parka until April. If you're not going to live in Ohio (or Michigan or Indiana) after college, why in the hell would you go to college there?

Never understood why the south boosters need to push their case so hard. Are you trying to convince yourself that the south is actually good?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The demand seems to be for big warm climate schools.

+1. Presumably rich preppy kids don't want to live in the isolated, cold, grey, and declining Rust Belt? It's not like you can keep it a secret how awesome the warm weather South and coasts are from sheltered Midwest kids anymore. They have snapchat, tiktok, youtube, and instagram.

For goodness sake, the South was never any kind of "secret." I grew up in suburban Chicago and did not know one kid who hadn't been to Florida at least once on vacation (most had gone many times). Granted, I didn't know anyone who had gone on vacation to Alabama or Mississippi, but then again, why the heck would they have? We knew how backwards they were.

Visiting grandma's retirement condo in Fort Myers is not the same as access to millions of first-person vlogs from attractive kids at SEC, ACC, and California schools. Kids are wiser than ever. Southern college kids are not seen as "backwards," they're attractive and soaking up the sun and distinct fun culture of their location and university. Backwards is willingly spending four years of the prime of your life in the depressing Rust Belt where you have to wear a $800 parka until April. If you're not going to live in Ohio (or Michigan or Indiana) after college, why in the hell would you go to college there?