RE GMU: Mason's new President Cabrera announced last week that graduates of GMU have higher salaries than any of the other VA institutions, including UVA and William & Mary. A Regent confirmed this. I think (no dog in this race) that it has to do with GMU's increasing ties with the Dulles Tech Corridor. GMU is reaching out to the companies saying "what do you need?" and in turn GMU is expanding its engineering, robotics, computer science, hard math majors.

http://president.gmu.edu/blog

But the fact remains that if you're looking at your child's true chances of getting into a school there are also plenty of schools that are just as good. Super selective schools are super selective for a lot of reasons. US News rankings significantly weight alumni contributions which is why institutions with either large alumni endowments or cultures of even minimal giving on a per student basis will rank higher.

Furthermore, word of mouth and "perceived" selectivity and quality of education are important in perpetuating a recurring high ranking. The reality is that the faculty at most lower first tier AND second tier institutions come from first tier national institutions and liberal arts colleges.

Finally, it is expensive to recruit students. mature institutions have a cultural and educational fit they are looking for. Many kids who apply are academically capable of the work, but fit is a black art, and it's easier to home in on that during the recruitment process than to attempt to retain a student.

Anonymous wrote:SATs aren't everything. The only predictor of first year success is a combination of standardized tests and high school GPA. Do you people read studies or just talk out your asses?

Oh wait, this is DCUM.

For 60-70 points I would rely on the best fit.

Sure, but SAT scores are definitely related to selectivity. Having SAT scores significantly lower and also having a lower acceptance rate basically says that you have a larger pool of less qualified students. And let's be honest, most schools have students with a relatively narrow SAT score spread, so of course the SAT scores would be less predictive. Let in a bunch of kids to MIT with high grades and 900 on the SAT and see how predictive SAT scores become.

13:01 back - I was confirming 12:34's comment.

SATs aren't everything. The only predictor of first year success is a combination of standardized tests and high school GPA. Do you people read studies or just talk out your asses?

Oh wait, this is DCUM.

For 60-70 points I would rely on the best fit.

I can confirm this. ^^^ Lot of Langley H.S. kids applied to GMU and did not get in.

Anonymous wrote:GMU is unlikely to even accept kids with B+ GPAs. A lot has changed in the last 20 years. Christopher Newport is the new GMU.

And yet the average SAT score is 60-70 points lower than VT.

GMU is unlikely to even accept kids with B+ GPAs. A lot has changed in the last 20 years. Christopher Newport is the new GMU.

Sorry. Cite for No. 1 up and coming. http://newsdesk.gmu.edu/2012/09/mason-1-on-u-s-news-2013-up-and-comers-list/

GMU is rating no. 1 "up and coming" university in the United States. The last Dean spent 12 years building state-of-the art buildings and dorms. GMU is on the cutting edge of STEM departments so its graduates get jobs.

It is no longer a commuter college which someone was referring to. Over 9,000 students live in the dorms. It is the largest university in the Virginia system (33,000 students, 12,000 of which are Ph.D. or Masters students) and has become much harder to get into than VT, JMU or CN. Go look. It's very impressive. I was surprised. The State legislature is pumping a lot of money into GMU because of its position on the Dulles Tech Corridor. GMU's graduates get jobs.

What do folks know about the University of Vermont?

Anonymous wrote:You cannot compare GMU to VT. Gimme a break.

just looked at U.S. News rankings for these two.

GMU is actually the more selective - about 52%. VT is 66%

That said, VT is the higher ranked school -- #72 compared to Mason (#138).

Personally I think GMU, with its location, size and budget should be a much better school than it is. Maybe it is just too young of a school to have developed much of a reputation.

You cannot compare GMU to VT. Gimme a break.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should take a second look at George Mason. It has a new dean (Cabrera) and is way more selective than either JMU or VT.

PP, you cannot possibly be serious. GMU is in every respect, without any exception, a long-term junior college compared to VT. And no, I didn't go to VT.

No dog in the fight, but this is ridiculous. GMU gets a lot of smart, local second-generation kids whose parents want them to stay in the area. They are certainly as qualified as most local students heading off to Tech, just not as intent on having a big party school experience.

+1.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should take a second look at George Mason. It has a new dean (Cabrera) and is way more selective than either JMU or VT.

PP, you cannot possibly be serious. GMU is in every respect, without any exception, a long-term junior college compared to VT. And no, I didn't go to VT.

No dog in the fight, but this is ridiculous. GMU gets a lot of smart, local second-generation kids whose parents want them to stay in the area. They are certainly as qualified as most local students heading off to Tech, just not as intent on having a big party school experience.