<p>Even then, I would modify what you said to say "some grad studies." Grad study really depends on the department and, in some cases, an individual prof. A school like Berkeley has so many fine grad departments that I think you would be safe saying its better than Rice, Emory, etc. for grad studies. The others have many fine departments, but some of departments aren't good at all. If you want to study warfare in the Late Bronze Age, for instance, Vandy would be a good place to go because of Robert Drews (just an example I know of).</p>
<p>The large research institutions have done stunning work, and one of the reasons the US is such a wealthy society can be traced directly to their work. I'm a big supporter of research universities. But I don't think undergrads are best served at most of them. A few still care a great deal about undergrad education. But many don't.</p>
<p>"Yes, I do think one will get a better education at the undergrad level at Emory than at UT, Michigan, University of Washington (or Wisconsin, whichever you meant"
that's what you think.right?it does not necessaryly means that emory is a better school at undergrad level then Ut austin.tell me why do you think emory or vandy undergrad would be better than Umich,ucla,utaustin......please no classes are big kinda of excuse</p>
<p>What kind of a question is that!?? He just answered it in a lengthy response, and with that exclusion, it'd be like saying "what color is the sky, and none of this "blue" crap you always talk about"</p>
<p>I just explained that once. I'm not going to do it again. And as for classes being larger, why would you call that an "excuse"? I would call class size one of the three primary indicators of likely educational value.</p>
<p>Actually, my wife is one of the leading scholars in her field. I think she's doing OK, but we appreciate the concern.</p>
<p>As for the real world, I've been working and raising children for decades. Perhaps you could fill me in on the real world with your depth and breadth of experience?</p>
<p>I'm glad your daddy makes a lot of money. Do you think your daddy could beat up my daddy?</p>
<p>yes i'm a college junior(mechanical eng.)about my experince i've lived in europe canada usa and brasil.
look Tarhunt i didn't mean to be rude...now that you said you teach kindergarten i feel bad about my offensive post..i'm sorry..</p>
<p>
[quote]
Maryland is south of the Mason/Dixon line, and U of Maryland used to refuse to play colleges with black athletes, so it's at least Southern enough for an insane thread like this.</p>
<p>Hopkins
Georgetown
UVA
Wm and Mary
Duke
UNC
Emory
Rice
Vandy
Tulane
Wake Forest
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Not a bad list. Although I think maybe Davidson instead of Wake, just on a quality basis? Also, 11 is definitely cheating ;)</p>
<p>"I've been working and raising children for decades" i tought you teach kindergarten i was not beeing ironic
"Oh no. You misunderstand. I don't teach kindergarten. In fact, I'd say I teach people with verbal skills very much like yours."how well do you speak portuguese?and french?what about spanish?maybe italian?i may have some(i lot) verball skill problems but i doubt you can speak as much languages as i do.</p>
<p>pateta, in the manner of fairness, why don't you refute tarhunt by explaining why you think big public research schools are superior for undergraduate education. That is certainly more meaningful than just saying "no! you're wrong."</p>
<p>Not to be mean or elitist, but there aren't really any Southern Ivies. I mean that in the sense of Southern schools that embody the traits of Ivy League schools (very close networking, long histories, combined with top five to ten academics)...and no, I'm not really counting Brown and Dartmouth as conventional Ivies, because the question, as you ask it, attempts to categorize all Ivy Leagues under one umbrella and I think that the most "well-known" and "expected" umbrella of the Ivy League school is Harvard, Yale, Princeton.</p>
<p>I think Duke comes close, in terms of history and in terms of SOME academics. Rice has good academics, but it doesn't have the same history as Ivy League schools, nor does it have the same diversity or links to networking / feeder schools.</p>
<p>And yes, UT and Rice and W&M and Duke have good academics. But, they don't hold the other characteristics that distinguish HYP, and also--quite frankly--the academics don't measure up to those, as a whole, of HYP.</p>
<p>I won't defend UT's graduation rate, because I do agree that it should be improved. However, there are a number of factors to consider. First is the reality that a lot of people admitted cannot meet the required academic standards. These students that fail out or drop out are a result of the institution maintaining academic integrity in the face of lower selectivity. While UT by state law cannot be as selective as other schools, it does not by law have to graduate everyone it admits. Sadly, this is true at a lot of public schools, where weeding is intense. Again, this does not necessarily reflect on the academic quality of the school as much as the students who are admitted. Yes, it is a VERY unfortunate disconnect at a lot of large public schools, but you could also argue that students are at least given the opportunity to attend a great research university - then must perform to get a degree. Aside from the students who can't hack it, there are the students who don't like it. That's fair - a large research university is not for everyone. Finally - and UT is known for this phenomenon - Austin is indeed a great town to spend 4-6 years and it does have a certain slacker mentality associated with it. For years tuition was so cheap at UT and there were no minimum hour requirements, that the "professional student" mentality was prevalent. Yes, it's not ideal. But then again, not everyone needs or wants to graduate in 4 years. A number of initiatives have been implemented to encourage increased graduation rates (like flat rate tuition and minimum course loads.) A low graduation rate also has the effect of resulting in less slots for freshman since the overally enrollment cap must be maintained. So while I agree UT should have a better graduation rate, I don't think it's some "shocking" phenomenon by any means. I bet everyone arguing how unselective UT is would turn the argument around if UT had 90+% grad rates and say they must not have any academic rigor. Grad rates are indeed influenced by multiple factors.</p>