<p>you might want to get a little knowledge</p>
<p>UW-Madison?s</a> area, international programs receive millions in federal awards (Aug. 18, 2010)</p>
<p>This link suggests that guidance counselors are spot on. Even UW itself recognizes that the university is focused more on graduate education than undergraduate. There’s not a university on the US News list above UW that doesn’t belong there at the UNDERGRADUATE level. </p>
<p>[Media-Newswire.com</a> - Press Release Distribution - PR Agency](<a href=“http://media-newswire.com/release_1124943.html]Media-Newswire.com”>Media-Newswire.com - Press Release Distribution - PR Agency)</p>
<p>How do you get to that conclusion?? UW is in the TOP 10 in fundraising dollars and usually the highest among publics. But using % does not measure that which is the real measure of success in fundraisimng–getting the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. I believe the graduation rate is still above the rate they project. The other stuff is just measures of some inputs and not outputs. You don’t have to spend lots of money to be good. By most measures our faculty is outstanding–among the top 17 in the world.</p>
<p>I reach this conclusion because this is what UW says in the article I just posted:</p>
<p>“While [the US News] report has UW-Madison slightly lower in the rankings this year, we are always pleased with our generally excellent scoring. Such information is but one of the many rankings and factors that students and their families consider when making decisions about where to attend college,” says UW-Madison Provost Paul M. DeLuca Jr. “Other rankings consistently show UW-Madison is one of the world’s best public research universities, and we strive to promote and protect our fine reputation.” </p>
<p>In other words, the provost is doing exactly what you’re doing – dismissing US News by talking about how great UW does in rankings of its graduate research programs. But this is mixing apples and oranges. </p>
<p>As for graduation rates, I suggest you read my post on the US News thread – in fact UW is the only state school other than Georgia Tech in the top 50 of US News whose actual graduation rate is LOWER than predicted. Granted, it’s only slightly lower but still stands in stark contrast with virtually every other state U in the top 50 whose actual numbers are SUBSTANTIALLY higher than predicted based on the qualifications of incoming freshmen. This tells me that UW may be bringing in the $$$$$$$ but it sure as heck isn’t spending it on undergraduate education.</p>
<p>Although I am not a UW student, I have lived my entire life a few miles of the school and am familiar with the UW culture due to my dad being a professor at the school for 19 years. About 1/5th of the kids at my school got accepted last year and I knew many of those students–several of them were truly brilliant kids who will take advantage of all the resources at UW, including the honors program, while others fit the frat/sorority stereotype and simply took easy classes and were forced to study for the act/sat by their patents. UW is not the school for a student who needs lots of attention, and you can either sink or swim; however, the lower rankings should nor discourage students from applying because there are few schools who can provide the the resources that UW provides to motivated undergrad students</p>
<p>Excuse my grammar errors, they are due to the fact I am using an iPhone on a hotel</p>
<p>WiscoKid-</p>
<p>Thanks for your perspective. It’s hard to argue with your logic, which is exactly why I think UW is ranked precisely where it should be. The higher ranked schools are generally more selective and as such tend to enroll a generally more motivated student body. Of course there are exceptions, as you point out, and the opportunities available to those students are likely unparalleled, but by and large the undergraduate culture at UW is not that way. It’s a work hard for some – and play hard for more – kind of school. And that’s just fine.</p>
<p>Or it means we should forget about the rankngs?</p>
<p>Huh- more motivated? You have to be motivated to succeed. No hand holding, prodding for those who don’t do it on their own. I don’t believe the quality of instruction has been watered down in recent years to accomodate slackers (any proof?). Just as as the most elite colleges passing the AP calculus exam does not mean a student will be prepared for second semester calculus at UW- the first semester covers more than the AP course. Then there’s the Honors calculus. Chemistry- I was shocked to hear from a student there was only one introductory choice at Wash U- what, no advanced or even tougher Honors courses? Of course these are only two examples, I’m sure examples can be found where the intro UW course isn’t as good as at some other schools in the top 50 (or even lower). It would take a too costly exhaustive search at the course syllabi at schools to do a comparison of similar courses. Therefore students need to see what is available in potential majors they are interested in.</p>
<p>Haven’t bothered with the USNWR yet but the more I hear the less vaild it seems this year. Do those other schools have the same %iles for test scores? Or did soft factors push them higher? Does this year’s rankings mean UW offers a lesser quality than last year- NO! Does it mean UW needs to remind people that it still has many great programs- YES! </p>
<p>Again- consider the reasons for the graduation rate. The rankings don’t have those. Difference in choosing to get a second major, wanting to stay…</p>
<p>nova- show us proof you have any idea beyond what you read from a distance about UW. The grad departments DO affect the undergrads. The depth and breadth of high caliber courses and teachers. Upper level undergrads are taking these courses, as well as some grad level courses. Good departments abound where undergrads have opportunities to attend seminars not part of a course. Hobnobbing with grad students - in a TA role or in going to an afternoon lecture. Opportunities to do research in grad labs, with world class professors. Professors rotate in the course loads- from grad seminars to freshman offerings. Note- anyone starting the honors calc sequence- the same great prof my son had is teaching it again.</p>
<p>Unfortunately the rankings don’t always show the peer group available. Percentages don’t always matter, absolute numbers can be a smaller fraction at a larger school but give a bigger peer group.</p>
<p>The school you get your degree from is what counts. The upper level undergrad courses. They accept transfers wo will have met general requirements elsewhere who get the UW degree. Always keep in mind this is a public school with a mission to serve the state’s students as well as be a world class institution.</p>
<p>Here’s something- how many students get admitted to elite grad programs? Not percentages, but numbers. Programs, not schools because even Harvard doesn’t have the best of everything.</p>
<p>Nova, you may not know this but research university is a classification that has been used for decades to designate institutions into certain classes. UVa is a public research university. Harvard is a private research university. </p>
<p>[Carnegie</a> Classification of Institutions of Higher Education - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnegie_Classification_of_Institutions_of_Higher_Education]Carnegie”>Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>Wis75, as I’ve said before, I don’t need to justify myself “from a distance” to you any more than you’ve felt the need to justify yourself before offering your opinion in any of the 3298 times that you’ve posted all over this board. </p>
<p>Having said that, all I did above was agree with WiskoKid, who lives in UW’s backyard and seems to me to have a pretty good grasp of UW’s culture. You going to attack him too?</p>
<p>“Always keep in mind this is a public school with a mission to serve the state’s students as well as be a world class institution.” I don’t disagree, but so is every other flagship U that is outperforming it.</p>
<p>Comparing UW to Wash U is a joke, by the way. The average student there trumps UW by 200 points or more on the SAT. I’d love to see how the average student at UW would fare in Wash U’s watered down calculus class. A school like Wash U doesn’t have honors courses because it doesn’t need them – all students are well qualified.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And let’s not forget cost. Choosing to stay an extra semester for $4,500 is different than choosing to stay an extra semester for $15,000+. You don’t spend another year double majoring at WashU if it’s going to cost you $30k+ in tuition. </p>
<p>Graduation rates are negatively affected at UW partly because it’s cheap.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This really nails it. Top students at UW Madison are good enough to be top students anywhere. It’s the consistency of undergrad student body’s quality that doesn’t match elite privates. It’s a problem that every big state school has. Look at the 25th percentile of Berkeley’s SAT and compare it to 25th percentile of WashU. Both great schools–but WashU beats Berkeley by 100+ points in each section of the SAT. Their 75th percentiles are similar, however. It’s no coincidence.</p>
<p>It’s not just a matter of SATs, though. Performance in the high school classroom counts for something. Nearly all of UC-Berkeley undergrads were in the top ten percent of their high school class, and at both U-Va and U-Mich the number is around 90 percent. At UW we’re talking less than 60 percent.</p>
<p>As for the cost of an extra semester at UW versus Wash U, no one’s making that comparison. The point is that UW lags well behind PUBLIC flagships as well, most of which – UCLA, UNC, U-Va, Michigan, etc. – aren’t exactly in hellish places where students can’t wait to escape. And all this talk about UW being so cheap is baloney. I never see the school ranked at or near the top of any public college “best value” list. Financial aid is terrible. The most recent Kiplingers rankings has UW 14th for both in state and out, which is a pretty good showing, but it’s not as good as UNC, U-Va, William and Mary, UCLA, etc. The idea that UW is so much of a better bargain than other flagships just isn’t supported by the numbers.</p>
<p>^But this says nothing about the amount of UW’s undergrad spending or its efficiency in spending–which is the earlier implication you made. UW’s 4 yr graduation rates are fairly low, but this is not an end-all measure of UW’s success in undergrad education.</p>
<p>UW has particularly cheap tuition–even among public or big 10 universities, and especially among privates. This skews the graduation rate data, which makes it a bad measure for determining “spending efficiency.”</p>
<p>I never said anything about the quality of the institution being watered down, or anything about the rankings in general; in fact, I agree that UW is a top 40 if not 30 institution. My main point was that top students who are considering higher ranked schools should realize that if they are up for the challenge, UW is a top notch school; however, there are kids who spend their 4 (or more) years at the school partying and occasionaly attending class. I honestly don’t see why we have to argue about this in every thread, because a conclusion will never be reached. We should forget about the rankings and brainstorm ideas to improve the institution as a whole</p>
<p>Financial aid is “terrible” by what measure? UVa and W&M and probably UCLA have students from much higher average income strata. It’s much easier to offer lots of aid to a few than to many.</p>
<p>
Kiplinger’s methodology is pretty sketchy. The actual figures are far more important. UW estimates that it should cost an in-state student $21k and change for a year of study. I personally consider that a pretty significant piece of change, but there’s no denying that it is well under half of the rack rate at somewhere like WUSTL. I don’t see anything wrong with justtotalk’s conclusions.</p>
<p>I don’t know much about need-based aid, but merit aid is awful at Wisconsin.</p>
<p>Most top institutions do not believe in merit aid. Until recently this was not a big issue as few competitors had much merit aid either. This has changed as some schools have wanted to improve their prestige and see Merit Money as a quick way to do that–Uminn, Indiana, WashU, USC and others. So the game has changed but merit aid is generally still something that grates against the basic UW/Wisconsin values of progressivism and anti-elitism. They rather provide millions to the needy than scholarships to the wealthy. Most studies of merit versus need based aid support that position. But for top instate students the potential of a brain drain to other schools counters that view and they are looking to up the merit money for instate on the basis of avoiding brain drain long term.</p>
<p>I was shocked that there did not appear to be separate courses for chemistry at Wash U while UW doesn’t lump all freshman chemistry students into the same course. Many Honors program students outrank those at Wash U. Unlike private U’s public flagship U’s accomodate their average students and their honors ones. A bit lower mid range of test scores does not mean significant numbers of peers in honors courses that may be better than those at higher ranked private schools. I suspect that a student majoring in math or chemistry at UW will have access to more challenging courses from day one - and upper division experiences correlating with UW’s higher grad school rankings.</p>
<p>A major point - students need to check out potential majors/fields. Does it really matter to the average student which of hundreds of schools they attend? No. Does the school culture matter? Yes- liberal all the way for us, excluded many for that reason alone. btw- on some thread a comment was made about # of posts. Gee whiz- the years go by and parents keep posting on their thread (cafe posts don’t add to the total)… Better to get many points of view to “sift and winnow” (students - can you find that plaque with the whole statement?).</p>
<p>Wis75, maybe you’ve managed to post so many times on CC because so many of your posts are written in cryptic short-hand (like you’re writing a prescription or something) and can be so hard to follow. </p>
<p>You again offer nothing by way of data to support your views. Only opinions based on anecdotes.</p>