<p>I’m not sure what everyone else was talking about, but if you read my post more thoroughly (talking to wgmcp… if you were responding to anything i had to say; if not then just ignore this lol) you could see that I was focusing specifically on the Honors College within PSU-University Park; given that Dionte said that there were people who were turning Schreyer down for Temple (and Temple Honors), implying that Temple is superior to Schreyer, which I believe is absolutely absurd… and thus set out to disprove even though it’s kinda hard to prove/disprove this sort of stuff.</p>
<p>Schreyer has its own statistics posted in an online/paper brochure (separate from those of University Park, ind you). That’s where I got my numbers/information.</p>
<p>I was gonna bring Rhodes, Gateway, and Fulbright scholars into this but I didn’t feel like looking anything else up.</p>
<p>No, I read your post and your stats are wrong. I don’t have the time to bicker about this, so here are the stats from the Penn State website that they DO provide:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Those stats entitled “All other campuses” are oddly familiar to your ones that include University Park. But I think here we have a failure to communicate. No one is comparing Temple to the Penn State satellites except for you. In all fairness, even diontechristmas understood that we were talking about University Park and to bring in those other statistics would be unreasonable and unfair because we are talking about HIGH SCHOOL admissions. Would it be fair to include the community colleges that Temple serves not unlike the satellite campuses to University Park? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That would not be fair to Temple to include the abysmal SAT scores and GPA from these community colleges into their statistics now would it? Once again, we are talking about University Park and high school students. Since you brought it up however, I know quite a few students who got into Temple and couldn’t get into Penn State Main so they went to a Penn State satellite in order to transfer in a year or two as opposed to Temple. You’re right, these satellite students will get the same degree, but we are talking admissions here. You are getting off on a tangent that is illogical. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You are correct in that rankings are subjective and that there really is no true number one, but you can’t argue that Schreyer’s is not among the best honors colleges in the country because that is undebatable. I don’t understand your point. Whether or not it is the best, it IS one of the best among those who know what they are talking about. I urge you to find a better honors college than Schreyer’s - you adamantly claim it is not the best so find one better. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Since you left out most of the data, here you go:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is damn respectable for an honors college to a public university. In fact, let’s compare this to other top colleges. Since 2000, Cornell has received 3 Rhodes scholars, Dartmouth 4, and Penn 4. Now, let’s take a look at student body numbers. Cornell has almost 14,000 undergraduates; Dartmouth a little over 4,000; and Penn almost 10,500. So, considering Schreyer’s caps their numbers at 1800 students that gives them a huge disadvantage in terms of size. So with a graduating class of around 450, Schreyer’s still finds a way to compete for top scholarships with schools 8 times its size in the form of Cornell. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You are right, and for that reason a number of students may choose to attend a satellite for a year or two to get their PSU degree instead of a Temple degree. I don’t think you know what you are talking about though. In no way, shape, or form does Temple have better statistics than Penn State University Park which is what we are comparing it to! Would it be fair to do the same for UNC or UVA by decreasing their statistics by including satellites? It doesn’t make sense not to mention we are looking at admissions for University Park. Your point is muddled, but I truly believe there is not a point there as I have already explained thoroughly. Not to mention you neglected the community colleges that Temple serves. But in all fairness those are as irrelevant to Temple admissions as satellites are to University Park’s!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>At this point, you are simply not making sense. How can I be biased? I applied to neither Penn State nor Temple, and have no affiliation with any university. I don’t like people saying false things so when someone claims that Temple is a generally better school than PSU and has harder admissions, I will say the truth. I’ve already proved that diontechristmas is biased beyond all belief, but I am not. To say I have not provided proof to my statements is pathetic on your part to be honest. I have provided statistics time in and time out to bolster my statements. But I would love for you to explain my bias - that would be a joy to hear you tell me that I am biased because of x, y, or z. I really want to hear what BS you can sling on that one.</p>
<p>Talking circles around admissions statistics? NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT THE SATELLITE CAMPUSES. They are completely irrelevant to University Park’s admissions criteria out of high school! Why are you being so dense? I have no reason to spin any information, and I have not “spun” anything in the least bit. I’m sorry, but I’ll turn the tables on you - you are the one spinning the information. I would love for you to show me one post where I spin information because there are no such posts. Apart from my statistics, I have also provided first-hand information based on the general qualities of my graduating high school class which I know very well. That information was then corroborated by many others from many other different PA public schools. While you must take information like that with a grain of salt, there is great merit that can be placed to things like that. I have never left any information out unlike you. I’m sorry, but I think you need to reread this thread because you are not understanding the argument. Wise up.</p>
The statistics I posted are correct for 2009-10 as I stated above. The statistics you posted are unofficial numbers for fall 2010 that can’t yet be combined as 1) they aren’t final numbers and 2) it is yet unknown how many students will matriculate to each campus making them impossible to weight. Apparently, you either too lazy to look up the [Common</a> Data Sets](<a href=“http://www.budget.psu.edu/CDS/Campus.asp?AY=20092010&Location=UP]Common”>http://www.budget.psu.edu/CDS/Campus.asp?AY=20092010&Location=UP) for yourself to see that what I posted is exactly duplicated from Penn State’s own reported information for each campus in 2009 or can’t comprehend that the stats the PSU posts on their website do not combine University Park appropriately weighted with the rest of their campuses. Perhaps you just don’t understand statistics. </p>
<p>In any case, it is clear to me you are simply unable to have that discussion in a logical manner, especially since you continue to use personal circumstantial examples as some sort of conclusive proof. Please try to read slowly and comprehend this: considering that even you admitted there was no difference in main vs branch campus diplomas, admission in fall of 2009 for Penn State, system wide, vs admission into Temple for 2009 was essentially no different. Although you tried to discount this by saying this was true at campuses of state system in Virginia or the UNC system, it is not, and it is nonsense or ignorance for you to make that comparison. </p>
<p>It also seems that you think that community college students do not transfer into Penn State, which they do not only to University Park, but all of their campuses, some of which have the exact same transfer agreements as Temple (for instance, PSU-Harrisburg has the exact same matriculation agreement with Harrisburg Community College as does Temple). Many of PSU’s branch campuses have their own transfer agreements. What this means is that PSU actually has more transfer/matriculation agreements into their system with community colleges than does Temple. No only that, but PSU’s statistics do not include the “PSU World Campus” where close to 10,000 currently enrolled students could get any of several on-line Penn State bachelors degrees, identical to the ones at University Park, with nothing more than a GED. Again, the point is that it is not harder to get admitted out of high school to Penn State than Temple, considering all 20 PSU campuses award identical diplomas as even you admitted. Is Penn State-University Park more selective than Temple coming out of high school, yes, but what does that mean when the diplomas are all the same for all ~20,000 first year admitted students to the Penn State system? Along these lines, no one has presented one shred of evidence that one honors college is better than another in 2010. Zero comparative data. And trying to compare entire universities to Schreyer, and claiming a size disadvantage for is PSU is beyond laughable. Is Schreyer better than Temple Honors? Maybe, based on the Rhodes data I presented (which with PSU’s last winner being in 2001 is possibly less relevant than the 2005 RD article), but there’s has been nothing else presented by anyone, save personal declarations of self-knowledge, to make any further comparison. </p>
<p>You are biased, not because of some imagined connection you have to either school (nor do I have any connection), but because of your assumptions that do not rely on any real data. You are also far from methodical in your approach because you don’t even take the time to verify information that is presented before discounting it. You want an example of inconsistently talking around data, take your championing meaningless OOS percentages but talking around admission rate differences because of Penn State’s size without considering their use of their branches as a feeder system, or providing absolutely no “statical anaylsis”, as claimed, in your statements about Schreyer’s preeminence. I would seriously recommend taking your own advice about seeking wisdom.</p>