<p>In response to why you see more people applying to Rice then Northwestern, this is part of the “name game” that many people use, where perception and name means a lot to people. Juilliard gets a ton of applicants because it is literally known all over the world and many believe it is ‘the best’ conservatory (without necessarily knowing why), it is kind of like people buying brand X of something because it has the reputation of being ‘the best’ (reminds me in grad school in a course on quality, about one person who insisted that Honda cars represented quality, without being able to say why:). </p>
<p>The Shepherd school at Rice has a lot of buzz around it, while they are comparatively new, they have aggressively set out to build a world class program over the past several decades, gotten top notch faculty, great facilities, and that has given them a name, it is out there, if perhaps not as much as Juilliard in common perception. Northwestern has a great program, in some areas stronger then others, but still a great program and is known in musical circles, but it doesn’t necessarily have the ‘name buzz’ that other schools do (there is a rough analogy in terms of business schools, the Kellog School at Northwestern is one of the top 10 business programs, but if you sampled a lot of people, you would probably hear Yale or Havard or Wharton before they mentioned Kellog, though within Business circles Kellog is up there with them). </p>
<p>It doesn’t mean that Rice and Juilliard’s programs aren’t strong programs that attract top students (that is one area where name does have influence, Rice and Juilliard attract a lot of applicants, especially very strong ones because of their name in part or full) or that Northwestern is ‘better’ then them, it is just that name still attracts a lot of people, which isn’t necessarily a good thing (among other things, having the assumption that getting into a Juilliard or Rice means when they get out, their path is ‘gilder’, kind of like some ivy grads believe with their degrees). </p>
<p>The one point that people emphasize on here is that what is important is what works for the student, teaching violin is not like teaching calculus or chemistry, and students have their own needs. Some students could thrive at a smaller but less strong program because they are self motivated and also enjoyed more individual attention, someone else might need to be around strong musicians at their level or better to be driven forward, and so forth. Northwestern (hypothetically) might be hog heaven for a brass student (which I have actually heard is a dynamite program) but might not be strong enough for a cello student or a violin student (hypothetically, again, I don’t know how good Northwestern’s string program is), whereas Rice might be better for strings and be so so for brass (again, Hypothetically…)…</p>
<p>It is why students need to do their own research and see what works for them rather then what others tell them. What other people say is part of the research, of course, and needs to be factored in, but for example, someone could say “My nephew went to Rice and hated the brass program, he said it was full of nasty, cutthroat kids and faculty who encouraged that” and that could say more about the nephew then the program…it is important to weight what people say against what you learn, and decide based on all factors…(and likewise, someone could say "oh, the violin faculty at school X is so great, my son had a great time there) and you find out the kid had a great time, but when he came out couldn’t get into a good grad program and was otherwise a weak player…you get the idea I hope. </p>
<p>The key idea is no program is perfect, no program is perfect for all students, and in the end it is what the school does for its students, and not its name, that matters when getting out there in the world:)</p>