<p>I didn't say the faculty of W&M is not up to par with other colleges ... but you were comparing W&M to Wisconsin. My comment was just that ... you can't say that W&M has better faculty and facilities than the University of Wisconsin.</p>
<p>From the U of Wisconsin website:
"Outside sources have traditionally identified UWMadison as one of the leading institutions in the nation for educational quality. Many departments are routinely ranked among the nation's best. U.S. News and World Report lists 46 UWMadison program areas among the top 10 in their fields, and a once-a-decade survey of academic departments, conducted in 1995 by the National Research Council, named 16 UW departments among top-10 lists.</p>
<p>Since 1974, UWMadison has educated six Rhodes scholars. Seventeen people who have taught or studied at UWMadison won Nobel Prizes, and 29 have won Pulitzer Prizes..."</p>
<p>May be you can name some W&M programs that are ranked in the top 10? ... top 20? ... top 50?</p>
<p>What W&M says about their university:</p>
<p>"U. S. News and World Report:
- WM ranked sixth among all public universities (2005)
- WM ranked 44th among national universities that offer the best value (2005)
- WM ranked 31st overall among the nation's best universities (2005)
- WM ranked 16th in graduation rates for national universities (2005)"</p>
<p>It's not like W&M ignores departmental ranking ... for it goes on to say that:</p>
<p>"The School of Law ranked 29th in the nation (2004)
- The School of Education's graduate program ranked 47th in the nation (2004)
- The doctoral program in American colonial history ranked 2nd in the nation (2001)
- WM ranked the top public institution in the nation in terms of commitment to teaching<em>"
(</em>poll conducted in 1995 and not repeated since)</p>
<p>"Financial Times (2004):
- WM School of Business ranked tied for 49th in international rankings and the Executive MBA program ranked 33rd in the nation.
- WM School of Business ranked 26th for value for money in international rankings.</p>
<p>"Forbes Magazine (2003):
- W&M MBA program ranked 23rd nationally"</p>
<p>I must say I have not seen any Ivy League school boasting about their programs ranking in the 20's/30's/40's nationally.</p>
<p>I hope you know I am an undergrad student...therefore I couldn't give a ***** about W&M grad programs...I was actually considering Amherst, they don't have grad schools...with that said, UW undergrad doesn't compare to W&M undergrad...The dumbest people from my high school went UW...as its valedictorian I went to W&M, where the best and the brightest come, and please don't be an as* about people thinking one way or another, for god sake's you responded to your own posts...that's too pathetic...I really hope you have better things to do with your time than doing all this research for the sake of arguing with a total stranger.</p>
<p>I'd take W&M over Univ of Wisc. I may be biased as I have more friends at W&M, including the 'wonder boy' of W&M ;) Though I have to say that both schools are strong in their region. I think most ppl from the south or east coast would rather go W&M and maybe ppl in the midwest would rather go UofW. On the westcoast, little is known about both schools.</p>
<p>"The dumbest people from my high school went UW.." (sic)</p>
<p>I'm sure you are well informed as to the stats of all the kids from your HS class at UW. Any proof?</p>
<p>wmrocks,
We were comparing the quality of the faculty and the facilities between W&M and Wisconsin on posts #59-60. The same faculties who teach the graduate program also teach the undergraduate, and they share the same facilities. Selectivity is only one measure of the quality of the undergraduate program. It is foolish not to consider the faculty and the facilities.</p>
<p>And this thread is about "Public Ivies". Surely you don't think the Ivies are prestigious only because of their undergraduate programs.</p>
<p>Don't get me wrong. I agree with you that W&M is a top university (at least for undergraduate). However, if you are to put together a list of top public universities, you can't leave out Wisconsin ... the same goes for UT-Austin.</p>
<p>Btw, the average GPA of the freshman class was 3.6 (unweighted). The out of state stats should be slightly higher. If "the dumbest people of your high school" have 3.6 GPA or higher (unweighted), there must be grade inflation at your high school ... 'cause no one gets anything below a "B".</p>
<p>Guys just get over it, US News has them 31&32. They both could be in the non-existent public ivy league</p>
<p>Actually I think it's closer to a 3.7. Here's a nice summary. 25% or about 1400 freshmen have 3.95 or better unweighted GPA. That's nearly exactly the same number of students as in the W&M freshmen class.</p>
<p>Ranges for the middle half of our fall 2004 class:
Academic GPA: 3.533.94
Recalculated based on unweighted academic course grades only.
Class Rank: 85th96th percentile
If your school does not provide rank, we consider other indicators.
ACT Composite: 2630
SAT Total: 11801350
course schedule all four years.
.</p>
<p>I agree with wahoo2007. The debate is for the most part moot. If you do well at W&M or UofW, the same type of career/graduate opportunities will be available.</p>
<p>Fantastic new microbial sciences building under construction at UW. Adding to a dozen new science and engineering buildings built in the last 10 years.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bact.wisc.edu/MSB/index.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.bact.wisc.edu/MSB/index.html</a></p>
<p>And for the next few years</p>
<p>public ivies would be:</p>
<p>Berkeley
UCLA
UCSF
UCSD
U of Michigan
UVA</p>
<p>Here are the World Rankings from the London Times. This ranking addresses the many faults of US News World Rankings whose methodology is becoming less and less relevant around the world. </p>
<p>1 Harvard University
2 University of California, Berkeley
3 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4 California Inst Tech
5 Stanford University
6 Yale University
7 Princeton University
8 U. of Chicago
9 University of Texas-Austin
10 Columbia University
11 University of California, San Francisco
12 Cornell University
13 University of California, San Diego
14 Johns Hopkins University
15 UCLA
16 UPenn
17 U. of Michigan
18 U. of Illinois
19 Carnegie Mellon University
20 UMass</p>
<p>For the TRUE Public Ivies ranking, this is what I think:</p>
<p>UC Berkeley
UMich - Ann Arbor
UCLA
UVA
UNC
UWisconsin
UIUC
Penn State - Univ. Park</p>
<p>(Rutgers is definitely NOT EVEN public ivy)</p>
<p>A university/college should be evaluated in terms of academic/faculty quality. I have not heard of any famous depts. from UW&M. I would rather turn it down and go for UW.</p>
<p>you guys forgot UF</p>
<p>Nobody here would know anything about Wisconsin or WM just from saying the name...they aren't exactly well known outside of their regions. I would say the publics with the best REPUTATIONS are UVA, UNC, Berkeley, UCLA, and Michigan.</p>
<p>Uva and UNC are not that well known outside the east coast either.</p>
<p>What about new college of florida? Could that be a public ivy considering its 2nd of the wall street feeder public schools behind uMICH</p>
<p>W&M this year = 1270-1420 SAT I</p>
<p>out here in the west, most people don't know of the good publics outside of california. most honors students don't even consider applying to them. oftentimes, their reputation is based on their geography, and they end up being grouped with colleges around them. only a small percentage (like the ones on this website) know better. for example, </p>
<p>UVA or UNC = UGA or Alabama</p>
<p>I always wonder how students from other states decide on U of I. They must know it in other states that don't have good engineering schools (where we get most of the out-of-staters). I still don't understand anyone from California. oh well.</p>