something doesnt add up...

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Wisconsin
41

<p>"The original poster was rejected out of state from UW and asked a pretty straightforward question: “how does UW treat out of staters? Is it a top flight public like UM, UVa and UNC?” </p>

<p>All I did was give the answer to the question, and the answer is “no.” "</p>

<p>So you asked for a rebuttal and you got it. There is plenty of evidence to suggest overall UW is easily as good a school as any of those when you look just beyond average SAT scores and look at what the school provides to the students as well as what it has done for society overall (UW’s accomplishments in this area are close to amazing). There also is evidence that UVa is a bit overrated when you dig a little bit and the ranking is in part a function of a good location and good campus planning in the 1800’s. But I’d be satisfied to say they are peers with different styles.</p>

42

<p>See, Barrons, I wasn’t asking for a rebuttal. A guy was rejected from UW from out of state. He wondered if he was rejected because it’s much harder to get into UW from out of state than from in state, a la UM, U-Va or UNC. And the answer is clearly no. In fact, many in Wisconsin have long complained that it’s EASIER to get into UW from out of state than from in state, and there are numbers out there that support this complaint. </p>

<p>The guy did not ask if the academic quality of UW was lower or higher than these other schools and I never said that it was (or wasn’t). All I did was answer the question, used the word “cachet,” and you crucified me for it.</p>

43

<p>UW IS harder to get into from OOS if you are from areas where UW is popular. It is equal or maybe easier if you are from areas that don’t send many like the South and out where I live. When somebody asks in a separate question if it is top flight public like …and you say No without any clarification I had to assume you meant it is not on par educationally or in quality with those other schools mentioned. Now if you honestly were only talking about admissions statistics I misread your intentions.
I must add that most UVa supporters I have run into around here are very big on the “elite” angle and have very little knowledge about other schools not catering to the East Coast elite.</p>

44

<p>Barrons-</p>

<p>Check this out, from UW’s own website. It sure doesn’t look like UW is tougher on out of state applicants than in state, at least not generally speaking. </p>

<p>[UW-Madison</a> admissions myths: Applicants from outside Wisconsin are taking up spots that could go to state residents.](<a href=“http://www.news.wisc.edu/admissions/myth12.html]UW-Madison”>http://www.news.wisc.edu/admissions/myth12.html)</p>

45

<p>A. That article is now several years old. From what we have seen here and heard from my friends in admissions, admissions this year have gotten tougher than ever. </p>

<p>B. I heard directly from the adcom handling the northeast area that kids that could have been shoe-ins a few years ago are now not getting in. He said counselors from Long Island and Scarsdale etc were going nuts over having kids rejected that would have gotten in just a couple years ago. </p>

<p>C. So what overall. If your entire point is that it’s on average harder to get into UVa than UW from OOS I say sure. And so what. My point is that once you get there, UW has more excellent departments to offer than UVa or UNC and is very close to UM overall. And I think many people not generally aware of this leading UW to be somewhat underrated. UM has done a much better job of tooting their horn for years. Maybe UVa and UNC have too. My goal is to toot UW’s horn by using just the facts and not the cachet factor. </p>

<p>Berkeley has a nice chart on their site about top ranked schools besides UCB</p>

<p>Top universities by number of graduate
programs in the top 10 in their fields (NRC rankings)</p>

<p>Rank</p>

<pre><code>* 1. University of California, Berkeley [35]

    1. Stanford [31]
    1. Harvard [26]
  • College of Letters & Science [26] (for comparison only)
    1. Princeton [22]
    1. MIT [20]
    1. Cornell [19]
    1. Yale [19]
    1. Chicago [18]
    1. Pennsylvania [15]
    1. UC San Diego [14]
    1. Columbia [14]
    1. Michigan [14]
    1. Wisconsin [14]
      </code></pre>

<p>[NRC</a> Rankings of L&S Graduate Programs, by Department* | College of Letters & Science](<a href=“http://ls.berkeley.edu/?q=graduate/graduate-program-rankings/nrc-rankings-l-s-graduate-programs]NRC”>http://ls.berkeley.edu/?q=graduate/graduate-program-rankings/nrc-rankings-l-s-graduate-programs)</p>

46

<p>The Berkeley chart is entitled “top universities by number of GRADUATE programs in the top ten in their fields.” Why must you insist on highlighting Wisconsin’s graduate school on a forum that’s primarily focused on undergraduates? </p>

<p>To me, a more relevant indicator of the UNDERGRADUATE experience at UW is this: barely half the class graduates in four years. This is a horrific statistic that is not approached by any truly first tier undergraduate institution that I know of. Whatever the root cause – a pervasive lack of academic seriousness among the undergraduate student body, the inaccessibility of required courses, or the university’s inability to provide sufficient financial aid so students don’t have to attend college on a pay-as-you-go basis – until UW makes substantial progress in this area it cannot be counted among the top tier of American undergraduate institutions no matter how strong its graduate offerings may be.</p>

47

<p>Novaparent, you are so frickin’ off base with this claim. Once you’ve actually spoken with a any number of 5-year undergrads at UW, like myself, you can start saying it’s for the reasons you cite. </p>

<p>Most make conscious choices to stay for a fifth year, like myself, and it’s paid off in many, many ways. </p>

<p>If it’s not viewed as a problem by the students, in any way, that so many peers graduate in 5 years instead of four, then why the hell should we be worried about a stupid statistic that doesn’t at all get at the big picture of where our graduates are going and why they’re consciously choosing to add an additional semester or year?</p>

<p>What an ignorant idea.</p>

48

<p>MNBadger, I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to suggest that the reasons that I offered were the sole or even primary reasons why so many students don’t graduate on time; my key point is, whatever the reasons, graduation rates are a key indicator of a top undergraduate institution and UW does not measure up. Search UW’s own website and you’ll find that your own institution does not disagree.</p>

49

<p>As a parent who presently is advising upcoming soph D on her Fall '10 schedule, it is apparent that the goal of graduating in 8 semesters at UW-Madison is a daunting task indeed. Even within tracked science majors, there are numerous class time conflicts cropping up that certainly don’t make it easy. It’s typical large school bureaucracy at work, which is common despite the statistics that purport one college as better than another in that respect. </p>

<p>I will say, however, that within my scope of knowledge–basically the Big Ten schools–this happens frequently. And…it’s something that we knew going into this deal. We knew that unless D was very careful to make the right course choices while at the same time not overburdening herself with 18-20 hours per semester, it could take an extra year if she double majors, as many do. Maybe half that if she’s lucky. And if she changes majors again…fuggetaboutit!</p>

<p>But my D and no doubt many others picked the breadth of Madison over small privates that ‘guaranteed’ a 4-year graduation. Why? Because they love it there & would probably acquire 6 majors and attend til they’re 30 if they had the chance & unlimited funds. My D was a writer/English type going in & has switched to the College of Agricultural & Life Sciences (CALS) because of the phenomenal, passionate faculty.</p>

<p>I just don’t think–other than the fact it’s a little more of a financial burden on the parents–that having so many great choices academically can be a bad thing…</p>

50

<p>I don’t disagree that what you’re describing is typical among Big Ten schools. My point is that it’s not typical among truly top tier undergraduate colleges. Most top tier undergraduate colleges offer a wide variety of majors and courses AND the guidance and resources to make it possible for the large majority of their students to graduate in four years. It’s one of the things that makes them top tier.</p>

51

<p>BS. Utter BS. You have no idea on God’s green earth about the UW way and experience. Many UW kid’s come from middle and working class backgrounds unlike the privileged class typical at UVa. Some see it as a badge of honor to pay their own way without mom and dad. It gives you the freedom to take as long as you like and major in anything you want without getting the approval of mom and dad. People take off a semester to just travel or do something interesting. They are not trapped in " a you must graduate in 4 years" state of mind. UW is much more free-spirited than the uptight pre-professional prepsters common at UVa and the like. Many UW students graduate with multiple majors as UW makes it easy to do so… </p>

<p>This is a pretty common UW story.</p>

<p>[Can</a> Carol Bartz help Yahoo compete with Google? - Apr. 16, 2009](<a href=“http://money.cnn.com/2009/04/15/technology/fortt_yahoo.fortune/index.htm]Can”>http://money.cnn.com/2009/04/15/technology/fortt_yahoo.fortune/index.htm)</p>

<p>Now as to “grad rankings”, when are you going to understand that grad rankings are just a ranking of the strength of the FACULTY quality of the department??? It has little to do with grad school except that grad students are more focused on the quality of their department than the overall school ranking. Thus it is an excellent proxy for breaking down the component parts of a university which is just the sum of the individual departments. Virtually every department in the “grad rankings” also teaches undergrads in the same subject. Get it now?? That’s why the WAG report made such great use of the “grad rankings” in evaluating the uVa departments it was reviewing.</p>

<p>Biology
Biology ranks number 42 in USNWR, on the same level as Purdue, Penn State and Ohio
State, but well below UNC (number 26). The TT Faculty numbers 27, unbelievably the
same since 1968. We are told that this is only 65% of the size of the median for top 20
Biology Departments (as may be true for other several other CLAS science departments).
There were no retirements or hires for 10 years until one senior and two junior faculty
were recruited this past year. Rundown bio labs reflect the low ranking.
The undergraduates are taught by quality scientists assisted by 11 TAs for Introduction to
Biology, alone. Nevertheless, there is a need to modernize courses: there is only one
course in genomics, none in bioinformatics. There are multiple opportunities for joint
teaching and collaborative research between CLAS and SOM. Prominent examples exist
in Chemistry and Biology. Further opportunities exist in genomics, bioinformatics, brain
imaging, and a wide range of cell biology and biochemistry areas.
Current annual research expenditures are $8.3M, which comes to about $300,000 per
year for TT Faculty. Hopefully, recruitment will generate a major increase in funded
work in this department. There have been remarkable improvements in the department
during the past 4 years – from autocratic leadership and factionalized faculty to collegial
Ecological and Evolutionary Biology and Cell and Molecular Biology subgroups, with
good linkages. Promotions and tenure review are regularized; annual reviews occur for
faculty.
A frequently mentioned frustrations is the failed senior faculty search for the Ivy Chair
($1.5M) in Morphogenesis and Regenerative Medicine. They had three good female
candidates; needed $600-800K for renovations. The reason given was that they could not
mobilize the support of the Dean, Vice President or Provost.</p>

<p>Civil Engineering (CE)
CE has a faculty of 12 FTEs, an undergraduate class of 167, and a USNWR rating of
number 41. It is grouped into three research areas: transportation, environmental, and
structures. Transportation enjoys a reasonable level of research funding, while the other
two areas have very little funding. CE wants to change its name to Civil and
Environmental Engineering and to adopt “sustainable infrastructure” as its unifying
theme. Sustainability is an emerging and popular theme for teaching and for policy
analysis. Sustainability requires careful explication for a research strategy. It can be so
broad as to embrace the entire University. It must be focused to attract funding from
external sponsors.
While Transportation is a reasonably strong group, it alone can hardly make a viable
civil engineering department. Judging from the presentation, the faculty in CE is
dispirited and needs help. This is a very weak department in any comparison group.
Without substantial help from the Dean and the University administration, the future
viability of CE is in serious doubt. In fact, it is not unreasonable to suggest that UVA
consider closing the department, salvaging what it can, combining it with other programs
in UVA (e.g., environmental activities), phasing out the existing commitments to students
and faculty over a three year period, and letting Virginia Tech with a more substantial
and more vigorous department be the Virginia school for CE. (For comparison: USNWR
ranking of Virginia Tech CE is 10 vs. 41 for UVA.)</p>

52

<p>Who said anything about U-Va? Can you post similar diatribes on every other top tier university as well? Because, after all, every single top tier university in America, public or private, that I can think of does a better job graduating its students on time than does UW. And this isn’t a point that has been lost on its students:</p>

<p>[The</a> Badger Herald: Opinion: Don’t be a martyr, go to Michigan](<a href=“http://badgerherald.com/oped/2010/02/26/dont_be_a_martyr_go_.php]The”>http://badgerherald.com/oped/2010/02/26/dont_be_a_martyr_go_.php)</p>

<p>“Our leaders should focus on the statistics people outside Madison actually care about: our abysmal professor retention rates, our binge drinking per capita and the fact 40 percent of us will not graduate in four years. These are the statistics that define UW. Somehow having more CEOs than Harvard does nothing to change my view on Madison being more like Harvard, whereas the statistics about UW’s binge drinking rate just reminds me how much lower we are than Harvard.”</p>

<p>More to your point is the first comment in response to this student editorial:</p>

<p>“Thank you. Now we are starting to see what it means to go to a top research university. The focus is just that, research, not education. Cram as many students in as you can and collect that tuition money. As a senior I truly wish I would have gone somewhere else for the last 4 years, however, the friends I’ve made and the times I’ve had have been awesome, but the education has been hit and miss. This is especially true for science majors, who are continually competing with research for their professor’s time.”</p>

53

<p>One student saying things most responding thought were ridiculous. Student papers often have some over the top content. Here’s a salute to the benefits of drinking games from The “Cavalier Daily.”
[The</a> Cavalier Daily | Game on](<a href=“http://www.cavalierdaily.com/2010/03/17/game-on-2/]The”>http://www.cavalierdaily.com/2010/03/17/game-on-2/)</p>

<p>His opinion is about as representative of most UW students as this recent group formed at UVA</p>

<p>“A new organization that claims to be a secret society has emerged on Grounds, touting its mission “to protect student self-governance, to reignite students’ absent strength of spirit and to chide the insufficient and debauched elements.” Known as The Ten, the society’s members “wish to differentiate [themselves] and to also create a culture of elitism,” according to an e-mail sent to The Cavalier Daily by an anonymous member of the group.”</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.cavalierdaily.com/2010/02/15/new-secret-society-the-ten-seeks-to-reclaim-elitism/[/url]”>http://www.cavalierdaily.com/2010/02/15/new-secret-society-the-ten-seeks-to-reclaim-elitism/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>And other UW students have a far different take on the same article:</p>

<p>This is ridiculous. If you feel this way, then why are you here? UW is just like any other school - you get what you put into it and if you make the effort it will be rewarded. I have friends who go to some of the “top schools” you listed: Harvard, Princeton, Duke, Johns Hopkins, etc. and let me tell you - we have it WAY better off. Most of them never even see their professors, almost all students binge drink 3 nights of the week, and they spend 2 or 3 times as much as we do only to be treated like a number.</p>

<p>And a note on your “evidence”: you complain about Chancellor Martin and co. “regurgitating the same three statistics on a weekly basis”, and yet that YOU regurgitate that complaint throughout the entire paragraph! If UW takes your advice and starts only accepting Merit Scholars, I do not imagine you would be one of them…</p>

54

<p>Barrons, you can huff and puff all you want, but nothing will change the fact that top universities graduate their students on time and top graduate programs mean nothing to undergraduate students if the professors who run them care more about research than teaching.</p>

<p>And, again, who’s talking about Uva?</p>

55

<p>Graduation rate is an interesting metric. The UW planning site shows the 52% rate and 82% within 5 years. At the same time the average time to graduation University wide is indicated as 4.2 years, which it turns out is exactly the same as its peers. </p>

<p>It’s also interesting to see the breakdown by major and the large number of liberal arts degree graduates taking longer than 4 years - counter to popular belief that a shortage of science and engineering courses are holding people back. </p>

<p>But I keep thinking that drawing a line in the sand at 4 years - and I bet it’s measured differently at some schools - when many students may take 1 or 2 additional classes, some by choice, some need is just silly. If by choice wouldn’t that indicate a more intellectual student body?</p>

<p>Plus the cost. If I attended a private school or out of state UMichigan, I’d probably want to graduate EARLY. </p>

<p>But what is a good rate? Stanford is 78% in 4 years. Is that acceptable for such a prestigious U? Case Western graduates 58% in 4 years and Tulane 59%. People frequently consider these schools prestigious. </p>

<p>Funny.</p>

56

<p>The reason UW’s graduation rate is lower than other schools is because UW is funner than those other schools and students want to stay longer.</p>

57

<p>Each of the schools that you’ve just mentioned has graduation rates higher than UW’s. And the fact that UW’s rate is lower because it’s “funner” proves my point.</p>

58

<p>get a life</p>

59

<p>Funny. If the 4 yr graduation rate is a make or break metric when comparing 52% to 59 or 58, then the issue is meaningless.</p>

60

<p>This has got to be one of the best threads on CC. Our son applied and was accepted to both UW-Madison and to UVA. He now attends the UW and is Junior engineering major. He said, and I quote, “Dad, coming to Madison is the best decision I’ve ever made”. Oh, and by the way, he’ll graduate in 4 years. Go Bucky!</p>