The Future Winner Among State Us is…U North Carolina?

College Search & Selection
101

<p>

</p>

<p>RML,</p>

<p>Just a hint. Read what someone posts before you reply to it. I haven’t suggested as much, and I don’t think anyone else on this thread has either. You misread my post.</p>

102

<p>

</p>

<p>Rhodes alone does not define academic tradition and excellence. And, this is reflective of UNC’s average score it got in USNews’ Peer Assessment Rating. What defines academic excellence and academic tradition is the outstanding academic program of the school. For example, the Ivy League schools have great undergrad program. They attract the best undergrad applicants. MIT, Stanford, Caltech have the best science and engineering programs. They attract the best scientists and engineers wanabes. Chicago, Northwestern, Berkeley, Michigan, to name some, have great postgrad programs. They attract some of the best postgrad students. What area is UNC strong that the academic world would consider it a very strong or top contender? NONE!</p>

103

<p>So, what’s the relevance of this statement then? Why do you have say such statement if you were not trying to say something?</p>

<p>“What I do know is that we are talking about 3 universities here, and none of them are in danger of going bankrupt and closing.”</p>

104

<p>“Looks pretty close to me and that virtually all of the difference is in the Math scores (probably heavily generated by U Michigan’s engineering students). Want to revise your thinking that U North Carolina’s student body is not as strong as U Michigan’s or do you want to claim that these two student bodies aren’t pretty darn close to equivalent?”</p>

<p>Hawkette, I never said UNC’s student body was weaker than Michigan’s. I said that UNC’s student body was not stronger. I was responding to Tranadad who stated that UNC’s lower cost attracted a higher caliber student body that the other 4 top public universities mentioned on this thread. I merely said that UNC’s student body is at best equal, but not better. I personally don’t see a significant difference in the quality or potential in student bodies between schools that are within 100-120 points. </p>

<p>“And it’s a fact that in the USNWR rankings, U Michigan has never even ranked as the number two public school in the USA, much less the first. LOL.”</p>

<p>Hakwette, since when is the USNWR the authority? I personally don’t agree with the USNWR. Many others do not. In fact, the majoroity of people don’t agre with the USNWR undergraduate rankings. But you are wrong in your statement above. It is NOT a "fact that Michigan has never even been ranked as the number two public school in the USA. That bold statement, which you make with such confidence, is way off. Michigan has certainty been ranked as the number two public university in the USA, not once or twice or three times, but a total of eight times, which is roughly once every three years. Below is a breakdown of those 8 years:</p>

<p>1983
Cal: #5
Michigan: #7
UIUC: #8</p>

<p>1988
Cal: #5
Michigan: #8
UNC: #11</p>

<p>1995
UVa: #17
Michigan: #21
Cal: #23</p>

<p>1996
UVa: #17
Michigan: #24
Cal: #26</p>

<p>1997
UVa: #21
Michigan: #23
Cal: #27</p>

<p>1998
UVa: #21
Cal: #23
Michigan: #23</p>

<p>2005
Cal: #21
Michigan: #22
UVa: #22</p>

<p>2007
Cal: #21
Michigan: #24
UVa: #24</p>

<p>[U.S</a>. News Rankings Through the Years](<a href=“http://chronicle.com/stats/usnews/index.php?category=Universities&orgs=&sort=2007]U.S”>http://chronicle.com/stats/usnews/index.php?category=Universities&orgs=&sort=2007)</p>

<p>At any rate, the top 3 public universities (Cal, Michigan and UVa) have been ranked within 1-5 spots of each other overall in the nation most years, so it is not like there is a significant difference according to the USNWR. And again, the USNWR is not necessarily accurate. I certainly don’yt agree with it.</p>

105

<p>

</p>

<p>The relevence is post #93.</p>

106

<p>“Total
1800-2080 U North Carolina
1810-2130 U Michigan
1890-2230 Berkeley - Looks significant to me”</p>

<p>RML, Cal’s figures looked a little high, so I checked up on them and I think the numbers you listed for Cal were admit numbers, not enrolled numbers. The mid 50% SAT range for enrolled students according to Cal’s latest CDS is 1810-2190. That’s not a significant difference from the mid 50% of admitted students, but it is worth nothing. </p>

<p><a href=“http://cds.berkeley.edu/pdfs/PDF%20wBOOKMARKS%2008-09.pdf[/url]”>http://cds.berkeley.edu/pdfs/PDF%20wBOOKMARKS%2008-09.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Cuse, Rhodes scholarships are great, but let us face it, with the exception of Harvard, Princeton, Yale and Stanford, all universities have produced less than 1 Rhodes scholar annually. Less than one Rhodes scholar out of thansands each year is just way too insignificant to draw any comparison. Even HYPS do not produce enough Rhodes on an annual basis to make a statement, but other universities just don’t register.</p>

107

<p>i gave up arguing with this lady(OP) a long time ago. She clearly doesn’t understand basic math and statistics concepts, or gets paid to do some sort of promotion for some schools. Every few days, she’ll come up with a totally bogus “ranking” or “theory” with the intention of getting some folks heated up (with a general and consistent strong bias against Michigan/Berkeley), and then everyone falls for this trap and argues for 20+ pages, and then we repeat a few days later, when she will just do the same thing again. Finally her best quote: “Michigan is a fine public University” (but the connotation is that it’s ONLY a public university).</p>

108

<p>

Have you not been listening to anything that Hawkette has been saying? UNC-CH has the best combination of price and undergraduate education out of any school in the country. I would argue that the marginal cost of a Michigan or Berkeley education isn’t worth it when you could attend UNC-CH for 40k cheaper over 4 years. We’re talking about quality and affordability of undergraduate education here I’m assuming.</p>

<p>Although UNC isn’t at the top of any of those categories you’ve mentioned, it’s pretty strong for both categories and is more well-rounded than Berkeley or Michigan. Anyone who thinks UNC isn’t a peer of Michigan and Berkeley are fools.</p>

<p>TIER 1 PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES(no specific order)
UCB
UCLA
UMich
UNC
UVA</p>

109

<p>“Have you not been listening to anything that Hawkette has been saying?”</p>

<p>Why should anybody listen to Hawkette? She is not exactly the most knowledgeable posters. Many of her posts require correction, and quite frankly, I am tired of cleaning up after her. </p>

<p>“I would argue that the marginal cost of a Michigan or Berkeley education isn’t worth it when you could attend UNC-CH for 40k cheaper over 4 years.”</p>

<p>I agree with you on that one ring<em>of</em>fire. Cal and Michigan are not $40,000 better than UNC, particularly if one does not come from a wealthy family. Hell, for most people, I would even argue that Harvard is not $40 k better than UNC, let alone schools like Cal, Michigan and their peers (private or public). </p>

<p>But this thread is not about the best value in public education (which UNC excels at), it is about which public university is best postioned to be the best in the land in 10, 20, 30 years. Personally, I think the landscape will remain unchanged. The top 10 or so public universities will all remain near the top in years to come.</p>

110

<p>

</p>

<p>Ditto!! But you know what, Alexandre, I think hawkette’s strategy is backfiring on her. She is making Michigan (and Berkeley) more popular than ever on CC. :D</p>

111

<h2>“The only NC people hurt by the current economy are state employees?”</h2>

<p>The above claim is ludicrous. Try telling that to the BoA or Wachovia/Wells Fargo employees in Charlotte. Many of them, including a sister in law of mine, are still waiting for the dust to settle on the mergers and finding out whether they will still have a job afterward.</p>

112

<p>ring<em>of</em>fire, </p>

<p>for someone who’s “international”, (not from the US), the 40k difference set between Cal/UMich and UNC is worth it. I would pay 100k more for Cal over UNC. You have no idea how prestigious Cal’s name is outside of the US, particularly in countries I have once lived. UNC is practically unknown in here and in places where I’ve been to. Of course, if I have to spend a hundred thousand grand more, I would rather spend it in a school that’s highly regarded in my society. But then again, I would understand that some Americans would think UNC would be a good alternative to Cal or UMich.</p>

113

<p>

</p>

<p>Are you talking about the number of Rhodes Scholars produced each year on average, or on a year-to-year level? If the latter is the case, I think it is important to note that UNC produced 2 Rhodes Scholars this past year.</p>

<p>I agree with you, however, that using Rhodes Scholars alone as an indicator of a school’s academic success is a bit narrow; many more factors need to be included. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>My apologies; as an Eastern North Carolinian, Charlotte doesn’t cross my mind too much. Rest assured that most of North Carolina’s other cities are doing much better than Charlotte at the moment, and some are even booming.</p>

114

<p>Cuse, I am referring to the average in general. Some years, a school may produce 1 or 2 or even 3 Rhodes scholars, but other years, that school may not produce a Rhodes scholar for several years. On average, few school produce one or more Rhodes scholar annually.</p>

115

<p>

</p>

<p>Kinda hard to be “well-rounded” without an engineering program.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Absolutely true!</p>

116

<p>

I would argue that international employers, who are the ones actually in charge of making hiring decisions, are fully aware of UNC and its great reputation. Who cares if the average Chinese person on the street isn’t aware of UNC? Multinational companies are well informed about the reputation of American colleges.</p>

<p>Besides, we’re talking about a small demographic here. Most students applying will be domestic and they would under no circumstance pay 100k extra to go to Berkeley. Do you know how much money that is? I wouldn’t even go to Harvard over UNC for that kind of money.</p>

<p>Spending 100k extra on a peer institution is quite foolish.</p>

117

<p>alex,
My error on part of the earlier U Michigan ranking comment and some clarification. </p>

<p>Since 1991 when USWNR began publishing rankings on more than the subjective Peer Assessment, I meant that the school has never ranked # 1. They have ranked # 2 on 6 occasions (with 3 of those times being ties for # 2 with another public). I think it is noteworthy and interesting that, when using the full USNWR methodology, U Michigan has never ranked ahead of U Virginia.</p>

<p>As for how the schools compare to one another, the average USWNR ranks during the 19 years of the full methodology (1991-2009) are:</p>

<p>1.5 UC Berkeley
1.7 U Virginia
2.9 U Michigan
3.7 UCLA
4.5 U North Carolina</p>

<p>If one were to rank based solely on objective factors only, ie, without the subjective PA scoring, the current USNWR State U rankings would be:</p>

<ol>
<li> U Virginia</li>
<li> UC Berkeley</li>
<li> UCLA</li>
<li> U North Carolina</li>
<li> U Michigan</li>
</ol>

<p>tenisghs,
A conspiracy theorist, huh? U Michigan gaining in popularity on CC? Really? Well, let’s see who’s pumping up U Michigan in this thread: goblue, rjkonovi, dstark, RML, hoedown, tyler09, tranandy, alexandre, OHKid, kb10, and you (did I miss anybody?). With the exception of RML (who seems to think that U Michigan’s rep in the Philippines is meaningful in the selection of an undergraduate school), all are either grads, students, employees, parents of UM attendees or, in the case of OHkid, hopeful high schoolers. If you want to interpret that as a groundswell of supporters, then be my guest. </p>

<p>U Michigan’s dilemma is that, once you peel away the PA scoring measurement, and start looking at how the school compares to others on objective factors that can be meaningful to the average undergraduate student, the school struggles. </p>

<p>As for this thread’s topic, look, I think that U North Carolina is a good (and underrated) school and it’s in a region of the USA that is growing. IMO, this will give U North Carolina some tailwinds that can work to the benefit of future undergraduates. In addition, the school is priced far more attractively than the State Us of California, Virginia and Michigan and in demanding economic times, this is potentially very important. </p>

<p>My conclusion is U North Carolina is on the upswing vis-</p>

118

<p>hawkette: while I agree with your inputs, I disagree with the ultimate conclusion. Because NC is a growing state (high school seniors), and bcos the state caps the number of OOS matriculants, over the next few years it will be even HARDER to get in OOS. Thus, UNC is only worth a look by the most accomplished OOS applicants (read high stats); the masses would waste their money applying. And, of course, one MUST apply EA to UNC.</p>

<p>Since UVa also meets 100% of need, its a better app value for most kids, IMO. And, of course, UMich is easiest to get into.</p>

119

<p>Hawkette, the amount of strong students at a school is an objective factor. One that you dismiss. That is your right.</p>

<p>But it is an objective factor.</p>

<p>If percentages are objective than amount of students is objective.</p>

120

<p>

</p>

<p>hawkette, the bottom line is you consistently continue to denigrate Michigan’s reputation and expect most of the forum to agree with you. You do this in almost every thread. Well, you are wrong, and the large turnout of posters debunking your claims proves my point. </p>

<p>I don’t know what you have against Michigan, but just admit that it is an elite institution that can withstand economic difficulties (the state alone has been in a recession for 8 years, yet the university continues to pump millions of dollars in research and maintain the highest bond rating. That is quite outstanding if you ask me.).</p>

<p>Want to know my theory? I believe in ten years the state of Michigan will economically turn around and people will want to migrate to Michigan in droves because a) cheaper standard of living, b) abundant amount of land and natural resources, and c) excellent place for starting new industries and small businesses. But hey, it’s my opinion.</p>