<p>
</p>
<p>Haha not entirely. Both j-schools are pretty much equal. If you take away Mizzou’s journalism school and Syracuse’s Newhouse school, however, Syracuse is without a doubt the better school academically.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Um, considering Columbia doesn’t have an undergraduate journalism program, I highly doubt that. Most people agree that the top 3 j schools are Missouri, Northwestern, and Syracuse.</p>
<p>The problem with Syracuse is that it’s just about the ugliest college campus on God’s green earth. Having to live there for the better part of 4 years would be depressing as all get out.</p>
<p>Besides that, it doesn’t seem to be academically better, going off of the student profiles…but what do I know.</p>
<p>The campus? No way, it is one of the most beautiful campuses out there. Have you ever been? Most people are speechless the first time they see SU, the beauty is simply breathtaking.</p>
<p>The city? That is another story. The city absolutely sucks.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Believe me, it is. Mizzou accepts close to 90% of the people that apply; Syracuse accepts roughly 50%. That is a huge disparity. There is a reason why Mizzou is ranked about 50 spots behind Syracuse in the USNWR rankings…</p>
<p>Well I never saw the campus from a terrestrial level, but I’ll take your word on it. There was a hill that had a good view and it appeared to be dominated by ugly mid-rise Soviet-style buildings and that incredibly ugly white plastic dome arena. Yeah Syracuse is not the most beautiful place in the World.</p>
<p>To hell with rankings…</p>
<p>Alright, so you haven’t seen the campus. So you aren’t in any condition to judge it. Another Syracuse myth debunked, along with countless others that have been posted in this thread.</p>
<p>It is 85% and 53%. MU is a public university that is still allowing itself to grow. It has not, as of yet, set limits on freshman enrollment, but may have to do so soon. </p>
<p>I’m not sure on what grounds you can argue that Syracuse is a “better” university simply because a smaller fraction of applicants were accepted. The academic record of the students who enroll is very similar.</p>
<p>Who’s to say that you can’t judge a campus from how it looks half a mile away? Which is very very ugly like the rest of Syracuse.</p>
<p>Well if we’re debunking each other’s myths, then by the way, there’s a reason Mizzou has a higher acceptance rate than Syracuse. It’s called automatic admissions. Mizzou posts the criteria that will get you admitted into the school no matter what, and if you don’t meet it, then no need apply–that simple. Syracuse, like all other private schools, do not do this and prefer to leave an element of mystery to their admissions process.</p>
<p>So that 90% - 50% comparison means nothing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, huge difference.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Syracuse is a better university because it is more selective, has a better faculty, and has better recognition nationwide, among many other factors. There is a reason why Syracuse turns away 50% of people who apply, while Mizzou only turns away 15%.</p>
<p>So it is still behind Syracuse in that respect, as well as many other public universities.</p>
<p>For the record, the part of the MU campus around the medical college and the various hospitals (Univ. Hospital, Mental Health and the VA) is ugly, concrete and full of parking garages. The rest of the campus is very attractive, however, and abuts the downtown, which is full of shops, restaurants, bars, and music venues of various types. And a lot of coffee shops. Unlike the downtown of most midwestern midsize towns, Columbia is thriving.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Um, yes, it does. Mizzou accepts 90% of people who apply because it can’t afford not to. Syracuse already has a national reputation, and can afford to turn people away. Even NC State University has more stringent admission requirements than Mizzou, which may explain why it is ranked higher. Public-private is not really a factor here.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And in that respect, Mizzou has something on Syracuse. The city of Syracuse, once you leave the university campus, is awful.</p>
<p>rankings mean nothing. considering that missouri is a much larger school then syracuse, it makes sense that their acceptance rates are different. missouri has a lot more incoming freshmen, so they accept more applicants.</p>
<p>if you really want to compare the intelligence of the two student bodies, look at the act scores of last year’s incoming class. you’ll see that they are identical.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not quite. Size means nothing; UNC, UVA and UMich are much larger than Syracuse, but are much more selective. Mizzou accepts more applicants because they have to, while other top publics do not.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, they choose to because the taxpayers want to broaden access to the only flagship campus. Now, they could choose to reject some of the more marginal students, but then the average ACT and SAT scores would be a lot higher than Syracuse’s. So maybe they should. (Actually, I think they should, but they don’t take my advice.)</p>
<p>^^^</p>
<p>Well until they choose to do so, Mizzou will continue to lag behind Syracuse academically, and that is what matters right now.</p>
<p>You are completely missing the point of automatic admissions. The guidelines for admissions into Mizzou are already posted.</p>
<p>In fact I think it’s wondrous that a school whose admissions guidelines are clearly marked and never deviated from even has to reject ANY applicants at all.</p>
<p>so syracuse is more selective, but mizzou’s incoming freshmen had the same test scores that syracuse did. maybe that says something about the people who apply to syracuse, and i wouldn’t be surprised judging by your posts ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Something which most selective universities, both public and private, would never dream of.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’ll agree with you on that. Why would you apply to a school that you are guaranteed to be denied from?</p>