<p>I have heard Tulane described similarly to SMU - the stereotype of wealth, students who are bright but not extraordinarily so, the school's offerings are better than what the students "deserve" academically. The only difference being that Tulane has a northeast / urban / Jewish skew and SMU has a southern / WASP skew. Can someone with more knowledge of these two schools compare and contrast them? Are the academics between the two similar? Are the student bodies and social life similar to what I have heard? Thanks.</p>
<p>I think it's fair to equate these two schools. I am very familiar with SMU over the past twenty-five years, and with pre-K Tulane. Each wishes it were Vanderbilt, secretly hopes it is Emory, and sometimes pretends to consider itself in the Rice or Duke ranks, but no one takes that seriously. </p>
<p>I would not characterize the student body at either place as particularly monied, just lots of children of the upper middle class (perhaps the types who think they have money because they drive a BMW 3-series of recent vintage, but not actually wealthy.)</p>
<p>SMU missed the opportunity during Dallas's growth to improve the quality of the school and remains a "top 75" university, therefore about on par with a middling state U (think Va Tech, Miami of Ohio). Tulane's future is murky from all reports but reputationally it had been better and is still clinging by its very fingernails to a "top 50" status, equivalent to Yeshiva, Syracuse, U of Florida. I expect it will slip farther in the future. It is always hard for me to understand why anyone actually pays the freight at either school when at least 20 or so states have qualitatively better public universities, but each trades on a very unnuanced notion that private equates to prestige. These are people who grew up truly caring about who drove what, what side of the suburb you lived on, where you bought your clothes and other similar high schoolish notions of "popularity." I think each, and Tulane more, occasionally is attended by a serious student, but they clearly did not receive good advice. </p>
<p>Students at SMU tend to be B+, 1100-1300 SAT upper middle class types from Midwestern and Texas suburban high schools without strong academic interests. Substitute East Coast and Mid-Atlantic and raise the SAT's by 75 points and ditto for Tulane. At SMU, often very hard partiers with lots of drugs on campus. This past year, at least three SMU students died from drug overdoses (likely more but those are the ones that were directly reported.) I do not profess to know about the current party/social scene at Tulane in that benighted city, other than I expect alcohol is a big player.</p>
<p>Neither school has a strong athletics program, though SMU surfaces occasionally in an off-brand sport, and is unlikely to have one in the future.</p>
<p>There is some comparative data at <a href="http://www.collegeboard.com%5B/url%5D">www.collegeboard.com</a> - type in both (or others) under CollegeQuickFinder for profiles, SAT ranges, costs, and whatever demographic information they publish.</p>
<p>Not sure I get what you mean by "better than what the students 'deserve' academically?" Generally, students - wherever they are - get pretty much what they deserve academically - learning is what happens when you apply yourself, and (only) sometimes is facilitated by a good 'teacher.' Smart kids at any school who don't apply themselves get nothing out of their experience.</p>
<p>Estimates at Tulane on the Jewish population range from 11% to as high as 30% of the student body, depending on the survey or the guesser. Tulane appears to have a strong Hillel organization, if you are Jewish.</p>
<p>After you've done your research, and make a short list, go visit - given the investment over the next couple of years, the price of a trip is very small insurance to pay...</p>
<p>Redcrimble may express it a little more harshly than I would, but I agree with much of what he says although I would assign higher marks to Tulane. I think that Tulane is underrated, but I would not confuse it with the likes of Duke, Rice, Vandy, Emory (all of which I also consider underrated!). </p>
<p>Tulane attracts a broad geographic cross-section of high quality students and the average standardized test scores of its students make it a direct comparable to U Michigan and Boston College (1323 at Tulane vs 1315 at U Michigan vs 1335 at Boston College). Academics hate the school as its current Peer Assessment is at 3.3 which is the lowest in the USNWR Top 50. (Ex-PA, Tulane would rank in the high 30s). By contrast, IMO business people like Tulane students and consider many as bright, personable, fun, and with a good sense of personal balance. </p>
<p>The story at Tulane post-Katrina is fascinating and the script is truly being written every day. Some see the glass as half-full and others see it as half-empty and truly legitimate arguments can be made for both sides. But, for anyone interested in being part of the solution to a real-time community disaster, there is nowhere better than Tulane right now. And even if not, Tulane can still be an excellent undergraduate experience and, of course, New Orleans can still be a lot of fun. But anyone considering Tulane needs to visit. There is so much misinformation about the school and the city and nothing will replace seeing it with your own eyes and making your own judgments. </p>
<p>As for SMU, I see this in a much more regional vein. The Cox School of Business has some talented students, but the academic reputation of the school does not hold up well in comparison with the top southern/southwestern colleges. However, SMU has some strong alumni who can be very helpful in Texas and should this be a post-graduate work destination, I would not underrate the advantage that this can provide.</p>
<p>Thanks, Hawkette, I cringe a bit (but stand by) what I wrote. I agree if you are sure you are going to be staying in Dallas that SMU is a good option, as is most any local university which is unjustifiably exalted by virtue of propinquity and the higher population of alumni. (cf. Marquette, Milwaukee; Case Western, Cleveland; U of Pitt, et al.) Because SMU draws so heavily locally, more so than Tulane, those factors are stronger here than in New Orleans. I hope Tulane comes through this time more or less intact and regret that SMU missed an historic opportunity to make itself into a better university.</p>
<p>To be fair, neither Tulane nor SMU have as large of endowments as Rice, Duke, Emory, Vanderbilt, etc. Some schools like Rice started out with lots of cash while others acquired significant funds alone the way (e.g., Emory). It's much easier for a private institution to achieve high academic standards if it has plenty of $$$$ to build its programs. According to recent figures, SMU's endowmnet is at $1.3 billion and Tulane's is about $1.0 billion. Not too bad, but significantly behind the other schools mentioned above.</p>
<p>tulane is not "clinging by its very fingernails" to a top 50 ranking. the data used in this years rankings is far worse than the data for the next set of rankings. the 2007-2008 admissions and financial stats are much better. falling to 50 is the lowest that we should drop, and that really is not that bad considering exactly what the school went through. i expect tulane to rise to around the low 40's in the next few years, but we'll probably be stuck around there for some time to come.</p>
<p>BTW, the business school actually moved up a few spots in this years rankings.</p>
<p>redcrimblue, what the hell is your problem? after looking through your previous posts it's quite obvious that the only time you ever come to this board is to bash tulane and/or new orleans. got some personal issues there? this seems to be the only school's board that you frequent on this site merely to attack. i mean, going as far as to post 7 year old articles about possible financial issues is just pathetic. don't you have anything better to do?</p>
<p>My goodness. I have not "bashed" Tulane. As far as clinging to a top 50 status, being tied for 50th seems as far down in the top 50 as you can get. I hope it can get back into the 40's. I think, btw, that I have been more than fair to Tulane, and objective. Perhaps you could refrain from the profanity and look a bit more carefully at your own subjectivity that would cause you to lash out as you have. The "seven year old article" was written by Tulane itself and comes from its own site, where it is still posted. It reflects the school's own pre-K views of its major issues, which have only been exacerbated by the hurricane and its aftermath. You will note, as well, that I have been consistently hopeful that Tulane could overcome its problems, and I continue to hope so. Being myopic and profane do not seem to advance your position, nor do ad hominem attacks.</p>
<p>My goodness, actually, you do.</p>
<p>Having interacted with redcrimble on Tulane and other schools, I want to come to his defense. He may see the situation at Tulane and New Orleans a bit more darkly than others, but his comments are not without merit. I agree with his thoughts that there ARE issues there and it will be a few more years til the jury comes back in. Having said that I am impressed by the job that the administration has done in crisis management and, even more impressive has been the way that the Tulane student body has rallied. The great spirit level of/for that school is a fabulous story and a point of real differentiation with many other highly ranked colleges. </p>
<p>Now, if you want something to be legitimately angry about, look at the 3.3 PA score that the academics assign to the school. Tulane definitely gets shafted in this and carries the same score as institutions ranked 67th, 91st, 96th, 112th, and 124th. It is testimony to Tulane's strength in the measurable, quantitative categories that the school remains in the USNWR Top 50. As mentioned previously, on the fact-based data, Tulane ranks in the high 30s with student quality on par with Boston College, U Michigan, NYU, etc.</p>
<p>Interesting discussion.</p>
<p>May I momentarily hijack and ask the opinions of the obviously well informed group on this thread?</p>
<p>Would you share a bit about Tulsa? (There's no Tulsa forum on CC for some reason). My dd has a scholarship offer there, and is trying to get some informed reads on it ...</p>
<p>SMU has a better reputation than some on this board will have you believe; granted, the reputation is not as national in scope as Tulane's, but from what I can see, that is changing. The university is improving in all areas, though admittedly it has a way to go. </p>
<p>However, I disagree with redcrimblue who stated "SMU missed the opportunity during Dallas's growth to improve the quality of the school." In the early 90s, SMU was a very regional school with an acceptance rate close to 90%. Now, SMU accepts about 50% of applicants, has more of a national reputation (but still not quite national), and continues to improve every day. The Cox School of Business and Meadows School of the Arts are very well regarded, and Dedman College (liberal arts & sciences) and the School of Engineering are improving each and every year. There is also a brand-new School of Education and Human Development.</p>
<p>Personally, I'd like to see SMU take steps to encourage students to live on campus for more than their first year at the university. That is one of the things I do not like about SMU is that most students tend to move off campus after one year.</p>
<p>That being said, Tulane is also a VERY good school and has more of a national reputation than SMU does.</p>