Tulane Vs. Wisc Madison

<p>Yes, good point. I don't think that either of the universities are super-selective, but not easy to get into either. </p>

<p>Both are great schools, so stop arguing so passionately. Can't we just agree that they are both fine universities with different atmospheres and offerings? Does one school have to be better than the other?</p>

<p>And Barrons, that comment was uncalled for. Georgians are much smarter and educated than you realize, and it's the truth that outside the midwest, UW has little "name-value."</p>

<p>"it's the truth that outside the midwest, UW has little "name-value."</p>

<p>That depends on whom you talk to. When I was in Houston, if I told my neighbors about HYP, they would think that I was talking about my new pickup. They would tell you that Rice is the best university in the country, and UT and A&M are right up there too (not bad advice btw).</p>

<p>But Wisconsin is well recognized and highly respected in the academic circle. Wisconsin is ranked #12 among top research universities, with 34 programs in the top 25. University presidents and deans gave Wisconsin a high 4.2 peer assessment, quite a bit higher than Tulane's 3.5.</p>

<p>Wisconsin is ranked #28 in N.America (#66 worldwide) in the recent London Time poll (World's Top 100 Universities). The LT poll is nothing more than a beauty contest, but it does measure international prestige.</p>

<p>So your grandmother might not be able to brag about you going to Wisconsin. But when it comes to applying for graduate school, I'd give Wisconsin the edge.</p>

<p>Hoo, you are sadly mistaken. Wisconsin has very strong name recognition. Obviously, regional universities will be raised to a higher level by locals no matter where you are. In Pennsylavania, schools like Temple, Pitt and Lehigh are held in higher esteem than Rice, University of Chicago and Northwestern. Does it make them better? No way. Not even close. But if you ask someone outside of the midwest and outside of the mid-Atlantic to compare Lehigh and Pitt to NU and Chicago, it would be no contest. Internationally and nationally (Midwest and South not included for fairness purposes), Wisconsin has greater name recognition than Tulane. And that's not such a bad thing since Wisconsin has a better reputation than most schools in the nation. I can only think of 20 or so research universities that have arguably better reputations than Wisconsin.</p>

<p>I visited Tulane after I was accepted. And though I ultimately decided not to go there, I did like some aspects of the school. First of all, it has an excellent reputation in the south and a long colorful history. The location was wonderful. It was next to the Garden District and just a trolly ride away from the French Quarters. There were alot of students from out of state so I imagine the atmosphere would be different from Wisconsin. I ended up attending a public university that also wasnt as geographically diverse but I enjoyed it. When I sat in some of the classes, the professors were very friendly and the teaching very personal. I loved it when the professor took the class outside because the weather was good. People sat down on the green and heard the lecture outside. The main downside may perhaps be the academics. The students didnt seem to know anything the professor asked. I even knew the answers because I was taking AP Economics at the time. I think the professor got annoyed that I knew all the answers and her students didn't. I cant blame the students though because there is so much social life and vibrancy in 'The Big Easy.' I knew I would be distracted if I went. The price tag was another concern. Though they did give me more than half, it was still cheaper for me go in state because the public universities offered me a great deal also.</p>

<p>thanks for your input. I am leaning more toward Wisconsin, but my parents are pushing Tulane, as they think smaller classes and more attention are important factors. Doesn't hurt that I got a scholarship there too.</p>