U of R vs RIT vs Northeastern

<p>Finalchild, I attended an info session on 29 March where Dean Burdick spoke, and he did say what grouchygrownup reported on the priority of research over teaching, including that other research universities would be lying if they denied this. He used this as a way to launch into the discussion of the Rochester curriculum (as lergnom does above), though he didn’t close the loop as well as lergnom on how this results in improved teaching.</p>

<p>I’ll be blunt: I had a child who went to Boston University. The forum there was overrun with people arguing about which school was better - or worse, depending on point of view - and some of the arguments were absolutely idiotic. (I have to admit I goaded on this one nutso kid who totally, absolutely freaked out about business grad school curricula but it was fun to see the hysteria.) It was idiotic. Our school has large numbers attending both schools - and BC and Tufts, etc. It’s not like anyone cares about rah rah bull.</p>

<p>Thing is, as I kept saying, the schools are not the same but they aren’t equal either. One can fit better than another but they aren’t the same and they aren’t equal. For example, BU is a major research university, with multiples of dollars received by BC - which is about the largest “college” you can find - or by Northeastern. But BU also has a different mandate, one which is more similar to NYU, which is to provide a wide range of schools with differing curricula. They both provide what at BU is called CGS, which is a 2 year program which leads into one of the other BU colleges. Given the different schools and different criteria, it’s impossible to say these are apple to apple. But I can tell you the applicant scores to CGS are more similar to what they are at Northeastern than to the main schools at BU like COM, ENG or CAS. </p>

<p>I happen to have friends who teach at Northeastern so I certainly have no bad feelings about their work. But I do have problems with their marketing. I caught them lying about salaries; they claimed employment and salary ranges that, frankly, exceeded just about any liberal arts school in the country. I checked into it and concluded they were using data - if they were using data - rooted in the numbers of people who took part-time classes there while working. That was what Northeastern was: a giant commuter school with something like 50k students considered as “attending”, with big ads in the T for classes. (BU was a commuter school too a generation before that so it’s not a bad thing to have been.) I give them credit for building a campus and cutting their numbers and making an effort to draw better students, including reducing the number of in-state and getting more people to graduate on time or close to that (numbers which I believe they still fudge). But I think they play games with data. Some schools really work to game the rankings and reportings. I think they do. I have no idea why they need to push the marketing so hard. It’s not like they won’t have a class full of kids. </p>

<p>If you look at my posts, I say repeatedly 3 things: go where you fit, where they have your program and where you can afford. The rest is mostly nonsense. I’ve noted that the few studies about earnings show a kid who gets into a “prestige” college but doesn’t go ends up making the same. And all the research shows the major determinants of salary are what you do and where you live, not where you went to school. I sometimes have trouble believing people don’t understand that a degree from x is not a magic way to make more money in your field. If you live in New Jersey, you will make the salaries paid in New Jersey. If you live in Arkansas, you will make what they pay there. Period. So go where you fit personally, where they have your program and where you can afford. And by where they have your program, I mean partly specific, like some engineering schools are big in mechanical engineering and others aren’t, and partly general, like whether you want a more liberal arts education or something more like a trade school with extra classes.</p>

<p>yotommy, I also attended an info session by Dean Burdick. That’s why I know both of you are grossly distorting. He RAVED about the school. He raved about the advantages of undergrads being able to participate in research from day one, even in the humanities. He totally endorsed the idea that research happens there as a huge PLUS. He NEVER suggested that the professors were disinterested in teaching or that any research emphasis had a negative impact on the undergrad experience. In fact, he emphasized that professors are happy to have kids CHOOSING their classes based on interest rather than some core requirement.</p>

<p>Hi Guys,</p>

<p>Lakemom. Justlistening was reading me right. (thanks Justlistening ) WRT URoc visit I was just describing what I saw and heard. An earlier post had hit on the “research school where prof’s don’t want to teach” issue so I thought to report those points as pertinent. The quote (which was from the URoc dean of admissions) was verbatim. Very memorable.</p>

<p>The starkness of the difference in vitality between downtown Rochester and downtown Boston showed in my delivery. I wanted to like it when we drove in. I really did. </p>

<p>Regarding crime in Boston. For comparison, I had never been the victim of a theft, ever, until two summers ago. On our family’s first day on a trip to Spain I was pickpocketed on the subway in Barcelona. I kid you not.</p>

<p>Also see: [Crime</a> in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“Crime in the United States - Wikipedia”>Crime in the United States - Wikipedia)</p>

<p>From above: “Overall, New England had the lowest crime rates, for both violent and property crimes. New England states also had the lowest homicide rates in the country.”.</p>

<p>I was curious about relative crime rates of the two cities:</p>

<p>[Boston</a> MA crime rates and statistics - NeighborhoodScout](<a href=“The page you were looking for doesn't exist (404)”>Boston, MA Crime Rates and Statistics - NeighborhoodScout)
In above NEU is in the area St Stephen St / Gainsborough St.</p>

<p>[Rochester</a> NY crime rates and statistics - NeighborhoodScout](<a href=“The page you were looking for doesn't exist (404)”>Rochester, NY Crime Rates and Statistics - NeighborhoodScout)
In above URoc is in Joseph C Wilson Blvd and Elmwood Ave.</p>

<p>Regarding bustling metropolis LA vs Boston. Yeah, fer sure. LA is bigger than Boston. The point was that Boston is far more densely populated than metro Rochester and you have to go very far out of Boston to hit anything remotely rural. So for somebody who likes outdoor activities it could be rough. Head west from Boston and as soon as it looks like you’ve broken free (about 40 miles ( ~65 K) out) you start entering the environs of Worcester, population 181K. (Population of Rochester is 210K for comparison) Googling “US at Night” illustrates this. Compare Rochester and Boston (and LA if you like :^)</p>

<p>Regarding cars and parking. On that day we drove to downtown Rochester we didn’t have trouble finding street parking. (Boston parking is hard.) But the bigger point for a college student is that in Rochester you apparently <em>need</em> to drive. In Boston you can live quite well w/o a car, in fact a car is almost an encumbrance. Of course, emelul, if you’re a car buff as your original post hints and you want to have a car on campus, NEU is a harder sell. You might want to check to see if freshman can even have a car. I couldn’t find where I read it but I believe at RIT freshmen can have a car.</p>

<p>el adulto gru</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>We heard this exact quote too and were pleased to see the honesty. Then my guy talked with students about the profs and discovered most liked theirs. He has liked his (though as a freshman, he hasn’t had many).</p>

<p>I think students who are interested in research do just fine with profs who are interested in it (similar loves) - but it’s just a theory.</p>

<p>I believe URoc is a self-selecting school. It if is not appealing to a student on a visit, then it’s not the place for them. If they’re in love, proceed to see if they can get in and if it’s affordable. It does best for the research inclined student who loves to delve deeply into a subject. My youngest was able to compare the basic Bio course. He’s taking one here (college level DE) and sat in on middle son’s there. Here the prof talked about how there was “an enzyme that speeds up the process…” There they talked about what the MULTIPLE enzymes were and exactly what they did. Youngest called his Bio class “Bio lite.” If your student wants Bio lite - go elsewhere. If they want to delve in and really know the details, consider U Roc.</p>

<p>Incidentally, I took middle son’s first Bio test to the prof of the Bio lite class (he had been telling kids his class was the same one they’d encounter from state U to Yale). It took him less than 15 seconds to change his mind. Then he raged… “Why would they want kids to know __<strong><em>? The only people who would need to know </em></strong> are those doing deep level research!” My reply was simply, “It’s a research school. They are training students for research.” He no longer tells his students that his class is the same everywhere.</p>

<p>Finalchild, I am not sure what you are saying that my post is distorting.</p>

<p>I agree that he raved about the school, its research focus, and the effect of this on undergrads; I did not mean to imply otherwise. I was simply validating lermnom’s assertion that the speaker was explicit that at a research university, a professor’s first priority is her research. Lergnom goes on to make some of the same points that you make, in particular that UR professors are happier teaching since students affirmatively choose their courses.</p>

<p>No worries. I just know the Dean did not intend to say that the professors have no interest in teaching or are otherwise poor in terms of teaching in any way. It is suspicious when someone tilts a quote wrapped up in such a context ALONG WITH a polemic about the qualities of Rochester as a city. My instinct is to then follow my friend Lergnom that there is a clear, discernable difference in quality between UR and NEU. Not a huge gap, but also not a close call.</p>

<p>I have a junior and a freshman at UR. They haven’t had a teacher yet who they can’t easily access by stopping by their office, emailing, or running into them hanging out in the lounge for their department. From their experiences and that of their friends, it is very easy to get involved in research. </p>

<p>They both considered Northeastern. I never did feel like I got a good sense of it, so i can’t really compare the two schools. It might be great - we just never felt like they clicked with it or really got a good sense of the classroom experience. Boston is very cool, and Rochester the city is fine but it’s not Boston. While my oldest really did want to go to school in a big fabulous city like Boston, DC, NYC, or Chicago, when it came down to it, the list of factors he considered when choosing his school were all about affordability and quality of education (which includes quality of teaching, access to profs, and opportunities to participate in research, TAing, etc). If he’d had a tie breaker, the coolness of the city probably would have been considered.</p>

<p>My son is very happy at UR. He did interview at RIT (my husband’s alma mater) but felt it was just too focused on getting a job. He is not dying to do research but the intelligence and inquisitiveness of the kids attending UR is the draw. </p>

<p>The main draws I felt were that the caliber of education and the high performance that is there without the competitiveness. That is unique.</p>

<p>I went to school at UCSC which was only pass/fail evaluation then. That meant people learned because they wanted to as we were all going to pass. I was thrilled to see there was a school on this coast that focused on learning for the joy of it as a lifelong pursuit. At the freshman convocation, that was emphasized.</p>

<p>There is no perfect match. Students have to weigh which factors are most important to them.
The quality of their education is why they should be there. </p>

<p>They can always live in a busy city and have activities that are fun very close by. But they hopefully are only going to be undergrads once. As long as there are some things to do off campus (think of those really rural schools) that is usually enough. </p>

<p>And finalchild, while the OP may be gone, we post here on CC for the benefit of anyone who is looking for the same information.</p>

<p>Lakemom, understood. And that’s exactly why I felt compelled to correct what I viewed as a massive distortion in the service of someone’s agenda. Regardless of what the quote was/is, I know the Dean does not believe the quality of teaching is mediocre or that professors are disinterested in teaching and/or unresponsive to students.</p>

<p>Lest I be accused of being part of a marketing plan by dropping by here I found this thread answering a FA question on this forum.</p>

<p>My son loved UR and his best friend goes there. I thought he would be at UR as well but in the end he picked NEU-the biggest factor in the beginning was price difference and that is why I thought he made his decision but he had other reasons. </p>

<p>She is happy at UR-he is happy at NEU. If you switched the schools they would be happy. I was concerned when he picked NEU over UR he would not be academically challenged. He has been academically challenged. I was worried based on what I understood about UR his friend wouldn’t be able to do the work and compete in her sport-she is excelling. I get the impression from talking to him NEU is harder than he thought it would be-I have no idea what she thinks about the rigor of UR. I am sure it is rigorous. I loved the Clusters and the curriculum at UR-the campus is beautiful-we even liked the city. I have no reason to believe it is not a better school academically that NEU-and going in I was very concerned about the quality of the classroom education he would be receiving and if NEU would not be good enough. For him at least it has been more than good enough.</p>

<p>I guess I felt compelled to post this to say that NEU is not some inferior school or that he was roped in by marketing. In fact, he made an excellent decision for him and is getting a fine education. He liked the coop program not because he is afraid of getting a job-he liked it because he went in undecided and wanted to try out a job situation before graduating in something he hated. He also liked the location-and being in the city is an integral part of what he has learned. </p>

<p>I won’t quote statistics since they seem to be manufactured by the school per one poster. If you have evidence of that I would be interested to see it or be directed to it and I will personally take it up with the school as I don’t like the school my son attends to be either one that lies and fabricates or is accused of such.</p>

<p>I hope each student goes to the best school for them-but I found some things said here that I felt I needed to address. I am particularly interested in the possibility NEU is involved is something that isn’t above board and would like the poster who brought that up to feel free to come over to the NEU board and discuss that so concerned parents can know this information as this is news to me and would be to most NEU parents.</p>

<p>Try reading what I say that’s positive about Northeastern and then stop with the challenges - the nonsensical internet stuff that “well, if you have evidence …” </p>

<p>I’m glad your kid is happy at Northeastern.</p>

<p>I am asking you to back up some claims I find concerning-you can either do so or not but I am not getting into a back and forth with you about this-if you want to state things you should be able to back them up, or else you should not put them out in a public forum. You state these charges so clearly surely you must have this information at your fingertips?</p>

<p>If the school is filing false reports by all means they should be reported. If I understand correctly a school that takes federal funds cannot publish false information. </p>

<p>Since this has nothing really to do now with UR I have nothing left to say on this thread-but I will on the NEU one feel free to come over and contribute.</p>

<p>From a completely independent perspective… I have no affiliation with any of those school… (Although one of my daughters was accepted to URoch, but is not attending there…)</p>

<p>URoch is a far more prestigious RESEARCH university… competing with other top tier schools (WashU, JHU, etc.) and Ivies and the like. FYI, the recently retired President of MIT (Susan Hockfield, a neuroscientist) was a URoch grad. If you want research, especially in the biomedical or related fields, that’s the best place. (Agree the Rochester is not an exciting city, but the area is beautiful! Weather is about as pleasant as Boston…!)</p>

<p>I’m still amazed at the popularity of Northeastern, but it seems it’s attractiveness (like that of Drexel in Phila.) is about the co-op program and the “job experience” that gives you upon graduating with a bachelor’s degree. It’s related, I think, to the recent economic climate and job market. In my days in Boston, Northeastern was basically a commuter school - although I know things change. It’s still pretty far down the pecking order of Boston-area schools (1. MIT & Harvard; 2. Wellesley, Tufts, Brandeis, Olin?; 3. then maybe Northeastern, Babson, WPI.) If your goal is to get a bachelor’s degree and then a job, that certainly doesn’t hurt to have the co-op experience. If you want further education, URoch would get my vote.</p>

<p>I know very little of RIT, but I’d put it below those two - URoch for the research orientation, and Northeastern for the practicality/co-op.</p>

<p>Sorry, let me correct above… not sure how I forgot BU and BC…</p>

<p>It’s still pretty far down the pecking order of Boston-area schools: 1. MIT & Harvard; 2. Wellesley, Tufts, Brandeis, Olin?; 3. BC and BU; 4. then maybe Northeastern, Babson, WPI.</p>

<p>Back 20 years ago, as a commuter school, Northeastern was perhaps the largest private university in the country (Reggie Lewis was the basketball star, and CBS announcers would talk a bout “little Northeastern” making waves, and they had no idea). They have reduced the size of their student body considerably, and filled the commuter lots with new buildings. Correct me if I’m wrong, but that maybe be about the time they also went from quarters to semesters.</p>

<p>Again, back 20 years ago, when John Silber was at the helm, it seemed that BU was the “hot” up and coming school in Boston. Now the hot school appears to be Northeastern.</p>

<p>But please and I really mean please, there is no competition for best. This is the entire problem and it’s made a problem by people who have a need to argue that somehow this school is “better”. THAT is not what matters. Yale is likely better. Cal Tech is better. But odds are the person involved didn’t get into Yale or Cal Tech. Each kid and each family has to make decisions based on the choices they actually have. Better is not the issue. Fit and cost are what matters.</p>

<p>The way this started, as it often does, is that people have a need to talk up a school. I still don’t know why. Wow, Northeastern is really moving up. Soon it will pass Washington University. Oxford is next. (I’m being sarcastic.) It doesn’t matter. If you want a co-op - or need one financially - then Northeastern is one of the few schools that does this. It’s in a very good city for college students. It may fit your family’s educational needs. Period. </p>

<p>One of the many aspects I find offensive about the “hot” and “rising” idea is the implicit idea the others are standing still or somehow getting worse. Nonsense. Repeat that in capitals: NONSENSE. BU and BC are improving each year. Tufts is improving. All these schools have invested in capital construction. BU, for example, built a gigantic high rise dorm that may have the best view of Boston of any building - not kidding, I would love that view. They just finished a huge student center with a new dining hall. BC just built out a new dorm and other new buildings. Do I have to go on? </p>

<p>Some schools, as I’ve noted repeatedly, work to game the rankings. Some outright lie. There have been threads about this in the past. Examples range from listing retired professors as active to decrease the student ratio and counting non-existent books to make the library bigger to much worse (like fake SAT’s). Others game the system by setting up classes specifically to look better, like they add a few TA’s and increase the number of sections for some large lectures so they can say the average class is x and the maximum is lower, but without actually changing the way they teach. And others have, intelligently, realized they can managed their admissions yield to appear more selective by rejecting those who they know from past admissions data won’t attend. This is a relatively new application of data science and it not only lowers admission rates but is probably a sensible thing to do if rankings didn’t exist. Kids can no longer assume certain safeties are “safe” because the safety may reject them as being a “reach” for the school that is a waste of an admissions offer. My point is not to point at specific things at specific schools but to note that rankings are BS and are essentially a marketing tool. That people fall for marketing is too bad. If it makes you feel better about your choice, fine.</p>

<p>Lergnom, I agree with everything you’re saying except I don’t know if it entirely applies here. Who knows? We haven’t heard from the OP in ages. But there are threads like this all over the site on every college site…so and so vs. so and so vs. so and so. I think there are kids who are in the midst of trying to make some very difficult decisions and they or parents come on asking “what do you guys think?” Vassar vs Hamilton vs Colgate…NYU Stern vs something else…</p>

<p>I don’t think all of these are about marketing, although, as happened in this thread, some of that did seem to work its way in. But you were reacting from the very beginning. I actually don’t totally get NEU. I don’t fully understand the whole co-op thing, and to what extent it really is legit and to what extent its just taking classes for a semester, a finding his own internship or job, and then going back to classes again. I think NEU has reached a point where it’s rise and “hotness” is going to level out or suffer because it seems like it only about working internships and jobs. NEU has had a remarkable rise or we wouldn’t even be having this discussion, but I also believe UR is rising. Both of my kids applied and were accepted to NEU and I didn’t want either to choose it, partly because I was a philosophy major believes in something different than what NEU is advertised as. To me it’s not exactly like “real college” (whatever that means) but I also know in the current climate they are selling something that makes sense to an awful lot of people.</p>

<p>Anyway, if genuine, I think it is fair for students to come on these threads and pose X vs Z vs Y.</p>

<p>But I think they play games with data. Some schools really work to game the rankings and reportings. I think they do. I have no idea why they need to push the marketing so hard. It’s not like they won’t have a class full of kids. </p>

<p>Lergnom, your mention of there being deceptive practices with zero evidence is really appalling. Northeastern is rising in the rankings. Think better merit aid might have something to do with attracting better students? T It doesn’t matter where you go to school, but having an extra $100,000 in your pocket when you graduate to start your own business does.</p>

<p>I have learned through my many years that being called “appalling” is a compliment. Thank you. I have also learned that people misread things. I’m not responsible for how people misread. I’m also not responsible for providing “evidence” to back up everything I say. For two reasons. First, when I do provide evidence, the subject gets changed. It’s not like I win but rather that people don’t want evidence; they just want to say they need it. Second, research things yourself. I don’t work for you. I can say what I want when I want. Take the time as I often have - and many of posts prove this - to do some independent research of your own. I engage with people who show they are willing to do work. Without a demonstration of work put in to talk to me in more detail, I won’t bother. That means if you want to go through CC or some other sources, as I have done, and look up discussions about gaming ratings and the like, then I’d be happy to discuss your findings with you.</p>