<p>How do those three compare in generally held public views? (Especially regarding the Ugrad business programs) Thanks</p>
<p>
[quote]
UMich-UVa-Cal </p>
<hr>
<p>How do those three compare in generally held public views? (Especially regarding the Ugrad business programs) Thanks
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The general consensus are those three are the only true public universities that can be considered a "Public Ivy." </p>
<p>Everybody gets into ****ing matches about which public or state universities are prestigious, but everybody will agree that those three are the only three state schools that could legitimately claim to be a "Public Ivy."</p>
<p>Around 20-30 flagship state universities hold themselves out to be a Public Ivy, but again, only UC Berkeley, University of Virginia, and University of Michigan are the three state/public universities that are respected enough by everybody from laypeople to elitists to be considered an Ivy.</p>
<p>The only other public universities that are arguably a Public Ivy are UCLA and UNC-Chapel Hill. (Texas, Wisconsin, Illinois, etc. although very good in their own right, are NOT up there with those considered truly prestigious enough to earn a "Public Ivy" title). </p>
<p>So the general consensus is that when we talk about Public Ivies, there's only the Big 3 (Berkeley, UVa, Michigan), and two others (UCLA, UNC-Chapel Hill). Everybody else is a wannabe Public Ivy.</p>
<p>For Ugrad business I would say:</p>
<p>For East Coast/Wall Street:
UMich (Ross)
UVa
Cal (Haas)</p>
<p>For West Coast/Silicon Valley:
Cal (Haas)
UMich (Ross)
UVa</p>
<p>For overall prestige, UC-Berkeley is better than the other two. </p>
<p>However, regarding the u-grad business school, I'd say it's debatable between the three. If you wanna land a job in an investment bank in NYC, then UVA/UMich is better than Berkeley because of the location. But based on rankings alone, UVA is ranked 2nd, JUST neck on neck behind Wharton, in BusinessWeek (which I think is better than USNews since it places more weight on job placement). </p>
<p>I might be biased because I will be attending UVA, but do note that I turned down Berkeley (and Carnegie Mellon's Tepper) just to attend UVA. :)</p>
<p>ANCooky,
I'm curious; why are you looking only at publics?</p>
<p>Iamyourfather,
I think you neglected perhaps the best public of them all for undergraduate education-William & Mary. It has no where near the profile of the top ranked publics (UC Berkeley, U Virginia, UCLA, U Michigan and U North Carolina), but on many metrics, W&M has superior numbers. And for a student looking for a more intimate educational environment, W&M could be the best choice. </p>
<p>Re the posed question, if you are in-state for any of UCB, UV or UM, then the choice is easy. Stay in-state.</p>
<p>If you are OOS for all three, the differences in the post-graduate opportunities that these will provide are miniscule and, depending on whom you ask, will favor a different school. The only clearcut advantage that exists would be for the UC Berkeley grad looking for a job in Silicon Valley as they have such a superior network in that community. Otherwise, I personally prefer U Virginia and its Mcintire School, but one could easily accomplish his/her placement goals coming out of UC Berkeley's Haas or U Michigan's Ross. Choose among these three colleges based on other factors.</p>
<p>U.Va. is half the size (undergrad) of the other two, and W&M is half the size of U.Va. That fact alone makes the undergraduate experience on those campuses qualitatively different than at most big-name publics.</p>
<p>Father is completely unfounded. UVa can't even compare with Wisconsin in most science areas and is finding trying to hire top scientists a losing proposition. It's fame is more related to the founder and quaint campus than anything in the faculty offices.</p>
<p>...</p>
<p>He asked specifically about Ugrad business schools? Don't think he cares much about research.</p>
<p>Surprised no one's mentioned Mcintire by name, but it's questionably -- albeit very questionably -- better than Haas and Ross. </p>
<p>For west coast - Haas.</p>
<p>For east coast, I think Ross grads have a higher median salary for some reason? Idk. So if the 1k difference or w/e it is means anything...</p>
<p>I'd go to Mcintire for what it's worth.</p>
<p>
[quote-Bourne]
Surprised no one's mentioned Mcintire by name, but it's questionably -- albeit very questionably -- better than Haas and Ross.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>U.S. News ranking of undergrad business programs (for what it's worth; I personally don't put much stock in these rankings) places Berkeley and Michigan tied for third, Virginia tied for 9th:</p>
<ol>
<li>University of Pennsylvania (Wharton) 4.9</li>
<li>Massachusetts Inst. of Technology (Sloan) 4.7</li>
<li>University of California–Berkeley (Haas) * 4.5</li>
<li>University of Michigan–Ann Arbor * 4.5</li>
<li>New York University (Stern) 4.3</li>
<li>U. of North Carolina–Chapel Hill (Kenan-Flagler) * 4.3</li>
<li>Carnegie Mellon University (PA) 4.2</li>
<li>University of Texas–Austin (McCombs) * 4.2</li>
<li>Univ. of Southern California (Marshall) 4.1</li>
<li>University of Virginia (McIntire) * 4.1</li>
<li>Indiana University–Bloomington (Kelley) * 4.0</li>
<li>Cornell University (NY) 3.9</li>
<li>Emory University (Goizueta) (GA) 3.9</li>
<li>Ohio State University–Columbus (Fisher) * 3.9</li>
<li>U. of Illinois–Urbana-Champaign * 3.9</li>
<li>Univ. of Wisconsin–Madison * 3.9</li>
<li>Washington University in St. Louis (Olin) 3.9</li>
<li>Pennsylvania State U.–University Park (Smeal) * 3.8</li>
<li>Univ. of Minnesota–Twin Cities (Carlson) * 3.8</li>
<li>University of Notre Dame (IN) 3.8</li>
</ol>
<p>Yeah, but B-week which I put more stock in ranks Mcintire second. Idk, personal preference at that level. I think it's just GPA and internships coming out of either. </p>
<p>Definitely what you make of it.</p>
<p>B-weekly's rankings.</p>
<p>Barrons:
Not true.
You are completely misunderstanding UVa (or lack of understanding).</p>
<p>UVa has numerous reports and plans to enhance their science and engineering standing which leads one to conclude that it is now not as good as they wish. </p>
<p>For the last decade, private and public peer universities have made significant
transformative investments in science research and technology, international programs,
curricula, diversity, new faculty members, and new buildings to accommodate new
emphases, especially in science. Relative to our peers, we are behind in certain areas,
most notably science and engineering and the fine and performing arts. The physical and
financial deficiencies in the sciences are especially critical. We need to address the
absence of what one might call critical mass of faculty working in new and developing
scientific and engineering fields, space for research and for teaching, and infrastructure.
We spend too little to support graduate students, who are essential both to the renewal of
national human capacity in science and engineering and to the ongoing processes of
research here. Universities offering more competitive stipends often entice our most
promising prospective graduate students to enroll elsewhere. The reasons for our lagging
in science and technology are numerous. Among them, the absence of the continuing
state commitments that have made these disciplines strong elsewhere—in Maryland,
North Carolina, Georgia, Michigan, and California, for example—has handicapped all of
Virginia’s public universities since 1990 or so, and we have undoubtedly taken longer
than we should have to recognize just how severe these deficiencies are.</p>
<p>......
2. Science and Technology: Research and Teaching. A major research university must
have capacity and competence in science, engineering, and technology. We have not kept
pace in these fields with peer universities. Rather than attempt across-the-board
excellence, we will solidify existing areas of strength in basic sciences and engineering,
and expand selectively in promising new areas.
To accomplish this goal, we must increase the size of our faculties in mathematics,
science, and engineering throughout the University. To prepare for new faculty members,
we will construct new laboratory space immediately. Planning is in progress now. We
will maintain strength in digital scholarship, radio astronomy, environmental science and
sustainability, morphogenesis, information engineering, and biomedical engineering. We
will plan for significant growth in translational research and public health, possibly
founding a School of Public Health. To encourage and support collaboration, we will
create grants for research and teaching across schools, and improve the infrastructure to
support multi-investigator proposals. We are planning a new doctoral program in
translational research with a core three-year seminar in innovation.</p>
<p>Even if that's true, I think the OP is more concerned with UG business schools which have little to do with the rest.</p>
<p>Iamyourfather was expounding how UVa is one of the three true public Ivy's. I don't think a school so deficient in major areas is a top university. I might have a great business school but there a are gaping holes in some areas.</p>
<p>barrons,
I think that you have twisted the OP's original question which asked about overall reputation, but specifically mentioned undergraduate business. I don't think that there is anyone who would dispute U Virginia's prowess in this area. </p>
<p>As for your latest criticism of U Virginia, there are plenty of colleges that most of us would consider as "top" universities that don't have a high profile in engineering and/or the sciences. Since when did this become the metric by which a college is judged to be top or not? Clearly it is important to PA voters as colleges with this bent tend to have higher scores in academia-land, but much of the college-going population is not involved in these areas. And in these other areas, IMO U Virginia would be very well regarded.</p>
<p>^ Some colleges have a high profile in business and engineering and the sciences... two of these schools happen to be what the OP was asking in comparison to UVa.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Around 20-30 flagship state universities hold themselves out to be a Public Ivy, but again, only UC Berkeley, University of Virginia, and University of Michigan are the three state/public universities that are respected enough by everybody from laypeople to elitists to be considered an Ivy.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It depends what part of the country you're in, IAmYourFather. For example, while I personally think UVa is an excellent school, it's not hugely regarded out here in the Midwest. Many people would be more impressed by Mich, Wis and UIUC compared to UVA. I'm not saying that I necessarily agree, but if the question was "popular, generally held perception" I think there is quite a regional skew to the answer.</p>
<p>^^^^Absolutely, positively agree. 100%. </p>
<p>For these three top publics, the reputation is most exploitable in their home region where, in many cases, each would be an equal competitor in recruiting terms with the non-HYP Ivies. But a Cal grad or a U Michigan grad living in Virginia and the Mid-Atlantic/Southeast is definitely going to be at a disadvantage to a U Virginia grad, just as the outsiders would be at a disadvantage in Chicago/Midwest or in San Francisco Bay Area/West Coast.</p>