<p>I know I know, age-old question.
But as an international student, I get
'what? washU? Why didn't you apply to the one in seattle instead? I think it's much better'
a LOT.</p>
<p>Why isn't it more well-known than it is?
How well-known IS it in the states?</p>
<p>I think that the average person out there does not know what the "good schools" are. They know Harvard, Princeton and Yale and they know the big state schools, but that's about it unless they personally know someone who has gone to a particular school.</p>
<p>Those who are aware of Wash U are impressed by it. What it boils down to, I think, is finding the best fit for you. My guess is that you are putting a lot of thought and effort into choosing what school(s) to apply to and you will be successful in college and beyond regardless of how many people recognize the name of the college you attended.</p>
<p>It is well known in the academic community around the world. If you want the people in the street to be impressed, only HYPSM will do.</p>
<p>HYPSM? Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford (got those pretty quickly.) But "M?" MIT?</p>
<p>I wouldn't have chosen those as my top five in name recognition, or prestige to the "average person."</p>
<p>Doesn't matter though. Your point is a good one. People on the street have a different mindset than those who are in the market to go to, or hire from, the better schools.</p>
<p>I'm the D of a WashU freshman. I don't know, I think that whole name recognition thing has ended. We live outside of the U.S. and I can tell you that, for sure, north of the border there is great unfamiliarity with the school. But, anytime I'm in the U.S. and wearing anything WashU-related (proud father!), people come running over to me and tell me what an amazing place the school is and who do I know that goes there. So, on an anecdotal basis, I think that the school is zooming up on name recognition. To quote a friend of mine from the east coast, he said to me: "your S is going to the hottest school on the planet."</p>
<p>The main reason for the anonymity is pretty simple, if a little sad to admit: no Division I sports program. Most people couldn't name more than 3 Division II or III schools. But, if you are thinking about graduate or professional school, I can guarantee you their admissions folks have heard of Wash U.</p>
<p>The second reason is probably the name. Washington is a pretty vague name, and has no real connection to St. Louis. They have tried to address it by adding "in St Louis" to their official name, and it seems to be helping. There is U of Washington and George Washington that are often confused with it. I have seen suggestions that they change the name to Danforth University since half the campus already carries that name. Has a nice ring to it. And I think George would be OK with it.</p>
<p>Danforth University sounds pretty good actually; I think that is a good idea, but it will never happen.</p>
<p>i agree with hartinGA... washington is a vague name</p>
<p>part of it could be that it's in the east coast and it is overshadowed by the ivies as opposed to UW in seattle which is a well known public school in the west</p>
<p>We know of its wonderful reputation and I'm in San Diego, but you're right, it isn't common knowledge yet. It was near the top on my daughter's list...we visited and have relatives in St. Louis...but she got in to Stanford, and she has loved that school for years. Maybe for medical school (if she can get in!)</p>
<p>no washU is in the midwest, though.
Changing its name to danforth university is a great idea! I think that it would still take a longer time to establish in everyone's head, right? If it were to switch names, I mean</p>
<p>It's very (very) well-known where I live. Vanderbilt, Emory, Duke and WashU...yea, they are the ivy in the south.</p>
<p>I think Washington University in St. Louis is pretty well known throughout the midwest and it is recognized by most well educated people on the coasts. If you want the average person to recognize the name, however, you are going to have to get a Division I football or basketball team.</p>
<p>I personally had never heard of it until my gc advised me to look at it. After researching and visiting, I still wonder how I could have missed it.</p>
<p>Let me add that while a D-I athletic program would increase recognition, I think it would be a huge mistake. D-III is still somewhat pure competition, where the athletes are truly students first. In the UAA conference (Wash U's) admission preference for athletes appears to be minimal, and no more than any other special talent might warrant. </p>
<p>Even in the Ivies (which are technically D-I but without scholarships) the stats gap between the athletes and the other students is pretty large, though they have rules in place to limit it (the Academic Index). And Williams-Amherst-Middlebury (The Little 3) have generated some controversy with their athletic admissions.</p>
<p>As for me, I love the idea that the students out there competing are doing it for no other reason that to enjoy it, challenge themselves, and represent their school. Virtually none of them will ever become professional in any sport, and they know it.</p>
<p>So I would rather they stay as they are, and maybe someday people wll decide to watch and enjoy the competition.</p>
<p>I tend to disagree with Div 1 sports theory. Does Johns Hopkins have super Football or Basketball team? Johns Hopkins on the other hand is well known pretty much around the world due to its medical research.</p>
<p>Wash U came into the big leagues after the big donation a generation ago, before that it had a May deadline and was a quintessental back-up school. It may have come further than any other school in the past 25 yrs.</p>
<p>jhu though does have an incredible lacrosse team. sorry random, but true.</p>
<p>what's washU?
hahajk. is it like the Northwestern/Brown level?</p>
<p>and lol. MIT. i once knew a girl who was like "mit? is that a fashion school?" haha. ignorance</p>
<p>Northwestern and Brown are vastly more prestigious in the U.S. than is Wash U. The fact that Wash U has to attach St. Louis to its name says something about the school's own perception of its prestige.</p>
<p>^^^ dude, adding the "in St. Louis" part didn't have anything to do with prestige. They just wanted to clarify where it was.I do agree that there are better names out there to choose from; however, it's always been Washington University in St. Louis, so It'll most likely stay that way.</p>