William & Mary vs Wisconsin?

College Search & Selection
101

<p>"Summary
UNC trumps UVA in most arts & science fields, except for some of the humanities in which UVA can hold its own. The difference between UNC and UVA for A&S is so great that UNC comes ahead in the NRC all fields ranking, despite getting almost all zeros for the engineering rankings (1/5 of all fields). </p>

<p>UVA trumps UNC in engineering by default. As an interesting note, UNC beat UVA in both of the engineering fields in which it is ranked by the NRC (BME and Civil Engineering).</p>

<p>UNC has stronger professional programs except for business, law, and education."</p>

<p>I stand corrected. It seems UNC is indeed better overalll academically than UVA.</p>

102

<p>“Wisky is not equal to Michigan in engineering, but it is a better in the natural sciences. I’d say the overall order in academic quality is: Cal, Mich., UCLA=Wisconsin, UVA, UNC, and W&M. UVA, UNC, and W&M are relatively weak in natural sciences and in engineering (of course that only applies to UVA).” </p>

<p>“I think UT-Austin belongs somewhere in there, probably between UCLA/Wisconsin and UVA.”</p>

<p>I don’t disagree at all. I was just referring to the list of seven schools in this thread.</p>

103

<p>Wisconsin: more prestigious faculty, higher rated departments, more fun</p>

<p>W&M: less students; more pretentiousness students</p>

104

<p>“W&M is THE Public Ivy. It offers an undergrad experience at 5500 students that the others cannot.”</p>

<p>So does my local community college…j/k</p>

105

<p>“I stand corrected. It seems UNC is indeed better overalll academically than UVA.”</p>

<p>This is why I don’t understand why people think UVa is better than UNC. Research-wise, UNC is overall stronger.</p>

106

<p>Thanks for that analysis, warblers. Could you do one for all the top publics? :)</p>

107

<p>

Research Wise. Student Wise, UVA owns the day when compared to UNC. It all depends on how much you value different aspects of a university. If undergraduate teaching is your main concern, for example, W&M wins: [Best</a> Colleges - Education - US News](<a href=“http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/national-ut-rank]Best”>http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/national-ut-rank)</p>

108

<p>Research is actually fact based and measurable. Teaching “quality” is based on what exactly?</p>

109

<p>Read the metrics, Mr. “Humanities aren’t real majors”.</p>

<p>It’s a fallacy to assume that that makes research the only important metric, btw. But you knew that. I could just as easily say that the research done at Berkeley isn’t as important as that done at Michigan. Its not all nice numbers.</p>

110

<p>“Student Wise, UVA owns the day when compared to UNC.”</p>

<p>I don’t agree with this statement. UNC and UVa have virtually identical student bodies. According to the USNWR selectivy rank, UVa is #27 and UNC is #34. In fact, many posters on this thread have tried to differentiate the top publics by claiming that one student body is better than another’s. Where student bodies are concerned, the top publics are all virtually identical.</p>

<p>% graduating in the top 10% of their high school class:
Cal: 98%
Michigan: 92%
UCLA: 97%
UVa: 88%
UNC: 80%
William and Mary: 79%</p>

<p>Mid 50% SAT:
Cal: 1230-1470
Michigan: 1230-1430
UCLA: 1170-1410
UVa: 1220-1440
UNC: 1210-1410
William and Mary: 1240-1450</p>

<p>Mid 50% ACT:
Cal: 27-32
Michigan: 27-31
UCLA: 24-31
UNC: 26-31
UVa: 27-32
William and Mary: 27-32</p>

<p>Cal
<a href=“http://cds.berkeley.edu/pdfs/PDF%20wBOOKMARKS%2009-10.pdf[/url]”>http://cds.berkeley.edu/pdfs/PDF%20wBOOKMARKS%2009-10.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Michigan
<a href=“Office of Budget and Planning”>Office of Budget and Planning;

<p>UCLA
[UCLA</a> Office of Analysis and Information Management | AIM](<a href=“http://www.aim.ucla.edu/cds/cdsForm.asp#cdsC]UCLA”>http://www.aim.ucla.edu/cds/cdsForm.asp#cdsC)</p>

<p>UVa (Freshman class of 2009)
[UVa</a> CDS - C. First-time, First-year Admission](<a href=“http://www.web.virginia.edu/IAAS/data_catalog/institutional/cds/current/admissions.htm]UVa”>http://www.web.virginia.edu/IAAS/data_catalog/institutional/cds/current/admissions.htm)</p>

<p>UNC
[Common</a> Data Set - Office of Institutional Research and Assessment](<a href=“http://oira.unc.edu/facts-and-figures/data-summaries-and-publications/common-data-set.html]Common”>http://oira.unc.edu/facts-and-figures/data-summaries-and-publications/common-data-set.html)</p>

<p>William and Mary
<a href=“Office of Budget and Planning”>Office of Budget and Planning;

111

<p>^ Great post, Alex. I didn’t know Berkeley’s SAT stats were that bad 2 years ago. This year’s SATs and GPAs at Berkeley are quite competitive.</p>

<p>SATs: 1290 - 1520
GPA: 3.93 (UW) 4.39 (W)</p>

<p><a href=“http://students.berkeley.edu/admissions/freshmen.asp[/url]”>http://students.berkeley.edu/admissions/freshmen.asp&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

112

<p>

</p>

<p>I think when people say that they’re often referring to higher school reputation as UVa does have a substantally more respected professional schools such as law and business.</p>

113

<p>

What metrics? The ranking you posted is an opinion survey.</p>

114

<p>

RML, It’s CR + M…from Berkeley’s 2010 estimate that would be 1270 - 1510.<br>
We’ll see if this holds when the official CDS is released.</p>

115

<p>I showed on the last page how there was a substantial drop between the top publics with regards to SATs. Cal, W&M, UVA, and Michigan were on top with a relatively sizeable drop down to UCLA, Wisconsin, and UNC.</p>

116

<p>

IMO, you need to adjust for size when comparing average SAT scores. As a student population gets larger, the more closely it should resemble the national SAT mean unless a school is offering something to attract a larger cohort of top SAT scorers to boost the average.</p>

<p>W&M, UNC and UVA have average SAT scores compared to schools of their size in the USNews Top 75. I did an analysis a while back…here are the results:</p>

<p>School, Avg. Sat, UG pop, Model SAT Predicted Score, Difference
Harvard 1485 6678 1364 121
Yale 1490 5277 1373 117
Caltech 1515 921 1398 117
Prince. 1485 4981 1375 110
Wash U 1460 6985 1363 97
Northw. 1445 8476 1354 91
U Chic. 1465 5065 1374 91
MIT 1470 4153 1379 91
Columbia 1455 5667 1370 85
UC Berk. 1340 25151 1256 84
U Penn 1425 9756 1346 79
Cornell 1400 13846 1322 78
U Mich. 1325 25994 1251 74
Duke 1440 6496 1366 74
U Illinois 1290 31417 1219 71
U Florida 1270 34654 1199 71
Stanford 1435 6532 1365 70
NYU 1345 21269 1278 67
USC 1370 16608 1306 64
Ohio St. 1230 40212 1167 63
Brown 1430 6095 1368 62
Dart. 1440 4147 1379 61
Wisc. 1280 30750 1222 58
Notre D. 1410 8363 1355 55
JHU 1430 4774 1376 54
Vandy 1415 6837 1364 51
Texas 1230 37389 1183 47
Tufts 1420 5044 1374 46
UCLA 1290 26536 1247 43
Rice 1425 3154 1385 40
Gtown 1400 7092 1362 38
Minn. 1245 32557 1212 33
Emory 1405 5214 1373 32
Penn St. 1210 37988 1180 30
Maryland 1275 26431 1248 27
CMU 1395 5998 1369 26
U Virginia 1330 15208 1314 16
BYU 1235 30912 1222 13
Tex. A&M 1190 38430 1177 13
G. Tech 1335 12973 1327 8
UNC 1300 17895 1298 2
BC 1340 9060 1350 -10
Brandeis 1370 3196 1385 -15
U Wash. 1215 29397 1230 -15
UCSD 1255 22518 1271 -16
W&M 1345 5850 1369 -24
Boston U 1270 18534 1295 -25
U Georgia 1225 25467 1254 -29
Tulane 1335 6749 1364 -29
Renss. 1335 5394 1372 -37
Rutgers 1200 28031 1239 -39
Mich. St. 1150 36337 1190 -40
Pitt. 1260 17427 1301 -41
U Roch. 1325 5355 1372 -47
U Miami 1285 10422 1342 -57
Wake F. 1320 4476 1377 -57
Vir. Tech 1205 23567 1265 -60
Lehigh 1315 4876 1375 -60
GWU 1280 10590 1341 -61
Purdue 1150 31761 1217 -67
Indiana U 1150 31626 1217 -67
Case W. 1310 4356 1378 -68
U Iowa 1205 20823 1281 -76
UC Irvine 1195 22122 1273 -78
UC Davis 1175 24209 1261 -86
Clemson 1230 14713 1317 -87
UCSB 1200 18892 1292 -92
Delaware 1210 16384 1307 -97
Worc. 1280 3252 1385 -105
U Conn. 1200 16765 1305 -105
SMU 1245 6240 1367 -122
Fordham 1225 7994 1357 -132
Syracuse 1170 13651 1323 -153
Pepperd. 1230 3404 1384 -154
UCSC 1155 15135 1315 -160
Yeshiva 1210 3044 1386 -176</p>

<p>Sorry for the formatting…</p>

<p>Granted UNC and W&M don’t have engineering programs which tend to elevate SAT math scores.</p>

117

<p>I don’t think adjusting for size is necessary nor correct. The purpose of the scores is to measure the quality of your classmates. You will be competing against them for grades, working with them on presentations, discussing with them in seminars, speaking with them in clubs. Indeed, a great portion of your learning comes from outside of the classroom - from the interactions with your peers. That is one of the reasons that diversity is celebrated. It is also why, I believe, intelligent (as measured by the SAT) peers are preferable, as they would be able to push and challenge you more. Yes, you can find smart people at every school, but if there are 2 high scorers in your class and the rest lower - the discussions will be dumbed down. You will learn less. That is why the average matters, and why it should not be weighted for school populations.</p>

<p>Besides, the fact that larger schools tend to have lower GPAs is not a causal correlation, but most likely merely a fact created by the structure of the higher ed system and the economies of scale.</p>

118

<p>“Not everything that can be counted counts, not everything that counts can be counted.” </p>

<p>-A. Einstein</p>

<p>I think this sums up this discussion/debate between research vs undergrad education.</p>

119

<p>^^^Well said.</p>

120

<p>This forum needs a like button.
j/k
maybe.</p>