Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
i dono't think there is a 'best'. there are a lot of good places for college. Vandy is a ripoff and most kids don't go to private schools. that is for the rich kids. you are not going to get a better education at Vandy than Clemson, Tenn, UGA, etc.
Duke and Vandy both have higher ROIs than Clemson, Tenn, and UGA, so you might not get a better education but you might make more afterward.
Will say that GA Tech has a higher return on investment than both Duke, Vandy, and UNC(since I mentioned it earlier).
is that looking at undergrad ROI, or all the programs including the medical and law schools?
Duke is a ripoff, you are paying like 4 or 5 times as much for the same courses as Clemson, UVA and other universities. can you specifify how the education at Duke is 4 or 5 times better than these large public universities? even if somehow the ROI was higher, i personally could not pay 4 or 5 times more for a service. i'd rather take my chances with a large public university that has a much larger alumni network which helps to get a job.
Duke is the college with the faculty that rushed to find those Duke lacrosee players guilty of rape of that black woman, and they even fired the Duke lacrosse coacch , despite not having any evidence the atheletes were guilty. all that mattered to them was the skin color of the accuser and the accused.
I have no respect for the academic side of Duke. I do love Coach K and Duke basketball though.
my point is Duke and Wake's reputation is mostly because of their professional programs. these are really small schools at the undergrad level.
What does the size of the undergraduate population have to do with reputation? If anything, the relationship is inverted. Take the Ivies, for instance. Huge reputation, tiny undergrad populations. Princeton and Yale have smaller undergrad enrollments than Duke does. MIT, UofC, Stanford: All pretty much in the 4-8k range for undergrads.
And Wake Forest's graduate population isn't anything like Duke's. It has something like 5k undergrad and 3k grad (compared to 6.5k undergrad and 8.5k grad like Duke).
What does the size of the undergraduate population have to do with reputation? If anything, the relationship is inverted. Take the Ivies, for instance. Huge reputation, tiny undergrad populations. Princeton and Yale have smaller undergrad enrollments than Duke does. MIT, UofC, Stanford: All pretty much in the 4-8k range for undergrads.
And Wake Forest's graduate population isn't anything like Duke's. It has something like 5k undergrad and 3k grad (compared to 6.5k undergrad and 8.5k grad like Duke).
small population plus no requirement to take x number of in state students means they can be uber selective, which they use to their advantage to be ranked higher b/c the rankings overvalue selectivity.
i prefer large universities so you get that large alumni network which helps when trying to get a job. Large universities also have a lot more major options than small schools like Yale and Wake.
Clemson is a good school but it's not in the same league as Duke, Vandy, Rice, and Emory.
how do you know. you said you went to a school in Rock Hill that you won't name for some reason. how are you qu alified to compare a college you didn't attend, Clemson, to other schools that you didn't go to. Clemson has a better rep in engineering than those private schools. and obviously it is more affordable which is a relevant factor that rankings typically ignore.
how are you qu alified to compare a college you didn't attend, Clemson, to other schools that you didn't go to.
You've literally been doing the same thing throughout this thread. Prestige is premised on perception. People can take perceptive audits, on any subject, wherever they go. You're saying because one didn't go to Stanford, one cannot comment on its reputation, nor make comparisons thereto. You don't come off as Stanford material. Or Virginia College, for that matter. You certainly don't write like you went to any college.
You've literally been doing the same thing throughout this thread. Prestige is premised on perception. People can take perceptive audits, on any subject, wherever they go. You're saying because one didn't go to Stanford, one cannot comment on its reputation, nor make comparisons thereto. You don't come off as Stanford material. Or Virginia College, for that matter. You certainly don't write like you went to any college.
I've put him on ignore. His unreasonable, illogical ramblings are just too much to bear for any sane person.
I've put him on ignore. His unreasonable, illogical ramblings are just too much to bear for any sane person.
I'm guilty of it from time to time. Not at all the time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
