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.
and TAB1452...please don't refer to Whitewater as "prestigious." Their business school may have been around a little longer than River Falls', but it's FAR from prestigious...even in Wisconsin. I wish you good luck with your AG Business degree in today's world.
I don't have an "ag business" degree as I stated I didn't go to River Falls...and WW is a lot more prestigious then RF and quite a few other business schools in Wisconsin...I'd say its the best D3 business school in Wisconsin...
The accounting program is known around the COUNTRY as one of the best and it's a D3 school...the marketing program or more so their AMA chapter has won international chapter of the year more times then any school of any size in the country and has finished no lower then 2nd the last 4 years including winning it twice...I could go on and on but you seem to be so much more educated on all of this then the rest of us so I will let you go brag about RF since it's such a great school...possibly better then Madison
It is hard to generalize about an entire school. River Falls, Madison, etc probably have some outstanding programs and some sad programs. Someone has to look at the program, and see if the faculty and facilities are right for that individual's needs.
Yes they are. They are smaller metros, but are are still metro areas. Read up on the census bureau web site.
It would make sense that UW-River Falls has a lot of students from the Twin Cities. And you're right, Pierce County is considered part of the Twin Cities metro (per the census bureau).
I think the reason for the argument is that River Falls sure doesn't feel like part of the metro area. As you leave the Twin Cities urban area, there is no question that you are "UP NORTH". The Twin Cities are very isolated.
Contrast that with Milwaukee. As you leave the urban area, you still approach a lot more populated cities and villages. It doesn't feel so isolated.
I would say that River Falls is not known very well to those of us in southern Wisconsin. I actually didn't know that it was so close to the Twin Cities until last year. I'm sure it's a fine school, as all UW schools are. But I don't think it's more prestigious just because it's located near the Twin Cities.
Go 4 or 5 blocks from UWM and some homes go for 2 or 3 million. Also, the census track between Edgewood and Capitol Dr.on Lake Dr. has the 2nd highest average per capita income in the state. This track is only blocks from UWM. The zip code 53211 has the 14th highest per capita income in the state out of 600 zip codes and this includes many students who claim little for income. If not for the students it would easily be in the top 10. An argument could be made that the UWM campus may be in the highest income area of any major college or university in the state. UWM is 5 blocks from Lake Dr. and boarders Shorewood and Whitefish Bay is only a mile or two away. A 2200 sq ft home south of UWM and not even near Lake Dr. will run at least $300,000. On a nice street such as Newberry this same home would be over $400,000. Many have no idea what their talking about when it comes to UWM or the UWM neighborhood. Homes prices over $600,000 to 2 million are no big deal within walking distance of UWM. They are very common.
I love the area near UWM campus and I love UWM as a result. What a great place to go to school. This area is probably my favorite area in the state of Wisconsin. I was there a little over a year ago, staying in Shorewood for about 3 weeks. I worked out in Lake Park in the morning. Great place to be.
Because of this environment, UWM can transform a mediocre student into a serious scholar, enable a C student to find themselves and overachieve. Not true of schools like Madison who only let in good students. I value more highly a school that transforms mediocre students rather than one that only accepts and processes students whose circumstances allowed them to already be good in academic settings.
Madison is in the top six public schools in the country along with Berkeley, Michigan, UCLA, Virginia, and UNC. Nough' said.
A version that I heard, essentially the same as yours, is that there are five great universities; Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Virginia. I might choose to add Texas at Austin to that list. No argument with UNC either.
To call UW a party school is something of a relic from the old days of Playboy listing their favorite party schools. Sure, the students play hard, but they also work very hard.
How many Nobel prize winners has Marquette produced, by the way?
A version that I heard, essentially the same as yours, is that there are five great universities; Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Virginia. I might choose to add Texas at Austin to that list. No argument with UNC either.
To call UW a party school is something of a relic from the old days of Playboy listing their favorite party schools. Sure, the students play hard, but they also work very hard.
How many Nobel prize winners has Marquette produced, by the way?
Virginia has a certain undergrad cache as a "gentlemans " school, but is a far cry
from being a great world-class research uni like the other 4 you mention, nor is UNC, Texas- yes
a bit of an observation from south of the state line (Lake County) in the part of Chicagoland that comes closest to Wisconsin. I don't have to tell you guys: we in the Chicago area know Wisconsin better than we know any state, including Illinois which we only know is "out there" and that we are really only connected to three pockets within: Champaign (the most), Springfield, and our artsy offshoot in Galena.
So as someone who knows Wisconsin and loves your state, I have to tell you this: the University of Wisconsin System is a joke.
No, I don't mean the universities within the system. I mean the system itself and the ridiculous weakening of outstanding brand name that is so deluted by all its schools.
First and foremost, let's get the silliness out of the way: UW-Madison is one of the finest public universities in the nation. Of course it has a stellar reputation in-state and throughout the midwest (Chicago's connection and respect for the school is exceedingly strong). But UW goes beyond that with a national appeal, most evident by the number of east coast students who attend it.
UW-Madison was on the right course when its "system" only included a few other schools, like UWM. Although truth be known, the state would be much better off to change the name of its flagship institution back to the University of Wisconsin. City names added on, even when they are "Madison" or "Urbana Champaign" or even "Berkeley" (well, maybe not Berkeley) give more of a regional than state wide image. Mizzou used just such thinking when if reverted back to the Univ of Missouri from it being the Univ of Missouri - Columbia.
The problem in Wisconsin began when the UW and WSU systems merged and a common name was used for all universities. It was a mistake. The only system out there that confers statewide prestige to its member universities is UC and the California campuses that share its name are happy to have it, knowing that prestige of the system carries to all members, not just Cal and UCLA.
But not so in Wisconsin where the alphabet soup of UW's is ridiculously large and a hinderance to identity.
There is no law that all UW schools need UW in their name. NC State is part of the UNC system in N. Carolina but does not carry UNC in its name. And next door in Iowa, all three universities, Iowa, ISU, UNI, are under the same board but there is no UI Iowa City or UI Ames.
Solution? To me, its simple:
UW-Madison becomes University of Wisconsin. Period. The face the Badger State wants to put forth in front of the nation is Bucky Badger himself
UWM: it becomes Wisconsin State University, a name that most conveys its statewide image beyond just Milw and suburbs. Univ of Milwaukee is another, although not as good alternative.
The rest: let them take their pick. Just keep out "UW" as part of the name. None would suffer with names like Green Bay State University (or Univ of Green Bay), Stout State Univ, Superior State Univ.
Out of Wisconsin, I'm all for UIUC becoming just Univ of Ill again (even though I am a grad of UIC). There should be no IUB, just IU, and U of M Twin Cities should drop the "Twin Cities" from its name.
I blame the incredible success of UCLA for the whole mess in the first place. It was first and it best and most famous of all the U of ___ @ ___ schools; yet it is the only one that can really, totally pull it off just its initials: the school is UCLA and, for all intents and purposes; obviously there has never been a UC-Los Angeles or Cal-Los Angeles while even the "University of California at Los Angeles" doesn't even exist anywhere but in small, meaningless letters on official documents. That sadly is not the case with the University of Wisconsin at Eau Claire.
a bit of an observation from south of the state line (Lake County) in the part of Chicagoland that comes closest to Wisconsin. I don't have to tell you guys: we in the Chicago area know Wisconsin better than we know any state, including Illinois which we only know is "out there" and that we are really only connected to three pockets within: Champaign (the most), Springfield, and our artsy offshoot in Galena.
So as someone who knows Wisconsin and loves your state, I have to tell you this: the University of Wisconsin System is a joke.
No, I don't mean the universities within the system. I mean the system itself and the ridiculous weakening of outstanding brand name that is so deluted by all its schools.
First and foremost, let's get the silliness out of the way: UW-Madison is one of the finest public universities in the nation. Of course it has a stellar reputation in-state and throughout the midwest (Chicago's connection and respect for the school is exceedingly strong). But UW goes beyond that with a national appeal, most evident by the number of east coast students who attend it.
UW-Madison was on the right course when its "system" only included a few other schools, like UWM. Although truth be known, the state would be much better off to change the name of its flagship institution back to the University of Wisconsin. City names added on, even when they are "Madison" or "Urbana Champaign" or even "Berkeley" (well, maybe not Berkeley) give more of a regional than state wide image. Mizzou used just such thinking when if reverted back to the Univ of Missouri from it being the Univ of Missouri - Columbia.
The problem in Wisconsin began when the UW and WSU systems merged and a common name was used for all universities. It was a mistake. The only system out there that confers statewide prestige to its member universities is UC and the California campuses that share its name are happy to have it, knowing that prestige of the system carries to all members, not just Cal and UCLA.
But not so in Wisconsin where the alphabet soup of UW's is ridiculously large and a hinderance to identity.
There is no law that all UW schools need UW in their name. NC State is part of the UNC system in N. Carolina but does not carry UNC in its name. And next door in Iowa, all three universities, Iowa, ISU, UNI, are under the same board but there is no UI Iowa City or UI Ames.
Solution? To me, its simple:
UW-Madison becomes University of Wisconsin. Period. The face the Badger State wants to put forth in front of the nation is Bucky Badger himself
UWM: it becomes Wisconsin State University, a name that most conveys its statewide image beyond just Milw and suburbs. Univ of Milwaukee is another, although not as good alternative.
The rest: let them take their pick. Just keep out "UW" as part of the name. None would suffer with names like Green Bay State University (or Univ of Green Bay), Stout State Univ, Superior State Univ.
Out of Wisconsin, I'm all for UIUC becoming just Univ of Ill again (even though I am a grad of UIC). There should be no IUB, just IU, and U of M Twin Cities should drop the "Twin Cities" from its name.
I blame the incredible success of UCLA for the whole mess in the first place. It was first and it best and most famous of all the U of ___ @ ___ schools; yet it is the only one that can really, totally pull it off just its initials: the school is UCLA and, for all intents and purposes; obviously there has never been a UC-Los Angeles or Cal-Los Angeles while even the "University of California at Los Angeles" doesn't even exist anywhere but in small, meaningless letters on official documents. That sadly is not the case with the University of Wisconsin at Eau Claire.
What's in a name? Plenty.
This is absurd.
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.
