How much better is GW and BC than BU?

Colleges & Universities Boston University
21

<p>The undergrad rankings don’t make sense for a variety of reasons.</p>

<p>Graduate schools are what give schools good repuations. I would agree with Lergmom that historically BU is the best school because they have excellent MBA, Law, Med, Eng, and COM for post-graduate work.</p>

<p>Their undergrad is not too shabby, with the College of Communications, School of Management and other specific programs being regarded as some of the nations best.</p>

<p>In terms of academics, IMO, BC=GW=BU.
In terms of athletics, BC>GW>BU
They don’t compare with campuses because BU seems to have a ‘lack of a campus’, yet it is more of a community feel then San Diego State where they had a major central campus.</p>

<p>Ratings shouldn’t count, its about the vibe you get, the people you meet, the professors you have, the program (SMG’s CORE curriculum is why I cam to BU). The greatest decision of my life was to choose BU over BC. This went against the ratings and the athletics, but I know absolutely I made the right choice.</p>

22

<p>I got into Northwestern and NYU – two highly ranked schools – but I couldn’t imagine going anywhere besides BU now. Most of my classes have been wonderful. GW and BU, by the way, are basically equivalent in rank – BU’s rankings have ranged from around 50 to 60 in the last several years. I think it’s all random fluctuations. BC has a slightly better reputation, I would say, but I don’t think its significant, particularly in fields like business and communications where BU is highly regarded. Take a look at a list of BU’s alumni and I think you’ll be very impressed (as long as you ignore Stern and O’Reilly, but hey, every school’s got a few of those).</p>

<p>(Also – I LOVE BU’s campus, and I agree with the person who said it’s a difficult thing to understand until you get here. I mean, we’re right next to Fenway and Newbury Street! Paradise Rock Club is on campus! There are adorable brownstones, popular bars, and an amazing gym! What more could you want?)</p>

23

<p>BU is the only place I also see myself going (even though I don’t go there). It is honestly amazing and it’s campus is more beautiful than NYU’s which is spread throughout NYC - BU is all together - well close enough. </p>

<p>why won’t they tell us whether they want us already? :(</p>

24

<p>Is Northeastern’s business program in the same league as BU’s or BC’s?
Sorry if that is kind of off topic</p>

25

<p>lergnom=baller.</p>

<p>another anecdotal way to look at it is…I was home for Spring Break a couple weeks ago and hung out with my friends at their state school. Despite the fact that finals were the week after, they all still partied every single night. Literally. They’re smart kids, but I’m not sure what that says about the academic rigor of the school. Yet…it’s ranked about 15 spots above BU. It’s all relative.</p>

26

<p>[The</a> Top Undergraduate Business Programs](<a href=“http://bwnt.businessweek.com/interactive_reports/undergrad_bschool_2009/]The”>http://bwnt.businessweek.com/interactive_reports/undergrad_bschool_2009/)</p>

<p>Here is a link to the most well regarded ranking of Undergrad Business Schools</p>

<p>BC: is ranked 15 with the average salary of $55,000</p>

<p>BU: is ranked 43 with an average salary of $50,000</p>

<p>NU: is ranked 27 with an average salary of $55,000</p>

<p>BC and NU get all high marks for facilities and job placement. the same does not hold true for BU</p>

27

<p>oy again with the rankings, except this is freaking business week! this link places MIT in the top 10 as a business school and chapman, a FILM school, in the top 50 and BENTLEY at 33??? really now, really? so there you go guys. go to bentley in mass before BU. better ranked. and what moron actually tried to rank job placement in 2009? THERE ARE NO JOBS AVAILABLE! RECESSION! REVOKED JOB OFFERS! LAY-OFFS! gah! </p>

<p>oh, and this is great to me. BU is 43 in this thing, but if you look at the ACADEMICS being ranked, BU is 21. yet our teacher quality is a C. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA.</p>

<p>can i continue laughing?</p>

28

<p>BU doesn’t have any dorms that are exclusively for freshmen. We do use a lottery system, so your chances of getting into a large-style highrise dorm as a freshman is much better than getting into a suite or a brownstone. I was actually a lucky freshman who lived on Bay State Rd. in a brownstone for my first three years and then in the Student Village (a GORGEOUS building) my senior year.</p>

<p>Good luck with your decisions!</p>

29

<p>bu guru, was your post meant to be in a different thread or something?</p>

30

<p>I don’t pay much attention to the U.S. News rankings/ overall ranking of a university because there’s no way of comparing the overall education a school has to offer
I focus more on rankings of the department/ major of that particular school instead…and that’s exactly what your future employers will do too</p>

<p>AliAngel:you obviously don’t know much about business schools. MIT’s grad business school is ranked #4 and therefore a top 10 undergrad rank is obvious
are you just ****ed off because BU’s ranked 44th? It’s not like 44 is a bad rank…its just that BU’s business school isn’t the greatest…now its law or med school…thats another story
Business Week has the credentials and it has done plenty of research before putting up these rankings
Companies will look at Business Week’s rankings rather than U.S. news rankings when they recruit undergrad students and the stats about starting salaries etc don’t lie
and since the job placement stats came out in 2009 its obvious that the research as conducted for 2008
I don’t know what BU is ranked in terms of academics but I’ll take your word for it and say #22…but academics alone cannot define the quality of a University’s program…in the business field its more about having the right contacts and recruiters
so please be don’t be so ignorant and get your homework done before posting on here</p>

31

<p>what i was saying is that rankings don’t make sense because it ranked BU as 44th over all for business but as 21 for academics in the same ranking, look at the link. rankings don’t mean anything. that’s what this thread has become, and i find that it is something to emphasize because when i was an undergrad the rankings were all i cared about and thank goodness it didn’t factor in when all was said and done. and i really take offense to you calling me ignorant. really now, seriously? if you’re talking about how MIT’s business school is so wonderful, then why after 4 years of my being in boston and having loads of interaction with business students was mit NEVER mentioned by any recruiters that PERSONALLY come to BU and northeastern? if BU is so crappy then why are they all here? don’t tell me to do my homework because MANY students looking at BU appreciate my honesty. and i can recognize BU’s shortcomings, ask me about anything REAL. just don’t talk to me about any stupid rankings, because that means that you’re the one who’s ignorant if you think they’re that important. come here for 4 years and then tell me about what you know about BU. and if you are a student, then educate yourself about what your own school has to offer.</p>

32

<p>sorry AliAngel, but Sloan (MIT’s Business School) is truly one of the top business schools in the country. But Business Schools really get their prestige and reputations from the MBA and Executive MBA programs. BU has a very unique and interesting undergrad program which differentiates themselves from other business schools. But Sloan really is the cream of the crop when talkin about business schools</p>

33

<p>Sloan is not the cream of the crop in Boston. Harvard is. Believe me, there is a vast difference in meaningful prestige because you make more $$ and have a bigger, more useful alumni network from Harvard. </p>

<p>These rankings are total crap and anyone who believes the starting salaries listed is delusional. Well, to put in a context, the rankings are about as valid as the pre-season NCAA basketball polls: you can bet fairly strongly that the top 5 or 6 programs will be somewhere near the top but you’re guessing at the order and guessing about nearly everything as you move into the meat of the list. So there’s something like 180 schools - meaning 1/3 make the tournament - and if you eliminate the dead losers, the rest are in the “pick-em” category. So BC versus BU is pick-em and so on and no one in life cares at all which of the two (or 3 or 15 or 30) you went to - except when you’re talking smack over beer.</p>

34

<p>Lergnom - I do not understand your presence on this board. The original poster made an off hand remark that MIT doesn’t deserve to be that high of a rank (probabbly because they are disillusioned and think MIT is only for engineers). My point is that they are that good of a business school, yet you need to pollute this thread by arguing they aren’t cream of the crop. You are only confusing the readers of this board - because MIT absolutely deserves to be in the same conversation as harvard, wharton, and stern (all cream of the crop in my eyes).</p>

<p>For the record your basketball analogy makes no sense. Stick to your ivy league commentary because there are 347 Division I college basketball teams (not 180) which means only 18.7% of teams make the NCAA Tournament (37.5% in the NFL, 53% in NBA, 26% in MLB).</p>

<p>Your comparison to polls also makes no sense and I would suggest you go re-look at the polls. 20 of the pre-season 25 made the NCAA tournament (the 5 missing all made the NIT). </p>

<p>The # 1 seeds in the NCAA tournament were ranked #1, #2, # 3 and # 5 in the preseason polls.</p>

<p>The teams in the Final Four were ranked #1, #2, # 6, and #23 in the preseason polls. (The end of the season poll had this teams at # 2, #5, # 8, and # 11).</p>

<p>The teams that made the elite 8 had pre season rankings of #1, # 2, # 3, # 5, # 6, # 12, # 23 and one unranked team.</p>

<p>To me that says the preseason polls are pretty damn accurate with the exception of a little timely basketball and luck (Missouri and Villanova).</p>

<p>I would not say the rest are in the pick-em category at all. The USNews rankings is nothing like college basketball. The top 25 means everything in basketball and the difference between 15 and 40 is absolutely enormous. The BCS standings would be a much more realistic poll to compare because not only does it take into account wins and losses, but there are computer rankings, strength of schedule and other factors (alumni giving in USnews). I know what you are trying to say with your meat of the list argument, but there is no way BU compares to BC in basketball and they both fall in your meat of the list. There are ways you can evaluate schools to compare them against each other, and although they all have their shortcomings - it is valid to compare them.</p>

35

<p>i agree with a lot of the other postings, that rankings really don’t matter all that much, it comes down to preference. if she really wants a community feel, BC is a better choice. if she wants to be in the city, BU is a better choice. if she wants diversity, BU is a better choice. if she’s going into business, BC is a better choice. there are soo many things you have to take into account when you decide which school is best for you and you won’t get all of that information from a ranking.</p>

36

<p>Aztec, I think you’re trying to create controversy here. Havard is the top of the world in MBA programs. End of discussion. They have an unparalleled alumni network and astounding resources. The number of CEO’s and other metrics of “success” from teh B-school dominate. While Sloan, Wharton and some others are clearly the equal of Harvard in many ways they aren’t the B-school. (Note that I didn’t mention academics, because my bet is that you could take 30 or 40 biz schools and if you went through them you’d get similar quality educations.) I didn’t say Sloan was like BU or BC. That would be silly because Sloan is clearly in a league above.</p>

<p>I’m not sure what the rest of the post is about. College ranking are less reliable than pre-season basketball polls, which is my point and you seem to agree with that. It’s a heck of a lot easier to pick preseason finishing orders when you have 10 players, most already known and known coaching and a game that counts a score. But still, the process is full of errors. There are 64 teams in the NCAA tourney. You said 5 of the preseason top 25 didn’t make that group of 64, which makes my point: 20% of the supposed best teams didn’t even make a tournament with 64, not 25 teams. The NIT is not the NCAA Tournament. UNC & CT, the preseason top picks for most, made the Final 4 but CT didn’t make the final, so the general statement that you could pick the top 5 or 6 was actually optimistic; even when they ranked only 64 teams, only two #1’s made the final 4 and one lower seed made it. This happened after the teams had played an entire season and had been observed over and over. </p>

<p>I appreciate your marshalling facts to argue with me.</p>

37

<p>Lergnorm,</p>

<p>Sloan is in the same tier as HBS/Wharton??? really??? thats news to me.</p>