<p>As a huge fan of Rice and a great admirer of that school’s ability to blend top academics and (sometimes) great athletics, I find it hard to believe that I’m reading trash talking about Rice FOOTBALL. Wow!! I might print this out and frame it! </p>
<p>For the record, Rice’s big sport is baseball. They are currently ranked # 4 in the USA and are my favorite to win the College World Series. Go Owls!</p>
<p>As for how Rice might compare to a real athletic power like Notre Dame, however, I think we need a reality check. Academically, yes. Athletically, no. And in terms of overall school energy dedicated to the athletic teams, it’s not close. The only colleges in the USA that can match Notre Dame’s fantastic combination of great academics and great athletics are Stanford, Duke, Vanderbilt and maybe Northwestern. Every other college is weaker either in the academic realm or the athletic realm.</p>
<p>I don’t think Rice has domination over the baseball world. My school, OSU, has the 2nd most College World Series appearances…but is having a horrible year in baseball and won’t even make a conf tournament for the first time in 18 years. In the Big 12 right now Baylor actually is on top–that tells you that there’s no such thing as a perennial baseball power. Arkansas is pretty elite in baseball, so is UC-Irvine for some weird reason. But if there would have to be just one or two baseball powers, Rice would probably be a good candidate.</p>
<p>And Hawkette, I didn’t know that Vanderbilt and Northwestern have elite athletic teams?</p>
<p>“A point I’m making is that ND does trump UM and UCLA in prestige because it is more selective and private.” ~theendusputrid</p>
<p>This is clearly not true since UCLA is more selective at least in the percentage of students they admit. A school being private has nothing to do with prestige. There are tons of private universities in the US that are not prestigious. </p>
<p>“UCLA and ND are both very good schools and comparable on the undergrad level in terms of academic quality, quality of student body and selectivity. </p>
<p>On the grad level, UCLA easily trumps ND though. UCLA has better medical and engineering schools, which probably makes it more recognizable internationally than ND due to interest in these fields from international students. ND might have more recognition due to the strong alumni network and the large Catholic population in the US.”
~tranandy</p>
<p>I completely agree with this statement.</p>
<p>“Athletically, no. And in terms of overall school energy dedicated to the athletic teams, it’s not close. The only colleges in the USA that can match Notre Dame’s fantastic combination of great academics and great athletics are Stanford, Duke, Vanderbilt and maybe Northwestern. Every other college is weaker either in the academic realm or the athletic realm.”
~Hawkette</p>
<p>I would add UCLA into that list as well. UCLA has both a huge fan base and overall outstanding school spirit while also providing excellent academics. U Michigan should be in the list as well. Your list is biased towards private universities. UNC is also a school with excellent academics and huge sports scene.</p>
<p>That’s a misconception. It’s the same as any other public college, 80% white. A lot of colleges are worse. ND had an Islamic dude on their football team a few years ago, and the school offers incentives to try and bring in more diversity…just like every other college.</p>
<p>Osu,
I’ve posted a lot about the athletic life at schools and which colleges best deliver the combination of elite academics along with elite athletics. Clearly the best of this bunch are Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt and Notre Dame. And while places like Rice, Vanderbilt and Northwestern may not have the national athletic profile of Notre Dame, they do pretty well across a range of sports, including the majors. For example, are you aware that all three went to bowl games last year? Rice and Vandy both won over Western Michigan and Boston College, respectively. Notre Dame also went to a bowl game and beat U Hawaii. </p>
<p>Anyway, while I care about the wins and the losses, I focus a more on the social side of the athletic experience and what a student and/or alumnus experiences. Based on your posts, I’m guessing that you are familiar with the enjoyment that can be had at these collegiate sporting events and share my enthusiasm for how this can positively impact one’s relationship with a school, both as a student and as an alum. </p>
<p>I know that the student/alumni experience for major sporting events at places like Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt and Notre Dame is great, great fun and a major differentiator from the undergraduate life at other elite academic colleges.</p>
<p>I absolutely agree with you, Hawkette… that Vanderbilt and Northwestern do offer a unique side of college life that most elite private schools don’t, as well as a unique side of college life that most BCS conference schools don’t offer (although most BCS schools are “public Ivies” i.e…Texas, Michigan, UCB, etc). </p>
<p>It’s worth noting still that usually losing to Vanderbilt, Northwestern, or Baylor in any sport is considered really embarrassing. I thought it was cool that the Commodores won their first bowl game in like 40 years.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t lump Baylor in with Vanderbilt and Northwestern. Different level of student body. </p>
<p>Also, I think that Vanderbilt’s participation in the SEC and Northwestern’s in the Big Ten are distinctive as their enrollments are considerably smaller and their admissions standards are soooooo much more stringent than any other college in their leagues. </p>
<p>As for their competitiveness, I found that Vanderbilt has done awfully well in men’s and women’s basketball and baseball while Northwestern, in addition to being more than a flash in the pan in football as they have had many good seasons, is truly a women’s sports power. Still, I would agree that it is highly unlikely that either Vanderbilt or Northwestern will ever be a consistent national football power as ND once was…and hopes to be again. </p>
<p>Personally, I’m pulling for all of these schools as they do it the right way with a great blend of academic and student excellence and athletic programs that are nationally competitive and relevant.</p>
<p>Again, UCLA is a school that definitely is in the running for elite sports. Today or recently, UCLA received its 104 national NCAA title. All my friends that have visited or attended UCLA tell me that the UCLA bruin school spirit is something everything students prides themselves in. Academically, UCLA is up there with Stanford, Rice, Vanderbilt, and Notre Dame.</p>
<p>Hawkette, how can you leave out U Michigan, UNC, and UCLA when considering colleges with the best sports scene and outstanding academics. Both U Michigan (football) and UNC (basketball) speak for themselves, but UCLA should definitely be included as well. UCLA has the most national NCAA titles of any US college. Its school spirit can be seen in its rivalry with USC, the frisbee cheer, 8-clap, etc.</p>
<p>From post #124: “Notre Dame is very homogeneous. I don’t know why anyone would go there.”</p>
<p>I hate to open another can of worms, but is anybody here familiar with the “is/ought” fallacy? As it applies here, when did the concept of diversity become pre-loaded with value rather than being merely descriptive?</p>
<p>Where, did you get these numbers? When I saw UNC’s I knew they were made up.
from collegeboard.com
</p>
<p>You severely overstated those of ND’s rival schools while understating ND’s numbers. For a private school with 89% out of state students, ND is significantly less diverse than all of its competition. Additionally, almost 90% of those white students are catholics, and less than half of them received any financial aid to pay the 50k+ a year cost of attendance.</p>
<p>Tyler,
I think you’re barking up the wrong tree. Historically, I have read you as a fair-minded poster, so I am disappointed that you would make such inaccurate assertions. All of your observations are incorrect:
Ethnicity-The data on % of white students is directly from USWNR’s online edition and are for the entire undergraduate population. None are made up. At least not by me. BTW, the collegeboard numbers are for the entering students only.<br>
Geography-According to USNWR, ND is 92% OOS. Based on IPEDS data, I believe that Notre Dame is the most geographically diverse school in the Top 20.
Religion-ND is 82% Catholic. This was discussed earlier and is confirmed on the ND website.<br>
Financial Aid-There is a ton of financial aid data on USNWR. 47% of Notre Dame’s students received Financial Aid with an average package of $30,780 which is equal to 84% of their cost for Tuition & Fees. Also, for lower income students, 100% of need was met. If you don’t think Notre Dame’s Financial Aid is pretty darn good, then consider how it compares to some other Midwestern colleges:</p>
<p>% receiving Fin’l Aid, Avg. Size of FA Package for Freshmen, % of T&F covered by FA, College </p>
<p>48%, $33,441, 89%, U Chicago (meet 100% of need)
43%, $28,058, 76%, Northwestern (meet 100% of need)
40%, $29,491, 79%, Wash U (meet 100% of need)</p>
<p>40%, $16,335, 50% U Michigan OOS students (does NOT meet 100% of need)
19%, $8,623, 40% U Wisconsin OOS students (does NOT meet 100% of need)</p>
<p>I wonder if your new collegiate affiliation is distorting your views on a top college like Notre Dame. Also, it is little surprise that, in the liberal world of elite academia, Notre Dame would not score highly, but I hope that you will learn that there is far, far, far more to an undergraduate college experience than is reflected in its PA score.</p>
<p>I don’t see how dismissing my post based on whatever college affiliation I have, which could have been a very very wide range of things and even ND, covers for the fact that you didn’t refute anything said. I never accused ND of being a bad university. I simply asserted that it is below Cal, Michigan, UVA, and arguably UCLA academically (which it is by every measure of academic output). And that it is less diverse than most of those schools ethnically, religiously, and economically. </p>
<p>If you can find something that refutes the first point, THAT would be helpful to other posters wondering “what is it about Notre Dame that people love”. All I, among other posters, are saying is that what ND offers is more an environment conducive to sharing your faith than academics that supersede its peers’. </p>
<p>From ND’s website itself
</p>
<p>People don’t go to ND because its diverse, or offers a significant amount to non-catholics. This is why despite admitting nearly half of black applicants they still can’t enroll a class that is greater than 3% black. </p>
<p>The website itself also notes that 45% of ND students receive financial aid. I will give you that ND, as a result of its demographic, is a very geographically diverse school. </p>
<p>Nowhere did I say that any of this makes the environment “better or worse”. In fact, I think all of this makes the experience even better for the upper-middle class white catholic students that ND attracts. This adds to the ND tradition, the ND spirit, and the general ND vibe. In my college search it was very obvious to me, and based on their retention rate very obvious to others, that I would not enjoy ND but I could clearly see the type of person who would. I don’t know where I have shown any anti-catholic bigotry in this; I don’t think I’ve passed any judgement on any religion on this thread. </p>
<p>What I will stand firm about, is the fact that just because ND is private, and can thus enroll a smaller class with slightly higher SAT/ACT scores (29 average ACT vs. Stanford’s 31 and 28 for UMich) makes it better than public schools. </p>
<p>You’ll see that UM’s programs are ridiculously strong across the board, and there is a very similar story at Cal (and to a lesser extent UVA). Earlier in the thread I cited that despite having a higher ranked b-school on US News, and a school that is overall more selective, Mendoza grads far underperformed. There is nothing wrong with the students at ND, they’re stellar. It’s just that the top quality programs at Michigan and Cal offer their students more than ND can, and after four years graduates of those programs gain more and become more successful.</p>
<p>I’m afraid that you’ve fallen into a mental trap that is blinding you to what is truly important for undergraduate education. The crux of our difference is that you are judging a college based on criteria which is not hugely relevant, or at least not paramount, for most undergraduate students. </p>
<p>You focus on measures of prestige within the academic world and how prodigiously a university generates research. For an individual undergraduate student (perhaps you) who is keen on pursuing an academic career, such resume building has some relevance. But for the large majority of undergrads at top colleges all across the country, it mostly is not. The more accurate story is that the quality of their undergraduate academic experience will be most heavily impacted and determined by four things:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>The quality of their student peers. Notre Dame is very strong in this regard and btw, their ACT 25/75 is 31-34 which exceeds Stanford, Princeton, Yale and several others of America’s most selective colleges. No public is close, including two that you mention, U Michigan (27-31) and UCLA (24-31).</p></li>
<li><p>The size of the classroom in which they learn. In comparison to the other Top 20 schools, Notre Dame is not as intimate with a 12/1 student/faculty ratio and only 56% of its classes with 20 or fewer students. Again publics like U Michigan (15/1, 44% classes with <20 students) aren’t close.</p></li>
<li><p>The quality of the classroom instruction. My interest is on the student experience in the classroom and not on the university’s reputation in the laboratory. Notre Dame has been repeatedly recognized for the commitment to and quality of its undergraduate instruction. Among publics, W&M, U Virginia, and U North Carolina have a history of recognition for their commitment to classroom teaching excellence. I don’t think it is an accident that the most research-heavy publics are not known for this. </p></li>
<li><p>The depth of the institution’s financial resources and the willingness to spend them on things that benefit undergraduate education. Notre Dame is a wealthy school with a per capita endowment of over $530k (as of 6/30/08). This gives them the operating flexibility to offer more student services, provide a closer degree of attention in the classroom and in their advising and, perhaps most importantly, permits them to provide full financial aid to all of their students. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>As for your thread about “Is U Michigan Weak in Any Way?” the focus is on the institution’s rep among within academia and not about the actual undergraduate student experience. It’s a flawed, highly incomplete question. </p>
<p>IMO, the important thing is the student experience. What will he/she actually experience as a student, in and out of the classroom? If you compare U Michigan to the universe of Top 20 privates, U Michigan would lose in virtually every one of the categories that I have listed above as being the greatest determinants of an undergraduate academic experience. </p>
<p>As this relates to Notre Dame, consider the factor of yield. At 56%, Notre Dame, drawing students from all over the country, has the 8th highest yield among all private colleges in the USA. By contrast, U Michigan’s 28% yield with OOS students is only half that of Notre Dame. Granted, ND has the Catholic difference and the head-to-head with U Michigan (almost always Midwesterners) is likely closer than these overall yield numbers. But it is clear that Notre Dame is a formidable college, able to attract top students from all over the USA, in a way that even other top colleges can only dream of. It is a unique place and a superior undergraduate experience.</p>
<p>I think you’ve fallen into a mental trap in which you believe you know what is best for an undergraduate education. I agree that ND is strong in all those fields you mention, I disagree that those are the most important fields or that ND is even stronger than the top public schools. </p>
<p>1) Yeah, the students have higher test scores, but that’s about where the comparison stops. The student body, as mentioned earlier, is far more homogenous than the top public schools. And higher test scores clearly do not always translate into a stronger student body (Are you going to assert that the student body at ND is as strong as Stanford’s, Harvard’s, or Yale’s?). Additionally, on what actually manifests of the students’ time at ND, they underperform.</p>
<p>2/3) I agree ND is known for teaching-focused instruction. However, I doubt how much that matters if ND can’t attract the tops of their fields in the first place. Additionally, if you want small classroom ratios and top-notch, personal teaching, you attend an LAC. ND doesn’t focus on teaching because it is exceptionally strong at it, but because it doesn’t have the strength to focus on research. </p>
<p>4) The top publics all have high endowments, though ND may have more money for students because it is much smaller. However, all of the top publics have far more resources than ND because they have strong academic programs and actually attract top research dollar. </p>
<p>And finally, reputation in academia is VERY important, because it is more likely that they know what they are talking about than a disgruntled kid. ND’s abysmal Peer Assessment doesn’t mean its a bad school, it just means that ND’s peers are not who US News thinks they are. This is demonstrated whenever Cal and Michigan absolutely blow ND out of the water by every measure of academic output. </p>
<p>I don’t think we disagree on the yield aspect. ND’s applicant pool is highly self-selective; you know whether or not you’d want to go to ND. Most of that inquiry begins and ends with “am I catholic?”. And I also agree that ND offers a very good student experience to those who self-select to go there. </p>
<p>I strongly disagree, and I believe most others are with me on this, that ND’s being smaller and private means it offers a better undergraduate experience than Cal, Michigan, or UVA. The students at these respective schools would agree with that. In the midwest, the the two colleges that produce alumni who RAVE about their schools; Notre Dame and Michigan. </p>
<p>I think that says two things: First that ND does not disappoint its target audience. And Second, and more tellingly, that Michigan does a fantastic job providing a superior experience to the wide swath of people it attracts. </p>
<p>This is not a ND bashing post. This is definitely not a Michigan or Cal vs ND post. Your assertion that ND is academically stronger or offers a better undergraduate experience to the general population than any of the top publics is just not supported. </p>
<p>Cal, Michigan, UVA, and UCLA are all stronger than ND. I’ll give you UNC :)</p>
<p>Hawkette, I agree with most of your argument regarding what constitutes a good undergraduate education, but you fail to take into consideration several factors. University of Michigan (UCLA as well) not only has strong graduate programs (research, etc) but also outstanding undergraduate programs as well. If you look on US News, you will see that Michigan offers top notch engineering and business programs for “UNDERGRADUATES” (I only mention those two because those are the only two I can see). If Michigan does not provide a great education in those two fields, then why is it ranked so high? With regards to engineering, Michigan pretty much has a dedicated engineering campus (North Campus) consisting of 20+ engineering buildings. Although the classes may be bigger at Michigan, you will without any doubt receive a much much much better engineering education/experience at Michigan since there is just so much resource available. At top research school, one will most likely have more state of the art equipments at ones disposal which is paramount when it comes to engineering since engineering is all about building and designing stuff. Notre Dame just cannot compare with Michigan in engineering. If you want to become an engineer and you had the choice between Michigan and Notre Dame, then it would just be foolish to pass Michigan up just so that you will be in a smaller classroom, or with smarter peers. It has been proven that (employers can confirm this) that Michigan makes better engineers than Notre Dame.</p>
<p>Moreover, undergraduate education is not only learning about your intended major but also learning about yourself and others and becoming a better person. That’s where going to a diverse school comes in (I’m not saying that Notre Dame completely lacks diversity). There definitely stuff to be learned from all types of people: smart, not so smart, athletic, poor, rich, people of different religion, people from all over the world. Through diversity, one becomes more worldly and understanding of others who are in different circumstances than oneself. That why top universities fight so hard to maintain diversity. While larger class sizes and larger undergrad population at public universities are generally viewed negatively, one will be more likely to meet unique people that can change ones viewpoints. </p>
<p>Sure, at Notre Dame the overall student body may be stronger than let say UCLA’s but the top students at UCLA can definitely match or surpass those at Notre Dame. Everyone at UCLA works hard and pushes each other to achieve greater and greater things. What you learn in school is only good if you make use of your knowledge for the betterment of society and mankind. This is where UCLA excels. Just walking on UCLA campus, I see that there are so many student organizations established solely for good causes. Again I’m not saying that Notre Dame does not practice this but I just wanted to mention that education implies more than pure academic education and that the undergraduate experience is so much more than academics.</p>