<p>^ lol yeah. i wonder if he’ll stop breathing air when he finally figures out that it’s free.</p>
<p>i bet he bought that $1000 iPhone app</p>
<p>To deduce from his last post, “If noboby but me can afford it, isn’t it really desirable?”</p>
<p>You could sell him a million dollar sh.t sandwhich, and he would brag all day about it.</p>
<p>mark my words:</p>
<p>he’s going to make a response in this thread to the effect of “class jealousy. you all are just jealous of my wealth”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Uh, what about UC’s? Both UCLA and Cal are public schools, and I’m pretty sure they are considered pretty excellent, or at least are ranked higher than some of those you listed.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Cause all those chumps coming outta Marquette are so much smarter and well connected then us poor bozos over here in Madison. Just like those guys in SMU are so much better than teh commons down at UT Austin. And the sophisticates at George Washington are miles ahead of the folks at Maryland.</p>
<p>Right. :)</p>
<p>I think it’s just as funny listening to all of you getting your panties in a wad. </p>
<p>Althought there are a TON of public universities that are wonderful schools, and many of them are better than public schools, I think price CAN affect a school’s prestige and quality. I also think price can be a contributing factor to what makes a university good.</p>
<p>A more expensive school is probably going to have some prestige, and this often helps a school’s reputation. You don’t hear of horrible schools that cost $40 k a year. In your opinion, there might be some expensive schools that YOU dont like, but regardelss, most schools that cost $40 k a year are going to be at least decent. </p>
<p>So, perhaps he KIND OF has a point.</p>
<p>if so, it is a very weak indicator. there are a lot of terrible private universities out there that are more expensive than in-state tuition at state schools. for a particularly extreme example, itt tech costs more than in-state tuition at an average state university.</p>
<p>re: 40k. it is true that there aren’t very many $40k tuition schools out there that are terrible schools, but it is also true that there are a lot of schools cheaper than $40k that are better or comparable to the $40k tuition schools. middlebury college costs $50k a year, and isn’t nearly the school that Berkeley is.</p>
<p>That’s a pretty random example though. Here’s a better one: Say you live in Minnesota. You could go to St. Olaf for 50K a year. Not a bad school, put certainly not an amazing one either. Or you could go to Madison for 18K a year. Arguably one of the top five/six public schools in the country. It’s not that St. Olaf would give you a bad education - it’s just that it ain’t the better choice.</p>
<p>Great Points. In the end though, putting university comparisons aside and just looking at a particular school alone, you can usually count on getting a good education if you’re paying good money. </p>
<p>There are goign to be exception, of course, but that doesn’t invalidate my point. There are always exceptions. </p>
<p>And … 18K a year isn’t very cheap either. So, that coincides with my point. You’re paying good money, and you’re getting a great education at Madison. Once agian, tuition and a good education often show a postitive correlation. OFTEN - Key word!</p>
<p>what we are saying is that correlation is weak.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>First of all, Middlebury’s $50K comprehensive fee include all costs (tuition AND room and board). Secondly, many (including myself) would argue that Middlebury is twice the school that Berkeley is. Sure, there are plenty of folks who enjoy going to school with 25 thousand other kids, 93 percent of whom are from California. </p>
<p>Furthermore, Berkeley meets the need of 88% of its students, while Middlebury meets the need of 100%. The average undergraduate total need-based gift aid at Berkeley is $12,496, while at Middlebury it’s $29,308. For many needy students, Middlebury ends up being cheaper than Berkeley, and you’re not just a number floating in a sea of Californians.</p>
<p>Businessweek ranked the undergrad business programs for 2009.</p>
<p>Hmm let’s see.<br>
Out of the top 20 schools. 15 are PRIVATE.
Out of the bottom 20 schools. 1 is PRIVATE. </p>
<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>The facts don’t lie.<br>
Neither do I.</p>
<p>^I wouldn’t use Business Week’s rankings to make your point because:
- the top program is a state school
- the rankings greatly deviate from conventional wisdom (Wharton not #1, Sloan out of top 5, Stern out of top 10?)</p>
<p>Why do people hate public schools so much?</p>
<p>lol business schools are different tho</p>
<p>the quality of a business school is pretty much judged on how rich and well-connected are its students. in other subjects, things like how smart are its students and how much do they learn actually matter.</p>
<p>UT Austin is a public school. Very good business school. Theory disproved. Try again.</p>
<p>Some of you keep finding random exceptions to disprove a point. And some keep arguing that there are cheap public schools that are good too. Yes, I agree. That’s not my point though. I am not saying that EVERY private school is better than EVERY public school. I said, once again, that, if you are paying good money to go to a school (high tution costs, usually private), you most likely are goign to a decent (at least) school that will give you a valuable education. Therefore, often times, price can a sign of a school’s “excellence”. </p>
<p>And lets not use businessweek? So it’s not a valid ranking because you don’t agree with it? There’s an insightful argument. Once again, just because the number 1 school is public doesn’t negate the fact that 15 of the 20 are private. I’m not sure what you were trying to disprove with those random facts.</p>
<p>And, silence_kit, your theory on business schools and how they are judged is complete ignorance. That’s not true. Perhaps, they are judged some on their networking capabilities and how well they are able to find their students jobs through connections. BUT, they are not judged on how “rich” their students are. That’s a joke. Many of the B schools have high standards and selective admissions. Usually “smartness” is a key quality to have when in a business school, because most of them are tough programs.</p>
<p>And, let me add. I don’t agree that tuition is WHAT MAKES a school good, I just think high tuition is usually ONE sign of a good school.</p>
<p>I think we can disregard BW’s rankings as being irrelevant, because anyone with Mendoza ahead of Wharton is utterly clueless.</p>
<p>Well, what if we introduce top engineering schools into this argument? </p>
<p>Now 14 of the top 25 engineering grad schools are public, according to USNWR. 3 out of the top 5 are also public. [Rankings</a> - Best Engineering Schools - Graduate Schools - Education - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-engineering-schools/rankings]Rankings”>http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-engineering-schools/rankings)</p>
<p>Are you guys SERIOUSLY using COMPLETELY TRIVIAL ratings to decide whether or not a school is good?</p>