UW vs. MU Admission/Academic Standards

[Tom Crean's Tanning Bed]

From the most recent US News and World Report and the schools' respective websites:

Overall US News/World Report Ranking
UW=35
MU=77

Academic Tier (Per US News)
UW=1
MU=1

Acceptance Rate (Per US News)
UW=56.2%
MU=67.3%

Average ACT for Admission (per university)
UW=26
MU=26

4 Year Graduation Rate (per university)
UW=50.3%
MU=62.1%

6 Year Graduation Rate (per university)
UW=82.3%
MU=76.4%

Outside of the gap in overall US News ranking, is the gap between an MU and UW education really THAT large, outside of 1) you pay a lot more at MU, and 2) you turn into an insufferable kool-aid drinkier if you go to UW?

[dsfire]

Double check your ACT figures.  MU lists the middle 50% incoming ACT scores as 24-29 while UW's are 26-30.  The difference isn't huge, no, but there is something, which is probably dwarfed by the differences between UW's research university profile vs. Marquette's "Cura Personalis" approach.

All of this, of course, is completely irrelevant to whatever standards each university sets for their athletes.

[Hards Alumni]

Gotta love US News/World Report...  they are the end all beat all...

I can tell you for a fact that when I began at MU in 200 our overall ranking was something like 89, and our acceptance rate was around 89%.

that is a little indication of how much more difficult it has become to get into MU.

I got waitlisted at UW with a 3.7 GPA and a 29 on my ACT (additionally, I was VP of my senior class, in student government for 3 years, had a LOT of other extra curriculars, and had 10 college credits prior to walking out my high school doors), and MU sent me a free prefilled out application.

I eventually was admitted to UW in April, but by that time I had made up my mind that I wasn't going to somewhere that didn't want me with the great resume I had built. 

[Niv Berkowitz]

Sounds like someone deserves a popsicle!

[GGGG]

I got waitlisted at UW with a 3.7 GPA and a 29 on my ACT (additionally, I was VP of my senior class, in student government for 3 years, had a LOT of other extra curriculars, and had 10 college credits prior to walking out my high school doors), and MU sent me a free prefilled out application.

There are ten or so people like that at every high school in the state of Wisconsin...and they all apply to UW.  And even though they only accept just over half of their applications, an even smaller percentage of those accepted even show up because they end up choosing somewhere else for whatever reason.

[Hards Alumni]

There are ten or so people like that at every high school in the state of Wisconsin...and they all apply to UW.  And even though they only accept just over half of their applications, an even smaller percentage of those accepted even show up because they end up choosing somewhere else for whatever reason.

just think it was interesting that I pulled a top end ACT (for UW's standards), a pretty good GPA (with 10 college credit courses figured in), and a ton of EC's and was wait listed.

I understand the process and realize that some people who applied to Harvard or other good schools and had UW as their 'safety school' eventually decide to not attend.

[lurch91]

I think some of the numbers a little deceiving.

Both Universities draw for different reasons, but the fact is UW probably gets 3x-6x as many applications as MU.  Does that mean that UW is better?  Not on it's own, it means that UW is a big state school with very affordable in-state tuition.  MU graduates more kids in 4 years, does that mean UW students are dumb?  Not on it's own, there could be all sorts of mitigating factors like internships, co-op opportunities, etc. that slow the graduation process.

It would be interesting to see how many of the non-graduating students at the 4year and 6 year marks are athletes.  I'd be willing to bet that UW's football team drags that down (does redshirting count in this stat - so a redshirt year would make the athlete a non-graduate in the 4 year stat?).

[GGGG]

I think some of the numbers a little deceiving.

Both Universities draw for different reasons, but the fact is UW probably gets 3x-6x as many applications as MU.  Does that mean that UW is better?  Not on it's own, it means that UW is a big state school with very affordable in-state tuition.  MU graduates more kids in 4 years, does that mean UW students are dumb?  Not on it's own, there could be all sorts of mitigating factors like internships, co-op opportunities, etc. that slow the graduation process.

The fact that it is less expensive also slows the graduating process. 

[ecompt]

We may allow two students a year who wouldn't be at MU if they couldn't play basketball. UW probably admits 30 to fill out all their athletic squads.

[GGGG]

We may allow two students a year who wouldn't be at MU if they couldn't play basketball. UW probably admits 30 to fill out all their athletic squads.

So really...this is what it has come to?  So desperate to dig at UW that you make this claim?

Weak.

[Brewtown Andy]

Gotta love US News/World Report...  they are the end all beat all...

I can tell you for a fact that when I began at MU in 200 our overall ranking was something like 89, and our acceptance rate was around 89%.

that is a little indication of how much more difficult it has become to get into MU.

Part of it is that MU can afford to be more selective now.  I presume that your year there was 2000, and applications have been a new record high every year since (surprise) 2003, with this apps for this coming fall in the neighborhood of 14K.

Also, Marquette's going to have to start chilling out on the acceptance percentage, as they just recently announced that they have 1900+ housing deposits sent in, and they were planning/expecting a freshmen class of 1850.

[Hards Alumni]

Part of it is that MU can afford to be more selective now.  I presume that your year there was 2000, and applications have been a new record high every year since (surprise) 2003, with this apps for this coming fall in the neighborhood of 14K.

Also, Marquette's going to have to start chilling out on the acceptance percentage, as they just recently announced that they have 1900+ housing deposits sent in, and they were planning/expecting a freshmen class of 1850.

correctamundo on all accounts.

[LON]

Part of it is that MU can afford to be more selective now.  I presume that your year there was 2000, and applications have been a new record high every year since (surprise) 2003, with this apps for this coming fall in the neighborhood of 14K.

Also, Marquette's going to have to start chilling out on the acceptance percentage, as they just recently announced that they have 1900+ housing deposits sent in, and they were planning/expecting a freshmen class of 1850.

The incoming class of 2002-2003 (the year I started) was a record setting application year as well.  The years subsequent to that blew it away though.  My freshman year had 1/4 the incoming class basically living in hotel rooms for the first part of the semester.  I got in to UW and MU with a 3.8 and a 26 and I was NOT wait-listed at UW.  I'd say they are even more comparable now.

[TheGym]

Part of it is that MU can afford to be more selective now.  I presume that your year there was 2000, and applications have been a new record high every year since (surprise) 2003, with this apps for this coming fall in the neighborhood of 14K.

Also, Marquette's going to have to start chilling out on the acceptance percentage, as they just recently announced that they have 1900+ housing deposits sent in, and they were planning/expecting a freshmen class of 1850.

Where did you hear the housing deposits number?  I heard they were substantially behind prior year numbers as of the end of April.  The May deadline must have brought in a huge number just under the wire.

[ecompt]

wizard, I'm saying you cannot compare the admissions between a basketball-only school and a school that plays Division I football. You need to recruit 20-25 studs to play big-time football. UW recruits big-time for men's and women's hockey, which MU doesn't do. How is that a weak argument?

[ChicosBailBonds]

The fact that it is less expensive also slows the graduating process. 

It also raises the rejection rate.  People aren't going to apply to MU unless they know with a pretty good bet they are going to get in (as the price tag to attend is steep).  Every Tom, Dick, Dick, Dick and Harry from the state applies to UW-Madison which means their rejection rates will be higher.

[Hards Alumni]

I wouldn't say that.  I have friends who knew they would get in and couldn't afford it who applied... and eventually went to school.

there is so much "free" money out there that private schools aren't just for rich kids.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I wouldn't say that.  I have friends who knew they would get in and couldn't afford it who applied... and eventually went to school.

there is so much "free" money out there that private schools aren't just for rich kids.

I can name hundreds of kids that applied to UW-Madison because they liked to school and just wanted to "give it a shot"...they had no chance.  That helps their rejection rate (makes them appear more selective).  On the flip side, I can also give you many examples of kids didn't apply to MU or other high priced schools because of affordability.  Many families are deemed to make "too much money" even though the standards are uniform.  In other words, a family with an income of $100k in North Dakota isn't the same as a family with $100k in California.  It becomes a big issue for many families.

[chrisk1]

The admissions stuff is tough.  My brother had outstanding numbers and was immediately admitted to UW.  He was wait listed at MU.  I was shocked.  I believe he ended up getting admitted at MU, but he had already made his decision to go elsewhere (not Madison, luckily). 

[chapman]

The admissions stuff is tough.  My brother had outstanding numbers and was immediately admitted to UW.  He was wait listed at MU.  I was shocked.  I believe he ended up getting admitted at MU, but he had already made his decision to go elsewhere (not Madison, luckily). 

It's hit or miss I think.  I know two people who were waitlisted at Madison and admitted to MU.  One went to MU and left after a year because Madison accepted him as a transfer. There was a program he wanted to get into there that isn't offered at MU; he couldn't tell you a thing about their sports teams.  I think the waitlisting was probably because they were from in-state since Madison can't find housing for in-state students because they know they can't afford private dorms with a maid service.

[soloWarrior]

I can name hundreds of kids that applied to UW-Madison because they liked to school and just wanted to "give it a shot"...they had no chance.  That helps their rejection rate (makes them appear more selective).  On the flip side, I can also give you many examples of kids didn't apply to MU or other high priced schools because of affordability.  Many families are deemed to make "too much money" even though the standards are uniform.  In other words, a family with an income of $100k in North Dakota isn't the same as a family with $100k in California.  It becomes a big issue for many families.

You have used some fine logic here.  The fact is UW appeals to a broad variety of people, albeit because of finance, liberalism, size, secularism, more majors for study, etc.  Whereas MU appeals to a more narrow group of people, wealthier...conservative...catholic...jesuit...less majors for study...you get the picture. 

Consequently - not only does MU receive less applications because it is flat out smaller numerically, but it receives even less applications because it naturally attracts only a very specific type of person. 

Logically, Madison will appear far more selective on paper.  You can throw most of the statistics out the window because the metrics blow.   

[79Warrior]

It also raises the rejection rate.  People aren't going to apply to MU unless they know with a pretty good bet they are going to get in (as the price tag to attend is steep).  Every Tom, Dick, Dick, Dick and Harry from the state applies to UW-Madison which means their rejection rates will be higher.

 I just don't get this discussion? Who cares. We are comparing private vs. public. There is just no equitable comparision.

[Hards Alumni]

You have used some fine logic here.  The fact is UW appeals to a broad variety of people, albeit because of finance, liberalism, size, secularism, more majors for study, etc.  Whereas MU appeals to a more narrow group of people, wealthier...conservative...catholic...jesuit...less majors for study...you get the picture. 

Consequently - not only does MU receive less applications because it is flat out smaller numerically, but it receives even less applications because it naturally attracts only a very specific type of person. 

Logically, Madison will appear far more selective on paper.  You can throw most of the statistics out the window because the metrics blow.   

my roomate soph year and I are:
poor, liberal, not religious... yet we both applied and wound up at MU.

I applied because it was a good school.

[GGGG]

my roomate soph year and I are:
poor, liberal, not religious... yet we both applied and wound up at MU.

I applied because it was a good school.

Yeah, I was (and still am) a liberal, non-Cathlic and I *loved* Marquette.

[Brewtown Andy]

Where did you hear the housing deposits number?  I heard they were substantially behind prior year numbers as of the end of April.  The May deadline must have brought in a huge number just under the wire.

My wife & I both work for MU and she's on the "Marquette in the news" email mailing list they send out every week.  She was reading that when she told me.