Does MU have a waitlist or is this WSJ article below from a couple of weeks ago only relevant for top tier schools? Given MU's very high acceptance rate I would tend to doubt it but was curious if anyone had any thoughts on this. The direction MU seems to be going in by letting in almost everyone who applies seems very puzzling to me, and I suspect that will damage the brand over time. I'm originally from the Philadelphia area and realize that college status and prestige is something that people out here tend to place greater emphasis on than folks in the midwest, but a decent number of students from Philly attended when I was a student not too long ago and I would like that to continue. If MU stays on the same path, I don't think it will because many students will be turned off by their approach. It would be nice for MU to become a school where students are eager to get off a long waitlist and be offerered a place in the class but they have a way to go obviously. Thoughts?
Did Your Kid Get Placed On a College Wait List? Don't Hold Your Breath
The chance of getting off the wait list has plummeted at many schools as the pool has expanded
Liam Tormey, a senior at Valley Stream South High School in New York, applied to 15 colleges. Four rejected him. Four accepted him.
The remaining seven put the 17-year-old on their wait lists—a rapidly growing admissions limbo from which few students escape.
"I thought for sure, after getting wait list after wait list, that something was wrong with my application," said Mr. Tormey, who thought he would get into more schools than he did.
As hundreds of thousands of high-school seniors face a May 1 deadline to put down deposits at their college of choice, many still face uncertainty over where they will end up. Their futures are clouded by the schools' use of wait lists to make sure they have the right number, and type, of students come fall.
The University of Virginia increased the number of applicants invited onto wait lists by 68% between 2015 and 2017. At Lehigh University, that figure rose by 54%. And at Ohio State University, it more than tripled.
At some schools, the chance of getting off the wait list has plummeted as the pool has expanded. For the fall 2012 entering class, the University of California, Berkeley admitted 66% of the 161 applicants that were wait listed. Last year, only 27% of the 7,459 applicants on the wait list were ultimately admitted.
With high-school students applying to more colleges these days, schools have a tougher time predicting how many admitted students will actually enroll. Too few students can lead to financial trouble. Too many means overcrowded dorms and classrooms.
Some schools are locking in more students through binding early-decision offers. They are also keeping a deeper bench of backups to whom they can turn if, come the deposit deadline, they are still short of enrollment targets or don't have quite the right mix of students. Wait-listed applicants usually accept admission offers, allowing schools to control enrollment numbers.
"It's an admission dean's dream. You see where you are on May 1, then you round out the class by going to the wait list," said Michael Steidel, dean of admission at Carnegie Mellon University.
That school, with a target of 1,550 freshmen, offered wait-list spots to just over 5,000 applicants this year.
"You can take stock and 'fix' or refine the class by gender, income, geography, major or other variables," said Jon Reider, director of college counseling at San Francisco University High School. "A large waiting list gives you greater flexibility in filling these gaps."
This year, applications to Carnegie Mellon rose 19%. With more students accepting its offers of admission, it couldn't risk over-enrolling. The school admitted 500 fewer students and expects to go to some of its wait lists to make sure each undergraduate program meets enrollment goals, and that there is a good mix of students, including enough aspiring English majors or kids from South Dakota. The school can also take into account the financial situations of wait-listed candidates.
Berkeley spokeswoman Janet Gilmore said rising out-of-state tuition and competition from other colleges courting California students have caused uncertainty over how many accepted students will enroll, so more conservative offers for regular admission and reliance on the wait list offers flexibility.
Between fall 2015 and fall 2016, the latest year available, the average number of students offered spots on wait lists increased by 11% and the number admitted from those lists jumped 31%, according to the National Association for College Admission Counseling.
But there is a backlash to the surging numbers of students offered spots on the lists.
"It is cruel and keeps FAR too many students hanging on with unrealistic hopes of being accepted," Cristiana Quinn, an admission consultant in Rhode Island, wrote last month in an open letter posted to an email list for the college-admission association.
Joseph Humphrey, an 18-year-old senior at Homewood-Flossmoor High School near Chicago, called his wait-listed status at the University of Michigan, Northwestern, Vanderbilt and Notre Dame "college admissions purgatory."
He signed up for all the lists but also put down a deposit to enroll at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, where he was offered a merit scholarship. He said he would definitely attend one of the four if admitted off the wait list but would have to think carefully about the others.
Officials at the University of Oregon determined last year that their wait list—on which spots were offered to roughly 1,000 applicants for a freshman class of nearly 4,000—had gotten out of hand.
"We had moved into this place where students saw it as just kind of a deferred denial," said Roger Thompson, vice president for student services and enrollment management, noting that sometimes only a few dozen students got off the list.
Oregon offered wait-list spots to 134 applicants for the fall 2017 class, ultimately admitting 73. Applications jumped by 20% this year, and the school invited about 300 applicants to join its wait list.
Schools are doing little more than "emotionally stringing the student along" by dangling a wait-list offer, said Whitney Bruce, an admission consultant in Portland, Maine.
She urges clients to "start to fall in love with one of the schools where they were accepted."
Mr. Tormey of Valley Stream South High School didn't want to remain unsettled into the summer months and so decided against putting his name on the wait lists at Boston College and Villanova University, his original top-choice schools.
"I have four schools that I've been admitted to, who want me," he said. He plans to submit a deposit at Providence College in Rhode Island.
All I can tell you is that a friend of ours who is a former National Alumni Award winner had a kid who is an Eagle Scout with good grades and tons of international community service and never made it off the waiting list this year. He (meaning the kid) was very disappointed because Marquette was his first choice.
Bring back FFP. No waitlist needed
Several Scoopers went through the FFP Meat Grinder. The Goose is an excellent example of how the cleansing waters of FFP purged the stench of high school hijinks.
I was FFP in the summer of 2006. One of the best summers of my life
Quote from: swoopem on May 06, 2018, 03:06:19 PM
Bring back FFP. No waitlist needed
Fresh Frozen Plazma?
Why do so many people care about where they went to undergrad? Like it matters or something?
I think the waitlists are a function of kids to applying to more schools using the common app, making it harder for schools to predict the incoming class size. This (https://www.nacacnet.org/globalassets/documents/publications/research/soca17_ch1.pdf) indicates that the percentage of kids applying to 7 or more schools was 10% in 1995, 17% in 2005, and 36% in 2015. That's almost quadrupling in 20 years.
That puts schools in a tough bind. They don't want to accept everyone who meets their basic criteria for fear of getting too many students. And they don't want to reject too many for fear that more than expected go elsewhere. Solution - keep students hopeful but not committed by waitlisting them.
Back in 1980 I applied to three schools, and my friends thought that was a lot. I probably would only have applied to two, but I considered running track and I wasn't quite good enough for MU, so I applied to a small liberal arts college.
Seven still seems like a lot. I applied to 3, all early action.
Had some backups just incase but got into all three schools by early December so never even bothered.
Quote from: ChitownSpaceForRent on May 07, 2018, 07:21:52 PM
Seven still seems like a lot. I applied to 3, all early action.
Had some backups just incase but got into all three schools by early December so never even bothered.
I think some of it also relates the types of schools they're applying to.
My first daughter shot very high (a couple of Ivies and comparably competitive schools), so she ended up applying to 10...and got waitlisted at 3 or 4. She ended up deciding pretty quickly because of a nice scholarship offer, so we never found out if any of the waitlists would have panned out.
Her friends who applied to really selective schools did the same thing, while those who went less selective didn't.
She even had a friend who applied to one school - U of Illinois. It was both parents' alma maters, she knew she'd get in, and even got a full ride. Turned out well for her, as she now has a pretty sweet gig with Google and no student loans.
Quote from: swoopem on May 06, 2018, 04:56:13 PM
I was FFP in the summer of 2006. One of the best summers of my life
my oldest son was in FFP-4 years post-grad, he was a district manager for a top 5 bank in our region earning well into the 6 figures. now, 8 years post-grad he was enticed to join a competitor and they upped his salary by 40%. any more of this, i'm gonna be axking my kid for a loan
just saying, the application process numbers don't always tell the whole story. just like in athletics, it's difficult to read what's in a kid's(young adult's) heart
thebabyDavid
I might not be the best FFP example, but I am major supporter of the program. My family had three generations of FFP's and my son was the final class. Very proud of being part of the program.
rocket
Great stuff on your son. My son, the FFP, will be completing hie second degree (finance) from UWM in a couple of weeks. He graduated MU with a marketing degree in four years and decided he wanted to get into finance after graduation. He has worked full time and attended UWM for evening and online classes. Very proud of what he has accomplished. Maybe your son can hire him:)
Quote from: theBabyDavid on May 06, 2018, 04:01:19 PM
Several Scoopers went through the FFP Meat Grinder. The Goose is an excellent example of how the cleansing waters of FFP purged the stench of high school hijinks.
Keefe?
Quote from: Ellenson Family Reunion on May 09, 2018, 11:38:45 AM
Keefe?
Puh-leeze.
theBabyDavid is but 10 months old and his momma is a young, beautiful, intelligent A-Lister. Why would she 'settle' for an old grounded dude who drools from one side of his mouth while rehashing 'there I was' tales from another century between sips of cheap scotch?
theBabyDavid appears to be too sharp to be Keefe.
Thanks for Posting Process! I read this article on my commute the day it was published. I think your gut about this being mostly an issue for Top Tier schools is correct. MU is somewhat different than a lot of schools in that all of their colleges are direct entry instead of applying to the University as whole first and then applying to an individual college after Freshman or Sophomore year like most schools. I don't know for sure but my hunch is that MU's more competitive programs like Nursing and PT and maybe engineering probably do have wait lists, but generally speaking MU just isn't the type of institution where students are going to be desperate to get off of a wait list to the same extent as their Northeastern brethren like a Gtown or BC for example. MU is more akin to let's say Providence where one of the students profiled in the article ended up enrolling.
Like you, I'm both originally from and currently reside in the Northeast (NYC area) so I'm very familiar with what high school seniors and their parents are like around April 15th when the exclusive schools announce their decisions, how it's the talk of the various towns, etc, but MU isn't in the northeast and for the most part doesn't cater to that constituency. They have have rolling admissions and generally let students know within 2 or 3 weeks after they apply which is not something most schools in the Northeast do. They let everyone wait until April to maintain this air of exclusivity and mystery which I personally think is not really fair so I actually like MU's rolling admissions approach.
That said, I definitely share you concerns about MU's extremely high acceptance rate and there's no doubt in my mind that will be a turn off to many students in this region. Thankfully you and I are not the only ones with that POV, and I can assure you the MU administration has received substantial negative feedback on their high acceptance rate not only from alums, but from current and prospective students as well so they're not radically changing their approach but definitely pivoting on that. You can't have an 89% acceptance rate as they did last year, and 84% the year prior and not have the brand take a hit.
If you look at the attached PDF from MU's OIRA website, Figures 1 and 2 on page 3 are really telling. All of these other schools have almost double the number of applicants, a much lower acceptance rate, and still have a yield that's several percentage points higher than ours. To say that we don't stack up well to the peer institutions MU administrators hand picked to be compared with is a massive understatement, so hopefully they'll make some adjustments to rectify this.
Quote from: Disco Hippie on May 10, 2018, 10:40:15 AM
That said, I definitely share you concerns about MU's extremely high acceptance rate and there's no doubt in my mind that will be a turn off to many students in this region. Thankfully you and I are not the only ones with that POV, and I can assure you the MU administration has received substantial negative feedback on their high acceptance rate not only from alums, but from current and prospective students as well so they're not radically changing their approach but definitely pivoting on that. You can't have an 89% acceptance rate as they did last year, and 84% the year prior and not have the brand take a hit.
Those people are idiots. Students and alumni alike.
what's the difference between "wait list' and "deferred decision?" My sister was a "deferred decision" to her top choice college, which meant having to submit her first semester HS grades, which got her in. I was a "deferred decision" to my top choice grad school, which meant "we'll see who else applies first, then decide on your fate."
Quote from: #bansultan on May 10, 2018, 10:43:17 AM
Those people are idiots. Students and alumni alike.
+2,000
It is my understanding that Marquette met its enrollment targets this year and then some, and without lowering actual qualitative measures like grades and test scores.
It would not surprise me if Marquette did not admit a single person off of their wait list.
Folks that turned their nose up at Marquette because of the acceptance rate can go eff themselves. Have fun at your more "exclusive" school. I am sure you will fit in better there, anyway.
Quote from: warriorchick on May 10, 2018, 11:23:00 AM
+2,000
It is my understanding that Marquette met its enrollment targets this year and then some, and without lowering actual qualitative measures like grades and test scores.
It would not surprise me if Marquette did not admit a single person off of their wait list.
Folks that turned their nose up at Marquette because of the acceptance rate can go eff themselves. Have fun at your more "exclusive" school. I am sure you will fit in better there, anyway.
A club that let's everyone in isn't much of a club. If everyone knows the secret handshake it isn't a secret. Standards are important. Thresholds matter.
Quote from: theBabyDavid on May 10, 2018, 11:32:19 AM
A club that let's everyone in isn't much of a club. If everyone knows the secret handshake it isn't a secret. Standards are important. Thresholds matter.
Sounds like a Harvard/Michigan mentality...
Quote from: theBabyDavid on May 10, 2018, 11:32:19 AM
A club that let's everyone in isn't much of a club. If everyone knows the secret handshake it isn't a secret. Standards are important. Thresholds matter.
agree 100%. MU's acceptance rate is too high. US News has MU's Fall 2016 acceptance rate at 74%. That's way too high. Of our peer institutions, SLU is at 65%, Loyola at 73%, Creighton at 71% and Xavier at 64%. I understand that unlike state and "elite" schools that most people who apply to MU are in the core of the admission profile but still, to move up on the rankings we need to be more selective. They should aim to be below around 50%. This isn't like the 90's when MU was struggling to attract and retain students, closed East Hall and had to lower standards. After the Final Four MU capped the entering class at 1800, why the increase?
Higher admission standards equals a higher quality of education too.
Quote from: theBabyDavid on May 10, 2018, 11:32:19 AM
A club that let's everyone in isn't much of a club. If everyone knows the secret handshake it isn't a secret. Standards are important. Thresholds matter.
Thresholds most definitely matter. But thresholds based on quality academic criteria is what actually matters. Thresholds based on how many people ask to join your club don't matter one bit.
Not to mention that Disco Hippie keeps advocating for a type of admissions process that is a wasteful use of time and money.
Quote from: Billy Hoyle on May 10, 2018, 11:45:53 AM
agree 100%. MU's acceptance rate is too high. US News has MU's Fall 2016 acceptance rate at 74%. That's way too high. I understand that unlike state and "elite" schools that most people who apply to MU are in the core of the admission profile but still, to move up on the rankings we need to be more selective. They should aim to be below around 50%. This isn't like the 90's when MU was struggling to attract and retain students, closed East Hall and had to lower standards. After the Final Four MU capped the entering class at 1800, why the increase?
The twin towers of admissions stupidity: admissions rates and USN&WR rankings.
Quote from: #bansultan on May 10, 2018, 11:46:47 AM
Thresholds most definitely matter. But thresholds based on quality academic criteria is what actually matters. Thresholds based on how many people ask to join your club don't matter one bit.
Not to mention that Disco Hippie keeps advocating for a type of admissions process that is a wasteful use of time and money.
I agree with you Sultan. You're right on the merits but most consumers of higher education, especially where I come from, care more about superficial metrics and the appearance of things than reality. Your POV and that of the MU administration is how it SHOULD be but MU is not going to unilaterally succeed in changing the opinion of the average higher education consumer that rankings and acceptance rates don't matter and only outputs do. Perhaps if other institutions took the same approach as MU, these opinions would change over time but I don't see that happening anytime soon because demand to get into the most prestigious schools continues to increase and schools worry about the hit to the reputation. As I mentioned earlier, I was told directly by an MU admissions rep that they received significant push back on their approach the last couple of years and mostly not from snobs on the coasts either, so they had to make some adjustments and acknowledged they went too far in the other direction.
I am not at all advocating for MU to solicit applications from students likely to be denied just for the sake of lowering the acceptance rate and acknowledge that system is inefficient. What I have advocated for strongly is for MU to increase the total number of "qualified" applicants significantly so they can make more admissions decisions based largely on non academic criteria. It would be great for MU to have substantially more applicants than they could reasonably take, most of whom are very qualified, so they take other factors into consideration. That's what the schools on their peer list in the PDF I attached routinely do, and I think MU is heading in that direction.
Warrior Chick is correct that Applications were way up this past cycle and they exceeded their enrollment goals considerably which is a positive step forward. I'm just not sure that would have occurred without the pressure.
Quote from: theBabyDavid on May 10, 2018, 11:32:19 AM
A club that let's everyone in isn't much of a club. If everyone knows the secret handshake it isn't a secret. Standards are important. Thresholds matter.
Our club doesn't let everyone in. It just doesn't encourage people to request membership if they know they won't be voted in.
Quote from: Disco Hippie on May 10, 2018, 12:16:50 PM
I agree with you Sultan. You're right on the merits but most consumers of higher education, especially where I come from, care more about superficial metrics and the appearance of things than reality. Your POV and that of the MU administration is how it SHOULD be but MU is not going to unilaterally succeed in changing the opinion of the average higher education consumer that rankings and acceptance rates don't matter and only outputs do. Perhaps if other institutions took the same approach as MU, these opinions would change over time but I don't see that happening anytime soon because demand to get into the most prestigious schools continues to increase and schools worry about the hit to the reputation. As I mentioned earlier, I was told directly by an MU admissions rep that they received significant push back on their approach the last couple of years and mostly not from snobs on the coasts either, so they had to make some adjustments and acknowledged they went too far in the other direction.
I am not at all advocating for MU to solicit applications from students likely to be denied just for the sake of lowering the acceptance rate and acknowledge that system is inefficient. What I have advocated for strongly is for MU to increase the total number of "qualified" applicants significantly so they can make more admissions decisions based largely on non academic criteria. It would be great for MU to have substantially more applicants than they could reasonably take, most of whom are very qualified, so they take other factors into consideration. That's what the schools on their peer list in the PDF I attached routinely do, and I think MU is heading in that direction.
Warrior Chick is correct that Applications were way up this past cycle and they exceeded their enrollment goals considerably which is a positive step forward. I'm just not sure that would have occurred without the pressure.
Look, I know more about admissions marketing here than pretty much anyone else. I have worked in university marketing for almost 20 years. If Marquette is meeting its enrollment goals, both quantitatively and qualitatively, there is ZERO reason to worry about its acceptance rate.
Believe me, I know what drives enrollment. And this isn't a decade ago where rankings and exclusivity were at their peak. A targeted, analytical approach is the best way to build your freshman class - not only number-wise, but academics, diversity, etc. Ramping up costs, by casting a wider net for the sole reason so you get more people to reject, is inefficient both in the long and short term.
Marquette is doing the right thing. The proof is in the numbers.
Quote from: #bansultan on May 10, 2018, 11:48:02 AM
The twin towers of admissions stupidity: admissions rates and USN&WR rankings.
who said anything about US News Rankings. I only referenced them to cite my course for admissions rates or our peer schools. Plus, the top students look at rankings and admissions rates. They want a more exclusive institution. It doesn't help for MU to be considered a "safety school."
Admissions rates matter too when it comes to the institution's reputation when it comes to hiring graduates outside of the normal "market."
Quote from: Billy Hoyle on May 10, 2018, 12:46:43 PM
who said anything about US News Rankings. I only referenced them to cite my course for admissions rates or our peer schools.
You did. You mentioned "moving up in the rankings."
Quote from: Billy Hoyle on May 10, 2018, 12:46:43 PM
Plus, the top students look at rankings and admissions rates.
Not as much as you think. Definitely not as much as they used to.
Quote from: Billy Hoyle on May 10, 2018, 12:46:43 PM
They want a more exclusive institution.
Why?
Quote from: Billy Hoyle on May 10, 2018, 12:46:43 PM
It doesn't help for MU to be considered a "safety school."
Anyone who considers MU that is ignorant.
Quote from: Billy Hoyle on May 10, 2018, 12:46:43 PM
Admissions rates matter too when it comes to the institution's reputation when it comes to hiring graduates outside of the normal "market."
LOL....absolutely not. Corporations do not hire people based on the admissions rates of the school. That's just silly. They hire people based on the quality of the student on the back end. Which is smart.
A bit dated but with interesting insights
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevecohen/2012/09/29/the-three-biggest-lies-in-college-admission/3/#2a2e047a2d24
Quote from: Disco Hippie on May 10, 2018, 10:40:15 AM
Thanks for Posting Process! I read this article on my commute the day it was published. I think your gut about this being mostly an issue for Top Tier schools is correct. MU is somewhat different than a lot of schools in that all of their colleges are direct entry instead of applying to the University as whole first and then applying to an individual college after Freshman or Sophomore year like most schools. I don't know for sure but my hunch is that MU's more competitive programs like Nursing and PT and maybe engineering probably do have wait lists, but generally speaking MU just isn't the type of institution where students are going to be desperate to get off of a wait list to the same extent as their Northeastern brethren like a Gtown or BC for example. MU is more akin to let's say Providence where one of the students profiled in the article ended up enrolling.
Like you, I'm both originally from and currently reside in the Northeast (NYC area) so I'm very familiar with what high school seniors and their parents are like around April 15th when the exclusive schools announce their decisions, how it's the talk of the various towns, etc, but MU isn't in the northeast and for the most part doesn't cater to that constituency. They have have rolling admissions and generally let students know within 2 or 3 weeks after they apply which is not something most schools in the Northeast do. They let everyone wait until April to maintain this air of exclusivity and mystery which I personally think is not really fair so I actually like MU's rolling admissions approach.
That said, I definitely share you concerns about MU's extremely high acceptance rate and there's no doubt in my mind that will be a turn off to many students in this region. Thankfully you and I are not the only ones with that POV, and I can assure you the MU administration has received substantial negative feedback on their high acceptance rate not only from alums, but from current and prospective students as well so they're not radically changing their approach but definitely pivoting on that. You can't have an 89% acceptance rate as they did last year, and 84% the year prior and not have the brand take a hit.
If you look at the attached PDF from MU's OIRA website, Figures 1 and 2 on page 3 are really telling. All of these other schools have almost double the number of applicants, a much lower acceptance rate, and still have a yield that's several percentage points higher than ours. To say that we don't stack up well to the peer institutions MU administrators hand picked to be compared with is a massive understatement, so hopefully they'll make some adjustments to rectify this.
This is tremendous . Thanks for sharing. I hope MU administration takes this to heart.
The acceptance rate is killing MU. I had a prospect recently that I had been working on the family many years relative to MU. The kid loved MU because of our basketball team. Got them out to see the school even. They were enthusiastic to apply. When the kid applied the turnaround from admissions with an acceptance was fast which was exciting to them but when they saw the percentages of admissions stats the family began to question if this was the right school. These were not rich elitists either, rather they were middle class people who wanted to get value for the big bucks tuition they would have to shell out. I think that is what MU management is missing here. They are debasing the perceived value in the market place and creating a self fulfilling scenario where the people they want selecting out. The kid ended up going to Fordham. I know there are those who say we are getting our spots filled and that may be the case but long term the current strategy is fools gold.
According to this Marquette had more applications than Madison and a lower acceptance rate.
www.acceptancerate.com/wisconsin
Quote from: theBabyDavid on May 10, 2018, 01:32:39 PM
According to this Marquette had more applications than Madison and a lower acceptance rate.
www.acceptancerate.com/wisconsin
Behold Mount Mary College!! Obviously the most EXCLUSIVE college in Wisconsin!!! Everyone should want to go there!!!
if this strategy by MU is keeping douche bag New Yorkers and New Englanders out, then keep it up.
Quote from: ZiggysWhiteWineBoy on May 10, 2018, 01:48:50 PM
if this strategy by MU is keeping douche bag New Yorkers and New Englanders out, then keep it up.
(https://crazy4comiccon.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/high-five-gif-4.gif)
Pardon my cultural appropriation.
Quote from: #bansultan on May 10, 2018, 12:27:22 PM
Look, I know more about admissions marketing here than pretty much anyone else. I have worked in university marketing for almost 20 years. If Marquette is meeting its enrollment goals, both quantitatively and qualitatively, there is ZERO reason to worry about its acceptance rate.
Believe me, I know what drives enrollment. And this isn't a decade ago where rankings and exclusivity were at their peak. A targeted, analytical approach is the best way to build your freshman class - not only number-wise, but academics, diversity, etc. Ramping up costs, by casting a wider net for the sole reason so you get more people to reject, is inefficient both in the long and short term.
Marquette is doing the right thing. The proof is in the numbers.
Fair enough.....I don't work in higher education marketing/admissions/enrollment and have no idea. If the only goal is to make sure the institution has enough students, I'm sure you're right but this purely analytical approach to enrollment doesn't seem to take into account how that might affect an instutution's reputation. There's no way to measure that that I'm aware of. If that's the best way, then why aren't the other school's on MU's handpicked peer list doing the same thing?
Again refer to Figures 1 & 2 on Page 3 of the attached PDF
Quote from: #bansultan on May 10, 2018, 01:42:07 PM
Behold Mount Mary College!! Obviously the most EXCLUSIVE college in Wisconsin!!! Everyone should want to go there!!!
They probably con a bunch of dudes into applying to drive down their acceptance rate.
Quote from: warriorchick on May 10, 2018, 12:24:34 PM
Our club doesn't let everyone in. It just doesn't encourage people to request membership if they know they won't be voted in.
How then does one explain the strong correlation between the most prestigious colleges and universities and strikingly low admission rates?
Ivy and NESCAC acceptance rates are pointedly low. Not surprisingly, they are also regarded as the very best colleges in North America.
Acceptance rate is universally acknowledged as a crucial barometer of selectivity. This is fact. To argue otherwise is absurd.
Exclusivity is defined by selectivity.
Quote from: theBabyDavid on May 10, 2018, 02:22:00 PM
How then does one explain the strong correlation between the most prestigious colleges and universities and strikingly low admission rates?
Ivy and NESCAC acceptance rates are pointedly low. Not surprisingly, they are also regarded as the very best colleges in North America.
Acceptance rate is universally acknowledged as a crucial barometer of selectivity. This is fact. To argue otherwise is absurd.
Exclusivity is defined by selectivity.
That is true, as you said, of only the most prestigious colleges. Marquette will never be in that group, and does not want to be.
Quote from: warriorchick on May 10, 2018, 02:33:07 PM
That is true, as you said, of only the most prestigious colleges. Marquette will never be in that group, and does not want to be.
Disagree. FFP was the most prestigious of all summer school programs. Bring back FFP and watch our rankings soar (both academic and basketball)
Ranking are a funny thing, I think people try to generalize school rankings too much rather than looking into individual programs.
I think I was puzzled by Marquette's ranking for about a day before realizing well if I get into the program I want to, the overall school ranking doesn't mean a damn thing, and if it really bothered me that much, I just would have went to Illinois or Northwestern instead.
Quote from: warriorchick on May 10, 2018, 02:33:07 PM
That is true, as you said, of only the most prestigious colleges. Marquette will never be in that group, and does not want to be.
Yes this is true, but it's true because there's no realistic way for a >$600M endowment institution to compete with schools that have $10B+ endowments. The top top schools' endowments exceed $30B in some cases. Fine.
But MU absolutely aspires to move up in the rankings and compete with the peer schools they've identified. The strategic plan says the goal is to "Advance Marquette as a highly ranked destination university, renowned for academic rigor, high-impact educational experiences, innovation in teaching and learning, and achievement of its community of scholars. It's all right there below.
http://www.marquette.edu/strategic-planning/theme-academic-excellence.php
How on earth do they realistically expect to achieve that with the acceptance rate where it currently is (89%) for Fall 2017? What's interesting if you look at this is virtually every other stat that schools are typically measured by is on the left panel except their acceptance rate so they're omitting it on purpose. What I'm not sure of if they're omitting it because they're genuinely embarrassed, or because they just resent the fact that it's even relevant and are trying to make statement and thumb their nose at the higher education establishment?
It's one thing for MU to have a slightly higher acceptance rate than some other schools which is fine, but if you look at the graph on the PDF I posted earlier, to say MU is an outlier in this area is a massive massive understatement. I don't get it! How could our current Provost, who comes from a much more prestigious institution that Marquette not recognize this???????
Yeah butt, sources in Zilber and such, hey?
Quote from: Disco Hippie on May 10, 2018, 02:00:35 PM
Fair enough.....I don't work in higher education marketing/admissions/enrollment and have no idea. If the only goal is to make sure the institution has enough students, I'm sure you're right but this purely analytical approach to enrollment doesn't seem to take into account how that might affect an instutution's reputation. There's no way to measure that that I'm aware of. If that's the best way, then why aren't the other school's on MU's handpicked peer list doing the same thing?
Again refer to Figures 1 & 2 on Page 3 of the attached PDF
Because higher education is slow to accept change.
Quote from: theBabyDavid on May 10, 2018, 02:22:00 PM
How then does one explain the strong correlation between the most prestigious colleges and universities and strikingly low admission rates?
Ivy and NESCAC acceptance rates are pointedly low. Not surprisingly, they are also regarded as the very best colleges in North America.
Acceptance rate is universally acknowledged as a crucial barometer of selectivity. This is fact. To argue otherwise is absurd.
Exclusivity is defined by selectivity.
You're mixing up cause and effect.
Quote from: swoopem on May 06, 2018, 03:06:19 PM
Bring back FFP. No waitlist needed
MU discontinuing FFP in the Pilarz era was a travesty. I am a proud FFP'er! I have a number of family members who went through the program as well, everyone has come out better for it. The program forges life long friendships and allows an incoming student an academic experience they wouldnt otherwise have.
BRING BACK FFP!
Quote from: #bansultan on May 10, 2018, 04:40:03 PM
Because higher education is slow to accept change.
Translation:
Any school that doesn't need to resort to similar tactics isn't going to.
Quote from: Disco Hippie on May 10, 2018, 08:32:00 PM
Translation:
Any school that doesn't need to resort to similar tactics isn't going to.
Right. They are going to be inefficient and use resources unwisely.
Quote from: #bansultan on May 10, 2018, 08:43:44 PM
Right. They are going to be inefficient and use resources unwisely.
Have a serious question since you work in the field and am curious what your take is. If Marquette had exactly the same profile in terms of academic composition, USNWR ranking, enrollment, endowment, religious affiliation, etc. but were located in Massachusetts or New York or Pennsylvania or CT for example, would it still make sense for them to embark on the same enrollment strategy? I realize MU is not located there so I guess what I'm asking is to what extent do you think MU's geography and the attitudes of folks in WI, IL and MN compared to people in the Northeast factored into their decision making on the issue?
Quote from: Disco Hippie on May 10, 2018, 09:43:46 PM
Have a serious question since you work in the field and am curious what your take is. If Marquette had exactly the same profile in terms of academic composition, USNWR ranking, enrollment, endowment, religious affiliation, etc. but were located in Massachusetts or New York or Pennsylvania or CT for example, would it still make sense for them to embark on the same enrollment strategy? I realize MU is not located there so I guess what I'm asking is to what extent do you think MU's geography and the attitudes of folks in WI, IL and MN compared to people in the Northeast factored into their decision making on the issue?
That's a fair question and I really don't know the answer. And I'm not sure if Marquette does either.
Regardless, here is a summary of what Marquette did. Bear in mind that this was put out by their consultant, but there is a lot of good stuff in here about why they chose this path.
https://www.ruffalonl.com/case-studies/marquette-university
"Because getting more of the right applications was the goal—not getting more applications overall. Also, the staff realized that having a smaller search pool would make it possible to spend more time and resources on students who were more likely to enroll."
Quote from: #bansultan on May 10, 2018, 09:54:31 PM
That's a fair question and I really don't know the answer. And I'm not sure if Marquette does either.
Regardless, here is a summary of what Marquette did. Bear in mind that this was put out by their consultant, but there is a lot of good stuff in here about why they chose this path.
https://www.ruffalonl.com/case-studies/marquette-university
"Because getting more of the right applications was the goal—not getting more applications overall. Also, the staff realized that having a smaller search pool would make it possible to spend more time and resources on students who were more likely to enroll."
The report is a self serving puff piece by the consultants. My experience with the admissions staff at MU is they are super lazy and not very thoughtful. So bingo hire a consultant that can create a way for you to do less work and get easier to close on candidates.
MU had everything going for it when it hit 75 on US News and was really starting to build a good reputation . Now the school is heading toward the 100s and parity with Loyola of Chicago and eventually DePaul.
I have been a trustee of two very high performing high schools and I guarantee in the real world MU's approach is the wrong one. The guidance counselors who are very influential will reaffirm what I am saying. MU is literally making themselves unattractive to the people who can pay full freight. So I disagree with the analysis that MU is making a good use of resources. I think they are debasing their asset base( brand name) and in effect that needs to be accounted for in the full cost of their strategy. As such this strategy is super expensive and very hard to remedy.
Quote from: Herman Cain on May 11, 2018, 12:26:01 AM
So bingo hire a consultant that can create a way for you to do less work and get easier to close on candidates.
What?!?!
Marquette is achieving better results with fewer resources?
This must be stopped immediately!!!
Quote from: Herman Cain on May 11, 2018, 12:26:01 AM
The report is a self serving puff piece by the consultants. My experience with the admissions staff at MU is they are super lazy and not very thoughtful. So bingo hire a consultant that can create a way for you to do less work and get easier to close on candidates.
MU had everything going for it when it hit 75 on US News and was really starting to build a good reputation . Now the school is heading toward the 100s and parity with Loyola of Chicago and eventually DePaul.
I have been a trustee of two very high performing high schools and I guarantee in the real world MU's approach is the wrong one. The guidance counselors who are very influential will reaffirm what I am saying. MU is literally making themselves unattractive to the people who can pay full freight. So I disagree with the analysis that MU is making a good use of resources. I think they are debasing their asset base( brand name) and in effect that needs to be accounted for in the full cost of their strategy. As such this strategy is super expensive and very hard to remedy.
You have a pretty good history here of being wrong. So....
Quote from: warriorchick on May 11, 2018, 06:59:10 AM
What?!?!
Marquette is achieving better results with fewer resources?
This must be stopped immediately!!!
Right. Let's bitch about how much Marquette's tuition is and then bitch some more about how they are trying to be more efficient.
Quote from: #bansultan on May 11, 2018, 07:26:27 AM
Right. Let's bitch about how much Marquette's tuition is and then bitch some more about how they are trying to be more efficient.
::) I know, hey?
Quote from: #bansultan on May 11, 2018, 07:25:24 AM
You have a pretty good history here of being wrong. So....
Often wrong, never in doubt
Quote from: #bansultan on May 10, 2018, 04:42:05 PM
You're mixing up cause and effect.
You miss the point. If Marquette wishes to be seen as more exclusive it must be more selective.
If MU chooses not to be as selective then it cannot be as exclusive as the premiere colleges and should therefore be satisfied with its second tier reputation.
Frankly, there is nothing actually wrong with being a second tier school. In our category I would suggest that only UND and GU rank among the very best American colleges. MU is in that next group within its category and seems to be doing rather well.
The real question is can Marquette elevate its status to be on a par with its category leaders? We should not compare ourselves with a Dartmouth or a Williams; rather, our standard of excellence is GU and UND.
Framing one's conceptual lens properly is essential to addressing the real question.
theBabyDavid
Spot on. I have debated this very topic with my brother in law on many occasions. I think MU should maximize exactly where they are in the food chain. I struggle big time when I see folks place in the exclusive club. Honestly, we are far closer to a blue blood ball program than an exclusive university.
Quote from: theBabyDavid on May 11, 2018, 12:11:25 PM
You miss the point. If Marquette wishes to be seen as more exclusive it must be more selective.
If MU chooses not to be as selective then it cannot be as exclusive as the premiere colleges and should therefore be satisfied with its second tier reputation.
Frankly, there is nothing actually wrong with being a second tier school. In our category I would suggest that only UND and GU rank among the very best American colleges. MU is in that next group within its category and seems to be doing rather well.
The real question is can Marquette elevate its status to be on a par with its category leaders? We should not compare ourselves with a Dartmouth or a Williams; rather, our standard of excellence is GU and UND.
Framing one's conceptual lens properly is essential to addressing the real question.
The problem is that it is intellectually dishonest to somehow frame yourself as "exclusive" by pumping up the denominator in the fraction. That doesn't make the education you provide any better. It won't make your graduates any more successful. That really doesn't mean you're actually "exclusive."
Now there are a lot of great schools that attract a ton of applications and therefore are exclusive due to limiting the numerator. That's much different. Those schools actually are exclusive.
Quote from: Goose on May 11, 2018, 12:19:32 PM
theBabyDavid
Spot on. I have debated this very topic with my brother in law on many occasions. I think MU should maximize exactly where they are in the food chain. I struggle big time when I see folks place in the exclusive club. Honestly, we are far closer to a blue blood ball program than an exclusive university.
I agree Goose. And that's exactly what I think they are doing.
Quote from: Goose on May 11, 2018, 12:19:32 PM
theBabyDavid
Spot on. I have debated this very topic with my brother in law on many occasions. I think MU should maximize exactly where they are in the food chain. I struggle big time when I see folks place in the exclusive club. Honestly, we are far closer to a blue blood ball program than an exclusive university.
Goose
Fact is, two persons were instrumental in transforming Marquette from a regional to national university - Luci Baines Johnson and Al McGuire. Marquette had been a regional college serving its core constituency of WI and IL Catholics. Those two helped usher in large numbers of students from beyond its traditional base, especially from the northeast.
Marquette's brand is heavily dependent on the success of Men's Basketball. Witness the struggles of the early '90s both on and off the court.
Quote from: theBabyDavid on May 11, 2018, 01:14:41 PM
Fact is, two persons were instrumental in transforming Marquette from a regional to national university - Luci Baines Johnson and Al McGuire. Marquette had been a regional college serving its core constituency of WI and IL Catholics. Those two helped usher in large numbers of students from beyond its traditional base, especially from the northeast.
Interesting fact, Leo Flynn (former Dean of Admissions -- I
think I have the name right) recruited heavily from Guam with quite a lot of success. I recall hearing in the late 80's that Marquette drew more students from Guam than any school not on the West Coast. I think there were approximately 20-25 students from Guam in my freshman class. I'm not saying it was an efficient use of resources...I honestly don't know. But I'm sure Leo enjoyed his annual trip to Guam. If Leo hadn't showed up at my HS one day, I'm sure I wouldn't have attended Marquette.
Quote from: StillAWarrior on May 11, 2018, 01:26:58 PM
Interesting fact, Leo Flynn (former Dean of Admissions -- I think I have the name right) recruited heavily from Guam with quite a lot of success. I recall hearing in the late 80's that Marquette drew more students from Guam than any school not on the West Coast. I think there were approximately 20-25 students from Guam in my freshman class. I'm not saying it was an efficient use of resources...I honestly don't know. But I'm sure Leo enjoyed his annual trip to Guam. If Leo hadn't showed up at my HS one day, I'm sure I wouldn't have attended Marquette.
In my class there seemed to be more students from Guam than the entire eastern seaboard of the U.S. from Maine to FL. That's probably somewhat exaggerated but I honestly don't think by much. Someone touched on it earlier and it's absolutely true that MU is heavily reliant on the success of it's men's basketball program to stay nationally relevant. Since I was there in the very early 90's and they hadn't been good since like '85, they were much more regional at the time, but hey, they did have tons of students from Guam! Nothing against Guamanians but I never thought it was a good thing that they had as many or more students from Guam and PR than combined students from the coasts or the south.
Quote from: StillAWarrior on May 11, 2018, 01:26:58 PM
Interesting fact, Leo Flynn (former Dean of Admissions -- I think I have the name right) recruited heavily from Guam with quite a lot of success. I recall hearing in the late 80's that Marquette drew more students from Guam than any school not on the West Coast. I think there were approximately 20-25 students from Guam in my freshman class. I'm not saying it was an efficient use of resources...I honestly don't know. But I'm sure Leo enjoyed his annual trip to Guam. If Leo hadn't showed up at my HS one day, I'm sure I wouldn't have attended Marquette.
Gov Felix "Guamo" Camacho was an RA at the Beer Can
Quote from: #bansultan on May 11, 2018, 12:26:50 PM
The problem is that it is intellectually dishonest to somehow frame yourself as "exclusive" by pumping up the denominator in the fraction. That doesn't make the education you provide any better. It won't make your graduates any more successful. That really doesn't mean you're actually "exclusive."
Now there are a lot of great schools that attract a ton of applications and therefore are exclusive due to limiting the numerator. That's much different. Those schools actually are exclusive.
I agree Goose. And that's exactly what I think they are doing.
It is not about the quality of MU Education. We all know it is very good. It is about marketing that to the greater world beyond Wisconsin Avenue. There are truly only 9 schools in America where the Numerator is limited because they can. The Ivies and Stanford. The rest, even Williams Amherst etc is all marketing and full of people who couldn't get into Ivy or Stanford . I put U of C, MIT and Cal Tech in a different category because they cater to legit super high academic type kids and there are really only so many of those floating around.
MU needs to ramp up its " Marketing" not its actual educational product. Give a hint of exclusivity and the school can pretty quickly move into be a top 50 school. The benefit of being a higher rated school is in the medium to long term the dollars for endowment flow in. More endowment means more money for better academic staff which furthers the actual product.
The provincial notion that MU is a school for people whose family never sent someone to college etc is a much dated thing. In fact I am not sure it ever really was the case. There was no damn charity from the Jesuits in my day if you couldn't pay the bills. There are tons of state universities that adequately fill that educational access role. MU is an expensive private school and needs to look and act the part in order to compete. Every one will be better off especially the kids who actually matriculate.
I second Goose! The Baby David's comments are exactly right. For all my complaining about the acceptance rate and the current enrollment strategy on here and to various administrators, I've never advocated for MU to take steps to try and become the next GTOWN, BC or ND. They are not an elite school never have been and never will be. I'm perfectly fine with that and up until a year or two ago was fine with their USNWR ranking which for 10 year was either in the high 70's to mid 80's. If they stayed there forever, I'd be perfectly content. The problem is they won't if they continue down this current path. They're on a downward trend and the only reason they are is because of the ridiculously high acceptance rate. MU has stepped up it's research considerably, increased diversity as well as the academic profile of the avg student and improved in almost every other metric accept that one.
Herman is absolutely right that this is a major turn off to many many prospective students and that's not just a coastal elitist POV. MU's own students are taking it up as a cause celebre. Remember that Tirb article someone posted on here back in November?
I don't know about everyone else on here but to me it's vitally important MU remain in the top 100. I do know they're targeting more foreign students, many from countries where the government pays full freight but many governments only pay tuition for their citizens who are attending top 100 National Universities and USNWR is the standard they use so it's important. If a school falls out of the top 100, tuition is then on the family. I don't know how many countries actually do this and whether the ones that do are countries that MU is recruiting in but interesting nonetheless.
Middle of the road, hey?
Marquette is an exceptional venue for those seeking the cumulative benefits of the Jesuit educational experience. For theBabyDavid, it is best articulated in the concept of the anticipatory joy of finding God in every aspect of this mundane existence.
One can learn thermodynamics and chemical kinetics anywhere; but at a Jesuit college one has the unique insight of God's hand in how this physical world works.
Not every scholar requires this creative spark. But for those who cherish their faith such revelation is energizing.
To say that acceptance rates and selectivity shouldn't matter and only outputs should, as many on here do, reeks of moral superiority, self righteousness, and arrogance! Come on Scoopers! Of course that's how it SHOULD be, but that is not how it is and probably never will be. If Marquette really wants to become a "highly ranked destination university" as they claim to in the strategic plan, they're never going to get there by letting in virtually everyyone, even if everyone Is qualified and deserves a spot. They have absolutely nothing to gain by such an approach and everything to lose. The only purpose it will serve is to reinforce the moral superiority and arrogance of the current administration and make them feel better about themselves while the reputation and ranking continues to erode.
It seems clear to Porky that the curent administration is more interested in being a social service organization than a university and Porky has serious concerns about that. Porky understands that MU is a mission driven institution and is supportive of the social justice agenda, but not over and above all else including MU's reputation!
edit: links not working
will try again
https://www.collegeraptor.com/getting-in/articles/questions-answers/low-acceptance-rate-mean-school-better/ (https://www.collegeraptor.com/getting-in/articles/questions-answers/low-acceptance-rate-mean-school-better/)
"A low acceptance rate does not automatically mean a school is better. Despite the hype surrounding acceptance rate, the truth is, it does not really tell you much about the quality of education you will receive at a particular school. It's a measure of its exclusivity, not necessarily its quality or worth."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/willarddix/2016/05/24/rethinking-the-meaning-of-colleges-low-acceptance-rates/#24afae431dd0 (https://www.forbes.com/sites/willarddix/2016/05/24/rethinking-the-meaning-of-colleges-low-acceptance-rates/#24afae431dd0)
"Although colleges love to crow about these numbers, they conceal a fact that few outsiders realize: A low acceptance rate, along with high scores, grades and other characteristics, indicates inputs, not outputs."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevecohen/2013/03/25/college-rankings-arent-meaningless-theyre-just-misleading/#e61037e57d09 (https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevecohen/2013/03/25/college-rankings-arent-meaningless-theyre-just-misleading/#e61037e57d09)
"And all too often we've seen the same pattern: parents come in with a set of "ranked" colleges and want to spend 90% of their effort figuring out how to get Sam admitted.
That's backwards."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/willarddix/2016/05/13/dont-use-college-selectivity-as-a-measure-of-quality/ (https://www.forbes.com/sites/willarddix/2016/05/13/dont-use-college-selectivity-as-a-measure-of-quality/)
"If you look at our higher education system from an educational perspective, this preoccupation with enrolling smart students makes little sense, because the emphasis seems to be more on acquiring smart students than on educating them well...."
Ok, I got my links to work this time. A lot of good information and perspectives in these articles. I hope people take the time to read them.
As for Porky's comments: What a bunch of contrived BS! You're post is dripping with irony because the reason people care about acceptance rate is so that they can feel superior about the university they or their child are attending. It's a meaningless metric.
The real history of acceptance rates starts like this:
"In the distant past of college admission, even institutions like Harvard and Yale accepted most of their applicants."
"In a word, selective college admission really began as a way to keep "undesirables" out of WASPy campuses and, by extension, out of the social circles graduates expected to enter."
source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/willarddix/2016/05/13/dont-use-college-selectivity-as-a-measure-of-quality/#61833b031821 (https://www.forbes.com/sites/willarddix/2016/05/13/dont-use-college-selectivity-as-a-measure-of-quality/#61833b031821)
Quote from: Lazar's Canadian Bacon Headband on May 13, 2018, 10:47:48 PM
As for Porky's comments: What a bunch of contrived BS! You're post is dripping with irony because the reason people care about acceptance rate is so that they can feel superior about the university they or their child are attending. It's a meaningless metric.
Porky doesn't know if people want to feel superior necessarily, but they should certainly feel comfortable about where they're attending and given the substantial $$$ it costs to attend a private school like Marquette, many many people aren't comfortable shelling out that kind of money for a school with an 89% acceptance rate, no matter how strong the incoming metrics and favorable the outputs. To those who feel that way of thinking is ass backwards, that acceptance rates have no bearing on quality, blah blah blah well congratulations! They're 100% correct! The problem, as other posters have pointed out, is that way of thinking is alive and well and isn't going to change anytime soon unless every national university colludes together....to use the parlance of our times......and starts taking the pragmatic approach that Marquette has taken. We all know that's not going to happen. The sad thing is MU has succeeded in both growing the undergraduate population, and not just maintaining but INCREASING the academic quality of the incoming classes the last 2 years, but mark Porky's words......they will absolutely be penalized for it. That's not how it should be but it is how things are. That the powers that be don't seem to give a sh*&%t boggles Porky's mind.
Appreciate everyone's inputs and responses on this topic.
Having said this, I disagree with the direction that MU has decided to take. Agree with many that acceptance rate and rankings should not matter, but the truth remains that this is a deciding factor for many prospective students, especially those looking from long distances. We know the quality of MU's eduction, but the rest of the country simply does not. When you take a step outside of the Midwestern bubble it becomes apparent.
I truly am proud of my school. I just hope that one day others around the nation can recognize us for what we are, outside of the Wade's and Butler's so to speak.
Quote from: PorkysButthole on May 18, 2018, 11:16:34 AM
Porky doesn't know if people want to feel superior necessarily, but they should certainly feel comfortable about where they're attending and given the substantial $$$ it costs to attend a private school like Marquette, many many people aren't comfortable shelling out that kind of money for a school with an 89% acceptance rate, no matter how strong the incoming metrics and favorable the outputs. To those who feel that way of thinking is ass backwards, that acceptance rates have no bearing on quality, blah blah blah well congratulations! They're 100% correct! The problem, as other posters have pointed out, is that way of thinking is alive and well and isn't going to change anytime soon unless every national university colludes together....to use the parlance of our times......and starts taking the pragmatic approach that Marquette has taken. We all know that's not going to happen. The sad thing is MU has succeeded in both growing the undergraduate population, and not just maintaining but INCREASING the academic quality of the incoming classes the last 2 years, but mark Porky's words......they will absolutely be penalized for it. That's not how it should be but it is how things are. That the powers that be don't seem to give a sh*&%t boggles Porky's mind.
You are wrong on the bolded. There are so many rankings based on so much criteria that the marketplace is starting to see through it.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on May 12, 2018, 01:52:59 PM
Middle of the road, hey?
I say it's time to take The Zizzo Group off the leash. Marquette will skyrocket up the rankings with a solid Gold reputation for excellence.
Quote from: theBabyDavid on May 20, 2018, 05:15:03 PM
I say it's time to take The Zizzo Group off the leash. Marquette will skyrocket up the rankings with a solid Gold reputation for excellence.
What is Zizzo?
Quote from: Disco Hippie on May 21, 2018, 10:01:10 PM
What is Zizzo?
I hear a Zizzo roams along the same professional plains as a Chicos
Tink he mayof ment Jizzo, hey?