Quack!
They need him. For a program with so much tradition, they suck!
The more you hate us, the better we are.
Things just keep getting better and better at Oregon!
The more you hate us the better we are? People seem to hate Oregon a lot and they are still not that good so that statement makes no sense. Hey, if you believe that shit then I am happy for you!
this is laughably bad. How this kid chose Oregon over those other schools is pathetic. Such a mediocre program and terrible school.
A Duck wrote:
The more you hate us, the better we are.
Really? How does this causal relationship work, exactly?
Ten of 12 PAC-12 schools are on Shanghai.
Guess his grades fit that sort of school he chose.
WSU is the only other unranked PAC-12 school.
Oh contraire...Oregon is rather high on the Shanghai list. Open your eyes when you look at the list next time. BTW, what does a ranking of research universities have to do with the quality of undergraduate educations?
First off, a school has to be pretty high in eduational rankings to be admitted to the Pac 12, secondly Oregon ranks near the middle of the Pac 12 schools and in the top 1/3 in the country (US News and World Report).
Shang ranks only the Top 100 schools in the world. UO has never made the cut. HS advisors use Shang exclusively now. Others are disregarded.
UO aint so bad a choice. It's accredited after all. WSU and OSU are unranked PAC-12 schools on the Shanghai 100. Of the 8 Ivy League schools, Dartmouth is unranked. Of the 11 University of Calfornia schools, Merced, Riverside, and Santa Cruz are unranked.
I hope that you are not comparing that community college in Eugene to Dartmouth!
and yet a current Dartmouth graduate and other Ivy league graduates do their graduate work at Oregon.
Always a step or two behind Villanova.[quote]coach wrote:
In college wrote:
Shang ranks only the Top 100 schools in the world. UO has never made the cut. HS advisors use Shang exclusively now. Others are disregarded.
This is an 'impossible' statement on its face. You cannot possibly know what (all) high school advisers use and use exclusively. As to the general sense of the statement, both the specialist I know and the advisers at our high school have not said 'boo' about it in my discussions - they might use it but it is not the core. There are a number of broad resources.
A 'ranking' is really nonsense to have a 1, 2, 3... because even at the undergraduate level it depends substantially on the particulars of the student. Take a simple example; Harvey Mudd is one of the 'best' most exclusive schools - most of the kids that go there also get in to either MIT or CalTech or both. But it is a rather specialized school not appropriate for more then a modest fraction of the top, say, 1000 students in the US each year. In general, engineering schools of more relevance to a subset of students and not so for others.
Now, go to your animus for Oregon. Oregon State and U of Oregon are similar in level of with its agricultural, forestry, and engineering programs is appropriate and fairly good for a number of fairly good students, while Oregon's programs are better for others that are 'just as good schools.
As an example, a student I know rather well got more than 700 on the Math SAT and did reasonably well on the other parts and is considering Oregon State. Yes, the are good but not great scores -- but those were the scores in eighth grade and they have been on NASA's top 15 high school teams two years in a row, and went to nationals for Science Olympiad and etc.
As for programs for great high school runners. Over the last thirty-pus years one of the (other) great distance running programs is Arkansas, certainly not above Oregon on the academic pecking scale(s), although Wisconsin is. Going to a more recent period for Great distance programs, Oregon is easily a rival for Oklahoma State and well 'below' Stanford.
So quit your irrelevant ravings about 'how bad' Oregon is and it is silly to apply your criteria to Cheserek who had to take it easy in the summer and first half of the fall to prepare for the SATs so that he could get into reasonable colleges and to be eligible as a freshman.
A Duck wrote:
The more you hate us, the better we are.
I guess people don't really hate Oregon that much after all then
Down to earth schools are always the right choice. I like schools like UO where you are taught by regular people who follow the textbook and issue accurate pre-tests so you know for sure what to expect on midterms and finals. At USC lower division lectures are useless, pure fantasy, never follow the textbook. Profs add crap to the syllabus and teach out of order. Lectures have little to do with what will be on the tests which are always a complete suprise. TAs are told to write midterm and finals so that class scores average around 50%, and none of the TAs speak English for a damn.
Shame he won't reach his potential by going to Oregon. AJ Acosta, part II.
Running Faster wrote:
Oh contraire...Oregon is rather high on the Shanghai list. Open your eyes when you look at the list next time. BTW, what does a ranking of research universities have to do with the quality of undergraduate educations?
First off, a school has to be pretty high in eduational rankings to be admitted to the Pac 12, secondly Oregon ranks near the middle of the Pac 12 schools and in the top 1/3 in the country (US News and World Report).
It's "au contraire."