 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
|||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
I only see 13 universities listed as having joined in 1900: Berkeley, Michigan, Wisconsin, Columbia, Cornell, Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Princeton, Stanford, Chicago, Penn, Yale, and Clark.
I think you're right, but the AAU webpage has 14 written all over it. I'll change it to thirteen and inquire. Madmaxmarchhare 07:01, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Ah.. CUA.. thanks to whoever added that one. I learn something new everyday Madmaxmarchhare 00:49, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Dartmouth is missing, which surprizes me. Could that be the missing 14th school? Athaler 14:28, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Although Dartmouth is certainly a fine institution, it didn't grow up as a "research" university as close to the European sense as the other institutions in the AAU. As initially started, the AAU was to, in part, provide European research universities with a list of American schools that worked under somewhat the same philosophy. For awhile, some European universities took this to mean that only AAU members were true universities in the classical sense. The AAU stridently denied that, but, nonetheless kept their original mission. Hope that helps. Madmaxmarchhare 15:48, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Why did this institution get the admitted?-- 69.172.150.61 ( talk) 06:39, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
I can find references to Catholic University up to the year 2000 on the AAU's site, but no mention of when or why it left the association. -- Beefyt 02:11, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
I would guess that it maybe was never a member. The linked references say they include "other institutions," not just AAU members. Other non-AAU members referenced include UCSF and the University of Cincinnati. Yill577 19:27, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Never mind. This reference explicitly states the Catholic University of America was present at the founding meeting. Yet it never again metions it. Yill577 19:41, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
The letterhead on this letter, dated April 23, 2002, contains the Catholic University of America. Yill577 19:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
There is a letter at the bottom of this document showing that CUA withdrew from the AAU on October 20, 2002. Yill577 20:00, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the legwork! Madmaxmarchhare 20:07, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
not a member? strange!!
- It could very well be invited one of these days.. there were and are a lot of high-calibre universities that aren't in the list, and they seem to get around to them in time. Madmaxmarchhare 17:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Good call. They're on there now. -- 128.61.45.33 ( talk) 01:27, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Who would've known this article would have had such a strong influence over the AAU? Good work, everyone! ;) Ommnomnomgulp ( talk) 16:17, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
The image Image:Association of American Universities seal.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
- That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
- That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --23:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
the first sentence in this section isn't - a sentence that is. it's a disaster! totally incomprehensible.a set of parentheses is opened and doesn't close for about 50 words and/or numbers. by this point the reader is either totally confused or has lost interest. Toyokuni3 ( talk) 21:51, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
An editor has insisted that the article note that no members of the AAU are in Latin America, despite efforts to include Latin American institutions since the founding of the AAU. I can't seem to find any mention of these efforts in the source cited as supporting the claim. Can someone else please tell me where it is? Thanks! ElKevbo ( talk) 06:10, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- I didn't find it. Frankly, it doesn't seem to be relevant, anyhow. I'm sure a lot of schools from different states have been lobbying to get their schools in too. Why does it matter? I don't think it does.. Ommnomnomgulp ( talk) 08:15, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
The universities are ranked in alphabetical order, with the location, and year of establishment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juicy fruit146 ( talk • contribs) 20:11, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I see the utility of this table. These schools are all highly ranked and the differences between them in these ranking systems are misleading in their insignificance (i.e. there is little or no difference between schools that are ranked somewhat close together despite the silly numbers assigned by the ranking systems). And this table will have to be updated every time one of these systems is updated.
- For those reasons and more, I think this table should be deleted.
ElKevbo (
talk) 21:08, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
- I agree. The table suggests these rankings are used by the AAU in some manner. They are not. They have nothing to do with AAU membership or membership selection and thus their inclusion is misleading. A more useful table would be of total research expenditures, which is available from NSF, at least for the American universities. I am going to remove the table and wait or comments before proceeding with one of research expenditures. CrazyPaco ( talk) 18:23, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Agreed with both ElKevbo and CrazyPaco. It was exasperating seeing the endless string of insignificant rating changes being put into the article and I'm glad it's stopped. Ylee ( talk) 20:19, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
The table says that UChicago has an ABET accredited engineering program, but if I'm not mistaken, I don't think UChicago has any ABET-accredited programs? The only engineering/applied science disciplines that they offer are computer science and molecular engineering, but according to the ABET program search tool thing, neither of them are ABET-accredited. Popopopper ( talk) 01:16, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Halwes has begun an edit war to add a new section to this article listing the "longest-standing members" of this institution. First, this list duplicates what is already in the "Membership" section; if you really want to see which institutions are oldest, you can easily sort the membership table using the "Established" column. Second, the information is unnecessary, especially in a stand-alone section. Why do readers need to know the oldest institutions that are part of this organization? Third, the title "longest-standing" is misleading because it implies that the institutions in the list have been AAU members for longer than other institutions and that is clearly not true when all of the founding members (that are still part of the AAU) have been members for the same length of time.
It's inappropriate to begin an edit war, particularly without even bothering to open a discussion. It's especially inappropriate when the information being added in the edit war duplicates what's already in the article, is unnecessary, and is misleading. ElKevbo ( talk) 07:40, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
An unregistered editor is insisting that this article include the athletic conference to the table listing current members. They have not provided any reason for adding this information and have begun an edit war to retain the information. This information simply isn't relevant to the topic of this article. ElKevbo ( talk) 03:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- Totally correct. If he continues, disciplinary action should be taken.
Vgy7ujm (
talk) 18:36, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- Adding conferences seems pointless. This is a research and graduate education club. I added land-grant status which is much more relevant. 24.85.234.209 ( talk) 03:01, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
@ Rreagan007: Why are you now edit warring to add this information to this article? ElKevbo ( talk) 03:06, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
- Athletics is irrelevant when it comes to AAU. Relevant data points include members of the national academies, faculty awards, etc. This can be determined but it is a painstaking process. 24.85.234.209 ( talk) 00:58, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
- Just to add to the consensus. Athletics are not relevant to this strictly Academic organization. Grey Wanderer ( talk) 21:52, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
Rreagan007 was notified about this discussion two days ago and has declined to participate in any way. Since the only three editors who have participated in the discussion are in agreement, I'll edit the article to remove the athletic conferences. ElKevbo ( talk) 23:07, 30 September 2023 (UTC)