<p>Globalist,</p>
<p>If you take the big picture, the trend just follows the equilibrium theory, although it's imperfect and always changing. If there's a higher risk of drop-out, by zero-sum game theorem, there should be higher reward, or otherwise irrationality measure arises. If your idea turns out to be the new point of equilibrium in the future, it will move in that direction. Indeed, it doesn't really follow our humanitarian utopian ideas. But that's how our system works.</p>
<p>Re. Nashs (equilibrium) theory, in a perfect world, research universities would be utilizing, maximizing, and perhaps even synergizing both factors teaching and research towards a mutual gain for both areas, and in some schools, this is beginning to happen. But due to the often-used threat known as publish or perish, undergraduate students unfortunately end up being the losers (by virtue of zero-sum) since professorial research has become more and more the focus, to the demise of undergraduate instruction (both in the classroom and outside of it). To put it more bluntly, I refer to Sakkys quote from Inside American Education where a U. Mich professor stated, "Every minute I spend in an undergraduate classroom is costing me money and prestige".</p>
<p>You mentioned reward for the student or for the school? </p>
<p>For the student, I see no real reward tied to attending a school w/ a higher drop-out risk. Whats the greater benefit of attending Texas with a higher risk of drop-out (29%) vs. Princeton (3%).</p>
<p>For the school, there is a reward. That reward for the research university is the research dollars and prestige, but often at the cost/risk of a higher drop-out rate. Again, a weaker focus on undergraduates coupled with finite professorial resources (i.e. time and energy, which is spent in the lab rather than the classroom), and the finite resources of the school itself (in providing enough courses/classes needed for graduation), all contribute to lower student graduation rates at many public research universities.</p>
<p>For the benefit of undergraduates who deserve a stellar education, this should change. There has to be a happy equilibrium.</p>
<p>"For the benefit of undergraduates who deserve a stellar education, this should change. There has to be a happy equilibrium."</p>
<p>It is the same as saying: "You should donate your money to poor african people rather than feed your dog". The world is cold.</p>
<p>You are very optimistic, and you have to correct your understanding about zero-sum, since I'm talking about zero-sum in each individual or at least collective individuals (otherwise, we refer to irrationality).</p>
<p>Anyway, I like your passionate and utopian view :)</p>
<p>My last sentence was rhetorical rather than definitive. My point is research universities must find a win-win situation where undergraduate students won't lose (and if research gains in the process, great.)</p>
<p>Bad analogy. Feeding dogs vs. people (one done out of love for your dog, the other out of altruism) is very different from choosing research vs. teaching. Different factors come into play.</p>
<p>Regarding zero-sum...semantics. In this world where research is becoming all too important, I realize that using dominant strategies by both parties may be more detrimental in the long-run (private rationality vs. collective irrationality), and I know in a perfect world, the goal should be to create and sustain a mutually beneficial cooperative outcome. </p>
<p><em>sigh</em> (Perhaps, I am too utopian.) That said, I digress to my rhetorial statement, "there must be a happy equilibrium." (If so, someone please find it.)</p>
<p>reviveeee!</p>
<p>My post is a little dated, I suppose. Didn't really start using this site until recently. The "Top Public Colleges" being discussed here seems to be almost exclusively those that are listed as "National Universities" by USNWR. Fair enough, but there are also a number of public colleges and universities that do very well in the other rankings. Granted, it's tough to compare apples and organges, but some of these schools are very good, particularly for students who want an affordable education at a small or mid-sized school. The biggest opportunities are in the "tweener" Master's Universities category -- I think states have a harder time justifying using tax dollars to support smaller colleges. </p>
<p>Public Liberal Arts Colleges:</p>
<p>VMI
St. Mary's (MD)
U Minnesota -- Morris
UNC -- Asheville
Richard Stockton</p>
<p>Master Universities</p>
<p>Truman State University (MO)
Northern Iowa<br>
UW (Eau Claire, La Crosse, Steven Point, Whitewater)<br>
U MichiganDearborn<br>
Washburn<br>
Eastern Illinois<br>
U MinnesotaDuluth<br>
College of New Jersey<br>
SUNY (Geneseo, New Paltz, Fredonia)
Rowan
RutgersCamden (NJ)
Millersville<br>
Towson<br>
CUNY (Baruch College, Hunter, Queens, Brooklyn College, City College)<br>
Salisbury<br>
Shippensburg
James Madison (Div. I-AA Champion, BTW)
The Citadel
University of Mary Washington
App State
College of Charleston
Murray State
UNC (Wilmington, Charlotte)<br>
Winthrop
Mississippi Univ. for Women<br>
Longwood University
Tennessee Tech<br>
Marshall University
North Georgia<br>
UT -- Chattanooga<br>
Western Kentucky<br>
Radford
Cal Poly (San Luis Obispo. Pomona<br>
Western Washington<br>
CSU (Chico, Long Beach, Fullerton<br>
Sonoma State
Univ. of Colo.Colorado Springs<br>
Humboldt State
San Jose State
Weber State
Central Washington</p>
<p>Bachelor's</p>
<p>Ramapo College<br>
University of MaineFarmington
Winston-Salem State
USC (Aiken, Upstate)
Elizabeth City State
Shepherd University (Drop dead gorgeous town, btw)
Concord College</p>
<p>WHEW!</p>
<p>I think it's worth noting that within each of the great universities listed throughout this thread, individual departments may be ranked as one of the top programs in the country. For example, the U of Illinois for many years had the top Accounting program in the country. I'm sure once we look at the individual program data we will see why some of these schools excel in an overall list. I'll go out on a limb and say that they will each have a number of programs that are very highly ranked.</p>
<p>Thanks to Iderochi for the list of Public Colleges. As a student of Rowan University I have been able to see the many improvements made over the past four years. I would definitely recommend Rowan to those looking for a smaller more intimate college environment, affordable tuition, and strong academic base. The campus is being expanded every year with the construction of new academic buildings as well as student housing. The school has also just received a 10 million dollar gift. This is just one of many monetary gifts received the the University in the past 15 years. I will graduate in May so if there was any time to complain about my school, it would be now since I'm so eager to get out into the "real world" But I leave here feeling that Rowan University provided the best academic environment I could have hoped for. And this is coming from someone who transferred out of a more expensive and more elite University to attend Rowan. So thanks Iderochi. Public universities rock!</p>
<p>Its worth noting that it is a lot more difficult to get accepted into Penn State's main campus as a Freshman. The majority have to take their first two years at satelite, for lack of a better term. Also, the PSU Honors Program is more challenging to get into than Harvard. Check the stats. The University of Delaware has an Honors Program open to their top 14%. So any of these public schools on the list are excellent and most have Honors Programs that are worth considering if comparing to more selective private schools. I agree that grouping is better than going by ranking since so many things factor in to whether a school is a good fit for the student.</p>