College Comparison XVII: Geographic Diversity

College Search & Selection
81

<p>^ Like Hawkette said, there are plenty of great, regional universities throughout the US…but only a handful can claim worldwide recognition (and this is never because of undergraduate education). Distinction comes from research and graduate studies first and foremost and that’s where universities that want to rise up need to funnel their resources…sometimes at the expense of CC’s trumpeted “undergraduate experience”.</p>

<p>Again, Alex, thanks for the Michigan PSA…
I gotta say when I was watching college football this past Saturday, the Big Ten and Michigan had the classiest ads by far.</p>

82

<p>^^^Too bad we s*ck in football now. :-(</p>

83

<p>^ You’re talking to a Berkeley guy about your football team s*cking? I’d love to have the football history your school does. Too bad rugby isn’t as popular as football…my Cal Bears would be a dynasty.</p>

84

<p>Ucb,
I don’t agree that a school like Northwestern, with a distribution like the following is a regional school. </p>

<p>40% , Midwest
21% , Mid Atlantic
16% , South/Southwest
15% , West
6% , Northeast
7% , Non US</p>

<p>One can’t deny that a meaningful % of Northwestern students come from its home region, but a regional school? I definitely don’t think so. </p>

<p>This geographic pattern is the case for most of the privates in the USWNR Top 25-30. And I would certainly not consider these schools as anywhere near as regional as the vast majority of publics. </p>

<p>alex
Of course, the physical plants at nearly all of the colleges in the USA have changed/improved and many in extremely impressive fashion. If you’ve been around to many US colleges in the last decade, then you know that the most common feature at all of these schools is the ongoing construction of new buildings! </p>

<p>I think you also neglect the evolution of the student populations at these colleges as well as the resources that fund them. State Us are obliged to keep up with the population changes in their states and the operating pattern is usually that every year the schools are continually being asked to do more with less. While the population growth in Michigan has likely been miniscule, if not negative, I’d still be willing to wager that U Michigan’s undergraduate population is up sharply over 25 years ago. U Virginia makes that information public and its undergraduate enrollment has increased by 25% over that time. </p>

<p>Over the last 25 years, all schools have almost certainly seen some growth in undergraduate enrollment, but the key question is whether the colleges have maintained/increased services for this larger student population. If you or anyone has it, I’d be interested to see how enrollments have changed at schools across the USA, public and private.</p>

<p>In addition, there have been evolutionary declines in staffing levels at many colleges over the last 25 years and I believe that this trend has been more prominent for the State Us. This has coincided with an inexorable decline in state funding at most State Us. As a result, I’m guessing that measurements like average class size, student/faculty ratios, etc. at State Us have also deteriorated over that time vis-</p>

85

<p>

</p>

<p>I’d like to take a stab at this even though it’s been answered. </p>

<p>Although I’ve got ties to U-M, my views aren’t blind homerism. I went to a small liberal arts school for my undergrad, and thought that was a superior environment in just about every way possible. I came to U-M as a grad student, and was mystified as to why anyone from outside Michigan would attend as an undergrad. </p>

<p>But over the past decade (and more!) I’ve learned more about U-M as prospective students, current students, and alums see it. My views have changed. U-M is not for everyone; it probably would not have been as good for me as a small school was. However, I see very few other places that can offer the combination that U-M does: prestige (yes we can debate “how much” endlessly), extraordinary depth and breadth, fun college town, a big-time athletic scene. I can name lots of places that offer some of those. There are few that offer all.</p>

<p>These things may not matter to everyone. But for the students who are seeking them, U-M is one of the few places in the U.S. where they can get those things in one package. I think that’s pretty remarkable. Berkeley can make the same boast–plus they kick our butts in weather. LOL.</p>

<p>This goes beyond the focus on reputation or prestige, of course. But it’s a unique combination.</p>

86

<p>Hawkette, everything can be regional when you zoom out far enough. NU is one of many great national research universities…but I wouldn’t classify NU as one of the world’s great research universities.</p>

87

<p>

</p>

<p>Interesting question. I don’t have all the stats, but I think you’re wrong about Michigan, hawkette. I do know that the current total enrollment (grad + undergrad) of 41,028 (figure from 2008) is only about 8% higher than in 1999 when it was 37,846; but the undergrad enrollment grew by only abotu 6% over that decade, from 24,493 to 26,083.</p>

<p>I found an old AP story online that said the enrollment at the Ann Arbor campus in 1987 was 49,523, or almost 20% HIGHER than today’s figure—though I don’t necessarily trust the source, which may have flipped the numbers for the University of Michigan and Michigan State as the latter has been larger for some time now. Here’s the link.</p>

<p>[Ludington</a> Daily News - Google News Archive Search](<a href=“Ludington Daily News - Google News Archive Search”>Ludington Daily News - Google News Archive Search)</p>

<p>Bottom line, I don’t think enrollment at Michigan has changed much at all since I went there back in the early 1970s.</p>

<p>Not all public universities are alike. The University of Michigan went through a painful adjustment to drastically diminished state funding about 30 years ago, the last time the auto industry was in a mess comparable to the one it faces today. Since then, state funding has represented a really tiny fraction of the University’s total revenue, and still the University has thrived and is now well ahead of the curve in making that transition. The legislature is in no position to ask the University to “do more with less,” since under Michigan’s constitution no one but the University—an autonomous arm of the state, answerable neither to the legislature nor to the executive branch— decides what the University will do and not do, including how many students it will enroll.</p>

88

<p>bc,
You may be right on the enrollment at U Michigan. I don’t know. </p>

<p>I would assume that there is pressure in most states to increase enrollment at the state flagship in line with population growth. According to wikipedia, Michigan’s population has grown from 9.26 million in 1980 to 10.00 million in 2008 (increase of 8% in 28 years). </p>

<p>For amusement, I did a quick comparison with Virgina. wiki says that Virginia’s population grew from 5.35 million in 1980 to 7.77 million in 2008 (increase of 45%). Given this, I would’ve guessed at a larger increase in U Virginia undergrad enrollment during that time than the 25% it actually had. </p>

<p>It would be interesting to see how correlated population growth and flagship enrollment growth really are. Maybe if someone has an old copy of a College Guide book from the 70s or 80s, they can look up and post some of the old enrollment numbers for colleges.</p>

89

<p>

</p>

<p>You might be right, but there is another side to this coin–Population growth can also provide an opportunity for other schools within the state to grow and adapt–and they can likely do so for less state investment. Some of them stand to gain in stature, too, which is also a plus. I could easily see legislators buying into the concept that the flagship should stay about the same size, while other state schools absorb increased college attendance. Certainly this would be attractive for some of those institutions–and the flagship as well, unless it has growth aspirations.</p>

90

<p>

</p>

<p>That would be a poor assumption for many state flagships. Cal-Berkeley is landlocked, and cannot receive City approval to expand. Heck, it took two years to get the tree sitters down.</p>

<p>But your numbers show clearly why UMich has agressively courted OOS students – not only do they bring $$, they bring high test scores & gpa’s to help maintain UMich’s pre-eminence, particularly in a state that is aging relative to the sunbelt.</p>

91

<p>

I’d suggest you read about Mini’s entitlement index … schools have VERY different strategies building their classes … and there a big differences among elite schools in how many private school kids and how many financial kids they accept into their classes … if interested read posts #57 and #58 here …
<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-life/11033-rich-kid-schools-4.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-life/11033-rich-kid-schools-4.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

92

<p>

</p>

<p>Yes, Michigan has an aging population and stagnant population growth in the past decade. Many college-educated young people actually leave the state for better job opportunities. U-M literally has to court OOS students (including international students) to maintain its world-class reputation. I would not be surprised if U-M lowers its in-state undergraduate population to 50% to reflect changes in the local population.</p>

93

<p>^^Thank you for that post, tensighs. When I posted something similar a year or so ago, I was berated by the Old Blues on cc, who were shocked (“shocked”)…</p>

94

<p>3togo, those were excellent posts by Mini. Yep. Most of those schools are not too diversified. </p>

<p>MIT looks very good.</p>

95

<p>FYI, Middlebury still doesn’t offer a Ling program. It is starting a ling minor in 2010.</p>

<p>I agree that UMich offers “the quintessential public college experience,” which is why I called it an “excellent public university.” Smaller classes and better counseling are, to me, much more important than D1 football (which is actual a personal drawback because I hate football). </p>

<p>dstark - I WANT to hear about UMich’s programs. I was just clearing up the misconception by other posters that I’m interested for my own sake; rather, I’m interested because I care about accurate information for its own sake.</p>

<p>Last admissions cycle, a TASPer turned down Stanford for UMich. Money was a factor, but so was fit. And I don’t demean or question his choice in the least. But I am interested in the “boring details.” (Alexandre–good point, I forgot about the small town. But intimate LAC, Michigan is not.)</p>

<p>
[QUOTE=Alexandre]

Of the 13 main traditional academic disciplines (Anthropology, Biology, Chemistry, Computer Science, Economics, English, Geology, History, Mathematics, Physics, Political Sciences, Psychology and Sociology), Michigan is ranked among the top 5 in the nation in 5 of the 13, among the top 10 in the nation in 7 of the 13 and among the top 15 in the nation in all 13 traditional discipline. Only a dozen or so universities can match Michigan all-around excellence. As an undergraduate student, you will be spending two years taking clases in a wide spectrum of subjects (most in those 13 departments) and then you will focus for two years on a specific major, again, probably in one of those 13 traditional disciplines.</p>

<p>Beyond those 13 fields, Michigan also tends to be among the elite in many other specialized programs. For example, its Business program is generally considered one of the top 5 at the undergraduatelevel, as are its Music and Nursing programs. Michigan’s College of Engineering, practically a separate university with its own campus, is generally ranked among the top 10 in the nation, as are its colleges of Architecture and Public Affairs and Policy. All of those programs offer undergrads very specific and customized programs. Like I said above, only a dozen or so universities can match Michigan, whether we are looking at a single department or the university as a whole.

[/quote]

This sort of detail is what I was looking for. Though may I ask where the various disciplinary rankings come from? LACs generally don’t show up on graduate school rankings, yet that obviously does not make them worse academically for the 13 traditional liberal arts disciplines.</p>

<p>How does UMich’s endowment per student compare to its peer schools, using the $12B practical endowment number?</p>

<p>I’m so glad that I pushed in asking for detail about UMich; the answers I’ve gotten are rarely given in any other discussions of Michigan.</p>

96

<p>somebody asked why New Yorkers stay instate, even to expensive LAC’s and other privates like Colgate, Fordham, Syracuse, Hamilton and Cornell etc. There are many reasons for that, but its also because New York State does have grants to state residents even at private colleges. Its perhaps their attempt to keep their kids at home, so to speak.</p>

97

<p>How current is Hawkette’s information? I know for a fact that Fordham has 3.6% international this year and only 43% from New York State (though a fairly high percentage also come from Connecticut and New Jersey) but an increasingly high profile nationally.</p>

98

<p>gb,
As with all of these threads, the data is not mine. LOL.</p>

<p>Data is from the latest online version of USNWR. I think that means it is for students who entered in Fall, 2008.</p>

99

<p>

</p>

<p>Dontcha know that there is nothing but a vast wasteland west of the Hudson? :D</p>

100

<p>blue,
Or maybe the wasteland begins just west of about 8th Avenue…:)</p>