<p>[[And we should believe all your statistics, while you dismiss what all of us are saying!??]]</p>
<p>Which statistics? The Miami/Ohio State freshman class statistics or the Ohio-California comparisons? In either case, it took me all of five minutes on either the Miami/OSU website or on google to find. The information is there for anyone who wants to confront reality. </p>
<p>As for your and ohioguy's posts, they are not statistics. They're anecdotal, personal accounts that seems to be completely at odds with the larger statistics, so yes I view them with some skepticism. That, however, doesn't mean I completely dismiss them out of hand.</p>
<p>Look, I've been around Miami and Miamians for well over a decade. I know full well there is a distinct minority among us who, if Ohio State became as selective as Harvard and MIT rolled into one, would still attempt to pick apart the data and refuse to give OSU the least bit of credit. It just goes with the territory. They're also the ones who would rather see Ohio maintain a relatively weak and overpriced higher education system rather than do anything in the least bit that might increase Ohio State's stature. </p>
<p>Miami is and can continue to be a great university regardless of what does or does not happen in Columbus. It just seems as though a distinct minority in our community are driven as much by fear and hatred of Ohio State than by support of Miami, and that's sad.</p>
<p>Thanks for the clarification, stitchintime. I must have been thinking about another arts and science discipline that has the 7 doctoral programs.</p>
<p>Still, if we are going to use California as a base comparison, then relative to Ohio's population, university system and resource base, we should still only have 2-3 such programs. I'm curious to your thoughts on that.</p>
<p>I also look forward to see what this 10 year plan will encompass. I read several speech's by Fingerhut, and it would seem as though a California system is exactly what he has in mind. How close the final product will be after going through the political sausage grinder remains to be seen.</p>
<p>I just know that something has to change. At the end of the day, we have a system that ranks 46th among the states for affordability and whose highest ranked school barely cracks the top 20 public universities. That's not an environment which calls for complacency and maintaining the status quo.</p>
<p><a href="%5Burl=http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1059865770-post22.html%5D22%5B/url%5D">quote</a> Still, if we are going to use California as a base comparison, then relative to Ohio's population, university system and resource base, we should still only have 2-3 such programs. I'm curious to your thoughts on that... </p>
<p>...At the end of the day, we have a system that ranks 46th among the states for affordability...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>As a fellow Ohio taxpayer, I'm also concerned about getting the most for our tax dollars. On that point, I'm very open-minded on your cost-effectiveness arguments. That's why I'm looking forward to the 10 year strategic plan. Hopefully, it will delinieate the actual cost (if any) of duplication/redundancy.</p>
<p>I also know that affordability doesn't always translate to value. If affordability where the only criteria, everyone would be attending community colleges. This is not to disparage community colleges; they serve a very important role in higher ed. But clearly, many students (along with their families) value alternatives to community colleges.</p>
<p>Another point to consider: Comparing the cost of living in California to Ohio is also a bit of a buckeyes-to-oranges comparison. While our tax rates are similar (actually Ohio's might be a</a> tad higher :(), a dollar goes a lot further in Ohio than in California. Housing costs alone seal-the-deal for many.</p>
<p>
[quote]
... we have a system...whose highest ranked school barely cracks the top 20 public universities...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm personally not caught up in the college rankings. The 'In-the-USN&WR-Box Thinking' belies a lack of critical-thinking in many rank-obsessed students. There's a lot of merit to be found in the Annapolis</a> Group's argument. Therefor, to address the flagship</a> advocacy and with credit to Harvard</a> Schmarvard...Flagship-Schmaship.</p>
<p>To bottom-line it, I'm open to a consolidation of graduate programs but not at the expense of the many excellent undergraduate programs that Ohio publicly supported schools have. The undergradaute experience is often a transitionary one; distance from home during the transition is a concern for many students. I would advocate undergraduate excellence with geographic diversity (and would be prepared to pay a little extra for it) and a well-reasoned consolidation of graduate programs if the analysis supported it.</p>
<p>stitchintime, I don't rely solely on the rankings and feel that they've been grossly oversimplified and their importance grossly overinflated. On the other hand, I don't dismiss them out of hand. The underlying data (how bright and motivated a student body a school attracts, how well it's respected by other academics and other factors such as faculty and financial resources) are clearly important factors in determining a college's overall quality.</p>
<p>While one might find fault with the particular matrix used to come up with the final ranking and certainly find fault with the overwhelming emphasis solely on a schools overall ranking position to the exclusion the actual input data, I do believe that rankings serve a purpose and give a rough overall approximation of how well a school is doing.</p>
<p>One can obviously split hairs between schools ranked relatively closely: say Miami at 67 and OSU at 57. In such a case, it's certainly reasonable to view them as peers that require a far closer look beyond merely an overall ranking spot. OTOH, when one views schools ranked further apart, I see less problems with the pecking order. I doubt few would consider Miami/OSU at the level of Chicago or Yale. Conversely, few would also consider Miami/OSU at the level of Bowling Green or Toledo.</p>
<p>Ironically enough, I just stumbled upon this:</p>
<p>Campaign</a> U.: Student Editors at Flagship Campuses in Ohio, Texas Go for Different Democrats - Chronicle.com</p>
<p>While the nuts and bolts of the higher education restructuring are certainly a worthy and important topic of discussion, the paranoia about the state officially designating Ohio State a "flagship" seems to be much ado about nothing, for it's far more a simple recognition of the facts as they exist than any substantive change in policy. In essence, it's how the vast majority of the country views Ohio State's role in the system already--not too mention the historical reasons behind its establishment.</p>
<p>My ultimate point is that those who are passionate about Miami and her future should focus on precisely that rather than what's happening to or what people are calling the university in Columbus.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I also know that affordability doesn't always translate to value. If affordability where the only criteria, everyone would be attending community colleges. This is not to disparage community colleges; they serve a very important role in higher ed. But clearly, many students (along with their families) value alternatives to community colleges.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree 100%. The focus shouldn't be just on being the cheapest system but rather on offering the citizens and taxpayers of Ohio the best value for their money. Towards that aim, I do believe that most of our universities need to focus a lot more on undergraduate access and affordability and a lot less on adding graduate programs to chase after Ohio State. Other universities--namely Ohio State and Miami--need to focus on being great universities of national and global stature.</p>
<p>Again, it's been almost a half century since Ohio's public higher education system was organized in its present form and what has it resulted in either from a quality or value perspective? Where is our Cal-Berkeley? Not only do we not have one, but we charge more money to attend Bowling Green than California does to attend Berkeley!</p>
<p>Half a century down the road, that is a system that is broken and inefficient and one desperately in need of a thorough overhaul.</p>