The Business Journal says
1- University of Michigan
2- UNC
3- UVA
4- William & Mary
5- Cal Berkley (I think it was)
No word on what criteria they used
Here is the methodology
http://www.bizjournals.com/bizjournals/news/2015/02/12/how-the-tbj-public-college-rankings-were.html
I teach at #1.
If these are truly our best and brightest, I weep for our future.
That made me lol, romani!
I find a few of the criteria interesting. They use all the usual data like retention rates, acceptance rates, standardized scores etc, but they also include a few that I would not have. Several data points like area rents and COA are more related to a list labelled “best value Public Colleges”. Others like unemployment rates of the surrounding community and percentage of young people in the surrounding community are debatable as to their correlation with the quality of a school.
Ouch, @romanigypsyeyes!
You do get some of the best and brightest there, but UMich is huge (while MI is a small fraction of the population of CA), so you would also get some of the . . . not best and not brightest. For instance, UMich is actually a respectable 21st if you rank reseach universities by their 75th percentile SAT score, but if you rank by 25th percentile SAT score, they would not be anywhere near the top.
In any case, I would have had the same top 5-6 but would have put them in a different order.
Agree that some of the criteria they use is silly and makes little sense.
Sorry, I didn’t mean to necessarily put down U of M lol. I hate these types of things to be honest.
But, as I’ve said before, the fact that more than one of my students spelled Nazi “Natzi” and said that hanging Jews wasn’t really a bad thing because there’s so many of them, well… 
For instance, by absolute numbers, there are more kids with 33 ACT/1500 M+CR SAT at UMich than at Harvard. You also would have some kids at UMich who would not be able to get in to other schools that are several levels below Harvard.
Once upon a time the cost of attendance at UNC was a terrific value, even for out of state students. My son graduates in May. His first year tuition, room, board and fees in 2011-12 was ~$36,300
http://bot.unc.edu/files/archives/PP%201111%20BFA%20&%20FB%20Tuition.pdf
http://admissions.unc.edu/afford/cost-of-attendance/
The state cut funding. Out of state tuition, room board and and fees for 2015-16 will be $50,978.
http://admissions.unc.edu/afford/cost-of-attendance/
UNC is a womderful school, but the price increases are bumping it out of the “best value” category.
@eastcoascrazy, FWIW we recently did a Net Price Calculator for UNC and the financial aid package was surprisingly generous - competitive, even, with selective liberal arts schools. Of course, one has to gain admission to get that but other publics like Michigan, by comparison, are a priori out of reach for our out-of-state kid – just on financials alone. I wonder if we’re missing something.
@Valdog, UNC and UVa are the only publics that promise to meet full need for OOS students (as they define it, of course). Which is one reason why UNC has an exceptionally low OOS acceptance rate.
UMich is expanding fin aid for the poorest OOS applicants, but as you should expect, an affordable education for in-state kids is a greater concern for most state schools than providing an affordable education to OOS applicants.
UNC-Chapel Hill has a strict limit, required by law, on the number of out-of-state students it can accept. That’s another reason for the low out-of-state acceptance rate.
Also, people just love the place, which accounts for a lot of the out-of-state applications. Many kids in my home state of Maryland apply to UNC. Few get in.
WhooHooo! My college is #177! 
@Marian, part and parcel. Because they have a strict limit on the percentage of OOS freshmen (15%), the acceptance rate for OOS is low and UNC can afford to say they meet full-need for all (because there aren’t that many OOS to provide fin aid for).
The DIVERSITY rating seems “off”. It values geographical diversity far more than racial or socioeconomic diversity. Michigan is rated a 5 star, which seemed to be based on geographical diversity (lots of OOS students), even though it only has about 9% URMs and 14% Pell grants.
On the other hand, UF, is only rated 2 out of 5 stars in diversity, even though it’s running at 27% URM and 29% Freshman Pell Grants. However, UF 88% in-state undergraduate students.
I can see how geographical diversity adds value, but racial and socioeconomic diversity should have as much if not more weight in the calculation.
For the sake of completeness (and because my alma mater made the top 10 but not the top 5 ):
- University of California-Los Angeles (California)
- University of Florida (Florida)
- University of Maryland (Maryland)
- University of Washington (Washington)
- University of Wisconsin (Wisconsin)
Several of the observations here apply to multiple schools in the top ten, and probably further down. You’ll find some outstanding students, and a large middle percentage of solid students. And there are those who comprise the rough 25th percentile – some of whom may hold, frankly, questionable or offensive views (per Romani’s experience), or anemic academic preparation and skillsets. At least that’s my experience as well.
Also, the current OOS tuition really shifts what were once outstanding bargains for some of these schools (OOS) just a couple decades ago – their academic resources, strong faculty and departments, as well as great campus experiences made them very appealing. But I don’t know if I could justify the same choice today, especially considering financial aid packages of certain privates.
At the same time, I do feel a certain moral obligation to the ideals of state-supported, powerhouse academic institutions. Yet their ability to maintain that delicate balance of outstanding resources and affordability continues to erode in the current socio-political climate.
well, poo, Berkeley isn’t number one, although it is in terms of the whole wide world. So that’s all that counts. 
People smart enough to go to selective colleges (and not be at the bottom of the class) can have offensive views.
Offensive views? What does that mean, that every person in the 25th percentile of a college is racist, sexist, a terrorist, or anti LGTB? Or that they are offended by Calculus? And all the top scorers are perfect saints, I suppose.