People choosing Zurich are very aware of these things. Grad instruction is in English. And students going there don’t know any German. They know where this university fits in the spectrum for eventual placement into a US academic job.
Berkeley after the new labor settlement is expected to pay 34k in 2024. Princeton is paying 48k now I think.
You’re teaching undergrads though. I would look into it a little more. If you don’t speak the language you should be expected to try and learn it.
I understand what you are saying. I am just saying kids are aware and still considering Zurich seriously and don’t know German. Maybe no teaching responsibilities are involved.
No idea about some of the licenses you mention, but it will largely make no difference what state you attend law school in - law school largely doesn’t prepare you for the bar exam (that’s why most take a bar review course after graduation and before the bar that summer). There may be some schools that offer a bar review course as part of the curriculum - my vague impression is this has gotten more common especially at schools that want to increase their pass rates - but for the most part going to law school in one state and taking the bar exam in another is very common and doesn’t particularly put you at a disadvantage.
Those that are discussion Berkley and grad programs are welcomed to start a new thread. In no world are they a “mediocre” flagship, which was the point of this thread.
Agree with Juno. In reality, you can get a job at a firm in DC and they can ask you to take the Virginia, Maryland or Delaware Bar exams depending on what their needs are. You can get hired in NYC and be asked to take the NJ bar, etc.
I disagree with this. U of Florida is highly ranked, yet Florida public schools aren’t that great (I get to say this as my kids attended public schools is Colorado and California before Florida, their Florida school was in the ‘best’ school district, and it really wasn’t very good compared to the others). Georgia is not considered to have the best public schools, yet Georgia Tech and UGA are considered very very good. Alabama, Mississippi? Universities considered much stronger than the public school system for k-12. New Jersey has very good public high schools and it seems everyone wants to avoid Rutgers - except the 30k who attend.
Which half of the states are considered to have the ‘top half’ of the schools and which have the mediocre ones? Even if it isn’t 50 flagships but closer to 60 with some states like California having Cal and UCLA, who is deciding which are ‘top’ and worthy of top students going to while a student with the same stats shouldn’t go to Vermont or Oklahoma or Kansas? I think it is rather like Lake Wobegon where everyone is above average. We can all name the top 5, many schools think they are #6, then the other 45 or 55 all think they are ranked #10 to 20. No one thinks they are #49.
I went to a small state flagship - the University of Alaska Fairbanks. I’m sure some people would consider it to be mediocre, but I wouldn’t trade it for the top rated flagships if it meant I had to sit in lecture halls with hundreds of other students. My biggest class at UAF was about 60 students. All my professors knew me by name, and if I missed a class, there’s a good chance they’d notice and inquire about it. That kind of thing made a difference, at least to me.
For speech pathologists, grad school accreditation by the American Speech Language Hearing Association is the standard needed. Doesn’t matter if the school is viewed as “mediocre” or not.
Most schools, whether public or private, are close to average ( and statistically, half are below that). One can still get a good education, and such a school may be the perfect fit for some students, which is fine. There is a range of student ability at all colleges. Some flagships are academically stronger than others, and that can change over time. Older posters would remember a time when GA and FL were not academic powerhouses. Things evolve.
My criteria would be
1° State’s general level of academic achievement at the secondary level (NAEP, % students who take AP/IB classes and % who pass, threshold for NMSF status, % secondary school students reaching proficient or “at grade level or above” status…) - because most students at a state flagship are likely to come from the state
2° level of funding by the state and general public support for higher education (v. higher ed being used a go-to punching ball)
3° quality of honors program; general academic strength, overall and/or in some fields; quality of teaching, funds dedicated to undergraduate teaching, including class sizes in introductory Speech, Composition, and Foreign Language classes; to a lesser extent for undergrads but important for flagship due to recognition&funding: graduate school&research quality.
4° ability to attract good students from outside the state (through top programs, scholarships, etc.)
A lot of this is outside the university’s control.
It can try to focus and develop a couple “flagship programs” but if it’s in a “hostile” environment where funds can be cut if there’s a need for an easy punching ball or an environment where cutting funds to the flagship is seen as a “win”, then even that initiative could be closed before they could do anything about it.
I’m sure you didn’t mean to reply only to me!
How about ability to retain good students in state?
It has? I don’t follow Alabama outside of football, but I have been under the impression that its academic ranking has not trended upward, and if anything the opposite.
I don’t think that Alabama has necessarily trended upward academically yet, but it’s a hot school right now. It has made a significant investment in its honors college, recruiting NMFs, and using merit to attract other top students. Also, like many southern schools, it has become more popular with students in the northeast, especially after the pandemic.
The characterization tells us much more about the qualities of those making such claims (and perhaps CC culture) than it does about any particular school. What’s the point, other than to build up some schools by tearing other schools down? Finding a college is about fit, and LSU is likely a perfect fit for some students but not others. That’s not to say that there aren’t perfectly valid reasons for choosing MIT, but surely it can expressed without tearing down schools like LSU.
Nobody’s disputing any of that. I’m just wondering whether their ranking has indeed improved, which is what was said. It doesn’t seem it has.
At one point. Alabama was like in the top 70 or so school in US News and they’re way down from that for the last several years.
I was agreeing with you.
Everything in society has become like little league baseball. Everyone has done well. Everyone is as good as everyone else. Everyone wins a prize. But we want the goods and services to be of top quality. We like some products and service providers better than others. I feel there is a disconnect here, to put it mildly. It is all a fit issue. There is no question about anyone’s competence.