State Flagship Universities?

College Search & Selection
101

<p>there has been some discussion here about whether a state can have one flagship only or if it can have more than one. the debate seems to be based on semantics. If you take the word “flagship” on its literal level, then there can only be one. Santa Maria tumps Nina and Pinta.</p>

<p>Problem is, that’s not how it works among public state universities. There can be more than one. Why? Well, more than any other reason, the states themselves do designate more than one school as the flagship. Two states that I know of that have 2 flagships by official designation are Texas (UT-Austin & TAMU) and Florida (UF, FSU).</p>

<p>But that obviously applies to other states as well.</p>

<p>What’s a flagship? Generally a school that presents a state wide identity with a wide curriculum, having a heavy research component, large enrollment, huge economic importance, recognized throughout the nation. They really are a type of school…if it walks and talks like a duck, it must be a duck (even in Oregon where Ducks have to share flagship status with Beavers).</p>

<p>To me, states like Alabama (Bama, Auburn), California (Cal, UCLA), Michigan (U-M, MSU), Indiana (IU, Purdue), Arizona (UA, ASU) are among the two flagship states. States like Illinois (UIUC), Ohio (OSU), Wisconsin (UW-Madison), Missouri (Mizzou) are among states with one public flagship.</p>

<p>for those who think there can be only only flagship per state, they will usually tell you that it is the oldest public university in the state or the best academically. But in Ohio, flagship OSU is a lot younger than either Miami or Ohio. In Indiana, Purdue has a better academic reputation than IU.</p>

102

<p>The main difference between UCLA and Berkeley, and a bunch of the other comparisons you made, is that they’re part of the same university system; most (all?) of the others are part of a different university system: UT and TAMU are distinct university systems; UM and MSU are distinct university systems, etc.</p>

<p>Additionally, like many other states, California has other distinct university systems (CSU) which has its own university which is considered a flagship (SLO.)</p>

<p>Creating a fantastic university system takes a lot of time and investment. In this sense, the UC system is among the best public university systems in the United States. In the best public university ranking on USNEWS for example, it takes 2 of the top three spots (Cal and UCLA.) Three others are in the top 10 (UCSD, UCD, and UCSB), and a sixth is in the top 12 (UCI.) No other university system arguably comes close to matching the UC system in quality. </p>

<p>And UCI, a campus which, from my experience, doesn’t garner much prestige in, or outside, California, is ranked above a number of flagships from other states including PSU, UIUC, Texas, tOSU, Maryland, Udub, etc. Not that rankings are what matter at the end of the day. The aforementioned universities are among some of the most excellent schools within the United States. It’s just surprising that UCI would be ranked above them since I, at least, hold these schools in a higher regard than I do UCI.</p>

<p>And, in addition to having 6 exceptional public universities, what else does the UC system have? Well, it just happens to have two flagships in its system as well. Is UC unique in having two flagships? perhaps. But it’s just one, among a number of things, that makes the UC system unique.</p>

103

<p>A lot of people from Berkeley would look down their bear snouts at UCLA. The Cal-folk view their university as THE California flagship.</p>

<p>[History</a> - 19th-century founding of UC’s flagship campus - UC Berkeley](<a href=“History & discoveries - University of California, Berkeley”>History & discoveries - University of California, Berkeley)</p>

104

<p>That’s nice but they’re wrong. </p>

<p>

This is a super old post but I’d thought I’d clarify on the status of Oklahoma. Both Oklahoma State and University of Oklahoma are state flagships, and not in the same sense that both Georgia Tech and UGA are GA’s flagships or that UNC and NCSU are NC’s flagships. Within the state, neither OU or OSU are seen as being particularly better than the other except in a few fields. In fact, students are fairly evenly split on which university they’d prefer, assuming they get into and can afford both. In this regard, the Oklahoma flagships are more like Texas than they are Oregon or Indiana. For students preferring a more conservative, small town feel, most elect to go to OSU as they would TAMU if they lived in Texas. For students who want a more moderate political climate in a larger city they go to OU as they would UT Austin. </p>

<p>But even that comparison isn’t apt, because most people see UT as slightly better than A&M. In Oklahoma, both schools are on even footing assuming the person in question isn’t an alumnus of one of the two universities.</p>

105

<p>Missouri is probably Mizzou (Univ of MO - Columbia). Not selective at all, but very large and popular school. Lots of people go there because its affordable and admits anyone with the requirements. They’re also the only Division I public school in the state, too.</p>

106

<p>

</p>

<p>The Maryland flagship, UM-College Park, is the biggest and best-known school in the state system. It offers the widest variety of majors. It has the highest US News rank.</p>

<p>However, for liberal arts majors (not engineering), St. Mary’s College of Maryland is another contender for the “top of the line” title. SMCM is the state “honors college”. Entering students have higher average reading and writing scores at SMCM. Average class sizes are smaller. SMCM’s 4-year graduation rate is more than double the UMCP rate. </p>

<p>One could make a similar comparison between UVa and William & Mary. Either one (or both) could be considered “top of the line” for Virginia. Some STEM majors might consider Virginia Tech their top choice.</p>

<p>[Flagship</a> - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“Flagship - Wikipedia”>Flagship - Wikipedia)
[Category:Flagship</a> universities in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Flagship_universities_in_the_United_States]Category:Flagship”>Category:Flagship universities in the United States - Wikipedia)</p>

107

<p>“Creating a fantastic university system takes a lot of time and investment. In this sense, the UC system is among the best public university systems in the United States. In the best public university ranking on USNEWS for example, it takes 2 of the top three spots (Cal and UCLA.) Three others are in the top 10 (UCSD, UCD, and UCSB), and a sixth is in the top 12 (UCI.) No other university system arguably comes close to matching the UC system in quality.”</p>

<p>Yes. A spot on observation. The problem with university systems is this: “No other university system arguably comes close to matching the UC system in quality.”</p>

<p>They exist for one reason only: UC was developed as a university system and reached enormous success as a system in the 1950’s and 1960’s. </p>

<p>The problem is, the UC system was began and, more importantly, developed with a particular purpose in mind and California is not like other states; it’s a nation-state.</p>

<p>UC developed into a three tiered program of public higher education in California. UC was given the status of the elite system and the system most designed for research and higher graduate degrees. CSU developed as the middle ground for California students, often offering very good universities that were located in all of Calif. major cities. JUCO’s made up the third group.</p>

<p>UC, not in inception, but in development, became a quasi- association of relative equals. “UC” offers status; “UC” means something in and of itself. UC’s don’t get their prestige from Cal or even UCLA; they achieve it with the UC status.</p>

<p>and thus, the difference from virtually all other states with university systems (with SUNY being the only other one of similar organization…which it takes to an extreme beyond Calif. because it is the only system where it really is hard to pick out a true flagship(s); that hurts NY State because there is no stellar university that gains national prominence in this “world is flat” system).</p>

<p>UW-Green Bay gets no status from its “UW” because “UW” to most means UW-Madison. In the UW system, Madison is the kingpin; the others come across as branches (less so with UWM). Wisconsin is typical of most systems in this regard and they were not put together with the thought and purpose of UC.</p>

<p>UCLA has had a terrible effect on the naming of other universities. UCLA was just too plain successful. And, BTW, it has to be looked at as similar to Cal, a flagship. What started out as the “southern branch” of the university has become a powerhouse of its own. Cal and UCLA are the shiniest of UC’s shining stars. And what gives them some of their balance is pure location…Cal represents the Bay Area and NoCal and UCLA represents LA and SoCal. That same kind of metro balance gives UNR and UNLV equal status.</p>

<p>so why do I say UCLA hurt other universities. UCLA has a magical name and reputation; there is no UC-Los Angeles or Cal-LA. It is UCLA and the name University of California at Los Angeles is as irrelevant as Kentucky Fried Chicken is in comparison to KFC.</p>

<p>UCLA gave us the Univ of ___ @ ____ which, outside the UC system is a horrible naming system for universities. Why? Well as noted, schools like UW-Green Bay come off sounding as branches and schools like the University of Missouri-Columbia ended up dropping “Columbia” because the name of the city weakens the state wide imagine and prestige of a school that once was and now is again the University of Missouri. Mizzou’s dropping of “Columbia” was a scream “we ARE the state’s flagship”</p>

<p>Iowa may do a better job of naming its schools than most states. It has only three public universities: UIowa, Ia St, UNI…yet they are all part of the same university system, with all completely maintaining their separate identities. Thank goodness there is no UI-Iowa City or UI-Ames.</p>

<p>I really think that many of the Univ of ___ @ ____ were so named and initialed in hopes of becoming the next “UCLA”; there is no next UCLA.</p>

<hr>

<p>on another topic, on states with 2 flagships, I really think Michigan is a good example where two public universities now both take on a relatively wide range of curricula and come across, in the way they both function, as flagships. U-M and MSU both have law and med schools; both are very complete. And MSU has morphed from its original landgrant establishment to go far beyond science and agriculture. Yes, U-M is higher ranked, but then again U-M is up there with the elites (like Cal and UVa), a rarified place to be. MSU, however, would still rank among the better state flagships and would be the top ranked school if it were placed in many US states, arguably at least half of them.</p>

108

<p>“One could make a similar comparison between UVa and William & Mary. Either one (or both) could be considered “top of the line” for Virginia. Some STEM majors might consider Virginia Tech their top choice.”</p>

<p>W&M’s excellence and reputation are obvious; it is not a flagship, however, because of its more limited scope compared to UVa.</p>

109

<p>

</p>

<p>It is also the case that UT Austin is more selective than TAMU, since UT Austin’s auto-admit threshold is top 7% of high school class, while TAMU’s is top 10%, or top 25% + high enough test scores. Those who think that more selective is automatically better (a common assumption around here, though not necessarily true in all cases) may view UT Austin as the true flagship, rather than the co-flagship.</p>

110

<p>The point is, a flagship is the one top students in the state are most likely to choose. Just the fact that UT has a higher bar for admissions indicates that top in state students likely consider it slightly better. That doesn’t mean TAMU isn’t a “co-flagship”, it’s just that the Texas system is a bit like the California system in that there are two main flagships (despite what some posters may claim), but one school gets a slightly higher percent of top students than the other. </p>

<p>In Oklahoma, there’s no real distinction between OU and OSU in terms of admission selectivity. The average SATs are within 20 points of each other, and although there are more students at the top of stats at OU, that can be partially explained by better scholarship opportunities as well as aggressive recruiting of OOS Texans who were shut out of UT because of the 7% rule. The only people who see a meaningful difference between either of the two school seem to be people affiliated with either OU or OSU.</p>

111

<p>In some states, like Wisconsin, there is a clear flagship campus. </p>

<p>In other states, there is a “big brother flagship vs little brother flagship” relationship between two schools. Well-known examples are Alabama vs Auburn, UT-A vs aTm, UMich vs MSU, and UF vs FSU. The “big brother” is typically seen as a bit more prestigious than the “little brother” (although this can vary, depending on the program) but they are both major, national brands that are widely viewed as being within the top tier among the schools of their state. </p>

<p>Note: Both UF and FSU are designated, by Florida legislation, as the “preeminent universities.”</p>

112

<p>This post is 8 months old.</p>

113

<p>So? This thread has been ongoing for almost seven years. </p>

114

"States with (definite) multiple flagships:
Indiana - Purdue
Iowa - Iowa State
South Carolina - Clemson
Georgia - Georgia Tech
Alabama - Auburn
Mississippi (Ole Miss) - Miss. State

Debatable:
Oklahoma - Oklahoma State
Arizona - Arizona State
UNC - NCSU"

Don’t see how you could put the 3 you have as debatable compared to the ones you list as state with definite mutlitple flagships. You also left off Michigan State - Michigan