<p>lol this is definitely a "whose state is better?!" post.</p>
<p>Well, I would say my state, Illinois, is pretty damn good. Go... prarie state....!</p>
<p>Northwestern, UChicago, DePaul, Loyola, University of Illinois Chicago, University of Illinois Urbana, numerous LACs. </p>
<p>And the Sears tower.</p>
<p>And a lot of farms. Corn and cows and stuff. I guess. I don't know. I live in a suburb not in a field.</p>
<p>Pshhh beat that, guys. =P</p>
<p>Kidding, by the way.</p>
<p>Haha you better be kidding, DePaul, Loyola, and UIC are garbage.</p>
<p>Washington has a lot of great public schools and several nice LAC's.</p>
<p>im_blue: I was just naming all the schools I could think of in IL/Chicago. ;) Well, the ones that I thought are somewhat well-known. </p>
<p>I think the garbage comment is kind of harsh though- UICs GPPA program is supposed to be great. And I'm sure DePaul and Loyola have... stuff or something. Obviously not top Universities... but I wouldn't say GARBAGE.</p>
<p>Seriously, IM_Blue. UIC has one of the top philosophy departments in the country, for example.</p>
<p>Illinois is amazing. University of Chicago, Northwestern, UIUC are all well known schools and their teaching is far better than any UC school. The original question was about higher education, not about research. As far as teaching goes University of Chicago has the most amount of nobel laurates in the whole United States. As far education in drama and music Northwestern is one of the best in the United States. All three universities have law and business schools in the top 30 of the United States. </p>
<p>Hence Illinois ROCKS!</p>
<p>Well, call it buried treasure then. UIC's GPPA is good but that only reflects the med school which is in Chicago instead of Urbana-Champaign, not the quality of the undergrad.</p>
<p>States w/Best Public Education: California, Virginia
States w/Best Private Education:California, Mass.</p>
<p>They need to build a good private school in Virginia.</p>
<p>Washington and Lee
!</p>
<p>California.</p>
<p>Yes, Harvard and MIT and all those schools are great, no question about that. But let's face it, the VAST majority of students aren't going to get into Williams or Amherst, let alone Harvard or MIT.</p>
<p>That's what makes California special - there are options for everyone, from the top to the bottom. Massachusetts is very top-heavy school-wise. Sure, it may have more options for the very top of the nation, but California does a better job educating its public as a whole.</p>
<p>I don't think I like how other people on this board are totally writing off most of the population when they consider "education."</p>
<p>Wow I can't believe people are still blathering on about this.</p>
<p>Best publics = California
Best privates = Massachusetts</p>
<p>best public goes to VA and CA, most definitely</p>
<p>one factor in PA's favor...after UPenn, Carnegie Mellon, PSU, Bryn Mawr, Swarthmore and Haverford, there's a slew of "pretty good to very good" schools, maybe more than any other state:</p>
<p>Allegheny
Bucknell
Dickinson
Drexel
Franklin and Marshall
Gettysburg
Grove City
Lafayette
Lehigh
Muhlenburg
Pitt
Ursinus
Villanova
Washington and Jefferson</p>
<p>I know some aren't that well known (and most are small) but they're all decent quality.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Isn't Cali the most populous state as well? Schools can look better than they are by having more students go there (more of a chance that one of the students is going to "make it big" somewhere), more apply there, and more get rejected (making admissions look more rigorous--because the more who apply, the better you have to look to be accepted)...the pool is the largest for Cali, so when you run the numbers, it's a lot more likely that Cali would have better schools/athletics/porn..etc, etc, etc. Thus your statement does make sense!</p>
<p>A better question might be, which state has the best schools per capita? (i.e. for the population size, which state has an extraordinary system of schools)</p>
<p>I'd have to go with Massachusetts on this one.</p>
<p>Pennsylvania is top5 :D</p>
<p>
[quote]
That's what makes California special - there are options for everyone, from the top to the bottom. Massachusetts is very top-heavy school-wise. Sure, it may have more options for the very top of the nation, but California does a better job educating its public as a whole.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, let me say this. Massachusetts has a higher percentage of its high school graduates (something like 65%) go on to college than California does. </p>
<p>Now one might say that California has specific demographic problems that make college attainment more difficult. Maybe, maybe not. The point is that no matter how you cut it, it's difficult to say that California does a better job of educating its public as a whole. Maybe you can say that California does an excellent job given its demographic circumstances, but not as a whole.</p>
<p>If we were going to revisit this topic, I'd also like to take a look at how states treat their institutions (both public and private). That makes a difference, too--not just what is offered in the state, but how the State (as an organization) funds and supports the institutions and the students.</p>
<p>This isn't just a public school issue. Some private institutions get some state support as well.</p>
<p>I vote for Virginia:</p>
<p>UVA
William & Mary
Va. Tech
Washington & Lee
Mary Washington
VMI
University of Richmond</p>
<p>Meh...
I say North Carolina:
Wake Forest
Duke
North Carolina Chapel Hill
Davidson
NC State
Elon
UNC-Wilmington
UNC-Ashville</p>
<p>Actually I think we should compare for the relative population of the state. THAT would be much more fair. As I say, you can't compare apples and oranges. Comparing Mass and California is just unfair.</p>