<p>I'm going to agree with Sparkeye's list (not necessarily the rank-order, but at least the schools on there) and add Georgia Tech and Penn State to the honorable mentions -- Tech not making the list because of it's technical specialty.</p>
<p>"Similarly, though ranked on my list, Wake Forest U. with 4,400 undergrad population is more of a private college operation than a typical state sponsored public university. Therefore, it would not be a good representation be included in the Top 10 Public imho."</p>
<p>Sparkeye, Wake Forest doesn't just have a private college operation. It's a private university.</p>
<p>Oops.. I left out Penn State!!! My bad!! Thanks! :)</p>
<p>Also, if any of you question why I ranked NCHill a bit lower than expected, all I can say is that I have been brain-washed by my dukie roommate...@_@</p>
<p>Also, some might question why I left out a few of the highly ranked UC campuses that were established ~1950s. Besides media hype, selectivity, a few reknown faculties and perhaps some on par facilities/majors with the Big Ten institutions, they are in fact lacking in one way of the other as a truely 'comprehensive' top public universities on my list. Sometimes, these UC campuses remind me of the regional campuses of UWisc, PSU, OSU, UM-Dborn, UI-Chicago and others that were also established around the same era...keke :P</p>
<p>Note: Michigan offers over 200 majors, OSU encompasses 19 colleges</p>
<p>Sparkeye,
Did you forget about the University of Washington too? UDub is at least as good as UCSD and yet it didn't even make your honorable mention.</p>
<p>GoBlue81, oh yeah, UDub!! My bad! :)</p>
<p>Top 10 Public Universities (revised):</p>
<ol>
<li>University of California--Berkeley</li>
<li>University of Michigan--Ann Arbor</li>
<li>University of Virginia</li>
<li>University of California--Los Angeles</li>
<li>University of Wisconsin--Madison </li>
<li>University of Illinois--Urbana-Champaign </li>
<li>University of North Carolina--Chapel Hil</li>
<li>University of Texas--Austin</li>
<li>University of Washington</li>
<li>UCSD, UCD, UCI ... (peer pressure) =.="</li>
</ol>
<p>Honorable Mention:
Ohio State University--Columbus
Penn State University--University Park
University of Florida--Gainesville
University of Maryland--College Park</p>
<p>UW Madison is the shizz!</p>
<p>GoBlue81,</p>
<p>So what you're trying to show me is that Michigan is no more or less diverse than other homogeneous schools? Being as "diverse" as, say, Notre Dame is nothing to brag about. Interestingly, you didn't include HYPS, or Berkeley, or UCLA, etc. Whose model of diversity does Michigan want to emulate anyway? </p>
<p>Listen, if you're satisfied with Michigan's diversity efforts, then good for you. I thought you were self-proclaimed to be "Leaders and Best," but whatever.</p>
<p>California has more "minority" students than Michigan. It's that simple. The UC's do nothing special.</p>
<p>The UCs actively promote socioeconomic diversity through their application process. Consider the percentage of Pell Grant recipients at the UCs vs. Michigan.</p>
<p>I've seen Texas A&M and Maryland mentioned a few times, why hasn't Clemson or Pittsburgh been mentioned at least for honorable mentions?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Listen, if you're satisfied with Michigan's diversity efforts, then good for you. I thought you were self-proclaimed to be "Leaders and Best," but whatever.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>A rather argumentative slam. You implied that Michigan does less and cares less than other institutions you held up as examples. Posters have provided some evidence to better inform that assessment, since you were apparently unaware of Michigan's advocacy and programs in this area.</p>
<p>U-M may not be able to demonstrate leadership in what it has achieved in terms of racial and ethnic diversity, but U-M is widely avowed a leader in its legal advocacy. Unfortunately, Michigan's hands are now tied significantly by voter referendum. Where U-M failed was in convincing Michigan voters that diversity was a beneficial enough educational goal to justify considering race in admissions.</p>
<p>There's nothing wrong about championing UC's success. Michigan recognizes it too.</p>
<p>I believe UMich's demographics more closely resemble the state of Michigan than any of the UC's demographics resemble the state of California.</p>
<p>nyccard, I am sorry, but Michigan's student body can only be desrcibed as diverse. Is it as diverse as the UCs? Of course not; a state university's student population must, by definition, mimic that of the state it serves. Only 59% of California is white. 36% of California is Hispanic, 12% is Asian and 6% is African American. Michigan, on the other hand, is 81% white, 15% African American, 3% Hispanic and 1% Asian. How on Earth can you possibly try to rationalize comparing Michigan's diversity to that of a UC or expect Michigan to be as diverse as California? </p>
<p>Clearly, Michigan is not diverse as some universities in highly diverse locales or smaller private universities. Futhermore, Michigan does not do a great job of integrating diversity. But it is not "homogeneous". In fact, Michigan is diverse and relatively well integrated. Can it do better? Perhaps, but that is not to say it is lagging.</p>
<p>Is it me or is University of Wisconsin-Madison overrated?</p>
<p>I think Wisconsin is underrated. Few people give it the respect it deserves.</p>
<p>^ I agree with Alexandre. Wisconsin is one of this country's great universities, much underappreciated on CC and elsewhere. </p>
<p>I also find it highly ironic that some posters here would slam Michigan's diversity efforts, when in fact that university fought all the way to the Supreme Court, and for the most part successfully, to defend its right, and the right of all public colleges and universities, to consider race/ethnicity as a "plus factor" under the diversity rubric in both undergraduate and professional school admissions, in what now stand as the leading Supreme Court precedents on the subject. The University's leaders went on to fight tooth and nail---albeit unsuccessfully--to defeat a ballot initiative prohibiting any consideration of race in admissions. That Michigan's student body continues to be as diverse as it is under that legal obstacle should be seen by diversity advocates as nothing less than a heroic accomplishment. But then some people never let facts stand in the way of an argument.</p>
<p>pierre0913, </p>
<p>First off, Pitt, Texas A&M & the up-and-coming Clemson are all great public institutions! However, in order to make my honorable mention list as a Top Public, you have to be at least ranked w/in top 20 public by USWR. Pitt is close, but no cigar; plus I had PSU listed as the flagship public for the state of Pennsylvania.</p>
<p>jec7483,</p>
<p>"Sparkeye, Wake Forest doesn't just have a private college operation. It's a private university."</p>
<p>My bad.. I got confused between WF and WM..@_@ Anyhow, both would not have made my list. Nite!~ :)</p>
<p>UC-Berkely
Michigan
UCLA
Virginia
North Carolina
Wisconsin
Texas
Illinois
Florida
Washington</p>