Top 10 Public Universities

College Search & Selection
61

<p>proud wolverine,
While spoken like a "proud wolverine," you may want to check your facts before claiming that UC Berkeley and Michigan are the two top public universities in the USA. Looking at USNWR ranks dating back to 1991, the folks at U Virginia have a legitimate case to make vs UC Berkeley and an overwhelmingly strong one vs U Michigan. </p>

<p>Here are the facts based on 19 years USNWR rankings dating back to 1991:</p>

<p>Average rank among public universities since 1991:</p>

<p>1.47 UC Berkeley (leads with top rank or tied for top rank in 15 of 19 years)
1.68 U Virginia (leads with top rank or tied for top rank in 7 years and has never ranked lower than 2nd)</p>

<p>2.95 U Michigan (has never been ranked # 1 and has never been ranked ahead of U Virginia)
3.53 UCLA (has ranked ahead of UCB only once and now ranked as the # 3 US public university)
4.47 U North Carolina (has consistently been in Top 5 of public universities, but never equal to or ahead of U Virginia)</p>

62

<p>Hawkette, your points are all very flawed. </p>

<p>1) You continuously go back to the USNWR "teaching" rank that was published a few years ago. I have no objection to that particular ranking, since it was produced by the same university officials who are responsible for the Peer Assessment score. But since you continuously object to the Peer Assessment score on the ground that those university officials do not have full visibility and/or are biased, you must also admit that the teaching rank is also not accurate. Alternatively, you continue to point to the Teaching ranking and in so doing, acknowledge the Peer Assessment rating, which asks the very same university officials to rate universities according to excellence in undergraduate education. Pick your poison.</p>

<p>2) Your second point is also flawed. UCSD, UCLA, UT-Austin and UNC all have strong student bodies, but have not caught up to Michigan in the past half decade, and I do not see why they should catch up to Michigan in the coming decade. Here's a comparison of class rank upon High School graduation, SAT and ACT in 2002-2003 and 2007-2008. </p>

<p>Cal
2007-2008
Graduating in the top 10% of HS Class: 98%
SAT Mid 50%: 1220-1470
ACT Mid 50%: N/A
<a href="http://cds.berkeley.edu/pdfs/PDF%20wBOOKMARKS%2007-08.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://cds.berkeley.edu/pdfs/PDF%20wBOOKMARKS%2007-08.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>2002-2003
Graduating in the top 10% of HS Class:
SAT: 1180-1440
ACT: N/A
<a href="http://cds.berkeley.edu/pdfs/PDF%20wBOOKMARKS%2002-03.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://cds.berkeley.edu/pdfs/PDF%20wBOOKMARKS%2002-03.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Michigan
2007-2008
Graduating in the top 10% of HS Class: 92%
SAT Mid 50%: 1220-1420
ACT Mid 50%: 27-31
<a href="http://sitemaker.umich.edu/obpinfo/files/umaa_cds2008.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://sitemaker.umich.edu/obpinfo/files/umaa_cds2008.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>2002-2003
Graduating in the top 10% of HS Class: 69%
SAT: 1180-1390
ACT: 26-30
<a href="http://sitemaker.umich.edu/obpinfo/files/umaa_cds2003.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://sitemaker.umich.edu/obpinfo/files/umaa_cds2003.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>UVa
2007-2008
Graduating in the top 10% of HS Class: 87%
SAT Mid 50%: 1200-1420
ACT Mid 50%: N/A
UVa</a> CDS - C. First-time, First-year Admission</p>

<p>2002-2003
Graduating in the top 10% of HS Class: 84%
SAT: 1200-1420
ACT: 25-31
UVa</a> CDS - C. First-time, First-year Admission</p>

<p>William and Mary
2007-2008
Graduating in the top 10% of HS Class: 79%
SAT Mid 50%: 1250-1450
ACT Mid 50%: 27-32
<a href="http://web.wm.edu/ir/CDS/cds0708.xls%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://web.wm.edu/ir/CDS/cds0708.xls&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>2002-2003
Graduating in the top 10% of HS Class: 79%
SAT Mid 50%: 1250-1440
ACT Mid 50%: 27-31
<a href="http://web.wm.edu/ir/CDS/cds0203.xls%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://web.wm.edu/ir/CDS/cds0203.xls&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>UNC
2007-2008
Graduating in the top 10% of HS Class: 76%
SAT Mid 50%: 1210-1400
ACT Mid 50%: 26-31
<a href="http://oira.unc.edu/images/stories/factsAndFigures/dataSummaries/cmmnDataSet/cds_2007_2008_final.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://oira.unc.edu/images/stories/factsAndFigures/dataSummaries/cmmnDataSet/cds_2007_2008_final.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>2002-2003
Graduating in the top 10% of HS Class: 87%
SAT Mid 50%: 1180-1370
ACT Mid 50%: 24-30
<a href="http://oira.unc.edu/images/stories/factsAndFigures/dataSummaries/cmmnDataSet/cds_2002_2003.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://oira.unc.edu/images/stories/factsAndFigures/dataSummaries/cmmnDataSet/cds_2002_2003.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>UT-Austin
2007-2008
Graduating in the top 10% of HS Class: 69%
SAT Mid 50%: 1110-1370
ACT Mid 50%: 23-29
<a href="http://www.utexas.edu/academic/oir/cds/current_cds/CDS2007-2008.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.utexas.edu/academic/oir/cds/current_cds/CDS2007-2008.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>2002-2003
N/A</p>

<p>UCSD
2007-2008
Graduating in the top 10% of HS Class: 100%
SAT Mid 50%: 1140-1370
ACT Mid 50%: 24-30
<a href="http://studentresearch.ucsd.edu/sriweb/cds/c.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://studentresearch.ucsd.edu/sriweb/cds/c.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>2002-2003
N/A</p>

<p>Washington
2007-2008
Graduating in the top 10% of HS Class: 86%
SAT Mid 50%: 1090-1320
ACT Mid 50%: 23-29
<a href="http://www.washington.edu/admin/factbook/common_data_set_2007.xls%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.washington.edu/admin/factbook/common_data_set_2007.xls&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>2003-2004
Graduating in the top 10% of HS Class: 48%
SAT Mid 50%: 1070-1310
ACT Mid 50%: 23-28
<a href="http://www.washington.edu/admin/factbook/common_data_set_2003.xls%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.washington.edu/admin/factbook/common_data_set_2003.xls&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Clearly, Michigan has not lost ground.</p>

<p>3) Class size is hard to establish. But UNC and UVa do not offer smaller classes than their public peers. Student:professor ratios are not telling. Quoting them is misleading. And I should add that private peers, such as large private research universities, have large classes too. Intro-level classes with 300+ students at colleges such as Columbia, Cornell, Duke, Northwestern etc... are not uncommon, nor are intermediate-level classes with 75+ students. </p>

<p>4) and 5) As I clearly pointed out in post 49 above, Michigan's national and international appeal will continue to attract top students, top faculty and top corporate recruiters from all over.</p>

63

<p>"While spoken like a "proud wolverine," you may want to check your facts before claiming that UC Berkeley and Michigan are the two top public universities in the USA. Looking at USNWR ranks dating back to 1991, the folks at U Virginia have a legitimate case to make vs UC Berkeley and an overwhelmingly strong one vs U Michigan"</p>

<p>Hawkette, the difference between Cal, Michigan and UVa in the USNWR undergraduate rankings has been minimal. You can slice statistics any which way you want, the fact is, Cal's average ranking in the last 20 years has been #21, UVa's average ranking has been #23 and Michigan's average ranking has been #24. In other words, all three universities have been ranked roughly the same.</p>

<p>"1.47 UC Berkeley (leads with top rank or tied for top rank in 15 of 19 years)
1.68 U Virginia (leads with top rank or tied for top rank in 7 years and has never ranked lower than 2nd)</p>

<p>2.95 U Michigan (has never been ranked # 1 and has never been ranked ahead of U Virginia)
3.53 UCLA (has ranked ahead of UCB only once and now ranked as the # 3 US public university)
4.47 U North Carolina (has consistently been in Top 5 of public universities, but never equal to or ahead of U Virginia)"</p>

<p>Hawkette, the USNWR does not rank publics separately. They rank public research universities together with private research universities. So listing the public rankings as you do above is misleading.</p>

64

<p>Hehe...what a great thread...this place was boring the past couple months.</p>

<p>Anywho, I say you gotta go by PA score:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Berkeley (4.7)</p></li>
<li><p>Michigan (4.4)</p></li>
<li><p>Virginia (4.3)</p></li>
<li><p>UCLA (4.2)</p></li>
<li><p>Wisconsin/UNC (4.1)</p></li>
<li><p>UIUC/Georgia Tech/Texas (4.0)
10.Washington (3.9)</p></li>
</ol>

<p>:p</p>

65

<p>
[quote]
First, I like schools that have shown a strong commitment to undergraduate teaching and those that have consistently shown up in various surveys/measurements are William & Mary, U Virginia, and U North Carolina.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Forgive me if I've asked you this before, but what are the ways that you assess the commitment to UG teaching? What are the various surveys/measurements? I'm aware of the one survey from US News from the mid-90s, but what are the other (and more recent) measures that help you determine a school's commitment to UG teaching?</p>

66

<p>Hawkette,</p>

<p>Ranking schools like U Texas, UCSD, U Wisconsin, and U Washington ahead of Michigan is nothing short of bizarre, and IMO clearly confirms your anti-Michigan bias. </p>

<p>Strength of student body?</p>

<p>Middle 50% SAT scores:
Michigan 1220-1420
Wisconsin 1160-1400
UCSD 1130-1360
U Texas 1110-1370
U Washington 1090-1320</p>

<p>% in top 10% of HS class:
UCSD 99%
Michigan 92%
U Washington 86%
U Texas 69%
Wisconsin 60%</p>

<p>Commitment to undergraduate education?</p>

<p>Student/faculty ratio:
U Washington 11/1
U Wisconsin 13/1
Michigan 15/1
U Texas 18/1
UCSD 19/1</p>

<p>6-yr graduation rate:
Michigan 88%
UCSD 84%
Wisconsin 80%
U Texas 78%
U Washington 75%</p>

<p>Classes with fewer than 20 students:
Michigan 45%
Wisconsin 44%
UCSD 44%
U Washington 35%
U Texas 35%</p>

<p>Classes with more than 50 students:
U Washington 16.6%
Wisconsin 17.5%
Michigan 17.9%
Texas 22.8%
UCSD 30.2%</p>

<p>Faculty strength?</p>

<p>US News PA rating (I know you don't believe in this but unless you can offer a better ranking of faculty academic strength, this is the best we've currently got, and it's a reasonable proxy for the actual reputations of these schools among other academics):
Michigan 4.4
Wisconsin 4.1
U Texas 4.0
U Washington 3.9
UCSD 3.8</p>

<p>In short, Michigan comes in at the very top of this group in most key categories---best students, best faculty, best graduation rate, most small classes. Even where it's not #1, it's very close. And unlike the other schools in this group, it has no obvious deficiencies. UCSD and U Texas have serious shortages of faculty relative to the number of undergrads, as reflected in s/f ratio and class sizes. Wisconsin, Texas, and U Washington have disturbingly low graduation rates. U Washington's entering class is notably weaker than the others, with SAT scores a full hundred points or more below Michigan's at the 25th and 75th percentiles. In short, by any objective measure, Michigan is clearly a stronger school than any in this group, with Wisconsin a respectable second. And the reality (though no doubt you'll deny it) is that Michigan is much stronger financially than any of these schools, with a bigger endowment and a diversified revenue base (include a strong stream of OOS tuition revenue) that leaves it far less dependent on legislative appropriations than these other schools.</p>

<p>Now you're certainly welcome to make predictions about Michigan's eventual demise based on the state's economy. But that's just a prediction; it doesn't reflect the current reality. And there are plenty of reasons to believe your prediction is just dead wrong, not least that it's predicated upon a serious misunderstanding of the importance of legislative appropriations in the University of Michigan's overall financial picture.</p>

67

<p>last time i checked, threads were open for discussion, you can say what you please? and with GT's "limited expertise" i would take GT over Illinois anyday. Sorry, idc if they a "business/tech" school only</p>

68

<p>and i agree with current discussion, Michigan should never b behind UT, Wisconsin, UCSD, or Washington</p>

<p>top 5- UVA,UCB, U Mich, UCLA, UNC</p>

69

<p>Michigan also has top programs across all disciplines. Only Berkeley bests it among all publics.</p>

70

<p>Berkeley's SAT range this year was 1280-1500 and that's without superscoring. Its only going to get more competitive in the coming years.</p>

<p>I would rank it:</p>

<p>1.Berkeley</p>

<p>2.Michigan/UCLA</p>

<p>3.UVA/GTech</p>

<ol>
<li>William and Mary</li>
<li>UNC</li>
<li><p>UCSD</p></li>
<li><p>Wisconsin/Washington</p></li>
</ol>

<p>In the future I see UF and Texas possibly replacing the last two but only time will tell.</p>

71

<p>In no particular order here are mine (IMO):</p>

<p>UMich, William and Mary, UNC, UVa, Wisconsin, Berkeley, UT-Austin, UIUC, UMN, and UCLA</p>

72

<p>So besides GoBlue I am interested in why most people ate unsure about gtech</p>

73

<p>Many have said kids there are not very happy, the admin is harsh, and the social life lacking. Why bother? There are other good engineering schools that are also more fun and if you want to change your major you don't have to transfer..</p>

74

<p>bclinton and other U Michigan posters,
Please note that my rankings wherein I placed U Michigan 10th, and after U Texas, UCSD, U Washington, was a PROJECTED ranking. My words in my first post, # 37, were:</p>

<p>“So, assuming that these trends persist and looking ten years into the future, I would guess at the following as the premier public universities (for undergraduate education).”</p>

<p>I followed this up in # 52:</p>

<p>“while ten years might prove too short a time frame, there are large trends affecting the USA and which work to the detriment of northern, industrial states like Michigan. Population and jobs are leaving states like Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and, barring some unexpected changes, they're not coming back.”</p>

<p>I would agree with your opinions about the CURRENT position of U Michigan ahead of U Texas, U Washington, UCSD and U Wisconsin. </p>

<p>We’ve all (I think…I hope!) read, seen and experienced plenty about the broad population, business, demographic, political, economic trends in the USA where population, people, power, money, etc are flowing from the industrialized North to the Sunbelt. I expect this to inexorably affect the colleges in these states, including the ones in Michigan. </p>

<p>With specific regard to U Michigan, I concur that the school has a good endowment and their leadership appreciates and is trying to swim over these large waves. I’m confident that U Michigan will continue to be well regarded in many areas of academia and the business world. It’s not like I’m predicting the demise of the school. But U Michigan is not immune from what goes on in the larger world and these are large, probably irreversible, trends that will have broad impact. Things change and they evolve. IMO some major schools in the Sunbelt will benefit more in the future and if they hire the right leadership, I think that these schools can reach unexpectedly high levels of prominence. </p>

<p>Others may differ and I’m certainly ok with that. In fact, I’d love to hear the thoughts of others on how higher education in the USA will evolve over the next decade and what broad factors will significantly impact and influence the scene.</p>

75

<p>
[quote]
what broad factors will significantly impact and influence the scene.

[/quote]

high SAT scores, small class sizes, a focus on the liberal arts and a FBS division football team.</p>

76

<p>Alex,
As this is a thread about public universities, I looked at how they compared to others in this universe of schools. Also, in their literature, each of these schools publicizes their rank among public universities nationally. </p>

<p>1.47 UC Berkeley
1.68 U Virginia</p>

<p>2.95 U Michigan
3.53 UCLA
4.47 U North Carolina</p>

<p>For the larger USNWR rankings of all national universities, the average ranks were:</p>

<p>20.53 for UC Berkeley
21.26 for U Virginia which is 4% behind UC Berkeley </p>

<p>23.89 for U Michigan which is 12% behind U Virginia
25.00 for UCLA which is 5% behind U Michigan
26.63 for U North Carolina which is 7% behind UCLA</p>

<p>Not a big change from one way to compare them to the other, so I’m not sure how that is misleading. </p>

<p>I would agree that these are not large ranking differences. IMO, these are all fine state universities. </p>

<p>I should add that the USNWR methodology, which assigns a high weight to PA rankings among academics, disfavors W&M. W&M has an exceptional undergraduate program with a much more intimate environment that many students would prefer to more highly ranked colleges.</p>

77

<p>Hawkette, the trend of the last 5-10 years does not support your projections. Michigan has solidified its hold on its position, not weakened it. Michigan's financial situation and admissions standards have gained ground vis-a-vis its academic peers (including publics such as UCLA, UCSD, UT-Austin, UDub, Wisconsin, UIUC, William and Mary and UVa and private institutions such as Cornell, Northwestern and Penn). If you can point to specific instances where state universities have gained ground vs Michigan, share them with us because I cannot think of any.</p>

78

<p>Hawkette, my point about USNWR rankings were threefold:</p>

<p>1) The USNWR ranking formula is the same for public and private institutions. The USNWR does not rank Publics separately. Yes, they has a section where they rank universities according to percentage accepted, class size and public affiliation, but that does not mean that those breakdowns can be used in the context you used them in, </p>

<p>2) Cal, Michigan and UVA (and UCLA) have averaged rankings between 20 and 25 for the last 20 years. That's so close, it might as well be a four-way tie for first place. It would be like differentiating between Harvard, MIT, Princeton, Stanford and Yale.</p>

<p>3) The USNWR is just a ranking. Most people do not agree with it entirely.</p>

79

<p>
[quote]
Cal, Michigan and UVA (and UCLA) have averaged rankings between 20 and 25 for the last 20 years. That's so close, it might as well be a four-way tie for first place. It would be like differentiating between Harvard, MIT, Princeton, Stanford and Yale.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hmmm...</p>

<p>
[quote]
1. Berkeley (4.7)</p>

<ol>
<li>Michigan (4.4)</li>
<li>Virginia (4.3)</li>
<li>UCLA (4.2)</li>
<li>Wisconsin/UNC (4.1)</li>
<li>UIUC/Georgia Tech/Texas (4.0)
10.Washington (3.9)

[/quote]
</li>
</ol>

<p>Looks more like a tie for 2nd place...according to 2,000 academics...;)</p>

80

<p>I agree UCBChem.</p>