<p>rjko,
No more bailouts on hopeless cases. Not with my tax dollars!!! :)</p>
<p>Plus for your bailout hopes, Geithner (assuming he gets in) is a New Yorker and like his "Mr. Wonderful" predecessor, Hank Paulson, is a Dartmouth grad. Doubtful he'll pony up any more than ole Hank did for the auto companies. </p>
<p>Maybe Canada will offer to buy Michigan from the USA.... :p</p>
<p>Stephen Ross is a New Yorker too. He gave Michigan a hundred million to rebuild the business school. So maybe being a New Yorker might not be so bad after all. :-)</p>
<p>We tried to sell Michigan to the Canadians once. Instead they sent us one of theirs to be our governor. They also indicated that they would have purchased our state but were concerned that there would be no natural boundary between Canada and Ohio anymore. I believe the indication was they could regulate buckeyes better by keeping a close tab on them at the water border crossings. ;-)</p>
<p>rjkofnovi writes:
[quote]
I noticed that right away too gellino. It seems to me that Michigan pushes the ACT over the SAT in terms of importance when they are evaluating students. Many Michigan applicants only take the ACT because of this.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It isn't what U-M emphasizes; it's geography. If you look at a map, the midwest states are "ACT States" and that's what most high schoolers take. Now that the ACT has replaced the MEAP and every single MI student can take the ACT for free as a junior, the number of applicants with the ACT will go up. Actually, this freshman class was the first for which the state ACT policy was in effect.</p>
<p>hawkette writes:
[quote]
When I wrote earlier in this thread about rising southern/Sunbelt powers, I was thinking about publics like U Florida
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I've heard you say before that you thought Florida was moving in the right direction vis-a-vis public higher education and it floored me then as it does now. </p>
<p>Machen claims the current budget crisis is the worst he's seen. The state has cut $6 billion from the budget in the last 18 months and faces a deficit of $2.3 billion this year and a larger one next year. Depending on property taxes for revenue (no income tax), the fall in housing values and collapse in construction industry is killing the state's budget. The appropriation cuts at U-F were something like $47 million, and on top of that the state refused to allow the U to increase tuition as much as it wanted, resulting in lawsuits against the legislature. </p>
<p>Next year, cuts may be $50 million. The Governor may allow tuition increases, but they would cover less than a quarter of the anticipated state funding cut.</p>
<p>As a result, U Florida has announced it will cut back on research, eliminate some academic programs, lay off faculty & staff, and leave 290 positions unfilled. The Board of Governors has asked all public u's to shrink their enrollments as a way to cope, so the flagship is moving to cut enrollment by 4,000. I guess this will increase selectivity, but this isn't necessarily the way a college wants to do that. </p>
<p>Thie budget is difficult and relations with legislators are acrimonious, and U-Florida is being forced to cut things it would rather not. What about the Florida situation makes you feel they are moving in the right direction?</p>
<p>Thanks for the clarification hoedown. That completely makes sense, unlike many of hawkette's biased statments.</p>
<p>I try to make sense at least once every fourteen posts--I might be beating my average this month.</p>
<p>hoedown,
No argument from me that U Florida is facing some financial pressures, but that does not exactly make them unique among public universities in the USA. But there are important differences in the economic environments surrounding these universities and how they play out will make all the difference. </p>
<p>First, Florida had an economy that was booming and was expected to grow rapidly in the decade ahead. Notice I use the past tense. Given what's gone on almost everywhere in the last 12 months, nothing is certain in the near future. Florida's real estate markets are a mess and have morphed from a positive to a negative. However, tourism remains good as Florida actually can benefit during a recession as more Americans will opt for drive-in vacations, albeit they will likely be spending less than they have historically. Other local industry (aerospace, info tech, healthcare) remains in place, but corporate capital spending budgets are still being cut and these companies will likely feel the pain in 2009. Agriculture remains in fine shape and OJ remains a demanded commodity in the US and world markets. Florida supplies about half of this to the world. </p>
<p>Second, U Florida's student/faculty ratio of 21/1 is pathetic. They know it, the state legislators know it. But there was a path to correct for this-hire more professors. This was the plan until the economic train wreck hit the country and Florida. The response has been to push back hiring plans and try to spread out the distribution of students to public colleges throughout the state. Flagship U Florida has gotten even more popular and competitive in the last few years and the state has an obligation to support the other state colleges in Florida as well. U Florida has survived better than all other Florida institutions, but it's not immune to what is going on in the state. </p>
<p>Third, the state legislature has room to raise tuition as U Florida is the cheapest major public university by a wide margin. But this will be difficult in a state that is loathe to raise fees of any type and this mindset is part of what is contributing to the current budget crisis. Still, the option exists and this is a large difference with a school like U Michigan which has practically zero room to raise tuition & fees. U Florida's IS tuition is one-third that of U Michigan. U Florida also has a lot of room to increase OOS populations and bring in higher revenue per student. Presently, only 4% at U Florida come from OOS. At U Michigan, where OOS tuition is already more than 50% higher than at U Florida, 32% of the students are OOS. </p>
<p>The million dollar question is whether Florida (like much of the rest of the USA) has a future. IMO, the state has a brighter future than states in the industrial NE/MW as several of Florida's industries have a firmer footing or will grow markedly faster (tourism, Latin American trade, agriculture, space industry, even info tech and software development). It is the USA's 4th most populous state and has very good geographic/economic breadth with 6 metro areas with more than 1 million residents. There is excellent infrastructure in the state with 14 deepwater ports, 19 major commercial airports (including 12 serving international destinations) and a highway and cargo railway system that is among America's best. </p>
<p>Thus, I believe that the trends we have seen over the last decade that boosted Florida's position will ultimately resume and, with the right leadership, these trends all can bring greater prosperity to the state and to U Florida. If I am correct, that will translate to more population and wealth and political power, but I concede that the path is certainly bumpier and longer than envisioned not long ago.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I am not sure I see your point. I am not talking about one or two isolated cases. I am talking about an entire class of 1,000+ freshmen entering a particular university. I doubt that all 3.8+ students who take challenging classes in high school are nerds. In fact, I would estimate that the majority of them are well rounded and accomplished.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I guess what bothers me the most is the lack of concern in trying to discern standardization across different schools to try to create a more accurate comparison.</p>
<p>Whether a school is in an ACT state or SAT state, it's not like the percentiles are different are they? If UMichigan's median SAT is 1320 and median ACT is 29, do these represent different levels of acheivement?</p>
<p>
[quote]
with a school like U Michigan which has practically zero room to raise tuition & fees
[/quote]
U-M is expensive but I have not seen a recent analysis which suggests students would refuse to pay more. Also important is the fact that the University of Michigan has the autonomy to set tuition.</p>
<p>U-F may see better things in its future and of course we at U-M know its leader very well. But personally, I think the things you and I have each mentioned suggest that it's not the U to hold up in this thread as a model of a public flagship. From my perspective, I see academia watching and waiting, hoping the state of Florida doesn't blow it by continuing to de-invest in its educational institutions and hamstringing those who lead them. If it doesn't, Florida's gains from population growth and an economic bounceback will be underrealized.</p>
<p>standardized!=worthwhile</p>
<p>
[quote]
IMO, the state has a brighter future than states in the industrial NE/MW as several of Florida's industries have a firmer footing or will grow markedly faster (tourism, Latin American trade, agriculture, space industry, even info tech and software development). It is the USA's 4th most populous state and has very good geographic/economic breadth with 6 metro areas with more than 1 million residents. There is excellent infrastructure in the state with 14 deepwater ports, 19 major commercial airports (including 12 serving international destinations) and a highway and cargo railway system that is among America's best.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So tell, me, Hawkette. Do you moonlight as an economic development officer for the state of Florida?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There are lots of different conversion tables out there, but most would put a 29 ACT in the same range as a 1320 SAT (CR + M). The ACT and College Board jointly put out a "concordance table" equating a 29 ACT with an SAT range of 1290 to 1320. The University of California uses its own conversion table, calculating that a 29 ACT is equivalent to a 1320-1350 SAT. Take your pick. Either way, a 29 ACT and a 1320 SAT CR + M are pretty much equivalent.</p>
<p>Top 10 Public Universities imho:</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>College of William and Mary </li>
<li>University of North Carolina--Chapel Hil</li>
<li>University of California--San Diego
10.University of Texas--Austin</li>
</ol>
<p>Honorable Mention:
Ohio State University--Columbus
University of Florida--Gainesville
University of Maryland--College Park</p>
<p>
[quote]
I guess what bothers me the most is the lack of concern in trying to discern standardization across different schools to try to create a more accurate comparison.
[/quote]
They did account for school variation and curriculum difficulties. The old points system has a school factor ranging from 0 to 10; and a curriculum factor from -4 to 8.</p>
<p>Standardized test is downplayed as they didn't differentiate between an SAT score of 1360 vs 1600; or 1200 vs 1350.</p>
<p>I love that Texas has such an amazing state school. I mean if I get rejected from the Ivies I still get to go to UT in the engineering honors program. It is so AMAZING, I guess the only better state (IMHO) to live in for top publics would be Cali it is ridiculous that so many schools in that system are amazing.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Originally posted by nyccard
U Michigan is ridiculously homogeneous. This is not a good thing.
Racially, ethnically, socioeconomically, etc.</p>
<p>Except for California, most other states (with top publics) do not rule out race as a factor in admissions... What has Michigan done accordingly?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
Originally posted by rjkofnovi
As compared to what other top ten public schools? I think you'll find that Michigan isn't all that different than any of the others. For that matter I would assume, without real proof, that there are others in the top ten which are even more of what you call homogeneous than U-M.
[/quote]
Let's see how "homogeneous" Michigan is compared to the top publics of other states:</p>
<p>[Uni (%OOS)]...[African]..[Asian]..[Hispanic]..[Native]..[International]
Michigan (32) .... 6 .. 12 .. 5 .. 1 .. 5 = 29
Virginia (28) ...... 9 .. 11 .. 4 .. 0 .. 5 = 29
UNC (17) .......... 11 .. 7 .. 4 .. 1 .. 1 = 24
W&M (31) ......... 7 .... 7 .. 6 .. 1 .. 2 = 23
Wisc (32) .......... 3 ... 6 ... 3 .. 1 .. 4 = 17
UIUC (7) ............ 7 .. 13 .. 7 .. 0 .. 5 = 32
PSU (24) ............ 4 ... 5 ... 4 .. 0 .. 2 = 15
Texas (5) ........... 5 .. 17 .. 18 .. 0 .. 4 = 44 (10% rule)
Florida (4) .......... 10 .. 8 .. 14 .. 0 .. 1 = 33</p>
<p>compared to some of the top privates:</p>
<p>WUSTL ............... 10 .. 13 .. 3 .. 0 .. 4 = 30
Notre Dame .......... 4 ... 7 ... 9 .. 1 .. 3 = 24 (over 75% Catholic)
Vandy .................. 9 ... 7 ... 6 .. 0 .. 3 = 25
G'town ................. 7 ... 9 ... 7 .. 0 .. 5 = 28
Wake Forest ......... 7 ... 5 ... 2 ... 1 .. 1 = 16
Boston College ....... 6 .. 10 .. 8 ... 0 .. 2 = 26</p>
<p>Is Michigan so "ridiculously homogeneous"?</p>
<p>btw if you guys havent realized it with your rankings, Georgia Tech is currently ranked 7th in public universities...according to website, just sent my app.</p>
<p>Let's see how "homogeneous" Michigan is compared to the top publics of other states:</p>
<p>[Uni (%OOS)]...[African]..[Asian]..[Hispanic]..[Native]..[International]
Michigan (32) .... 6 .. 12 .. 5 .. 1 .. 5 = 29
Virginia (28) ...... 9 .. 11 .. 4 .. 0 .. 5 = 29
UNC (17) .......... 11 .. 7 .. 4 .. 1 .. 1 = 24
W&M (31) ......... 7 .... 7 .. 6 .. 1 .. 2 = 23
Wisc (32) .......... 3 ... 6 ... 3 .. 1 .. 4 = 17
UIUC (7) ............ 7 .. 13 .. 7 .. 0 .. 5 = 32
PSU (24) ............ 4 ... 5 ... 4 .. 0 .. 2 = 15
Texas (5) ........... 5 .. 17 .. 18 .. 0 .. 4 = 44 (10% rule)
Florida (4) .......... 10 .. 8 .. 14 .. 0 .. 1 = 33</p>
<p>Having gone to Penn State University Park, Penn State was a pretty white place. It seemed like there were always a lot of asians, but guess that wasn't completely right. Anyway, without trying to get too off subject, I am not sure of the relevance of bringing the homogeneity into the picture when comparing universities. Aren't intelligent people supposed to be color blind and compare people as students and not their race? </p>
<p>Tangent: I believe affirmative action to be wrong. Not all minorities get in based on affirmative action, but I think that making an issue of numbers of different races as a way to attack the integrity of an institution is wrong. Consequently, I don't not see the importance of these numbers on race, as the things that should be focused on are SAT, GPA, EC activities,etc.</p>
<pre><code> “Affirmative action is the attempt to deal with malignant racism by instituting benign racism”
</code></pre>
<p>-Elliott Larson</p>
<p>I think this thread should stick to comparing academics. Tangent done.</p>
<p><em>I don't see</em> not <em>I don't not</em></p>
<p>hmm..Georgia Tech.. is definitely a top-notch 'public' university. However, I would rather see GT grouped & ranked with technological favored schools such as MIT, CM, CALTECH, RPI..etc. as one of the top 10 Tech universities in the country though I reckon the fact that it contains a great business school, nonetheless, the emphysis is definitely as GT puts it, "Founded as the Georgia School of Technology, it assumed its present name in 1948 to reflect a growing focus on advanced technological and scientific research."</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>