<p>No such thing as a public ivy. As was said, it’s simply a figure of speech. It’s like saying ‘what New England liberal arts college is most like the Big Ten?’</p>
<p>^It’s Juilliard, not Julliard. </p>
<p>Darn that first “i”!</p>
<p>A couple of other people’s guesses as to what these would be:
[Public</a> Ivy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_ivies]Public”>Public Ivy - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>I wouldn’t consider UVermont a public ivy anymore</p>
<p>Post # 13: Indiana is NOT a public ivy.
Indiana is not a public ivy in the original sense of that term, an academically selective public with some social prestige among students in the Northeast. (BTW, the term, public ivy reportedly goes back to William Faulkner, who used it in late 50s or early 60s to refer to Virginia. I had heard the term before Molls 1985 book.)</p>
<p>When I gave the example of Indiana, I was using it as an example of a public flagship university at which a top/serious student has the opportunity to get an education as good as that provided at any ivy, depending on the field. I stand by that. Is Indiana as good as Michigan or Berkeley? In general, it is not, but I do think it is underrated academically. </p>
<p>Indiana offers a very broad range of disciplines, several of which are offered at relatively few public or private universities. In many fields, a serious student has opportunities comparable to all but a hand-full of top public or private universities, e.g., in languages, the Kelly School of Business, the Jacobs School of Music, etc. </p>
<p>Post #16: Julliard is the top music school in the country.
It goes back and forth as to whether Indiana or Juilliard is #1. </p>
<p>Post #24: I wouldn’t consider UVermont a public ivy anymore.
Thats probably true. However, for many years, Vermont was considered the best of the New England state universities. For a well-to-do preppie slacker, who didnt get into a good Ivy or LAC, it wasnt the worst place to be—at least he could ski. These days, it probably has more green appeal, given its location.</p>
<p>
Are faculty considered “resources”? I think faculty would be the major resource for a university. In terms of faculty reward and distinction, only one public university matches and/or exceeds the elite privates. :)</p>
<p>i would consider michigian, virginia, berkeley, william and mary, and unc-chapel hill to be public ivies.</p>
<p>“Are faculty considered “resources”? I think faculty would be the major resource for a university. In terms of faculty reward and distinction, only one public university matches and/or exceeds the elite privates.”</p>
<p>…and others like Michigan certainly match the lower ivies.</p>
<p>Faculty distinction is nice for an institution, but what does it mean for the individual student? </p>
<p>If Jane Faculty Member is a top-notch researcher and brings great acclaim to her institution but is not especially effective with/interested in undergrads, is that really better than Jon Faculty Member who is very knowledgeable AND a great instructor/mentor for more than a couple of undergrads?? </p>
<p>I know that the public school advocates would probably say “yes.” I would say emphatically “NO.”</p>
<p>Of course, some profs can fill both roles and their students recognize them for that. According to CP, there are publics that offer the high quality Academics, which they measure as “professors that are knowledgable, accessible and geniunely interested in their students’ welfare. Other determining facors include class size, how well professors communicate, and whether or not classes are engaging.” The highest scoring publics (all graded at A-, same as Ivy college Cornell) are:</p>
<p>Georgia Tech
UC Berkeley
UCLA
U Virginia
William & Mary</p>
<p>Post #26:“Are faculty considered “resources”? I think faculty would be the major resource for a university. In terms of faculty reward and distinction, only one public university matches and/or exceeds the elite privates.”</p>
<p>So in real terms of undergraduate outcome, which honors student will get the better education…
A Classics student who goes to Harvard, one who goes to Berkeley, or one who goes to Cincinnati?
A Chem Engineering student who goes to Cornell, one who goes to Berkeley, or one who goes to Minnesota?
A Chinese language student who goes to Berkeley, one who goes to Ohio State in the Chinese Flagship program, or one who goes to Dartmouth?
A History student who goes to Berkeley, one who goes to Wisconsin, or one who goes to Harvard?
A Psychology student who goes to Berkeley, one who goes to Michigan, or one who goes to Brown?
A Spanish student who goes to Berkeley, one who goes to Texas, or one who goes to Yale?</p>
<p>Since I’m going into politics I’ll make this point of the 100 (Prior to Robert Byrd’s death) sitting senators I believe 16 of them got their undergrad degrees at Ivies, that means 84 did not. Ohio State had 3 sitting senators more than any Ivy other than Harvard and Yale, and it was more common that a state would have two senators educated at the top state university, than two senators from an Ivy. Food for thought… The Ivy league doesn’t have a monopoly on politics</p>
<p>sclendsay, only one U.S. Senator got his undergraduate degree from Ohio State</p>
<p>US Senators - Undergraduate Degree
16 - Ivy League
1 - Ohio State</p>
<p>US Senators - Undergraduate & Graduate Degree
26 - Ivy League
3 - Ohio State</p>
<p>Undergraduate Enrollment
59,206 - Ivy League
41,348 - Ohio State</p>
<p>actually you’re right… 3 are OSU Alumni in one way or another Though… sorry, wrong stat, but my point still rings true</p>
<p>sclindsay, and the point that you claim that “still rings true” is what?</p>
<p>You’re comparing one school to 8, and OSU only has 250ish kids majoring in polisci, as opposed to roughly 1100 at all the Ivies. </p>
<p>and yes (16) 26 have Ivy backgrounds, but (84) 74 don’t. These are the people leading the free world, and to simplify it to only 8 schools where you can get a good education is stupid.</p>
<p>sclindsay do you realize how ridiculus you sound?</p>
<p>It is YOU that is comparing Ohio State to the 8 Ivy League schools</p>
<p>Ohio State has 41,000 undergraduate students and only 1 U.S. Senator</p>
<p>The Ivy League has 59,000 undergraduate students, 43% more than Ohio State and 16 U.S. Senators, 16 times the amount of U.S. Senators as Ohio State.</p>
<p>and now you claim that only Political Science majors become U.S. Senators…do you realize how ridiculous this sounds?</p>
<p>I think the point of sclindsay’s post was that you still have a chance to become a US Senator even if you didn’t attend an Ivy.</p>
<p>However…
Post #35: “…and yes (16) 26 have Ivy backgrounds, but (84) 74 don’t. These are the people leading the free world, and to simplify it to only 8 schools where you can get a good education is stupid.”</p>
<p>Sclindsay, I think your point had more to do with whether certain public offices are open to you if you did not attend an elite university. I don’t think that point has anything to do with whether or not any particular Senator received a good education. There are idiots in the Senate who attended elite privates and idiots who attended publics, just as there are intelligent Senators who attended both kinds of universities.</p>
<p>sclindsay, please copy/paste the part where someone posted on this thread that the Ivy League is the the only place you can get a good education.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ease up JohnAdams. Elected office is not like i-banking – having an ivy degree is not the be-all and end-all. If you campaign on the fact that that you graduated from Princeton, you’re screwed. So throwing out stats about how many Senators went to the Ivy League is very much pointless. On the list of things that would make someone a successful politician, the school they attended is pretty damn insignificant.</p>
<p>zap, here is the thing, **NO ONE **is arguing differently from his point of view. It is ridiculous to think that you need an Ivy League education to become a U.S. Senator.</p>
<p>
</p>