Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Thank you. I said what I said because I've only read it in a description of UVa.
Regardless, only 3 of these schools wow me, even though the others are clearly good:
1. UVa - for its historical legacy
2. Berkeley - I think there is a term "the Berkeley mystique" - when you walk through there, you can still sense a weird mix of rigor and rebellion
3. U of M - that it's that good, and the admission rate is still reasonable
While I certainly agree about those being probably the best of the 8, I happen to be partial to UNC since I am a North Carolinian.
New York State does not have a "singular best" or "one flagship university".
It has four. They are Albany, Binghamton, Buffalo, and Stony Brook.
Someone earlier argued that NY has 5, because he was taking the public portion of Cornell University into consideration.
I've never heard it referred to as a flagship university of SUNY, but either way, NYS does not have one, but at least four universities with the flagship designation.
What is your definition of 'flagship'?
The word itself, when used in general terms, means one, the best. Someone else mentioned that when used for public school systems, it means the first.
So I don't follow why you list 4, are they related in some way? Are they top ranked?
The word itself, when used in general terms, means one, the best. Someone else mentioned that when used for public school systems, it means the first.
So I don't follow why you list 4, are they related in some way? Are they top ranked?
New York state has worked to avoid labelling any one school in its SUNY as a Flagship school in order to try and maintain balance of budget and enrollment througout the system. Likewise University of Idaho relatively recently removed any mention of Flagship from its marketing efforts so that Idaho State could become more competitive and both schools would hopefully be able to increase the State's reputation.
In Florida it is complicated with University of Florida (UF), Florida State University (FSU), and Florida A&M University (FAMU) all having interest in the title. I don't believe any of the schools actively market themselves as the Flagship as a result. This is because of the Buckman Act of 1905.
From wikipedia:
Quote:
Buckman is known for being the author of the Buckman Act, a 1905 law that reorganized higher education into three institutions, segregated by race and gender, as follows:
Ohio State is considered Ohio's flagship university, despite being younger than both Ohio University and Miami University and for a long time less prestigious than the latter.
Ohio State is considered Ohio's flagship university, despite being younger than both Ohio University and Miami University and for a long time less prestigious than the latter.
You're right. And you seem to have the concept of "flagship" down correctly, Clevelander.
If you look at Big Ten country, you seem some interesting things....
People make fun of the "the" in tOSU, but it is there for a reason:
the land grant institution came around after the civil war when, as you noted, Ohio U and Miami were long standing institutions. But neither was a flagship. None existed in Ohio.
Problem for OSU was that both Miami and Ohio U had great reputations and both would aspire to the same role as OSU. But OSU's clout (coming form its Columbus base and central position in-state?) made it rise above the rest, even though Ohio U grabbed the name it probably wanted.
In Illinois, in comparison, UIUC was also a product of the Morrill Act, but it didn't have schools like Miami and Ohio. It did have the only older instate school, Illinois State, but that school was no Miami or Ohio and didn't stop the U of I from reaching its destiny.
So both Illinois and Ohio developed as single flagship schools in the region, both surprisingly land grant institutions that took on the full range of curriculum that flagships generally do.
Wisconsin (UW-Madison),Minnesota (U of M-TC), and Nebraska (UNL) followed the same route of one flagship institution.
Two other Big Ten states...Indiana and Michigan....went with two each.
Indiana, arguably more than any other state in the nation, had that concept of two flagship institutions nailed down in the 19th century; I don't think there was any comparison. IU was a school much like Ohio U, also located in that earliest settled southern region of the state, and not necessarily set up for "flagship" role. IU concentrated in the liberal arts so heavily that when Purdue was set up (as a university, never as a college the way that a second flagship did in other states), it took over the technological role. IU and Purdue have complimented each other ever since; no "big brother", "little brother" relationship like in other states. I don't think any state has seen an equity between its two public universities for as long as Indiana has with IU and Purdue.
In Michigan, nobody questions that U-M's reputation is up there are the top of public education (Cal, U-M, UVa may be in a class by themselves). But personally I think it absurd for anyone to not recognize that Michigan has two flagships. MSU is the quality of institution that could easily be the #1 school in a good percentage of our states. It has not only the largest enrollment of all Michigan schools, but by far the larger in-state enrollment compared to U-M). And MSU is long past its land grant status, complete with law, medicine, and every other type of curriculum. It's a flagship, like U-M, because only these two portray a state wide image and have the huge research component.
In Iowa, both the Big Ten's Iowa and the Big 12's ISU are flagships.
Out of Big Ten country, I would give both Cal and UCLA status as their state's flagships. Both are part of the the states top system, UC, and both represent the peak of the UC system's schools.
In Texas, everyone looks at UT-Austin and A&M as the flagships; I believe in that state there is actually a legal status to it.
Some other states (IMHO):
Ore: Ore, Ore St
Wash: Wash, Wash St
Nev: UNR, UNLV
Ariz: UA, ASU
Colo: CU, Co St
Okla: OU, OkSt
Kan: KU, K-St
Mo: Mizzou
Ky: UK (with L'ville borderline)
Tenn: Tenn (Knox)
La: LSU
Ark: Ark
Miss: Ole Miss, Miss St
Ala: Ala, Aub
Fla: UF, FSU
SC: SC, Clem
Ga: Ga, Ga Tech
NC: UNC/CH, NC St
Va: UVa, VT
Md: MD
WV: WV
Pa: PSU (maybe Pitt, Tem)
NJ: Rut
Conn: UConn
NY: none
Mass: UMass
You're right. And you seem to have the concept of "flagship" down correctly, Clevelander.
If you look at Big Ten country, you seem some interesting things....
People make fun of the "the" in tOSU, but it is there for a reason:
the land grant institution came around after the civil war when, as you noted, Ohio U and Miami were long standing institutions. But neither was a flagship. None existed in Ohio.
Problem for OSU was that both Miami and Ohio U had great reputations and both would aspire to the same role as OSU. But OSU's clout (coming form its Columbus base and central position in-state?) made it rise above the rest, even though Ohio U grabbed the name it probably wanted.
In Illinois, in comparison, UIUC was also a product of the Morrill Act, but it didn't have schools like Miami and Ohio. It did have the only older instate school, Illinois State, but that school was no Miami or Ohio and didn't stop the U of I from reaching its destiny.
So both Illinois and Ohio developed as single flagship schools in the region, both surprisingly land grant institutions that took on the full range of curriculum that flagships generally do.
Wisconsin (UW-Madison),Minnesota (U of M-TC), and Nebraska (UNL) followed the same route of one flagship institution.
Two other Big Ten states...Indiana and Michigan....went with two each.
Indiana, arguably more than any other state in the nation, had that concept of two flagship institutions nailed down in the 19th century; I don't think there was any comparison. IU was a school much like Ohio U, also located in that earliest settled southern region of the state, and not necessarily set up for "flagship" role. IU concentrated in the liberal arts so heavily that when Purdue was set up (as a university, never as a college the way that a second flagship did in other states), it took over the technological role. IU and Purdue have complimented each other ever since; no "big brother", "little brother" relationship like in other states. I don't think any state has seen an equity between its two public universities for as long as Indiana has with IU and Purdue.
In Michigan, nobody questions that U-M's reputation is up there are the top of public education (Cal, U-M, UVa may be in a class by themselves). But personally I think it absurd for anyone to not recognize that Michigan has two flagships. MSU is the quality of institution that could easily be the #1 school in a good percentage of our states. It has not only the largest enrollment of all Michigan schools, but by far the larger in-state enrollment compared to U-M). And MSU is long past its land grant status, complete with law, medicine, and every other type of curriculum. It's a flagship, like U-M, because only these two portray a state wide image and have the huge research component.
In Iowa, both the Big Ten's Iowa and the Big 12's ISU are flagships.
Out of Big Ten country, I would give both Cal and UCLA status as their state's flagships. Both are part of the the states top system, UC, and both represent the peak of the UC system's schools.
In Texas, everyone looks at UT-Austin and A&M as the flagships; I believe in that state there is actually a legal status to it.
Some other states (IMHO):
Ore: Ore, Ore St
Wash: Wash, Wash St
Nev: UNR, UNLV
Ariz: UA, ASU
Okla: OU, OkSt
Kan: KU, K-St
Mo: Mizzou
Ky: UK (with L'ville borderline)
Tenn: Tenn (Knox)
La: LSU
Miss: Ole Miss, Miss St
Ala: Ala, Aub
Fla: UF, FSU
SC: SC, Clem
Ga: Ga, Ga Tech
NC: UNC/CH, NC St
Va: UVa, VT
Md: MD
WV: WV
Pa: PSU (maybe Pitt, Tem)
NJ: Rut
Conn: UConn
NY: none
Mass: UMass
are you considering size as a factor as well? i don't know why you'd mention vt but not wm
Univeristy of Oklahoma is clearly better than Oklahoma State; while University of Arizona is clearly better than ASU, and UF is better than FSU.
For every school that has a University of X and a X State University, the University of X is always better.
The only one that can be considered as having two flagship state schools is California, even with CA, Berkeley is still widely regarded as better than UCLA.
The University of Texas and Texas A&M are both widely considered "flagship" schools.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
