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.
flagship means the original institutions from which the state university system grew, so usually that means the first, e.g., UC Berkeley is California's flagship university.
but ohio and miami predate ohio state. illinois State predates Illinois state. san jose state predates cal. W&M is way older than UVa, its colonial roots make it one of the earliest universities in the nation. A&M is older than UT.
and not all states have university systems. some have one, two, or even more.
if there is a general rule, a large number of states had a flagship institution prior to the civil war. after the civil war, through the morrill act, states across the nation were able to open a land-grant institution. most of these schools were devoted to agriculture and the sciences, the original state universities (where they existed) were more liberal arts oriented.
again, as I noted earlier, some states didn't have a pre-civil war flagship and the landgrant university became the flagship.
many landgrants started as colleges, but with the enormous amount of growth in the post-WWII years (particularly when the baby boomers hit the campuses), they were elevated to university status, broadened their curricula, and tended to be viewed as true second flagships in their states. Look at Penn State. There was no "flagship public university" in Pennsylvania until the 1950s since Penn State, which would fill that status, was still a college after WWII. It was transformed into the typical state flagship under the presidency of Milt Eisenhower, Ike's brother.
flagship public universities do, as you say, have some of an historic quality to them, but the true definition usually means state wide representation, broad curricula, and a heavy research component.
are you considering size as a factor as well? i don't know why you'd mention vt but not wm
size is important, but it doesn't necessarily give the flagship status. and you are right....I should have included W&M, too. I think the only knock against it (which obviously can't be academic reputation) is the more limited curricula.
It's somewhat like Ohio where a school like Miami is outstanding, arguably the academic equal of OSU, but doesn't have the scope of a flagship. W&M, of course, is more highly regarded than Miami is, but its that scope issue that is a a factor.
then again, as I stated above, i do recognize your point and, in part, embrace it.
But, UT is better though, just like UC Berkeley is better than UCLA.
i wouldn't disagree on that, advanced, although I think there is generally a pretty close academic relationship between Cal and UCLA.
But obviously even in states with two flagships, there generally will be a perception of one being a better (all around) academic institution. Again, if you read my previous comment here, the thing that makes a flagship (while as you note, academic standing among the peer in-state public universities) include mainly things like state wide image, wide curricula, heavy research component, economic impact on the state, etc.
That's why in a state like Michigan, U-M and MSU are in a state-wide description the other schools do not have.....even if U-M is more respected academically.
i wouldn't disagree on that, advanced, although I think there is generally a pretty close academic relationship between Cal and UCLA.
I would prefer UCLA to Berkeley. UCLA is in one of LA's best neighborhoods, Westwood Village. Berkeley sits close to bohemian Shattuck Avenue. The big negative with UCLA is the quarter system. Berkeley uses semesters. How the UC system has not coordinated on this issue and gotten their act together is pretty messed up.
I would prefer UCLA to Berkeley. UCLA is in one of LA's best neighborhoods, Westwood Village. Berkeley sits close to bohemian Shattuck Avenue. The big negative with UCLA is the quarter system. Berkeley uses semesters. How the UC system has not coordinated on this issue and gotten their act together is pretty messed up.
if I'm not mistaken, UCLA gets more applications for freshman admission than any university in the nation.
if I'm not mistaken, UCLA gets more applications for freshman admission than any university in the nation.
You very well may be right. I think it edges Berkeley by a small margin.
Over the years, many people have used it as a vehicle to move to Los Angeles, when out-of-state admission criteria and tuition differential weren't much of a deterrent at all. Similarly, I went to school with people who used Berkeley as a vehicle to move to SF/the Bay Area.
Last edited by robertpolyglot; 03-30-2012 at 10:03 PM..
Colorado's flagship is the University of Colorado at Boulder.
We have Colorado State University (almost just as big as CU) and University of Northern Colorado (2/3 the size, maybe?), with CSU being the next closest contender.
Also, so what's the pattern with engineering here? Reading through the posts, it seems like most of the "___ State" universities have the better engineering school than "University of ___" which is interesting, because if one were to get into both CSU and CU engineering, they had better pick CU engineering since the facts point to it being far better and right on par with the Colorado School of Mines program. I am a CU engineering student and I try not to be too biased, and I'm not trying to bash CSU's engineering program, but that's the way it is at least in this state... CU's engineering program is very well-respected.
I don't believe OU is clearly better than OSU. Each school has strengths, but one is not clearly better.
Same as with Texas and Texas A&M.
The "University of" vs "State University" difference is more in line with the University of California system and the California State system, where the CSUs are clearly at a lower level [they offer very few doctoral degrees, for example.]
Any smart/ambitious kid accidentally born/raised wherever will opt for college/major to help him get into most lucrative starting job....incomes/net worths thereafter really depend upon own job perf not college brands/majors/GPAs anyway
Really amusing as bottom 90+% and/or non-CS alums of Stanf/Berk/IL, etc really live off brand image of the few (maybe <200 in past 25yrs) super-achievers from these schools...and ironically hard to name many Stanf/Berk undergrads of note amongst SV's smartest/wealthiest....lots of Stanf CS MS/PhD dropouts and folks from far more crappy state undergrads like MI or MD, etc who likely couldn't gain admission to a Stanford from HS are those who actually own SV's most valuable tech cos. and hire allegedly smart young engineers....hmmm....is the admissions game/scam broken??? Thankfully, suspect tech industry/ethos has made value of any "formal" education/miseducation fairly suspect/irrelevant amongst those who have obvious real-world-relevant skills and economic/intellectual productivity
Any smart/ambitious kid accidentally born/raised wherever will opt for college/major to help him get into most lucrative starting job....incomes/net worths thereafter really depend upon own job perf not college brands/majors/GPAs anyway
Really amusing as bottom 90+% and/or non-CS alums of Stanf/Berk/IL, etc really live off brand image of the few (maybe <200 in past 25yrs) super-achievers from these schools...and ironically hard to name many Stanf/Berk undergrads of note amongst SV's smartest/wealthiest....lots of Stanf CS MS/PhD dropouts and folks from far more crappy state undergrads like MI or MD, etc who likely couldn't gain admission to a Stanford from HS are those who actually own SV's most valuable tech cos. and hire allegedly smart young engineers....hmmm....is the admissions game/scam broken??? Thankfully, suspect tech industry/ethos has made value of any "formal" education/miseducation fairly suspect/irrelevant amongst those who have obvious real-world-relevant skills and economic/intellectual productivity
i don't think that the state of Calif. had any intention of making CSU campuses inferior to UC campuses academically when it set up its 3 tiered system: UC, CSU, juco. So your points about the quality of education you can get at one of the CSU's compared to one of the UC's is valid.
but the system that was set up did have a hierarchy in mind: UC's were to be more research oriented and be able to grant more higher degrees than CSU. That doesn't imply better/worse, but merely a different purpose for each of the two systems.
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.
CU's engineering program is very well-respected.
