View Single Post
  #27  
Old Posted May 7, 2009, 7:18 PM
trigirdbers trigirdbers is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 154
No state of comparable size has 2 top flight publics. In fact the ONLY state that does is California and thats because So-Cal and Nor-Cal are huge regions and the state as a whole produces enough gifted students and tax revenue to support them. Even in the California system, where all the UC's are "top flight", no one would put IC Davis on the same level as UCLA or Berk which are nationally respected. Also, there is no state where the best university is not the flagship. Even if ASU didn't educate the whole state, even if they had higher admissions standards, its got a lot farther to go to compete with the most prestigious public universities than UofA which is already a quarter of the way there. If we "switched it up", we would be even further from producing a world class university. I don't get why re-making the system in its entirety is vital. ASU does a respectable job at educating the masses. They also have individual programs that are competitive on a regional level such as the business school. This is a decent place for them to be at. Just because Michael Crow and the City of Phoenix want ASU to be prestigious doesn't mean it will be. Every city and university president wants this. What UofA has is a solid foundation. Even though it is "massive" it is no more so than some of the country's most excellent flagships. 30k UG enrollment is sustainable even for a public university of the highest caliber (Michigan and UCLA both have almost as many students). ASU will never be able to cut enough enrollment to compete at this level, too many facilities would be wasted and jobs lost, even if parts were spun off. The one practical proposal of your flow chart is splitting off ASU east and west. I have no idea why this hasn't been on the table sooner, they have all the makings of independent universities.
Reply With Quote