View Single Post
Old Posted May 7, 2009, 4:35 AM
SunDevil SunDevil is offline
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Phoenix, AZ (I'm back!)
Posts: 391
Originally Posted by trigirdbers View Post
I disagree with you guys. I "fleed the state" to get a good education because Arizona doesn't have any universities REMOTELY comparable to Georgetown terms of quality of education. You can't give all of the best and brightest Flynns. However if the state, instead of spending all this money on these other colleges funneled it all into UofA (and let them raise their tuition) and tried to bring it onto par with schools like Michigan, Virginia, UNC, Berkeley, UCLA, and Texas, I think much more top talent would stay in state. Universities of this caliber also attract a lot of really smart people from out of state many of whom decide to settle down where they got their education after receiving their diplomas. UofA is the only university in Arizona that has the potential to reach this level and already has a pretty good rep. Give the best and brightest a place where we can get an incredible education in Arizona and I think you will see the state reap greater benefits then creating schools "lower" on the hierarchy then ASU/U of A. We should aim for the top, not the bottom. This whole affordability issue is getting redic. Do you guys know how much people pay in-state at the UC's?
Last I checked ASU was also a tier 1 research institution (Carnegie Doctoral/Research Universities-Extensive). UA and ASU have the potential to be on a high level. Indiana has Purdue and IU, Michigan has UM and MSU, South Carolina has USC and Clemson, Alabama has UA and Auburn, Georgia has UGA and Georgia Tech. Why can't AZ have two great universities?

By creating lower tier universities you allow both UA and ASU to be great universities because they can suddenly be more selective in who they accept. The lower tier will educate the rest.
Reply With Quote