ORD_Buckeye
Wrong glass, Sir.
It's being released tomorrow. Ohio State is up to 57th among national universities and jumps from 21 to 19 among publics.
-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter ORD_Buckeye
- Start date
BayBuck
Buckeyes are best
http://www.osu.edu/news/newsitem1402
The U.S. News & World Report ranking of Ohio State, which is based on 2005 statistics, notes improvement in several categories. The percentage of freshmen in the top 10 percent of their high school class increased from 34 to 39 percent, and freshman retention improved from 87 to 88 percent. (Freshman retention was below 80 percent in 1997.)
The continued improvement in freshman retention is due in large part to Ohio State's innovative First Year Experience (FYE) program, which U.S. News & World Report has listed for the fifth consecutive year as an outstanding example of a program that leads to student success.
...
Among recent recognition of the university's enhanced academic standing, for the third straight year, Ohio State leads the country in the number of faculty named as "fellows" of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Earlier this year, 20 faculty from Ohio State were awarded the "fellow" rank within AAAS, the largest scientific organization in the world. In addition, the university was ranked 9th among public universities in the amount of its sponsored research, according to statistics compiled by the National Science Foundation.
Ohio State also ranks among the nation's best in fundraising. The university's endowment now exceeds $2 billion, ranked the 6th largest among public universities in 2005, and ranked 27th when private schools were included.
The U.S. News & World Report ranking of Ohio State, which is based on 2005 statistics, notes improvement in several categories. The percentage of freshmen in the top 10 percent of their high school class increased from 34 to 39 percent, and freshman retention improved from 87 to 88 percent. (Freshman retention was below 80 percent in 1997.)
The continued improvement in freshman retention is due in large part to Ohio State's innovative First Year Experience (FYE) program, which U.S. News & World Report has listed for the fifth consecutive year as an outstanding example of a program that leads to student success.
...
Among recent recognition of the university's enhanced academic standing, for the third straight year, Ohio State leads the country in the number of faculty named as "fellows" of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Earlier this year, 20 faculty from Ohio State were awarded the "fellow" rank within AAAS, the largest scientific organization in the world. In addition, the university was ranked 9th among public universities in the amount of its sponsored research, according to statistics compiled by the National Science Foundation.
Ohio State also ranks among the nation's best in fundraising. The university's endowment now exceeds $2 billion, ranked the 6th largest among public universities in 2005, and ranked 27th when private schools were included.
Upvote
0
ORD_Buckeye
Wrong glass, Sir.
I agree. Remember, however, that the USN&WR ranking is generally our lowest overall ranking. In others, we rank as high as 26th in the country. Also, our freshman class took another big jump forward in 2006, which should give us a boost in next year's rankings. The increased retention rates that are showing up now should translate into higher graduation rates over the next several years.
Also, USN&WR is historically skewed in favor of smaller, private universities. Nobody in their right mind considers Emory, Notre Dame or Carnegie Mellon to be superior universities to Cal-Berkeley, UCLA or Virginia.
Upvote
0
Cal Berkeley is the best of that lot but Emory has improved tremendously in recent years. I have been there on two visits and the business school is rapidly climbing up the ratings. That said, it is still virtually equivalent to Ohio State, no better, despite all that Coke money.
Upvote
0
I had Carnegie Mellon more in mind when making that statement. My bad for not clarifying that.
Upvote
0
ORD_Buckeye
Wrong glass, Sir.
I think that the rankings are generally pretty solid when you seperate them into a private list and a public list.
The combined rankings, however, would be more accurate if you shifted all of the private universities down five spots and all of the public universities up five spots.
The combined rankings, however, would be more accurate if you shifted all of the private universities down five spots and all of the public universities up five spots.
Upvote
0
OSUsushichic
Fired up! Ready to go!
College Ranking Guide
OSU is 27th!
(I placed this in the poli forum based on source.)
A Completely Different College Ranking Guide
By The Editors, Washington Monthly
Posted on September 4, 2006
A year ago, we decided we'd had enough of laying into U.S. News & World Report for shortcomings in its college guide. If we were so smart, maybe we should produce a college guide of our own. So we did. (We're that smart.) We've produced a second guide this year -- our rankings for national universities and liberal arts colleges -- and it's fair to ask: Is our guide better than that of U.S. News?
Well, it's certainly different. U.S. News aims to provide readers with a yardstick by which to judge the "best" schools, ranked according to academic excellence. Now, we happen to think U.S. News and similar guides do a lousy job of actually measuring academic excellence (see "Is Our Students Learning?"). But the aim of such guides is a perfectly worthy one. Higher education is a huge investment, and parents and students have a right to know whether their hard-earned tuition dollars will be well spent.
But isn't it just as important for taxpayers to know whether their money -- in the form of billions of dollars in research grants and student aid -- is being put to good use? After all, when colleges are doing what they should, they benefit all of us. They undertake vital research that drives our economy. They help Americans who are poor to become Americans who will prosper. And they shape the thoughts and ethics of the young Americans who will soon be leading the country. It's worth knowing, then, which individual colleges and universities fit the bill.
And so, to put The Washington Monthly College Rankings together, we started with a different assumption about what constitutes the "best" schools. We asked ourselves: What are reasonable indicators of how much a school is benefiting the country? We came up with three: how well it performs as an engine of social mobility (ideally helping the poor to get rich rather than the very rich to get very, very rich), how well it does in fostering scientific and humanistic research, and how well it promotes an ethic of service to country. We then devised a way to measure and quantify these criteria (See "A Note on Methodology"). Finally, we placed the schools into rankings. Rankings, we admit, are never perfect, but they're also indispensable.
By devising a set of criteria different from those of other college guides, we arrived at sharply different results. Top schools sank, and medium schools rose. For instance, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, 48th on the U.S News list, takes third place on our list, while Princeton, first on the U.S. News list, takes 43rd on ours. In short, Pennsylvania State, measured on our terms -- by the yardstick of fostering research, national service and social mobility -- does a lot more for the country than Princeton.
Don't get us wrong. We're not saying Princeton isn't a superb school. It employs many of the nation's finest minds, and its philosophy department is widely considered the best in the country. Its eating clubs, or whatever they're called, are surely unmatched. Princeton may be a great destination for your tuition dollars, all 31,450 of them, not including room or board. But what if it's a lousy destination for your tax dollars? Each year, Princeton receives millions of dollars in federal research grants. Does it deserve them? What has Princeton done for us lately? This is the only guide that tries to tell you. That, and a bit more.
The Findings
This year, once again, top-tier schools on the U.S. News chart fare much worse on our list. State schools are, by our measure, the primary heroes of higher education in the United States today. There are also a few villains to make it interesting. Here are some highlights from this year:
The U.S. News top 10 rarely cracks our top 10.
Of the top 10 national universities in the 2006 rankings of U.S. News, only two, Stanford and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, make it onto our top 10. Harvard, first with Princeton on the U.S. News list, occupies only 28th place on our list, mainly because it's weak on national service. MIT takes first place, while four state schools take spots two through five: the University of California, Berkeley; Pennsylvania State, University Park; University of California, Los Angeles; and Texas A&M University.
We love Texas A&M.
Sure, for some of us, Texas A&M evokes imagery of the weak being forced into a locker by the strong, but that doesn't change the numbers. At 60th place on the U.S. News rankings, Texas A&M may not be celebrated, but few other schools can compare when it comes to churning out great engineers and scientists in high numbers. It has a healthy level of ROTC enrollment, and it uses federal work-study money towards community service. Texas A&M thus breezes to fifth place on our list.
We love the ladies.
Three cheers for Bryn Mawr College, 21st on the U.S. News list but first on our list of liberal arts colleges, and the same to Wellesley, fourth on the U.S. News list but second on ours. On every front -- social mobility, public service, and research -- both schools perform near the top. Does their gender ratio, 100:0 women-to-men, have an influence? We don't know, but it doesn't look like an argument for admitting men.
Emory gets no love from us.
Emory, 20th on the list of U.S. News, comes in at 96th on our list. It ranks lowest on our list of any of the U.S. News top 25, and it's a full 42 spots behind runner-up Carnegie Mellon. Its social mobility score puts it at 104th place. (Its number of Pell recipients is low, its SAT scores are relatively high, yet its graduation is relatively low.) By spending its money on recruiting applicants with high SAT scores (a way of boosting one's U.S. News ranking) Emory has apparently decided reaching out to poorer students is a low priority. Nor does it do especially well in public service or research. That's not great for a school with an endowment of $4.5 billion, the eighth-highest in the nation. Boo, Emory.
The New School University: "unusual intent" meets non-existent results.
The New School University in New York doesn't engage in a lot of U.S. News jockeying, but it boasts of goals that are exactly of the sort this guide rewards. Its website speaks of the school's "unusual intent" to bring "actual, positive change to the world." The reality: it's at 228th place on our list. By every measure we have, it drops the ball. (By contrast, The Evergreen State College in Washington State, which approvingly quotes a description of itself as "ultra-progressive," scores much higher, at 47th place.) The best candidate for "actual, positive change" may in fact be the New School.
The Big Ten slaughters the SEC.
Of the 11 members of the Big Ten Conference -- University of Illinois, University of Minnesota, Northwestern University, Purdue University, University of Wisconsin, Indiana University, University of Iowa, Ohio State University, University of Michigan, Michigan State University, Pennsylvania State University -- all 11 make our top 75. Of the 12 members of the Southeastern Conference -- we'll not list them all -- only Vanderbilt University and the University of Florida even crack it. Football is fine for schools, as long as they're Midwestern.
UC schools continue to rule.
Sorry, red-staters. By our yardstick, University of California, Berkeley is about the best thing for America we can find. It's good by all of our measurements. The same goes for the rest of the schools in the UC system, four of which make our top 10, the rest of which make our top 80.
A new, better pressure
Let's go back for a moment to the issue of academic excellence. Academic measures are surely as important as those of research, service, or social mobility in allowing us to judge whether colleges are good for the country. We don't include such measures in our rankings, however, for a simple reason: It is currently impossible to get reliable data on how much learning goes on in America's college classrooms. Until we have good information, we'd rather stay silent than try to go down the path of U.S. News in devising oddball heuristics. (If it's a choice between wondering about your IQ and having it measured by someone who counts the bumps on your head, it's surely better to wonder about your IQ.)
It's not that such data on learning don't exist. But, thanks mainly to resistance by colleges and universities, especially the elite private ones, that information is under lock and key, unavailable for public inspection. What little we know about the data, however (again, see "Is Our Students Learning?"), suggests that if they were included in our ranking, you'd see similarly boat-rocking results. Many of the top schools on the U.S. News list would plummet, and many bottom-tier schools would soar. (No wonder the elite schools don't want the data out.)
We hope the rankings that follow will be useful in several ways. Adults can see how "patriotic" their alma maters are. Prospective students looking for colleges with a strong ethic of service, or with a reputation for fostering PhD candidates, or with records of paying attention to poorer students, will find them here.
Most of all, we hope that citizens and elected officials will look at this guide when making decisions on how to subsidize and regulate higher education. After all, almost all the great challenges America now faces -- the fact that incomes are not rising for most Americans, that the Army has resorted to recruiting ex-convicts and skinheads to fill its ranks, and that our economic competitors are increasingly investing in human capital to build the high-wage industries of the future -- are ultimately tied to actions taken or not taken by America's colleges and universities.
The point is this: Rankings reflect priorities, and they also set them. Our periodic grousing about other college guides isn't so much about the influence they have on prospective students (although it's strong). It's about the influence they have on colleges themselves. In order to improve their rank in the U.S. News guide, schools often lose sight of the greater good and focus on throwing a lot of money at the wrong things in the hopes of gaming the system. (Emory's pursuit of high-SAT students over poor students is an example.) By enshrining one set of priorities, such as those set by U.S. News, colleges neglect the ones we think are most important.
This guide, then, is a modest bid to generate some pressure of our own, to create a ranking that will inspire schools to aim for standards other than those set out by U.S. News and its imitators. As we said last year, imagine if colleges -- the many thousands of them -- tried to boost their scores on The Washington Monthly College Rankings. They'd enroll more low-income students and try to make sure they graduated. They'd encourage their students to join the military or the Peace Corps. And they'd produce more scientists and engineers. In short, our country would grow more democratic, equitable, and prosperous. We don't think it will happen overnight, but we'd like to think our colleges will eventually sit up and pay attention.
And maybe they'd stop sending us so many damn brochures.
The complete rankings for national universities and liberal arts colleges are available on The Washington Monthly's website.
© 2006 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/41189/
OSU is 27th!
(I placed this in the poli forum based on source.)
A Completely Different College Ranking Guide
By The Editors, Washington Monthly
Posted on September 4, 2006
A year ago, we decided we'd had enough of laying into U.S. News & World Report for shortcomings in its college guide. If we were so smart, maybe we should produce a college guide of our own. So we did. (We're that smart.) We've produced a second guide this year -- our rankings for national universities and liberal arts colleges -- and it's fair to ask: Is our guide better than that of U.S. News?
Well, it's certainly different. U.S. News aims to provide readers with a yardstick by which to judge the "best" schools, ranked according to academic excellence. Now, we happen to think U.S. News and similar guides do a lousy job of actually measuring academic excellence (see "Is Our Students Learning?"). But the aim of such guides is a perfectly worthy one. Higher education is a huge investment, and parents and students have a right to know whether their hard-earned tuition dollars will be well spent.
But isn't it just as important for taxpayers to know whether their money -- in the form of billions of dollars in research grants and student aid -- is being put to good use? After all, when colleges are doing what they should, they benefit all of us. They undertake vital research that drives our economy. They help Americans who are poor to become Americans who will prosper. And they shape the thoughts and ethics of the young Americans who will soon be leading the country. It's worth knowing, then, which individual colleges and universities fit the bill.
And so, to put The Washington Monthly College Rankings together, we started with a different assumption about what constitutes the "best" schools. We asked ourselves: What are reasonable indicators of how much a school is benefiting the country? We came up with three: how well it performs as an engine of social mobility (ideally helping the poor to get rich rather than the very rich to get very, very rich), how well it does in fostering scientific and humanistic research, and how well it promotes an ethic of service to country. We then devised a way to measure and quantify these criteria (See "A Note on Methodology"). Finally, we placed the schools into rankings. Rankings, we admit, are never perfect, but they're also indispensable.
By devising a set of criteria different from those of other college guides, we arrived at sharply different results. Top schools sank, and medium schools rose. For instance, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, 48th on the U.S News list, takes third place on our list, while Princeton, first on the U.S. News list, takes 43rd on ours. In short, Pennsylvania State, measured on our terms -- by the yardstick of fostering research, national service and social mobility -- does a lot more for the country than Princeton.
Don't get us wrong. We're not saying Princeton isn't a superb school. It employs many of the nation's finest minds, and its philosophy department is widely considered the best in the country. Its eating clubs, or whatever they're called, are surely unmatched. Princeton may be a great destination for your tuition dollars, all 31,450 of them, not including room or board. But what if it's a lousy destination for your tax dollars? Each year, Princeton receives millions of dollars in federal research grants. Does it deserve them? What has Princeton done for us lately? This is the only guide that tries to tell you. That, and a bit more.
The Findings
This year, once again, top-tier schools on the U.S. News chart fare much worse on our list. State schools are, by our measure, the primary heroes of higher education in the United States today. There are also a few villains to make it interesting. Here are some highlights from this year:
The U.S. News top 10 rarely cracks our top 10.
Of the top 10 national universities in the 2006 rankings of U.S. News, only two, Stanford and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, make it onto our top 10. Harvard, first with Princeton on the U.S. News list, occupies only 28th place on our list, mainly because it's weak on national service. MIT takes first place, while four state schools take spots two through five: the University of California, Berkeley; Pennsylvania State, University Park; University of California, Los Angeles; and Texas A&M University.
We love Texas A&M.
Sure, for some of us, Texas A&M evokes imagery of the weak being forced into a locker by the strong, but that doesn't change the numbers. At 60th place on the U.S. News rankings, Texas A&M may not be celebrated, but few other schools can compare when it comes to churning out great engineers and scientists in high numbers. It has a healthy level of ROTC enrollment, and it uses federal work-study money towards community service. Texas A&M thus breezes to fifth place on our list.
We love the ladies.
Three cheers for Bryn Mawr College, 21st on the U.S. News list but first on our list of liberal arts colleges, and the same to Wellesley, fourth on the U.S. News list but second on ours. On every front -- social mobility, public service, and research -- both schools perform near the top. Does their gender ratio, 100:0 women-to-men, have an influence? We don't know, but it doesn't look like an argument for admitting men.
Emory gets no love from us.
Emory, 20th on the list of U.S. News, comes in at 96th on our list. It ranks lowest on our list of any of the U.S. News top 25, and it's a full 42 spots behind runner-up Carnegie Mellon. Its social mobility score puts it at 104th place. (Its number of Pell recipients is low, its SAT scores are relatively high, yet its graduation is relatively low.) By spending its money on recruiting applicants with high SAT scores (a way of boosting one's U.S. News ranking) Emory has apparently decided reaching out to poorer students is a low priority. Nor does it do especially well in public service or research. That's not great for a school with an endowment of $4.5 billion, the eighth-highest in the nation. Boo, Emory.
The New School University: "unusual intent" meets non-existent results.
The New School University in New York doesn't engage in a lot of U.S. News jockeying, but it boasts of goals that are exactly of the sort this guide rewards. Its website speaks of the school's "unusual intent" to bring "actual, positive change to the world." The reality: it's at 228th place on our list. By every measure we have, it drops the ball. (By contrast, The Evergreen State College in Washington State, which approvingly quotes a description of itself as "ultra-progressive," scores much higher, at 47th place.) The best candidate for "actual, positive change" may in fact be the New School.
The Big Ten slaughters the SEC.
Of the 11 members of the Big Ten Conference -- University of Illinois, University of Minnesota, Northwestern University, Purdue University, University of Wisconsin, Indiana University, University of Iowa, Ohio State University, University of Michigan, Michigan State University, Pennsylvania State University -- all 11 make our top 75. Of the 12 members of the Southeastern Conference -- we'll not list them all -- only Vanderbilt University and the University of Florida even crack it. Football is fine for schools, as long as they're Midwestern.
UC schools continue to rule.
Sorry, red-staters. By our yardstick, University of California, Berkeley is about the best thing for America we can find. It's good by all of our measurements. The same goes for the rest of the schools in the UC system, four of which make our top 10, the rest of which make our top 80.
A new, better pressure
Let's go back for a moment to the issue of academic excellence. Academic measures are surely as important as those of research, service, or social mobility in allowing us to judge whether colleges are good for the country. We don't include such measures in our rankings, however, for a simple reason: It is currently impossible to get reliable data on how much learning goes on in America's college classrooms. Until we have good information, we'd rather stay silent than try to go down the path of U.S. News in devising oddball heuristics. (If it's a choice between wondering about your IQ and having it measured by someone who counts the bumps on your head, it's surely better to wonder about your IQ.)
It's not that such data on learning don't exist. But, thanks mainly to resistance by colleges and universities, especially the elite private ones, that information is under lock and key, unavailable for public inspection. What little we know about the data, however (again, see "Is Our Students Learning?"), suggests that if they were included in our ranking, you'd see similarly boat-rocking results. Many of the top schools on the U.S. News list would plummet, and many bottom-tier schools would soar. (No wonder the elite schools don't want the data out.)
We hope the rankings that follow will be useful in several ways. Adults can see how "patriotic" their alma maters are. Prospective students looking for colleges with a strong ethic of service, or with a reputation for fostering PhD candidates, or with records of paying attention to poorer students, will find them here.
Most of all, we hope that citizens and elected officials will look at this guide when making decisions on how to subsidize and regulate higher education. After all, almost all the great challenges America now faces -- the fact that incomes are not rising for most Americans, that the Army has resorted to recruiting ex-convicts and skinheads to fill its ranks, and that our economic competitors are increasingly investing in human capital to build the high-wage industries of the future -- are ultimately tied to actions taken or not taken by America's colleges and universities.
The point is this: Rankings reflect priorities, and they also set them. Our periodic grousing about other college guides isn't so much about the influence they have on prospective students (although it's strong). It's about the influence they have on colleges themselves. In order to improve their rank in the U.S. News guide, schools often lose sight of the greater good and focus on throwing a lot of money at the wrong things in the hopes of gaming the system. (Emory's pursuit of high-SAT students over poor students is an example.) By enshrining one set of priorities, such as those set by U.S. News, colleges neglect the ones we think are most important.
This guide, then, is a modest bid to generate some pressure of our own, to create a ranking that will inspire schools to aim for standards other than those set out by U.S. News and its imitators. As we said last year, imagine if colleges -- the many thousands of them -- tried to boost their scores on The Washington Monthly College Rankings. They'd enroll more low-income students and try to make sure they graduated. They'd encourage their students to join the military or the Peace Corps. And they'd produce more scientists and engineers. In short, our country would grow more democratic, equitable, and prosperous. We don't think it will happen overnight, but we'd like to think our colleges will eventually sit up and pay attention.
And maybe they'd stop sending us so many damn brochures.
The complete rankings for national universities and liberal arts colleges are available on The Washington Monthly's website.
© 2006 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/41189/
Upvote
0
An interesting set of standards, some of which I completely agree, others I think need to be refined.
My only surprise here is that West Point and Annapolis aren't mentioned as being at the top of the list. I wonder where they are deficient...unless they are not considered "national universities" by this group.
My only surprise here is that West Point and Annapolis aren't mentioned as being at the top of the list. I wonder where they are deficient...unless they are not considered "national universities" by this group.
Upvote
0
Depends what you want to get out of a college education. As the article says, what is one's priorities determines the value of the rankings. Simply becaus your priorities bias your ability to see the value of a South Caroline State education as compared to one at Harvard doesn't mean it doen't have value to others who view the purpose of education very differently than you do.
Placed in the context as defined by the authors of that article, if you want to simply benefit yourself and remain at your current economic-social position, then yes, Harvard is the better choice than South Carolina State. Then again, if your own mobility is a real concern for you, you likely aren't getting into Harvard anyway, which is kind of the point of these rankings.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
OSUsushichic
Fired up! Ready to go!
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]From their website: (I didn't realize that SCSU was a historically black college; that partnered with their strong ROTC program probably helped their ranking.)
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Since 1896, SOUTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY has maintained a legacy of excellence in education. We have been home to generations of scholars and leaders in business, military service, government, athletics, education, medicine, science, engineering technology and more. Located in Orangeburg, SC, STATE was founded as a land grant college with a mission of providing education and service to the citizens of the state. In its first century, STATE was a leader in education and continues to lead the way into the next century.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]STATE is consistently among the national leaders in producing African-American students with baccalaureate degrees in biology, education, business, engineering technology, computer science/mathematics, and English language/literature. Moreover, we are one of three universities in South Carolina to offer a doctoral program in Educational Administration and one of two schools in the state to offer an accredited master's degree program in Speech-Language Pathology.
[/FONT]<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="97%"><tbody><tr><td>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]SOUTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY offers a number of unique programs in the state and the nation.[/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Since 1896, SOUTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY has maintained a legacy of excellence in education. We have been home to generations of scholars and leaders in business, military service, government, athletics, education, medicine, science, engineering technology and more. Located in Orangeburg, SC, STATE was founded as a land grant college with a mission of providing education and service to the citizens of the state. In its first century, STATE was a leader in education and continues to lead the way into the next century.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]STATE is consistently among the national leaders in producing African-American students with baccalaureate degrees in biology, education, business, engineering technology, computer science/mathematics, and English language/literature. Moreover, we are one of three universities in South Carolina to offer a doctoral program in Educational Administration and one of two schools in the state to offer an accredited master's degree program in Speech-Language Pathology.
[/FONT]<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="97%"><tbody><tr><td>[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]SOUTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY offers a number of unique programs in the state and the nation.[/FONT]
- [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Only undergraduate Nuclear Engineering Program in the State[/FONT]
- [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Only undergraduate Environmental Sciences Field Station in the nation[/FONT]
- [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Only Masters of Science Degree in Transportation beginning in Fall 2003[/FONT]
- [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Regional HUB for Science and Math Education[/FONT]
- [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Only Doctor of Education Degree in South Carolina[/FONT]
- [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Developed the model and is the Resource Center for the National Summer Transportation Institute[/FONT]
- [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Named in 1998 by the U.S. Congress and the USDOT as one of 33 University Transportation Centers in the nation, the only one in South Carolina[/FONT]
- [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Lead institution for the state of S.C.'s Lewis Stokes for Minority Participation (SCAMP)[/FONT]
- [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]17th in minority degrees granted in all disciplines[/FONT]
- [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]5th in minority degrees granted in Biology[/FONT]
- [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]4th in minority degrees granted in Mathematics[/FONT]
- [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]31st in minority degrees granted in Master's level[/FONT]
- [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]18th in minority degrees in Education[/FONT]
- [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]29th in minority degrees granted in Computer and Information Science [/FONT]
- [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Commissioned over 1,900 officers to date[/FONT]
- [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Has produced the highest number of minority officers in the country[/FONT]
- [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]12 graduates have achieved the rank of General[/FONT]
- [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Only female colonel on active duty in the Army[/FONT]
Upvote
0
