Category Archives: Stats and Surveys

U.S. News 2013 Rankings Even Tougher on Publics

Posted on by
Reply

The 2013 U.S. News rankings are out and, for the most part, the results are not kind to public universities, probably because the emphasis the magazine places on financial resources hits financially strapped state universities the hardest.   In An Alternative List of 2013 U.S. News College Rankings we analyze the rankings of the publics more closely, similar to our post How Much Do U.S. News Rankings Favor Private Universities?

For now we can say that the average drop in the rankings for the 50 universities whose honors programs we evaluated is about 2 places, with some schools falling 7, 8, or even 10 places in the rankings.  Of the 50 universities, a whopping 33 saw their rankings decline; 9 rose in the rankings; and 8 remained the same.  In such a difficult year, public universities that held their own or only lost one or two places were fortunate.

By far the most stunning improvement was by Stony Brook University, which improved from 111 to 92.  Were it not for this impressive 19-point rise, the average decline of the publics would have been even worse.

Along with Stony Brook, these universities rose in the 2013 rankings: Arizona, Binghamton, Florida, UC Irvine, UCLA, UC Santa Barbara, University at Buffalo, and Wisconsin.  UC Berkeley remained at number 21 and Michigan fell one spot to number 29.  In the post linked above, we argue that both are significantly underrated by U.S. News.

As we noted in the post linked above, we believe that U.S. News emphasizes a university’s financial well-being in ways that magnify the real impact of money on higher education.  Specifically, we suggest that the three magazine categories of financial resources, faculty resources, and alumni giving nudge the rankings toward wealthy private institutions.

Below are the 50 universities whose honors programs we evaluated, with their 2013 ranking listed first, following by their 2012 ranking:

Alabama–2013 (77); 2012 (75)

Arizona–2013 (120); 2012 (124)

Arizona State–2013 (139); 2012 (132)

Arkansas–2013 (134); 2012 (132)

Auburn–2013 (89); 2012 (82)

Binghamton–2013 (89); 2012 (90)

Clemson–2013 (68); 2012 (68)

Colorado–2013 (97); 2012 (94)

Connecticut–2013 (63); 2012 (58)

Delaware–2013 (75); 2012 (75)

Florida–2013 (54); 2012 (58)

Georgia–2013 (63); 2012 (62)

Georgia Tech–2013 (36); 2012 (36)

Illinois–2013 (46); 2012 (42)

Indiana–2013 (83); 2012 (75)

Iowa–2013 (72); 2012 (71)

Iowa State–2013 (101); 2012 (97)

Kansas–2013 (106); 2012 (101)

Maryland–2013 (58); 2012 (55)

Massachusetts–2012 (97); 2012 (94)

Michigan–2013 (29); 2012 (28)

Michigan State–2013 (72); 2012 (71)

Minnesota–2013 (68); 2012 (68)

Mississippi–2013 (151); 2012 (143)

Missouri–2013 (97); 2012 (90)

Nebraska–2013 (101); 2012 (101)

North Carolina–2013 (30); 2012 (29)

NC State–2013 (106); 2012 (101)

Ohio State–2013 (56); 2012 (55)

Oregon–2013 (115); 2012 (101)

Penn State–2013 (46); 2012 (45)

Pitt–2013 (58); 2012 (58)

Purdue–2013 (65); 2012 (62)

Rutgers–2013 (68); 2012 (68)

South Carolina–2013 (115); 2012 (111)

Stony Brook–2013 (92); 2012 (111)

Texas A&M–2013 (65); 2012 (58)

UC Davis–2013 (38); 2012 (38)

UC Irvine–2013 (44); 2012 (45)

UCLA–2013 (24); 2012 (25)

UC San Diego–2013 (37); 2012 (38)

UC Santa Barbara–2013 (41); 2012 (42)

University at Buffalo–2013 (106); 2012 (111)

UT Austin–2013 (46); 2012 (45)

Vermont–2013 (92); 2012 (82)

Virginia–2013 (24); 2012 (25)

Virginia Tech–2013 (72); 2012 (71)

Washington–2013 (46); 2012 (42)

Washington State–2013 (125); 2012 (115)

Wisconsin–2013 (41); 2012 (42)

 

 

 

 

 

Colorado State Honors: Well-structured, Good Housing and Food, Great Scholarships

Posted on by
Reply

Our planned post on updates and improvements to honors programs will appear in the near future, and we hope at least a few programs will provide information about new scholarship opportunities.  In the meantime, thanks to the transparency of the Colorado State site, we can report that there are some great opportunities for entering honors students there, even if they are out-of-state residents.

All students admitted to the honors program receive a $1,000 scholarship, and remain eligible for renewal through four years if they maintain program requirements.

But highly qualified OOS students are eligible for a $9,000 renewable scholarship, whichcovers about three-fourths of the OOS tuition and fees.  To be eligible, applicants must meet the February 1 priority deadline and have a 1300/ACT 29/ and at least a 3.8 GPA.

All National Merit finalists, Boettcher finalists and scholars, Monfort Scholars, National Hispanic Scholars, and National Achievement Scholars also receive this scholarship automatically if they apply by the February 1 priority deadline and list CSU as their first choice school.

The good news doesn’t end there.  OOS students with SAT 1230/ACT 27 and a GPA of at least 3.6 are eligible for a $7000 a year scholarship.

The regular application deadline for honors is March 1.  Admission is based on a combination of test scores and GPAs, allowing students with very high GPAs to be admitted with somewhat lower test scores.

The average SAT of admitted students is 1340, ACT 31, and weighted GPA 4.15

But admission is also likely with the following test/GPA combinations:

SAT 1310/ACT 30/ GPA 3.7;

SAT 1280/ACT 29/GPA 3.8;

SAT 1240/ ACT 28/ GPA 3.9;

SAT 1200/ACT 27/ GPA 4.0.

All also require a recommendation from a high school counselor, who will be contacted.

Automatic invitations are issued to students with the following combinations of test scores and GPAs:

SAT 1400/ACT 32/GPA 4.0;

SAT 1440/ACT 33/GPA 3.9;

SAT 1490/ACT34/ GPA3.8.

Once admitted, students can choose between two honors tracks.  Track 1 requires 13 hours of honors core classes and seminars; 6 hours of honors credit in the department, college, or major; and a total of 4 hours for honors research and thesis.

Track 2 is essentially an honors in the major track.  It totals 17 hours of honors credit, including the 1 hour freshman honors seminar, 12 hours in the major, and 4 hours for the thesis and research.

The strongest departments at CSU are biological and agricultural engineering 23rd in the nation; civil engineering, 37; environmental engineering, 41;  and overall engineering, 67. Chemistry ranks 45th, statistics 40, and all science departments are ranked number 82 or better in the nation.  Of special importance to pre-vet students is the very high ranking–number 3 in the nation–of CSU’s vet school.

Honors students have a great residential opportunity.  About 240 of the 360 new honors entrants each year can enjoy the amenities of the Honors Academic Village.  The residence hall features two-person suites with a private bath.  Immediately adjacent is one of the best campus dining facilities, Rams Horn Hall.  After freshman year, honors students may live in nearby Edwards Hall, an older facility with traditional rooms and corridor baths.

 

 

Transfer and current CSU must have 3.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

Value of College Degree vs. High School: Varies Greatly by State

Posted on by
Reply

While there is no doubt that competing in the workforce with a bachelor’s degree rather than a high school diploma is an advantage, the extent of that advantage varies greatly by state, according to a new study whose findings appear in Change Magazine.

The study, be researchers Matt Crellin, Patrick Kelley, and Heath Prince, finds that college grads in Connecticut aged 25-64 earn an average of almost $70,000 per year, while high school grads in the same age group earn an average of about $30,500, considerably less than half as much.

On the other hand, college graduates in Montana earn about $41,000 a year versus approximately $25,000 a year for high school grads, about 60 percent of what college grads make.

The national average in 2009 was $24,300 for high school graduates and $53,200 for those with bachelor’s degrees.

The states with the biggest advantage for college degree holders are Connecticut, New Jersey, Maryland, New York, Massachusetts, Virginia, California, New Hampshire, Illinois, Texas, Minnesota, and Delaware–all of which have an income difference that is higher than the national average.

The states with the least advantage for college degree holders are Montana, Idaho, South Dakota, Maine, West Virginia, New Mexico, Mississippi, Utah, Wyoming, and Oregon.

Of course this does not mean that degree holders from these and other states are limited to the earning levels in their own states.  But if states do not have employers that require large numbers of college graduates, they are at greater risk of losing home-grown college grads to other states.

Citing another study, the article in Change predicts that by 2018, some 63 percent of jobs in the U.S. will require a post-secondary credential, though not necessarily a bachelor’s degree.  The percentage of these jobs will vary, from 42 percent of jobs in West Virginia to 70 percent of jobs in Minnesota.

 

 

 

 

Princeton Review: Virginia Tech, Penn State, Clemson Get High Marks for Happiness

Posted on by
Reply

The 2012 Princeton Review measures student satisfaction in a variety of areas, and shows that Penn State, Virginia Tech, and Clemson do extremely well when it comes to making students happy.  Please note that our list of satisfaction does not include the famous Princeton Reivew categories of best party schools, “reefer madness,” “don’t inhale,” and “got milk?”

Other public universities that made the top 20 lists in one or more categories are Kansas State, Mississippi, Auburn, Georgia, UT Austin, Florida, UC Santa Barbara, Virginia, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Washington, Binghamton, Indiana, Miami of Ohio, Ohio University, Purdue, Vermont, Washington State, NC State, Pitt, Michigan, and UMass Amherst.

The rankings listed in parentheses are national rankings of all colleges, public and private.

Virginia Tech: Career Services (18); Students Love These Colleges (3); Town-Gown Relations Are Great (4); Quality of Life (6); Food (2).

Penn State: Career Services (2); Students Love These Colleges (7); Best Quality of Life (18); Happiest Students (13).

Clemson: Career Services (5); Students Love These Colleges (8); Town-Gown Relations Are Great (1); Happiest Students (4).

Kansas State: Town-Gown Relations Are Great (2); Quality of Life (4); Happiest Students (8).

Mississippi: Town-Gown Relations Are Great (11); Happiest Students (12); Most Beautiful Campus (4).

Auburn: Town-Gown Relations Are Great (13); Quality of Life (19).

Georgia: Best Value (8); Food (15).

UT Austin: Best Value (10); Career Services (20); College City Gets High Marks (20).

Florida: Best Value (7); Career Services (6).

UC Santa Barbara: Students Love These Colleges (11); Happiest Students (3).

Virginia: Best Value (2); Financial Aid (2).

Wisconsin:  Best Value (5); College City Gets High Marks (19).

North Carolina: Best Value (1).

Washington: Best Value (9).

Binghamton: Best Value (4).

Indiana: Study Abroad (12).

Miami of Ohio: Food (18).

Ohio University:  Most Beautiful Campus (15).

Purdue:  Food (14).

Vermont: College City Gets High Marks (15).

Washington State: Town-Gown Relations Are Great (9).

NC State: Town-Gown Relations Are Great (16).

Pitt: Career Services (19).

Michigan: College City Gets High Marks (10).

UMass Amherst: Food (3).

 


 

Forbes College Rankings 2013: A Mild Shift to Publics

Posted on by
Reply

The annual Forbes best college rankings have not been friendly to public colleges, but this year, because of changes in methodology, the rankings include six public institutions among the top 50 colleges, up from five in 2012 and only two in 2011.  If the service academies are included, the three major academies are also in the top 50.

The 2013 rankings continue a welcome trend on the part of the magazine that now yields a more sensible list with fewer wild variations.  A list of public universities in the top 100 appears at the end of this article.

Some observers of college rankings accept the Forbes position that the magazine’s rankings, put together by the Center for College Affordability and Productivity (CCAP), under the leadership of one of the most outspoken critics of public universities, Richard Vedder, are better than others because they focus only on “outputs” rather than on subjective data, such as academic reputation.

One of the main problems with the Forbes rankings has been their high variability from one year to the next.  It is surprising, for example, that the University of Wisconsin ranking would change from 316 (in 2011) to 147 (in 2012) and to 68 (2013).   Not to mention that it was ranked number 212 in 2010.  On the other hand, the continuing methodological changes at least are moving toward a more equitable consideration of the public institutions and appear to be indicative of more stability in the overall rankings.

In 2011 only the University of Virginia and the College of William & Mary barely cracked the Forbes top 50.  In 2012, the top 50 included UVA (36) William & Mary (40), UCLA (45), UNC Chapel Hill (47) and UC Berkeley (50).

For 2013, UC Berkeley has jumped all the way to number 22; UVA to 29; UCLA to 34; and UNC Chapel Hill to 38.

More indicative of the positive developments is that for 2013, the University of Michigan also appears in the top 50, at number 30, a big leap from 57 in 2012. (In 2011, Michigan ranked 93rd.)

Other public universities shared in the upward trend in 2013, with a total of 18 now ranked in the top 100.  Illinois has moved from 147 in 2011, to 86 in 2012, and now to 53 in 2013.  UT Austin, a particular target of Richard Vedder in recent years, has risen from 185 in 2011, to 104 in 2012, and to 66 in 2013.

The original Forbes methodology was clearly biased, using data from Who’s Who listings as one indicator.  Now the methodology appears to have settled into the following pattern:

–37.5% for post-graduate success, measured by salaries on Payscale.com, listings in “power” profiles, and winners of Nobel, Pulitzer, National Academy of Science, Guggenheim, MacArthur, and other awards, including Oscars, Emmys, Tonys, and Grammys;

–22.5% for student satisfaction, with two-thirds of the measure coming from RateMyProfessor.com and the other third from the percentage of students being retained after the freshman year;

–17.5% based on student debt load and loan default rates;

–11.25% based on four-year graduation rate;

–11.25% based on attainment of prestigious student awards, including Rhodes, Fulbright, National Science Foundation, and other scholarships, and on the percentage of graduates who earn PhD’s.

One interesting feature of the rankings is that they combine national research universities and liberal arts colleges into one large group.  This allows readers a direct rather than implied comparison, the latter being the option with the U.S. News rankings.  Therefore, while Stanford is ranked number 1 by Forbes this year, tiny Pomona College is ranked number 2.

Because Forbes has focused on four-year graduation rates rather than five- or six-year rates, renowned public engineering schools such as Purdue and Georgia Tech have risen gradually in the rankings but remain lower than they would be if six-year grad rates were used: Georgia Tech was 397 in 2011, improved to 135 in 2012, and now ranks 83 under the new methodology; Purdue ranked 311 in 2011; 195 in 2012; and now ranks 106.

A final comment: Forbes is applauded for not using subjective data, such as that for academic reputation.  Nevertheless, our own work has shown a significant correlation between academic reputation and Fulbright and NSF awards, and academic reputation and the percentage of bachelor’s students who go on to obtain a Ph.D., the latter a new metric for the magazine.  Academic reputation also has a positive correlation with graduation rates.  Therefore, the influence of academic reputation is present in the Forbes rankings, though indirectly, just as it is in our own rankings.

7–U.S. Military Academy

22–UC Berkeley

28–U.S. Naval Academy

29–Virginia

30–Michigan

31–U.S. Air Force Academy

34–UCLA

38–UNC Chapel Hill

44–William & Mary

53–Illinois

55–Washington

66–UT Austin

68–Wisconsin

73–Maryland

74–Florida

83–Georgia Tech

90–Georgia

93–Penn State

96–UC Santa Barbara

97–Indiana

99–UC Davis

STEM Majors: Faculty Reputation May Be Especially Important

Posted on by
Reply

From time to time we become mildly wonkish and write about the implications of some of our data, including information that we did not include in A Review of Fifty Public University Honors Programs.

Recently, we have been looking at correlations between faculty reputation and honors curricula on the one hand, and the attainment of prestigious scholarships, such as Rhodes, Truman, Goldwater, Fulbright, and National Science Foundation (NSF) graduate research grants on the other.

A significant correlation that stands out is that between faculty reputation and prestigious NSF grants, awarded for research in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, and, to a lesser extent, research in the social sciences.  

We did not find that our data for honors curricula correlated significantly with the attainment of NSF grants.  This does not mean, however, that participation in honors programs is not important to STEM majors, for honors programs are the surest way to connect serious undergraduates with research opportunities supervised by high-quality faculty.  In addition, of course, honors curricula typically provide more scope and depth to the overall education of all honors students.

We also found a lesser but still significant correlation between faculty reputation and the attainment of Fulbright Student awards, given in a variety of disciplines.  Again, the correlation of these awards with curricula was minimal; but the same access to strong faculty mentors via involvement in honors, along with the broader honors education, still points to advantages in pursuing honors.

The impact of honors curricula is clear, however, when it comes to Truman and Goldwater awards, and when curricula are correlated with a metric that combines all prestigious scholarships (including Rhodes, Marshall, Gates, and Udall) except for NSF grants.  Honors curricula are a stronger factor than faculty reputation with respect to the combined scholars metric, but both curricula and reputation are important.

It is interesting that curricula correlate with the undergraduate Goldwater awards, also given for STEM research, but not with the NSF grants.  The impact of faculty reputation was minimal when correlated to Truman Scholarships.

So what is the “take home” message from all this number-crunching?   For STEM majors,  strong faculty along with honors research opportunities are probably as important as the general honors curriculum. Departmental honors, with a thesis requirement, are also important if the honors program does not require a thesis.


 

 

UMass Amherst: Public Excellence Amid Private Elites

Posted on by
Reply

The University of Massachusetts Amherst has the unenviable challenge of carving out its own place of prominence amid some of the most elite private universities in the entire world. There is growing evidence that the university, along with its Commonwealth Honors College, is doing just that.

The Times Higher Education world rankings of research universities has consistently ranked UMass at number 64 or better in the world–higher than some elite private institutions in the New England neighborhood. The Times also ranked the UMass disciplines of life sciences and physical sciences at number 32 and 48, respectively.

Other highly ranked academic departments at UMass are computer science, sociology, earth (geo) sciences, English, psychology, education, kinesiology and linguistics.

The UMass Commonwealth Honors College has for 18 years hosted the Undergraduate Research Conference, which brings together more than 800 young researchers from across the state to present their research work to their peers and a wider audience.

Further evidence of undergraduate research opportunities comes from the six to eight-credit year-long Capstone Experience, which “is a comprehensive, research-intensive thesis or project of original scholarship. Typically completed in the senior year, it is a chance for honors students to engage in rigorous scholarship and to explore an academic interest in depth.”

The UMass prominence in world rankings ties in with its International Scholars Program, which “allows honors students of any major participating in any of the university’s over 400 approved study-abroad programs in more than 60 countries to form an intellectual cohort, providing a structured opportunity to reflect on and share their international experiences and complete research linking their study abroad experiences to their larger academic goals.”

Prospective honors students should be excited to know that a new, 500,000 square-foot, 6-building honors college complex will open to students in fall 2013. Located on central campus, it is next door to the new rec center and a 5-minute walk to the main library. The residential complex will have 1,500 beds, including 600 in two-person rooms and another 900 in suites or apartments.

Best Universities in the World Under 50 Years Old

Posted on by
Reply

UC Irvine, UC Santa Cruz, and the University of Illinois at Chicago are among the top universities in the world that have been in operation less than fifty years, according to the Times Higher Education rankings of the “top 100 under 50.”

In all, there are eight American universities for undergraduates on the list, which emphasizes academic research and publications far more than do most college rankings.  The schools are listed below.

The Times published the list for the first time this year in order “to show which nations are challenging the US and the UK as higher education powerhouses–and offers insights into which institutions may be future world leaders.”

China has no universities listed among the “top 100 under 50,” a fact that points to a continuation of the current rush of Chinese students to strong research universities elsewhere, especially in the U.S.   The influx of these students, who pay full tuition, is an increasing and somewhat controversial source of revenue for many U.S. universities, including cash-strapped public institutions.  (We will report on this phenomenon is a separate post in the near future.)

China has only two universities in the top 100 in the world, and only nine in the top 400.

The U.K. led the list with twenty universities among the top 100 “young” institutions.  Although the Times report emphasizes the emergence of Asian universities and the U.K. prominence on the list, it is remarkable that continental Europe also has twenty-eight institutions on the list, and Australia has nineteen.   Hong Kong has four emerging universities, and Taiwan has five.

The Republic of Korea has the top emerging university: Pohang University of Science and Technology.

The U.S. universities that are on the list are below, with their “young” rank first and their overall world ranking listed next:

UC Irvine, established 1965: (4) and (86)

UC Santa Cruz, established 1965: (7) and (110)

Illinois at Chicago, established 1965: (11) and (167)

UT Dallas, established 1969: (29) and (251-275)

UT San Antonio, established 1969: (53) and (276-300)

George Mason, established 1957*: (57) and (301-350)

Maryland-Baltimore County, est 1966: (63) and (301-350)

Florida International Univ, est 1965: (84) and (unranked)

*We assume that the Times takes a liberal view of fifty years.

 

 

 

 

 

World University Rankings 2011-2012: the Top Publics

Posted on by
Reply

Note: there is a new post for the current rankings at Times Higher Ed World University Rankings 2012-2013: The Top Publics on this site.

According to the latest Times Higher Education World University Rankings, UC Berkeley is 10th in the world and UCLA is 13th, making them the highest ranked American public universities in the survey.

The Times rankings place a strong emphasis on research and have a somewhat lesser focus on teaching, with the latter measured mostly by academic reputation (15% for teaching) and faculty to student ratios. The research metric derives from the volume of research and the number of citations assigned to research publications; the citations count for a whopping 30% of the total scores. Academic reputation for research counts for 18% of the total. With more than 17,000 responses, the rankings do have a lot at their disposal when it comes to assessing research and academic reputation.

It is interesting to note that the U.S. News rankings list 16 public universities in the top 50 nationwide, while the Times rankings list 13 in the top 50 while considering many more highly competitive institutions all over the world. Again, the difference is mainly due to the Times rankings’ placing such an emphasis on research.

Overall, the UC system has five campuses that ranked in the top 50 in the world.

All U.S. public universities in the Times top 50 are below, along with their rankings in subject areas such as engineering/technology, life sciences, physical sciences, social sciences, and arts/humanities. Physical sciences include mathematics, physics, and chemistry; life sciences include biology, zoology, agriculture, and botany.

The rankings may be useful for prospective students whose majors may be more likely to take them abroad at some point in their careers or who are interested in postgraduate research.

The world ranking is listed first, then the name of the university, and then the world subject rankings.  (Not all of the 13 public universities ranked overall in the top 50 in the world also have rankings in the top 50 in every subject area.)

10–UC Berkeley: engineering/tech (4), life sciences (6), physical sciences (3), social sciences (13), arts/humanities (8)

13–UCLA: engineering/tech (8), life sciences (10), physical sciences (9), arts/humanities (14)

18–Michigan: engineering/tech (14), life sciences (19), physical sciences (16), social sciences (7), arts/humanities (13)

24–Georgia Tech: engineering/tech (11), physical sciences (35)

25–Washington: life sciences (13), physical sciences (15), social sciences (12), arts/humanities (22)

27–Wisconsin: engineering/tech (22), life sciences (20), physical sciences (15), social sciences (12), arts/humanities (22)

29–UT Austin:  engineering/tech (13), physical sciences (21), social sciences (22), arts/humanities (20)

31–Illinois: engineering/tech (16), life sciences (39), physical sciences (22), social sciences (28)

33–UC San Diego: engineering/tech (24), life sciences (16), physical sciences (37), arts/humanities (40)

35–UC Santa Barbara: engineering/tech (16), life sciences (34), physical sciences (19), social sciences (48)

38–UC Davis: life sciences (18)

42–Minnesota: engineering/tech (29), life sciences (19), physical sciences (45), social sciences (21), arts/humanities (13)

45–North Carolina: life sciences (35), social sciences (23), arts/humanities (23)

Other public universities that are not among the top 50 overall but that did earn rankings in the top 50 in subject areas are listed below:

51–Penn State: engineering/tech (36), life sciences (39)

57–Ohio State: engineering/tech (42), social sciences (29), arts/humanities (46)

59–Pitt: arts/humanities (25)

64–UMass: life sciences (32), physical sciences (48)

77–Colorado: physical sciences (25)

81–Rutgers: arts/humanities (15)

94–Maryland: social sciences (45)

97–Arizona: arts/humanities (32)

98–Purdue: engineering/tech (40)

UC Irvine and Michigan State were also ranked in the top 100 in the world,  at number 86 and 96 respectively.  Indiana University, at number 123, is highly ranked in the social sciences–35th in the world.  It is important to remember that even being included among the 400 universities included in the survey is a great honor considering the huge number of universities worldwide.

State Cuts Hit Honors Programs and Affect U.S. News Rankings

Posted on by
Reply

State funding for higher education fell by almost $6 billion from 2011 to 2012, and the impact on public honors programs and the U.S. News rankings of state universities is significant.

Although a lot of the drop-off in state support has come about because federal stimulus monies are no longer flowing to universities, the harsh truth is that state appropriations in 2012 are almost $3 billion less than they were in 2007, just before the severe recession hit and well before stimulus funds were available.

Only ten states saw a net increase between 2007 and 2012, and some of the states hit the hardest are those with universities among the fifty that we follow on this site.

(This information comes from the Grapevine Annual Compilation of Data on State Fiscal Support for Higher Education, produced by the Center for Study of Education Policy at Illinois State University, James C. Palmer, Editor.)

The immediate impact on many honors programs will be an increase in class sizes, a wrenching development because smaller class sizes are at the center of the public honors mission to give exceptional students an experience that approximates or surpasses that of students at leading liberal arts and private research universities.

As a part of our lengthy analysis of U.S. News rankings, we have observed that the relationship of the “Financial Resources” and “Faculty Resources” categories utilized by the magazine provide interesting insights into the way the ample resources of many private universities give them such a dominant presence in the rankings. (In separate posts, we discuss the decline of public universities that are among the top 25 in the rankings.)

According to the magazine, the Financial Resources category (10% of the total) is essentially “the average spending per full-time-equivalent student on instruction, research, public service, academic support, student services and institutional support during the 2009 and 2010 fiscal years,” including spending for graduate students. For reasons that are not clear from the explanation, U.S. News also includes as a part of spending the “operations and maintenance” expenses “(for public institutions only.)”

The Faculty Resources category (20% of the total) assigns about two-thirds of its total points for faculty pay and the percentage of classes with 19 or fewer students. The faculty pay is adjusted for cost-of-living variations.

The key to the two categories is the ratio of Faculty Resources to Financial Resources: in other words, how much of the total money available is used for faculty pay and for a sufficient number of faculty (with the highest level of degree) to keep class sizes small.

What budget cuts do to most public universities is make them choose between having a competitive (and higher-paid) faculty that will maintain or boost academic quality or having a greater number of less-qualified faculty so that they can offer more–and smaller–classes.   And, almost always, taking only one of these actions requires an increase in tuition.

The well-heeled private research universities are not burdened with this painful choice, and tuition increases are more easily offset for those in need of assistance. On the other hand, since the 50 state universities we track are the best pubic universities in the nation, their choice is generally to hold on to the quality that they have struggled to achieve, even if it means seeing their class sizes go up. And…their U.S. News rankings go down.

Indeed, their rankings would likely suffer regardless of the choice they make between quality faculty and class size. Another, and lesser reason for emphasizing faculty quality in this case is that the U.S. News category of Academic Reputation, at 22.5% of the total, is the most influential single category in the rankings.

As evidence of these relationships, here are some numbers showing the ratio of Faculty Resources to Financial Resources for the 36 leading private institutions and the 14 public institutions that we follow and that are also in the top 50 U.S. News Rankings:

The average ratio of Faculty Resources to Financial Resources for the elite private universities is 1.63 to 1.00, while the ratio for the 14 public institutions is .914 to 1.00. In other words, the private schools are able to spend a disproportionate amount of their money on the areas that U.S. News values the most: faculty compensation, number of faculty per student, and the enhancement of academic reputation.

The two lowest ratios among the private universities are those for Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (.812 to 1.00) and Wake forest (.851 to 1.00). By contrast, only six of the public universities have ratios higher than that of Wake Forest.

So there we have the unhappy equation for public universities in the current climate of state spending reductions: severe cuts+larger classes=general decline in rankings and less interactive honors education.  What this means for the nation is that excellence in higher education is becoming increasingly restrictive.