Talk:Miami University

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Ohio, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Ohio. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

Contents 1 Admissions 2 Multi-Culti 3 Frats 4 the whole tuition thing 5 Yale? 6 Durbin Ward 7 Picture of Oxford in the state of Ohio 8 The "honors university" 9 In defense of the Other Ohio 10 Sofa Punch 11 President and quarterback 12 Time for cleanup? 13 Ron Zook 14 The Synchronized Skating team 15 Miami and the founding of Ohio State 16 Closing of WCP 17 Miami U. vs. U. Miami 18 Oh, this is funny... 19 Seventh oldest public university 20 Land Grant college?

[edit] Admissions

Based on the Ohio State Page I think an "Admissions" category might be a valuable addition to the Miami page. The OSU page speaks somewhat extensively to admissions scores. On the undergraduate level Miami has higher average test scores on both the SAT and ACT than any other public school in Ohio. The overall admissions ratings are also considerably higher. These factor could be spoken to considering the considerable jabbing that seems to resonate from Ohio State bringing up every ranking in which they prevail and none in which they become second fiddle.[1]

Be careful what you wish for. The overall admissions ratings at Miami are not considerably higher. That's just another myth that floats around Mother Miami and has as much actual relevance as the Molly Ringwald or Olsen twins myths. Here are the recent freshman class statistics from each school's website. IMO, they're close enough as to be statistically dead even--1202-1197 advantage to Miami in average SAT, 42%-38% advantage to Ohio State in student who graduated in the top 10% of their class, 74% acceptance rate at Ohio State vs. 78% acceptance rate at Miami.

Miami U.

Ohio State

As to the Business Week ranking, I find it highly amusing that when Miami gets one ranking above Ohio State, that nobody is supposed to talk about Ohio State without mentioning coming in "second fiddle" to Miami in this one ranking that is for one college and solely undergrad at that. Yet, if I was to edit the Miami article to highlight every ranking (overall, college, department, faculty or research) where Miami comes in second or worse to Ohio State, there would be a huge uproar. Also, please don't use the "those ranking don't count because Miami is a liberal arts college." That too is a myth. I have never seen a ranking or a classification that includes Miami with traditional liberal arts colleges instead of comprehensive universities. The Carnegie foundation has nine levels for classifying four year colleges based on the amount of graduate education and research that an institution does. Miami is classified in as Doctoral/High Research Activity: the second highest of those nine catagories.

And for what it's worth, I've also seen an internal presentation on the raw data that breaks these numbers down much further than any publication. The only reason Miami is keeping pace with Ohio State on admissions is by recruiting out of state students. Top 10% Ohio high school students are choosing Ohio State over Miami in record numbers. The only subgroup that preferred Miami was "alumni children." The five year trend is also strongly in Ohio State's favor, as evidenced by your drop in selectivity with the 2006 class: acceptance rate up to 78%/top 10% students down from 41% to 38%.

--Sam Harmon 22:02, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

You constantly mention that a school should not have to list who ranks higher than them within their own article and this is why Ohio State need not mention the lower ranking in undergraduate business schools. The huge hole in your logic is that the Miami page never claimed at any point (well, before my edits today) to be the "highest ranked undergraduate business school in Ohio." It is true that schools should not be able to go to another schools page and point out they are ranked higher, however, should a school claim they are the "highest ranked university in Ohio" then they better stand up to that claim in ALL major rankings. Excluding the other major ranking, placing Ohio State far lower, makes the entire section POV.

The second point you speak to is admissions. The numbers are there: SAT: Miami=1202, OSU=1197. ACT: Miami=27, OSU=26. While these numbers are not dramatically different, they are far more significant considering the huge sample size and less subjectivity than the one spot Miami falls behind OSU in US News rankings. The Princeton Review also ranks Miami Admissions Significantly harder than those at OSU (90 vs. 84). As far as class ranking %, those numbers mean nothing, they could simply be indicative of the types of high schools Miami draws from versus those at OSU (instate vs. out of state as you mentioned). I attended a school that the University of Michigan gave a .4 boost to in order to figure out a real GPA number, and where a 1400 and hard work far from meant you would fall within the top 10%. Those class %'s could simply mean that OSU is doing an excellent job at attracting kids from easy schools around the area while Miami is pulling in high achievers from top schools around the region.

I think you bring up a couple of good points but slightly overstate your case. I doubt the class rank discrepency is solely the result of Ohio State recruiting "easy high schools" or the test score gap would be much wider in Miami's favor. Also, the much more complete internal documents that I've seen show a significant gap in Ohio State's favor for the very, very top high school students (i.e. National Merit Finalists, top 1% class rank and so on) which I would attribute to Ohio State offering far more prominent science and engineering programs, as well more nationally prominent faculty members not to mention a 2 billion dollar endowment to help fund full-ride scholarships. Neither is class rank meaningless. In fact in this age of rampant grade inflation, it can strongly be argued that gpa not put in the context of class rank is highly questionable. Also, test scores in and of themselves have been shown historically to be biased along race and class lines. Given that Miami recruits an overwhelmingly white and upper middle class (55% from families with 100k incomes versus 38% for all selective public universities) student body, it is expected that test scores would skew higher than class rank. Whether it's Miami, Ohio State or any selective university, a combination of gpa, class rank and test scores is needed if one is to have any hope of gauging the institutions selectivity, and such an overall picture does not show much difference between acceptance to Miami and acceptance to Ohio State. In fact, I'd argue that it's a lingering matter of perception from the old Jim Rhodes' days when Ohio State was forced by the state to artificially lower admissions standards. Miami, in the meantime, had the rather brilliant ploy of simply not building enough dorm space in order to get around the Rhodes policies. I'd also look for the Princeton Review number to drop next year when the 2006 class data is included.

What I found very interesting in the Business Week data was that it seems that by-and-large the best and brightest at Miami major in business (average SAT 30 points higher than the campus wide average SAT); whereas at Ohio State, it's the average students (average SAT 10 points lower than the campus wide average SAT) that major in business, which explains Miami ranking significantly ahead of Ohio State. The USN&WR undergrad business school ranking, on the other hand, focuses less on the qualifications of the student body and more on outside perceptions of the schools quality, which tend to be largely based on faculty quality. The two studies in my opinion are both highly valid but also have an "apples and oranges" character in what they judge. I see no harm nor a POV in letting each article list the ranking that highlights that university, as well as to keep the peace among MU and Ohio State editors --Sam Harmon 23:24, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Multi-Culti

Someone contacted me about removing the information on African-Americans. I hope this note reaches them. It may be true that Miami admitted African-Americans before other schools. If it is the page should reflect this. This page should help us determine the accuracy: [2]

If it is true I think we should put something on the page about the bigotry here. A neutral way to do that may be finding the number of actually African-Americans students. Miami would have you believe it's 10% but it's really something like 384 out of 15,000. 10% of students are multicultural but they stretch the definition to get there.

-User:Alison

That was me. I've actually taken the liberty of sending a request about the info to the fine folks at King Library and when I find out what the deal is I'll amend the article (if indeed it needs amending) -- the page you posted up there is excellent but I'd like to know how those dates stack up to other Ohio schools. If you want to research the race breakdown and format it in an NPOV way and place it in there, the more the merrier. btw, I don't think it's up to Miami U to determine racial makeup -- pretty sure that's a state or federal yardstick. If in the future you want to contact me or any other Wikipedian you can leave a note in the discussion page off our userpage -- mine, for instance, is here. --I. Neschek 03:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Frats

I removed language calling Miami "the mother of fraternities" because it seemed to be in a prejudicial light and was not evidenced. Liffer 01:34, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I reverted Liffer's edit. I'm not sure what the heck "prejudicial light" and "was not evidenced" means, but the Mother of Fraternities appelation is pretty well known. ref: http://www.units.muohio.edu/saf/GRA/ even. --Neschek 22:51, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] the whole tuition thing

How is the new tuition scheme different from the old? Wasn't there always one price for out of state and one for in? Certainly during my time there that was the case. -- — I. Neschek | talk 18:17, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I didn't follow it much because I am not an in state student and I knew that President Garland could steam roll it so nothing I thought would make much difference. I know that it was a highly argued topic at the time even though faculty knew they couldn't stop it (they hate Garland by the way, or as some of us affectionately call him "Jimmy G and his buildings"). One emphasized point in the discussion was how it is set up to give more money to majors that are deemed to benefit Ohio's economy. While it doesn't do so now it could in the future mean that engineering majors get more financial aid then English majors. Other resources: What Miami Says About the Plan and I know the Chronicle of Higher Education wrote it up too. Alison9 02:22, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Interesting, interesting. Thanks for the pointer. I've added the link you gave to the main page. -- — I. Neschek | talk 16:09, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Yale?

Miami's campus is "somewhat modeled after Yale?" I always thought it was William and Mary... -- — I. Neschek | talk 22:52, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Don't know about W&M, but Miami University was "the Yale of the West" - the west being the old northwest and Ohio/Miss. river valleys, now the Midwest or Heartland. Slogan has kind of ebbed, but "Public Ivy" is much used. - Anon.

The Yale connection comes from a couple of places. First, the oldest dormitories, North and South Halls (now Elliott and Stoddard) were supposedly modelled after the Connecticut Hall on the Yale campus. Second, Miami's youthful late 19th century "dude faculty" was made up of a number of Yale grads and finally, Alfred Upham's 1909 centennial history book was entitled "Old Miami: Yale of the Early West."205.188.116.130 02:34, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Durbin Ward

Yesterday I added General Durbin Ward, a lawyer and newspaper publisher who served in the Ohio General Assembly, to the list of people associated with the university, but it was soon deleted. My sources say he attended Miami, but are silent as to whether he graduated; I'm assuming he didn't. Certainly Ward was as important as Nick Lachey, who is still listed in the same place. PedanticallySpeaking 15:23, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

Google internet search brings up only 135 matches on Durbin Ward, while there are over 277,000 for Nick Lachey. While Durbin Ward's contributions to society as a newspaper publisher and as a Civil War veteran may have been much greater than Nick Lachey's TV show, but Lachey's significance today as a great interest of pop culture makes him fit under the encyclopedic definition of "general knowledge," and Durbin Ward's lack of relevance today renders him otherwise. He is not a famous person nor is he associated with Miami University. Driscoth 02:21, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

Someone who was a hero in the Civil War and rose from private to general in that conflict isn't relevant? I've never heard the other two people listed under "famous" people and several of the grads are unknown to me. There is an article on Ward, he went to Miami, so why should he not be listed? PedanticallySpeaking 14:28, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

According to Durbin Ward's article on Wikipedia, which PedanticallySpeaking has created and remained the sole editor of, Ward was brevetted, i.e. temporarily received, the title of brigadier general, for an injury that he received during the war. It is misleading to claim thus that he was a general in the Civil War. All of the other people listed as famous grads or people associated with the university are very well known and deserving of the status as "famous" or for having some sort of notable connection to Miami. Durbin Ward has an ambiguous association with the university (we don't even know if he graduated or not) and he is not important enough as a historical figure to warrant such a placement even had he clearly graduated. Driscoth 11:15, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

Man, this is a pickle, isn't it? If this were a VfD style voting thing, I'd call the Durbin Ward issue a weak keep. Yeah, I've never heard of him before this kerfluffle, but by virtue of Durbin Ward having A) attended Miami U (graduated or not, I think technically everybody who attended a college is an alumnus of that college, but that might be a whole 'nuther can of worms) and B) being famous enough to warrant a Wikipedia entry (sure, PS is the sole author, but hey, the article is here and hasn't been obliterated yet) I think that it's OK for Ward to remain in the "famous alumni" section. Hey, we're Miami U, we don't have boatloads of famous people -- I added Mojo Nixon for chrissakes, like he's some paragon of scholarly or cultural virtue. If people think the list is getting too long, walp, this is WP and we can be bold and make a Famous alumni of Miami University article all by itself. -- — I. Neschek | talk 15:32, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Also, hey, we have the ticker tape guy listed, I mean really, ticker tape people, ticker tape. -- — I. Neschek | talk 15:39, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

And Ward was also U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Ohio. That's an important post, no? PedanticallySpeaking 15:45, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

I would agree that the ticker tape guy perhaps does not deserve to be there, but Samuel Laws is famous at least among Miami students as being "the Miami grad who invented the ticker tape." Durbin Ward is clearly not a famous person and his addition would be of little to no value on the list of famous Miami alumni. Driscoth 21:21, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

Oh c'mon, if he's famous enough to have an entry on wikipedia, surely he's famous enough for a link from the page. That way, people who are interested in learning about significant figure who went to Miami can actually learn something -- which is the whole point, isn't it? We're not going to run out of bits if we add a link there.

Kundor 12:00, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Picture of Oxford in the state of Ohio

Where did that picture come from? It's one of the more disproportioned maps of Ohio that I have ever seen. Stratton 08:51, May 29, 2005 (UTC)--

It comes from this page. -- — I. Neschek | talk 13:26, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, no kidding. Dayton's depicted as being about where Columbus is (I'm guessing it's actually the location of London, Ohio, or maybe somewhere around Marysville or Urbana), and Columbus is shown to be roughly where Mansfield is. Wouldn't the location map at Oxford, Ohio be a better choice? Dayton, Columbus, and Cincinnati could be added to the map as well, to establish location. -- SwissCelt 23:58, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The "honors university"

Okay, a recent edit to the article says that MU is the "honors university" for the Ohio state uni system. If this is true, this is the first I've heard of it. I'll try to verify this information, and if I can't, I'm going to take out the edit. Someday. When I have time. If someone beats me to it, more power to 'em. -- — I. Neschek | talk 23:05, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

No, I know Bowling Green has an active honors college. Moreover, Ohio has several state university systems, not just one. The state university system formed by Kent State University alone encompasses eight campuses (more than that system headquartered on the banks of the Olentangy) and more than 35,000 undergraduates. -- SwissCelt 15:33, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

So what if Kent State has more regional campuses than "that system headquartered on the banks of the Olentangy?" Ohio State still has over 15,000 more students than Kent. What a pathetic attempt to try to slight OSU. [comment left by anonymous editor]

If you want to talk about honors we got something along the lines of a Playboy honorable mention for partying one year while I was there (2001-2005). We aren't the "honors university" as far as I know. We have an honors program, but "honors university" sounds kind of stuck up. Alison9 04:33, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] In defense of the Other Ohio

The point, my anonymous friend (who won't even defend his/her school by identifying her/himself with an IP address), is that the state of Ohio has established that state-sponsored post-secondary education in Ohio will be conducted through several fully autonomous and separate university systems. What's truly pathetic are the attempts by tOSU nutheads to deny Ohio's rich collegiate heritage by demanding the lion's share (and more!) of dwindling state post-secondary educational support, while acting as though the farmland in the middle of Columbus is the beginning and end of university-level education in Ohio. Ohio has more state university systems than any other state. Why would any proud Ohioan-- even a nuthead-- try to trivialize this? Keep it up, and the General Assembly might agree with you by closing those other systems. Then all of Ohio loses. -- SwissCelt 16:38, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree, ohio state has some sort of complex against Miami University it seems. tOSU, you and 55,000 of your closest friends!!!!

[edit] Sofa Punch

An anonymous user made an edit about a band called "Sofa Punch" that supposedly plays at MU. I'm not sure this is notable; there are probably jillions of bands formed at MU who are famous in a very local sense, but unless it's somebody with regional or national chops I'm inclined to leave it out. Sofa Punch guy, if you want to mount a defense, please put a note here or at my talk page; I for one am open to dissent. -- — I. Neschek | talk 17:20, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] President and quarterback

Okay, so what are the other three colleges to have produced both a Super Bowl-winning quarterback and a US President? And where is this sourced? -- SwissCelt 13:16, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Michigan: Brady/Ford Naval Academy: Staubach/Carter Stanford: Plunkett/Hoover Miami University: Roethlisberger/Harrison

Yes... that information comes internally from within Miami and their Office of University Communications.

[edit] Time for cleanup?

The introduction to this article is really long. I count 12 paragraphs. Perhaps it's time for cleanup? Nothing needs to be taken out, per se, that I can see. However, much of the introduction should probably be moved to other sections. -- SwissCelt 12:28, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I think so. The style guidelines say an article of this length should have a lead section of two to three paragraphs. - EurekaLott 01:57, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I'll second. This entry is duplicative and just generally WAY too long.

[edit] Ron Zook

Ron Zook was captain of the football team in 1975; and was invited to work with the team as a graduate assistant in 1976 spring training. That qualifies him for inclusion in the "Cradle of Coaches" paragraph. Hokeman 05:38, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Synchronized Skating team

I know that the Synchronized ice Skating team won the National Championship this past spring, they also won in 1999. They are known throughout the skating world as THE varsity skating team... I think its worth mentioning something about them. Google it, or go to www.usfsa.org for more info.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronized_skating is a link as well

• Although Miami is the only college to have a varsity program for syncronized ice skating, the majority of the campus couldn't care less. The two most popular sports at Miami are Football and Ice Hockey which compete on the top caliber in the NCAA.

[edit] Miami and the founding of Ohio State

I'm curious as to exactly what Miami's role was in the founding of Ohio State. I do know that President Stanton and Miami attempted to gain the land grant designation for Miami but failed. Beyond that, what exactly was their role in founding Ohio State? I've checked The Miami Years, but it says nothing beyond Miami's failure to gain the state's land-grant designation. --Sam Harmon 06:14, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I know of five reasons why Miami University (and Ohio University) were passed over for the land grant:

1. Miami was a borderline sectarian university in the early 1870's. Presbyterians and Methodists controlled Miami and OU (though I do not know which is which). The state did not want the sectarian squabbling to infect the land grant.
2. Miami and Ohio University were still training grounds for the elite, with emphasis on traditional forms of learning (Latin or Greek, for instance, whereas Ohio State never had an ancient language requirement). The new university was to serve a broad population and some questioned that either could make the transition.
3. Miami had enrollment problems, as denoted by the temporary closure of the university in the early 1870's.
4. Miami was not centrally located, nor well-situated on railroad lines and roads.
5. Legislators were interested in a university in the capital. Some hoped this would remind them to fund it (which they did not). Rkevins82 19:27, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

--I took a course at Miami in which Curtis Ellison, a former Dean of the Western College and old-timer in Oxford spoke about this. I think he has done a lot of digging around in the university archives and I tend to believe him. Anyone else?

I don't mean to sound harsh about this but, "someone told you" "I think they've done some digging around in the archives." This is what passes for scholarship, peer review or citing sources? What it strikes me as is simply another apocryphal story that floats around the Miami campus as fact. BTW, when did Molly Ringwald graduate?--Sam Harmon 14:30, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

If you are interested, there is an extended discussion of Ohio State University's founding and site selection in "Building Sullivant's pyramid; an administrative history of the Ohio State University, 1870-1907" by William A. Kinnison. The book may be hard to come by. Rkevins82 14:58, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Closing of WCP

I restored the section regarding the recent closing of the WCP, assuming that it's removal was the result of an accidental reversion. If that's not the case, please let me know why you see the entry as inappropriate. Wikipedia often covers timely events and news stories and this one is relevant to other sections of the this entry.

[edit] Miami U. vs. U. Miami

This statement--Miamians cite that Miami was a university when Florida belonged to Spain (see Spanish Florida) as Miami University is over 120 years older than University of Miami of Florida--is designed to suggest that Miami University has some larger national distinction and prominance than the University of Miami. To most, however, the opposite would be true. UM is a globally-recongized university with many distinctions (including five national NCAA football championships) and top tier academic programs. The reason Miami U. is called Miami (Ohio) is because a typical reader would more commonly think of the University of Miami if the word "Miami" was used to describe it. This paragraph, if anything, should explain why Miami U. is called Miami (Ohio) and that means not describing how long its been around vs. UM but acknowledging that it is very easily confused with UM. The sentence in question is contrary to this reality and no more than academic boosterism, since the date of its founding is previously referenced.

This paragraph should read more simply: Miami University is commonly referred to as Miami (Ohio) to avoid confusion with the University of Miami in Florida. MiamiDolphins3 22:14, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree. If someone could support the claim that this is more often done in discussions of sports, I think it may merit inclusion. I think that is a true statement but, of course, we must find evidence in a verifiable source. I suspect this is not as common in many contexts, particularly academic or scholarly contexts (I would hope that scientists and scholars can differentiate between University of Miami and Miami University). --ElKevbo 22:23, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

As I've said on MiamiDolphins3's talk page, the statement regarding what MU advocates say about the confusion of MU and UofM is POV —- but not that of the editor. It is the POV of the people who say it. Proper references can be given to a variety of sources for the assertion regarding the age comparison. I am glad that MiamiDolphins3 has made clear that he/she believes UofM is the more prominent institution — an argument which does not matter. The matter at hand is the claim that is made by MU advocates.

On another issue, one may want to clarify why and how MU became Miami (Ohio) or Miami of Ohio in print and broadcast media. That very well may be worth another paragraph, possibly later in the article.Rkevins82 23:43, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I would be no means say that Miami of Florida (University of Miami) is as historically famous or prominent as Miami University. They are most well-known for their football team and the city of Miami is known for drug-dealers, old people, and great beaches. By no means of stature is Miami of Florida a superior academic institution to Miami University. My opinion after visiting both schools and talking with dozens of people at both including reading long accounts of alumni of both schools.

You're kidding, right? When speaking of Miami U., we're not talking about some hillbilly community college-- which, by the way, is how I've heard more than one ignorant Floridian describe it. We're talking about an institution which has established more fraternities than any other university in the US, possibly the world. We're talking about the alma mater of a number of college football coaches, as noted in the article. We're talking about a Presidential alma mater; one (Benjamin Harrison, in 1852) who was graduated just 10 years after the establishment of the Village of Miami (now Miami, Florida). Look, I love Florida, but college football does not define the notability of universities. And even if it did, both Miamis have claim on substantial history, in this field as well as others. -- SwissCelt 14:30, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I propose this: "In college athletics, Miami University is often called Miami (Ohio) to avoid confusion with the city of Miami, Florida and the University of Miami." Though I do think this claim should be sourced, and I think we'll find that a comprehensive source for the claim will explain that it's not just UofM which is disambiguated through "Miami (Ohio)", but also the Southeastern Florida region with its proud tradition of professional sports. I have a hunch we didn't hear "Miami (Ohio)" too much before the Miami Dolphins were established. -- SwissCelt 14:30, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

---

Hey, I tried to work with you. But since you insist upon putting these unsourced, diminuitive statements in the article without allowing input from Miami supporters, I say these concessions to your precious little Coral Gables Community College... er, I mean University of Miami stay out of the article. That is, of course, unless you're willing to work with us on adding sources. -- SwissCelt 02:26, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

"I don't like you or your school" is a pretty terrible reason to remove useful information from an encyclopedia article. I agree that the statement needs to be sourced but your removal of it under these pretenses is a huge step in the wrong direction. Further, the silly little swipe at the University of Miami is completely uncalled for and adds needless rancor and hostility to this discussion. For shame, SwissCelt - I expect better of a longtime Wikipedia editor. --ElKevbo 03:13, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

This insistence on leaving an unsourced statement disparaging Miami University-- now in a position of prominence at the beginning of the article-- amounts to vandalism. If it's "useful information" as you claim, there will be a source to substantiate it. Otherwise, it really doesn't belong in the article. We already have a statement disambiguating Miami U. from the Univ. of Miami. Besides, take a look at the article history. It's MiamiDolphins3 who was removing useful information first-- information, I might add, which was sourced. -- SwissCelt 03:20, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

This is getting ridiculous. While SwissCelt could have reacted better, MiamiDolphins3 obviously is promoting his own agenda. The only people who refer to Miami University as Miami of Ohio are those who are ignorant and those who wish to diminish the school. I'm reverting the article to a toned-down version of how it was before all this nonsense started. If it becomes necessary, I'll lock the article until an acceptable compromise can be reached here. - EurekaLott 03:25, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't dispute that MiamiDolphins3's actions and methods are disruptive and his edits largely unconstructive. But I don't want his actions to result in the removal of useful information. It is my experience that Miami U *is* often distinguished from the U of Miami by adding "(Ohio)" in reports and articles dealing with athletics, particularly in score tickers. Further, I think this discussion and some of the information that has been added (and removed and added and removed...) is some evidence that there is some sort of strange relationship between the two institutions which may be worth documenting. What I don't know is if we can find a good source documenting the history and reason for this. Does anyone know if this might in a publication manual or style guide commonly used by sports writers? My AP Stylebook doesn't mention anything but this is a bit too narrow and specific to be listed there. How about education writers' styleguides or guidelines? --ElKevbo 03:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Still looking for good sources for the history and the "why," but here are two good examples of this usage: ESPN story entitled "RedHawks coach accepts IU offer" (note the title of the webpage and the opening words "Miami of Ohio's...") and the ESPN "Football Clubhouse" entry for "Miami (OHIO)". --ElKevbo 03:45, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I'll concede to "often" or even "frequently", in place of "sometimes". However, we really do need a source for this. We might also want to make mention that the Southeast Florida area has many notable sports teams, and that could contribute to why one might hear "Miami (OH)" more often than "Miami (FL)". (Assuming, of course, this can be substantiated via a citation.) Far from disparaging the University of Miami, I'd say this recognizes the many fine athletic achievements of the entire Southeast Florida area. Sound fair? -- SwissCelt 03:40, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Based on the ten minutes of research I've put into this, "sometimes" seems to be perfectly appropriate. And I think your reasoning sounds, er, reasonable but I think that the reason why the U of Miami seems to have a monopoly on "Miami" in some college sports reporting, particularly football, is due to the recent success of their sports teams, particularly football. We could have a lengthy discussion on the sad state of affairs when our colleges are more well-known for their athletic accomplishments than their academic or research accomplishments but I think that more people are familiar with the U of Miami due to their immensely successful football team. I'll keep looking for good sources, though, as this a mildly interesting discussion and topic. --ElKevbo 03:45, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I also would like to request a better source for the "Miamians typically note..." sentence as one blog post is hardly evidence of Miamians "typically" noting this. Personally, the entire statement is needlessly defensive and the article would be better without it particularly since there is no reason given for why the "(Ohio") is sometimes used in the first place. In fact, since this appears to happen most often in reports and articles about athletics it might be better off being moved to that section and out of the intro. --ElKevbo 05:18, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I have added a source from CBS Sports, but there are thousands of such references and, in fact, I struggle to find any references in outside media that DON'T call it "Miami (OH)" or "Miami of Ohio". MiamiDolphins3 13:15, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

MiamiDolphin... you are an idiot. Google Search "Miami University" and hundreds of articles come up from reputable sources citing Miami University. No offense but everyone I know thinks of UMiami as a party and football school. Hell, the majority of your famous alumni are either athletes or actors. My cousin goes there and my whole family goes... he chose Miami of Florida, I guess he's going to be a playboy. Your president is a graduate of our school. Stop rationalizing and justifying yourself... you have little man's syndrome.

Hold on a second. Now, I realize I'm the one who called the Univ. of Miami "Coral Gables Community College" in a pique of frustration. But frustration is all it was: The University of Miami is actually an excellent school. The doctor who treats my own children is a graduate of the school-- meaning I literally trust the education he received at the University of Miami with my kids' lives. The majority of famous alumni of any American university will be either athletes or entertainers... such is the US's notion of "fame".

None of that, though, should detract from Miami University. Miami University is also an excellent school. One is a world-famous private university, the other is an equally famous state system of higher education. Those unfamiliar with either institution would have a hard time distinguishing which Miami is which, as both universities carry quite a bit of renown. -- SwissCelt 19:05, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not referencing graduate and professional schools at the University of Miami. I know the graduate and professional programs are good at UMiami Florida. I was talking about the undergraduate program and national reputation of the school as a whole. When you think of Miami, you think of the Hurricanes and the football team. I'm sure M.D.'s from UMiami are great.

[edit] Oh, this is funny...

After being accused by Floridians, Ohioans, and more of boosterism for MU, now an editor accuses me of trying to boost tOSU for citing both universities' placement in the USN&WR survey. Can't a Bowling Green alum express a NPOV on this here thang? *grin* -- SwissCelt 17:26, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I re-inserted the ranking information, but removed the reference to OSU. I hope that will make everybody happy. - EurekaLott 02:28, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

FWIW, I made the argument to SwissCelt that I don't think it necessary that any university place its rankings in the context of other schools, particularly if it's meant to show the school in a less than favorable light. While I do consider it valid for a university article to note that it's the "top ranked school" or "top ranked public school" in a state. To require a university to say that they're second, third or eigth in the state seems to me to have a lot more to do with promoting another school than discussing the one that the article is about.

Also the Carnegie classification used earlier is outdated. MU's basic classification is Doctoral/High Research Activity, which is the second highest of nine catagories for major four-year colleges, so I don't believe it's entirely accurate to portray Miami as a "liberal arts college" particularly in light of the low numbers of undergrads there who actually major in liberal arts, Nor, have I ever seen a university ranking or classification that groups Miami with traditional liberal arts colleges rather than national universities.--Sam Harmon 15:38, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Please do not confuse the Carnegie Classifications with a ranking system. Doctoral/High Research Activity is not "the second highest of nine catagories for major four-year colleges." It is merely the classification scheme into which this institution is classified. --ElKevbo 17:22, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not saying it's a ranking. It is the second highest classification in terms of an institution's level of graduate education/research activity, and as such goes a long way towards disproving this notion of Miami as a "liberal arts college" as well as disproving the argument that any comparisons between Miami and Ohio State are "apples to oranges" irrelevant. Honestly, I'm no fan of Miami, but I'm trying to be objective here in stating that a Miami article shouldn't have to note its ranking in the context of being second to Ohio State. It's doesn't seem to be normal wikipedia convention for university articles. Michigan State would be a good example.--Sam Harmon 17:32, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

But even that isn't the right way to describe the basic Carnegie Classification scheme. RU(H) simply states that the institution awards a certain number/type of doctorates and within that group of institutions it falls in the middle tier in terms of research funding (as defined and measured by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching). It certainly makes no claim as to the level of research conducted (even if we use funding as a proxy) as compared to institutions that do not award doctorates. It's probably a true statement but the comparison is simply not being made. Discussions like these are what motivated the Carnegie Foundation to move to multiple systems of categorization and I wish they would just do away with the Basic Classification alogether as all is does is cause confusion like this...

On the specific topic at hand: I tend to agree with whoever edited the article last to make it state the university's standing in Ohio without explicit reference to Ohio State. Personally, it wouldn't even hurt my feelings if the ranking/standing/whatever were removed altogether. I agree that the comparison to Ohio State is not needed and is detrimental to the article without further explicit context (i.e. if Miami always compares itself to Ohio State, then it might be appropriate). --ElKevbo 18:16, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Should we include a Carnegie Classification? If so, are these the correct data? Rkevins82 17:35, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I think we should. I think there should be much more widespread use of the Carnegie Classifications in Wikipedia articles about unviersities (including, perhaps, the info boxes) but I have been intimidated by the scope of the work. I'd love to see us replace some of the vague, undefined language thrown around in university articles with the Carnegie Classifications. --ElKevbo 18:08, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Further, I would advocate including all of the Carnegie Classifications and not just the Basic. The others help present a much fuller and more realistic view of what is a complex institution. --ElKevbo 18:25, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

You are right that the basic classification does not give a complete picture, particularly as to the quality level of that research, but it is an important component when looked at in the context of other (more qualitative) factors such as AAU membership, numbers of National Academies members on the faculty, Guggenheim and Fulbright fellows on the faculty and so on. A good example of this would be U of Cincinnati which is classified by Carnegie as "very high research activity" but is not an AAU member, has no National Academy of Sciences and only one Academy of Engineering member on its faculty and rarely sees its faculty awarded Guggenheim fellowships.--Sam Harmon 19:39, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

But what you're missing, Sam, is that Miami is in the next statistical place nationally from Ohio State. So while it's true that Miami is second in the state, it's a rather close second. I think this is notable. -- SwissCelt 01:24, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Seventh oldest public university

An editor has come forward to dispute the claim that Miami is the seventh oldest public university in the United States. I found a source from the university itself which makes this claim. However, if someone knows of a contravening source, please tell us here in this section so that we may evaluate the claim. -- SwissCelt 18:05, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

http://www.forloveandhonor.org/corporatepartners.htm http://www.cincinnatiusa.com/Attractions/detail.asp?AttractionID=129

Seems there's a lot of "haters" out there who haven't experienced the Miami Magic. Don't knock it until you've experienced it.

[edit] Land Grant college?

Can someone tell me why Miami U. is listed as a "land grant public university" (both in its heading/summary box and in the land grant college article as Miami is, most certainly NOT a land grant college (note discussion immediately below)? I'm an Ohioan who went out of state to a land grant school, Michigan State -- the oldest -- so I'd feel funny correcting this error. I hope one of the editors of this board would fix this major error, both here and in the land grant article listing Miami as a land grant school.151.197.39.235 07:20, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

If the land grant college article is correct, then you're right - Miami University is not a land grant college. By a more literal definition, however, the institution was established by a land grant and thus my qualify to be called a "land grant college." In general, though, I agree with you - this institution was not established by the Morril Acts and thus by common usage is not a land grant college. --ElKevbo 13:40, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I believe it the land was granted by the U.S. Congress in the very early 19th century or late 18th century by President George Washington to John Cleves Symmes to purchase that area of the Northwest territory and a plot was designated for an academy of the highest degree. Miami wasn't founded under the Morrill Act (Ohio State was) but it the land was granted by our founding fathers... What do you think? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.24.37.112 (talk • contribs) 18:16, November 14, 2006.

I understand what you're saying and you're right as far as I know regarding the history of Miami University. However, to the best of my knowledge the term "land grant college" is almost always used to refer exclusively to those institutions founded in relation to the Morril Acts. I could be wrong and if someone more knowledgable in this area can chime in to correct me then I'd be very appreciative. --ElKevbo 00:24, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

The 2nd para is correct: while most 19th century colleges were technically founded via a 'land grant' for campus and/or funding in our still frontier economy, the term "Land Grant Colleges" specifically refer to Morrill Act colleges: those with liberal/technical leanings designed to support 'agriculture and the mechanic arts" (engineering), and were to provide equal access to quality higher ed to the 'industrial classes'. Most colleges were created under the Morrill Act, either as separate colleges from existing State Universities or as appendages to brand new or existing state or, even, formerly private colleges (like Rutgers, Delaware or Vermont). Michigan State, Penn State and, I believe Maryland, actually received local (state) land grants a few years prior to the passage of the Morrill Act, which was signed by Lincoln in 1862 during the Civil War (Southern states opposed it because they felt the “Yankee” Fed Govt was using Morrill to try and usurp their power – of course, by 1862 those states were temporarily gone so Morrill went thru)… Suffice it to say, Miami U was not the Morrill land grant college in Ohio, OSU is. 151.197.39.235 06:56, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Miami also benefited from the Morrill Act land grant act, if I remember correctly. Ohio University and Miami University received small sums from the 1860's grant in addition to OSU being founded.Rkevins82 23:41, 15 November 2006 (UTC)