Can someone explain what a “regional” university is?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rankings and ranking classifications are based on academic offerings and quality, not the whereabouts of who attends. Regional schools do not have national or international academic recognition, thus they largely serve their local and nearby communities/states. That is, regional schools don’t have outstanding academics, thus they mostly attract regional students, not the other way around.

But weren't James Madison and Elon "regional universities" on USNWR just a few years back? Now I see they're both on the National Universities list. I really don't see how they changed that much if regional vs. national is really that big a distinction.

As another poster said, it probably just means they now attract students nationwide, rather than from a more localized area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a consolation prize for universities that aren't very good. They get to be on a "list" even if it's not the "real" list. You're not a top national university or a top LAC but you are a top regional university. Yay!

No, it's not that. There are excellent schools on regional lists.

Exactly, otherwise that would mean the #299 "national university" - Middle Tennessee State University - would be considered better by USNWR than a top regional university for an area of the country (e.g., Cal Poly - SLO which is ranked the #2 regional university in the West and admits only 33% of applicants).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As an example, Towson and UMBC seem like two schools that students might end up choosing between.

Hardly. UMBC is an R1 national university. Very different campuses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rankings and ranking classifications are based on academic offerings and quality, not the whereabouts of who attends. Regional schools do not have national or international academic recognition, thus they largely serve their local and nearby communities/states. That is, regional schools don’t have outstanding academics, thus they mostly attract regional students, not the other way around.

But weren't James Madison and Elon "regional universities" on USNWR just a few years back? Now I see they're both on the National Universities list. I really don't see how they changed that much if regional vs. national is really that big a distinction.

As another poster said, it probably just means they now attract students nationwide, rather than from a more localized area.

Except that it doesn't. I would be shocked if RISD, which is apparently regional had fewer students from outside the North, than Alabama State has from outside the South.

[Anonymous]

I view it as reach. It is only known within the region where it exists. JMU, CNU, GMU in Virginia would be regional schools. They're known within a geographic sphere, not not particularly nationally. If you went to Los Angeles and said you have a degree from James Madison U., the person would think "where?" and they wouldn't know where it was.

This doesn't mean the school is bad, it just means it doesn't have a national or global name. But if you said "I went to the University of Virginia or Virginia Tech," the person in LA would think "Oh, I've heard of those."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I view it as reach. It is only known within the region where it exists. JMU, CNU, GMU in Virginia would be regional schools. They're known within a geographic sphere, not not particularly nationally. If you went to Los Angeles and said you have a degree from James Madison U., the person would think "where?" and they wouldn't know where it was.

This doesn't mean the school is bad, it just means it doesn't have a national or global name. But if you said "I went to the University of Virginia or Virginia Tech," the person in LA would think "Oh, I've heard of those."

that is your definition (and likely based on sports programs), not the definition that USNWR uses

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I view it as reach. It is only known within the region where it exists. JMU, CNU, GMU in Virginia would be regional schools. They're known within a geographic sphere, not not particularly nationally. If you went to Los Angeles and said you have a degree from James Madison U., the person would think "where?" and they wouldn't know where it was.

This doesn't mean the school is bad, it just means it doesn't have a national or global name. But if you said "I went to the University of Virginia or Virginia Tech," the person in LA would think "Oh, I've heard of those."

See, you and lots of people are saying that you have some made up definition in your head. I agree with you, that maybe that's what a regional university should be. That it's what people think when they hear the term.

But it appears that it's not what it means. Which is why I'm asking what the working definition is.

As far as I can tell, the definition hinges entirely on whether they offer a PhD.

[Anonymous]

It’s a classification. This is where you find it:

https://carnegieclassifications.acenet.edu/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I view it as reach. It is only known within the region where it exists. JMU, CNU, GMU in Virginia would be regional schools. They're known within a geographic sphere, not not particularly nationally. If you went to Los Angeles and said you have a degree from James Madison U., the person would think "where?" and they wouldn't know where it was.

This doesn't mean the school is bad, it just means it doesn't have a national or global name. But if you said "I went to the University of Virginia or Virginia Tech," the person in LA would think "Oh, I've heard of those."

So schools like Middle Tennessee State University and Alabama State University are considered as having a "national or global name" and reach because they're classified as national (versus regional) universities by USNWR? Uh, I don't think so.

[Anonymous]

My understanding is they are larger than SLACs but font have a significant university/PHD program. They tend to be focused on undergraduate programs so in ways are a hybrid between a big university and a LAC. CNU fits this model. JMU has a bigger graduate program.

[Anonymous]

Good rep locally. Like uva

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I view it as reach. It is only known within the region where it exists. JMU, CNU, GMU in Virginia would be regional schools. They're known within a geographic sphere, not not particularly nationally. If you went to Los Angeles and said you have a degree from James Madison U., the person would think "where?" and they wouldn't know where it was.

This doesn't mean the school is bad, it just means it doesn't have a national or global name. But if you said "I went to the University of Virginia or Virginia Tech," the person in LA would think "Oh, I've heard of those."

Except that JMU and GMU are now ranked as national universities - and both have students from CA, as well as many other states.

[Anonymous]

https://www.alumni.jmu.edu/s/1591/18/interior.aspx?sid=1591&gid=3&pgid=7560

https://alumni.gmu.edu/s/1564/GID2/16/interior-1colb.aspx?sid=1564&gid=2&pgid=6708

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s a classification. This is where you find it:

https://carnegieclassifications.acenet.edu/

I think we just need to keep interjecting the correct answer periodically until people get that it has nothing to do with geography or the word regional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a classification. This is where you find it:

https://carnegieclassifications.acenet.edu/

I think we just need to keep interjecting the correct answer periodically until people get that it has nothing to do with geography or the word regional.

Except it does. From USNWR ranking definitions:

"The 604 total Regional Universities (239 public, 350 private and 15 for-profit) are ranked within four geographic areas: North, South, Midwest and West."

Regional universities are ranked within four geographic regions.