Talk:List of research universities in the United States

Part Private/Public Universities
Cornell is about 1/2 public. It is hard to categorize it as "private". See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornell_University#Organization_and_administration Chongman (talk) 18:05, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of research universities in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120617210050/http://mup.asu.edu/research.html to http://mup.asu.edu/research.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:02, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

recent changes about R1 and R2
Recently added about R1: "These institutions primarily focus on research, with little to no teaching available." I attended two R1 universities and there was plenty of teaching going on. I'm asking for a citation. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 23:36, 8 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Reference #3 has been added for the first statement, but it doesn't say anything about not teaching. It says:


 * Offer a full range of baccalaureate programs
 * Are committed to graduate education through the doctorate
 * Give high priority to research
 * Award 50 or more doctoral degrees each year
 * Receive annually $40 million or more in federal support


 * In fact, it says that it offers a full range of baccalaureate programs and is committed to graduate education... Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 01:23, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Merger proposal from Research I university
I propose that we merge the article content from Research I university into List of research universities in the United States because they cover the same content, include the same descriptions and tables. There isn't value in having a specific article for Research I university from Research II, Research III or others. In addition, there is also a separate article for the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education which offers an explanation as to how the classification system works. Randomeditor1000 (talk) 14:07, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I am amenable to this if and only if we (a) make Research I university redirect to the appropriate section in Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education and (b) include links to the research university list(s) in the appropriate places in Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education. It's important that we retain information specifically about "Research I" as a concept given its ubiquity in the vocabulary of U.S. academia even if we determine that it doesn't make sense to specifically maintain a separate listing of R1 universities. ElKevbo (talk) 15:38, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
 * ElKevbo I agree with your preferred approach. I think that makes the most logical sense. Is a merger notice needed with Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education needed? Randomeditor1000 (talk) 23:50, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's a good idea. And a note at WT:UNI if you really want to be thorough. ElKevbo (talk) 00:41, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

There is something seriously wrong going on with the classification of what a "University" is right now, and while I have not figured it out completely, I do know that Universities have become branded and monetized. I come from academia, and find what is going on appalling. Please be highly skeptical of anyone suggesting that the original definition of a R1 University needs to be merged with a list of institutions, because that list is being defined (ultimately) by educause.edu, which is accrediting institutions for the sole purpose of making money. Please take this seriously, as an institution of higher education needs to actually be an institution where higher level learning is taking place, with the application of that learning emphasized in the form of research. Based on my research, Educause has taken advantage of its position, and has designated accrediting agencies that did not exist before Educause became the sole proprietor. From what I have seen, some, if not many, of the institutions that have been accredited via these agencies should not be. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kepminer (talk • contribs) 10:47, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

I agree with Kepminer. I, too, am highly skeptical of anyone suggesting that the original definition of a R1 University needs to be merged with a list of institutions for the reasons given. Quaerens-veritatem 03:16, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

R3
Under R3, the article says: "These universities, although primarily focusing on research, have very low levels of research activity … ". Does this sentence make sense? Aren't they primarily focused on teaching rather than research? Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 01:10, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
 * If an institution is small it can have a low level of research activity and yet still be research-focussed. Klbrain (talk) 20:58, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Teaching University list needed for balance
A list of Teaching Universities is needed, to balance-out this list. Lance W. Haverkamp (talk) 14:13, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
 * How do you propose we define "teaching university?" The Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education doesn't have such a category so we'd have to find something else that may not be as widely accepted. ElKevbo (talk) 15:36, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Wyoming
Missing University of Wyoming 2603:7080:DB00:8B00:251D:F0A4:55A8:10B2 (talk) 00:38, 26 March 2023 (UTC)