I had to waste my time. A major problem with the nearsightedness of some (not all) BYU posters, is that they feel that somehow their institution must be nearly equal (or vastly superior) to the academic reps of the "bottom" PAC-10 schools.

From the list mentioned in the thread below. "Well how about OSU, UO, UA, ASU, WSU?" Well, they smoke you guys.

The way we in academia judge academic research achievement is generally by looking at how many research grants a school has. To investigate this, I looked up the issue on the Community of Science website and examined how many research grants are issued to schools by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Science Foundation (NSF) and the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture (USDA). Then I totalled those numbers. These are the results .

	School		NSF		NIH		USDA		Total Fed Grants
	Arizona State U.		16		63		12		91
	U. of Arizona		19		371		196		586
	Washington State U.		10		82		305		397
	U. of Oregon		5		78		6		89
	Oregon State U.		16		63		216		295
	U. of Utah		11		448		5		464
	BYU		3		12		2		17

As you can see, BYU isn't in anybody's league here. Utah is at the top. Arizona rates highly because they have both the med school and the Ag school (hence NIH and USDA grants). Oregon rates a little low, but they actually get credit for the Oregon Health Science University which I didn't include here.

I'm not arguing that BYU doesn't graduate top undergrads, but undergraduate BS schools are not what the PAC-10 is looking for.

Then there is that whole academic freedom problem at the Zoo, but that's another topic.

Hawkeye Ute

Last modified .