Excellent post!
Capping enrollment at the College Station campus
18,797 Views |
83 Replies |
Last: 7 yr ago by Sixers_Fan
Are we accepting more students that meet A&M requirements, or more students that don't meet A&M requirements?
It seems as if those campaigning for student body president are promising to campaign against 25x25, for those curious.
It'll be interesting to see how that ends up.
It'll be interesting to see how that ends up.
quote:
It seems as if those campaigning for student body president are promising to campaign against 25x25, for those curious.
It'll be interesting to see how that ends up.
Most current engineering students despise 25x25. I know this is anecdotal but I'm a current engineering grad student and I have not met a single student who supports 25x25.
quote:Hell son, you don't even know the difference between, then and than. I wouldn't throw rocks.
So you aren't an Aggie? Former corps member? Does that mean you didn't finish at A&M? If so, your decision to leave (retention rate) hurts A&M's rankings more then initial selectivity.
I can't help but laugh at you coming on here guns blazing, when you're academic record is a larger net negative towards attracting qualified students then original acceptance. Army or not, the fact you didn't finish and then come on here and preach about selectivity is beyond asinine.
Some advice you didn't ask for: Worry about keeping your side of the street clean. Email Bill Flores' office. He is an Ag, and a leading figure in expanding the influence of A&M and the opportunity for students to succeed.
Also, do you have any empirical data to support your claims that students don't want to go to universities with high acceptance rates? Please provide the peer reviewed publication, the meta-analysis, or keep your opinion to yourself and stop crapping on deserving students that busted their tails to get to where they are now.
I'd except a veteran to understand the value of an opportunity to succeed. Seems like you missed a lot of life lessons in college and in the army.
Perhaps you are the perfect candidate for community college.
Why hasn't Harvard adopted a higher acceptance rate - they have top notch applicants and should be chomping at the bit to blow up enrollment if it won't hurt the quality of student or quality of education.
Kathy Banks has to go.
The profs and curmudgeons using A&M-themed sock handles and complaining about academic policy they have no business commenting on need to go
quote:Somebody needs to tell Land Grants such as Cal to read up on their history. Or Cornell. MIT. Florida. Wisconsin. Georgia. Basically a litany of schools that have deemed it okay to be selective.
Research the Morrill Act, the Hatch Act, and the Smith-Lever Act, and then you MIGHT realize the irony of your statement, "If you want an A&M degree to be meaningful it cannot be accessible to all. That is the role of a community college."
Know the history of higher education in the US before you just start spouting off BS.
quote:Says TAMU. Look at the mission statement. Specifically look to the preeminence among public universities piece. We are not doing that by accepting any warm body that can increase revenues.
"Yes I know the history of land grant universities. Our role and purpose has changed since the Morrill Act of 1862. We are now counted on by the state of Texas to provide cutting edge research and top notch graduates to drive the state economy."
Says Who? I've never once heard that opinion expressed by Brett Cornwell, or anyone else in the OTC for the A&M system.
Texas A&M University is dedicated to the discovery, development, communication, and application of knowledge in a wide range of academic and professional fields. Its mission of providing the highest quality undergraduate and graduate programs is inseparable from its mission of developing new understandings through research and creativity. It prepares students to assume roles in leadership, responsibility and service to society. Texas A&M assumes as its historic trust the maintenance of freedom of inquiry and an intellectual environment nurturing the human mind and spirit. It welcomes and seeks to serve persons of all racial, ethnic and geographic groups as it addresses the needs of an increasingly diverse population and a global economy. In the 21st century, Texas A&M University seeks to assume a place of preeminence among public universities while respecting its history and traditions.
There's a huge difference between what used to be a land-grant university and what is still predominately a land-grant university. The Morrill Land-Grant Act of 1862 allowed States to provide funds to universities through sales of federal lands for the purposes of teaching agriculture, technical arts, and military tactics.
MIT had just been founded and it was difficult to raise money during the Civil War, so they took advantage of the Act. They were already private, so this was a one-time funding opportunity. MIT could be very selective from the beginning. Texas A&M is not going to go private and drop agriculture, technical arts, and military tactics.
Cornell is a hybrid university, part private and part public. The traditional private university has very restrictive admissions. Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine schools are public institutions funded by the State. Admissions are more typical for these type of public universities. TAMU is not going to go mostly private, but some public.
California (Berkeley) was the first public university in California and received land for its campus pursuant to the Morrill Act. Over time, the system evolved to include the University of California system (UC Berkeley, UC San Diego, UC Los Angeles, UC Santa Barbara, UC San Francisco, UC Irvine, UC Davis, UC Santa Cruz, UC Riverside, UC Merced) and California State University system (too many to list). The land-grant missions were essentially taken over by the Cal State system. Cal Berkeley became the most selective of all California's publicly funded universities. Texas is the closest Texas equivalent to Cal Berkeley. TAMU's evolution to its present high status is comparatively recent. TAMU has entirely different traditions, and missions than does Texas. Overall, Texas is very fortunate to have two great universities for elite students to attend.
Florida, Georgia, and Wisconsin are fair comparisons. So are Kansas State, Idaho, Mississippi State, and New Mexico State. Overall, Texas A&M still ranks near the top of public land-grant universities that embrace the land-grant tradition.
MIT had just been founded and it was difficult to raise money during the Civil War, so they took advantage of the Act. They were already private, so this was a one-time funding opportunity. MIT could be very selective from the beginning. Texas A&M is not going to go private and drop agriculture, technical arts, and military tactics.
Cornell is a hybrid university, part private and part public. The traditional private university has very restrictive admissions. Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine schools are public institutions funded by the State. Admissions are more typical for these type of public universities. TAMU is not going to go mostly private, but some public.
California (Berkeley) was the first public university in California and received land for its campus pursuant to the Morrill Act. Over time, the system evolved to include the University of California system (UC Berkeley, UC San Diego, UC Los Angeles, UC Santa Barbara, UC San Francisco, UC Irvine, UC Davis, UC Santa Cruz, UC Riverside, UC Merced) and California State University system (too many to list). The land-grant missions were essentially taken over by the Cal State system. Cal Berkeley became the most selective of all California's publicly funded universities. Texas is the closest Texas equivalent to Cal Berkeley. TAMU's evolution to its present high status is comparatively recent. TAMU has entirely different traditions, and missions than does Texas. Overall, Texas is very fortunate to have two great universities for elite students to attend.
Florida, Georgia, and Wisconsin are fair comparisons. So are Kansas State, Idaho, Mississippi State, and New Mexico State. Overall, Texas A&M still ranks near the top of public land-grant universities that embrace the land-grant tradition.
quote:
I have no qualm with you Ulrich. Just curious as to why someone would start two threads and bump several others all about the same thing, and then sit high on a soap box to proclaim his message. I agree that something should be done, but I'm not arguing with every person that posts on this board, whether they agree with me or not.
Also, for someone who claims to be such a die hard aggie, I find it odd that he doesn't understand the difference between alumni and former students.
I know this is an old thread, but for some reason it popped up on my thread list. Former Students ARE alumni. The big fancy building at the corner of George Bush & Houston St?
https://www.google.com/maps/place/College+Station,+TX/@30.6077399,-96.3360339,3a,75y,309.7h,89.43t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s0hMBgP7BvnM4sj2pcKCSag!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D0hMBgP7BvnM4sj2pcKCSag%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D292.36679%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x8646848619463ca3:0xc969c74db6bf6ac9!8m2!3d30.627977!4d-96.3344068!6m1!1e1
The Clayton W. Williams Jr Alumni Center.
The whole Aggieism/campo/whatever that gave rise to the term Former Students isn't the fact that they aren't alumni, it's that they aren't Ex-Aggies.
Sorry, personal pet peeve that I've seen people screwing up on Texags for the last 15 years.
The expected growth of the Engineering college has led to one of the worst designed and taught curriculae (idk im not an english major) I have ever seen. ENGR 111 and 112 are taught by purely incompetent professors in practice and that has to be addressed before we even think about growing. Weed out classes aren't weeding kids out because they're hard anymore, it's turning into "did you get the good professor?" which is absolutely appalling for a university that should hold prestige in the highest respect.
quote:Indeed, yes you do not know it all. Only half the professors teaching 111/112 are professors of practice (POP). The rest are tenured faculty from other Engineering depts. This summer they are totally rewriting the curricula to make the 2 classes flow better and provide a better introduction into Engineering.
The expected growth of the Engineering college has led to one of the worst designed and taught curriculae (idk im not an english major) I have ever seen. ENGR 111 and 112 are taught by purely incompetent professors in practice and that has to be addressed before we even think about growing. Weed out classes aren't weeding kids out because they're hard anymore, it's turning into "did you get the good professor?" which is absolutely appalling for a university that should hold prestige in the highest respect.
The school has a mandate from the Governor and legislature to produce high quality and quantity of engineers. I have been in the system a long time and most of it with the College of Engineering. I really have not seen any lowering of standards. The 10% rule gets you into the University, but it does nt get you into the College of Engineering. You have to earn that.
theyve been rewriting the curricula for 3 summers now then?
JW
Interesting betting lines for futures for A&M football as of April 2024
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
53