Yup. And why in tarnation to we need to spend half a billion on a football stadium? We can just all watch the games online, it's pretty much the same thing, right?

quote:

---

Yup. And why in tarnation to we need to spend half a billion on a football stadium? We can just all watch the games online, it's pretty much the same thing, right?

---

The stadium is paid for by the season ticket holders. Those people see value in watching the game live. There are more than 20 times as many people who watch the game online/tv (not in person) as the number of people who watch the game live. So there are a lot more people who see value in not watching it live than watching it live. Probably averages close to 97% to 3%. Thanks for making my point about the marketplace.

OH MY GOD! - Harvard offers online classes!!!

Harvard is the new University of Phoenix

HFS Stanford does online too!!

Stanford grads will be delivering pizzas now.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Are more online classes the way to develop that close-knit network?

---

Online classes will become more prevalent in future education. I'm in real estate and business brokerage and I'm seeing a lot more of our education offered online. This is a very cost effective way to learn for a lot of people, including me. Online education will allow the world's best educators the opportunity to educate more students then they can face-to-face. It will allow students access to the world's best educators instead of being stuck with poor professors.

---

You know, we had these things called "books" that gave you that ability long before the internet.

Online going to be more important going forward, but there's this false impression out there that just because it's not limited by the number of seats in the classroom that it scales infinitely. It doesn't. The completion rate for MOOC courses in on the order of 7%. Part of that is because people over-enroll and drop before the first lecture (which some students also do with live classes, but many fewer). But part of what makes a class different from just reading a book or relying on wikipedia+google+additional sources is the feedback between student and instructor. In a large school like TAMU, we were already struggling with that since before I arrived many years ago. I remember someone quoted in Science when distance ed started becoming a trend: it was something like: "we already have distance education; it's called the large lecture course"

I also suspect that the 7% who complete MOOC courses are enriched for students who learned to learn efficiently in other settings (not necessarily a traditional university).

quote:

---

quote:

---

Yup. And why in tarnation to we need to spend half a billion on a football stadium? We can just all watch the games online, it's pretty much the same thing, right?

---

The stadium is paid for by the season ticket holders. Those people see value in watching the game live. There are more than 20 times as many people who watch the game online/tv (not in person) as the number of people who watch the game live. So there are a lot more people who see value in not watching it live than watching it live. Probably averages close to 97% to 3%. Thanks for making my point about the marketplace.

---

Cecil lives in a universe where markets don't make sense and guvgoodhair and his boys are actively trying to destroy it all with their crony-ness (It's fun watching Cece and his pals play-pretend to be chancellor like Kramer and Newman play risk on the subway)

Now pls show Cece some courtesy and quit spoiling his jack-off thread with your facts.

quote:

---

Cecil lives in a universe where markets don't make sense and guvgoodhair and his boys are actively trying to destroy it all with their crony-ness (It's fun watching Cece and his pals play-pretend to be chancellor like Kramer and Newman play risk on the subway)

Now pls show Cece some courtesy and quit spoiling his jack-off thread with your facts.

---

Sid this is a good discussion that doesn't need posts like that. There's not need to insult posters with whom you disagree. Jeff and I have had a running debate on this, and I don't know that either of us has insulted the other with scatological insults. And I'm assuming some things about your age based upon your posting style, but I've been a free market libertarian since before you were born, so I'm pretty sure I understand and appreciate markets.

My post about the stadium was sarcastic/cynical - I'm quite aware of how athletic funding works, having donated enough to it over the years. Jeff's response was an apt touche, which was just as sarcastic/cynical.

Given the AG tag I assume that you really are an Aggie, but please understand that posts are just as much personal communication as are face to face conversations and should be treated that way.

Jeff, I understand the value of online courses, but like everything else in this discussion it's a matter of scale.

Online classes are useful so 0% online classes is too low. I hope we all agree that 100% online classes is too much. The discussion is what is the optimum number, which courses, and under what circumstances. IMO if an engineer wants to knock out lower level history online, fine. However an upper level engineering course, not so much.

quote:

---

The discussion is what is the optimum number, which courses, and under what circumstances

---

Dont think anyone has that answer. I see that answer being determined by the marketplace over the next 50 years. But I do believe that online classes/video conferencing will revolutionize education in a manner that the car revolutionized transportation over 100 years ago.

Agree, with the proviso that's standards are maintained (preferably increased). The market shouldn't influence that.

Maybe in a 100 years we will have 80K students. Maybe.

We need to be more concerned with academics than population.

A higher academic university is much more attractive to potential students than a larger university. Much more.

Online courses: Do they bring in more money for schools?

They are much cheaper to provide and most schools charge an extra fee for them.

quote:

---

We need to be more concerned with academics than population.

A higher academic university is much more attractive to potential students than a larger university. Much more.

---

Agreed - and so I am concerned about our ability to get those very best and brightest to enroll here.

It is one thing for them to get accepted - but when it comes time for them to for them to commit, has our size created a situation where our resources are spread so thin (scholarships, services, etc.) that they wind up going elsewhere for the more attractive packages/offers?

quote:

---

quote:

---

We need to be more concerned with academics than population.

A higher academic university is much more attractive to potential students than a larger university. Much more.

---

Agreed - and so I am concerned about our ability to get those very best and brightest to enroll here.

It is one thing for them to get accepted - but when it comes time for them to for them to commit, has our size created a situation where our resources are spread so thin (scholarships, services, etc.) that they wind up going elsewhere for the more attractive packages/offers?

---

As mentioned previously this is a big problem for engineering. Lots of kids can't get into the major they want.

Found this on rivalries board

quote:

---

All I could find were the 2013-2014 numbers online for number of Merit Scholars enrolled:

Stanford 188
Yale University 180
Texas A&M University 162
Princeton 151
MIT 142
UT Dallas 104
Baylor University 88
University of Texas at Austin 65
Rice 51

---

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/09/01/merit

UT-Austin stopped offering national merit scholarships in 2009.

quote:

---

OU is home to over 750 currently enrolled National Merit Scholars.

---

http://www.ou.edu/content/admissions/nationalmerit.html

A few pages back there was discussion about the value of a liberal arts degree, which happens to be the second biggest college at A&M.

That 'Useless' Liberal Arts Degree Has Become Tech's Hottest Ticket

quote:

---

Throughout the major U.S. tech hubs, whether Silicon Valley or Seattle, Boston or Austin, Tex., software companies are discovering that liberal arts thinking makes them stronger.

---

Remember when everyone was gushing about Forbes' value rankings (when they designated A&M a top safety school for accepting 69% of applicants). This is what they think about A&M overall.

http://www.forbes.com/top-colleges/list/

32) Rice
82) UT-Austin
108) SMU
150) Texas A&M

Lesson = value =/= great university

John Sharp and this BoR is absolutely gutting this school. What a load of **** they are.

Absolutely, I know when I was in high school, kids were turning down offers from A&M to go to lesser schools that offered better packages

Here's your problem:

quote:

---

University of Texas, Austin

Student Population: 52,059

Undergraduate Population: 39,979

Student to Faculty Ratio: 18

Total Annual Cost: $51,352

In-State Tuition: $9,830

Out-of-State Tuition: $34,836

Percent on Financial Aid: 63%

Average Grant Aid Received (FT/First-Time): $6,144

Percent Admitted: 40%

SAT Composite Range: 1140-1380

ACT Composite Range: 25-31

Texas A&M University, College Station

Student Population: 55,697

Undergraduate Population: 44,072

Student to Faculty Ratio: 23

Total Annual Cost: $39,873

In-State Tuition: $9,685

Out-of-State Tuition: $26,583

Percent on Financial Aid: 79%

Average Grant Aid Received (FT/First-Time): $5,917

Percent Admittede: 69%

SAT Composite Rangef: 1070-1290

ACT Composite Rangef: 23-29

---

http://www.forbes.com/colleges/texas-a-m-university/

Can anyone provide a factual number of how many students we lose if we raised our SAT minimum from 1070 to 1140 (where tu's is apparently)?? I'm wondering how much of the problem this will fix?

This is what happens when you dramatically increase your enrollment numbers without dramatically increasing your faculty hiring.

quote:

---

Can anyone provide a factual number of how many students we lose if we raised our SAT minimum from 1070 to 1140 (where tu's is apparently)?? I'm wondering how much of the problem this will fix?

---

Closest I can get quickly is another DARS link. See page 31 of the Fall 2014 data which breaks down students by SAT percentiles.

SAT 1145 is the mean for the 40th percentile. So it looks to me like excluding students at or below 1140 that would lose about 2500/6748 first time in college students. I can't find the data to show whether or not 1140 is really a minimum at Texas.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Can anyone provide a factual number of how many students we lose if we raised our SAT minimum from 1070 to 1140 (where tu's is apparently)?? I'm wondering how much of the problem this will fix?

---

Closest I can get quickly is another DARS link. See page 31 of the Fall 2014 data which breaks down students by SAT percentiles.

SAT 1145 is the mean for the 40th percentile. So it looks to me like excluding students at or below 1140 that would lose about 2500/6748 first time in college students. I can't find the data to show whether or not 1140 is really a minimum at Texas.

---

Probably 100 of the 2500 are athletes. I have no problem if the admin raises minimum SAT to 1140 and that should decrease class size from over 10,000 to maybe below 8,000. Everybody happy??

quote:

---

quote:

---

Can anyone provide a factual number of how many students we lose if we raised our SAT minimum from 1070 to 1140 (where tu's is apparently)?? I'm wondering how much of the problem this will fix?

---

Closest I can get quickly is another DARS link. See page 31 of the Fall 2014 data which breaks down students by SAT percentiles.

SAT 1145 is the mean for the 40th percentile. So it looks to me like excluding students at or below 1140 that would lose about 2500/6748 first time in college students. I can't find the data to show whether or not 1140 is really a minimum at Texas.

---

Probably 100 of the 2500 are athletes. I have no problem if the admin raises minimum SAT to 1140 and that should decrease class size from over 10,000 to maybe below 8,000. Everybody happy??

quote:

---

I know of kids rejected by A&M who had scores above 1250. I know of one kid who had above 1300 and didn't make in to Engineering since he was outside the top 25% of his very comoetitive high school. The reason given is there weren't enough open slots after the top 10% were admitted.

The university has to accept the top 10%, but they aren't required to admit them to engineering and business colleges. There should be minimum SAT requirements for each college with the Liberal Arts college taking all the top 10% who don't make the cut. This is what tu does and it works.

---

I've heard that the key to getting into ENGR is to accept and declare as early as possible, not necessarily having better qualifications. They basically fill up and then stop taking kids. It may be that the top 10%ers who don't have the other credentials are more likely to decide early, while other students are waiting to hear back from other schools. But I've been told that if you even think it's a possibility that you want to be an ENGR student at TAMU, you should tell us you're coming and grab a slot even if you end up going to another school.

I think that's unfortunate, but it's what I'm hearing.

Lines up with what I've heard. The idea that your major could be full doesn't even register for lots of people.

What I've heard (don't know this for a fact, please feel free to confirm or deny) is that Dr. Banks wants to basically make kids declare for engineering in general rather than mechanical, petroleum, etc. Then after your freshman year admission into specific majors is competitive. I think this is the way it's done at Purdue, which is where she came from.

I see good and bad in this way of doing it. There's already lots of kids choosing to go to schools like Oklahoma State, where they can get a decent engineering degree and be guaranteed they get the major they want (and in many cases get more scholarship money). Refusing to guarantee a major to anyone at all probably makes this problem much worse. Maybe do some kind of hybrid system where you fill x% of the spots in the class by "pre-qualifying" them with some standard criteria or through a review process, then the rest of the class you fill based on competitive applications.

Texas A&M unveils plans for 3,400-bed off-campus dorm

Is building giant dorms off campus good for the student experience?

Sure, if they leave room for Bonfire in the middle of them all.

What did Sharp say in his response?

Wondering so I can email him as well.

This is really sickening to think we could be so short sighted to dilute the value of our degree.

We should be using the population boom to climb rankings not drop.