quote:
Acceptance rates
UCLA 16.2%
UC Berkeley 19.1%
UC San Diego 30.2%
UC Davis 32.8%
UC Irvine 33.4%
UC Santa Barbara 33.5%
UC Santa Cruz 46.3%
UC Riverside 56.7%
quote:
The TAMU System should be similarly capping enrollment at 35,000 students and directing the rest to other system campuses. Otherwise what's the point of having an 11 university system if the majority of the students go to College Station?
quote:The A&M system is grossly unbalanced to say the least. I've heard the smaller ones on the bottom consistently lose money for the system. They're not self-sustainable at their current size.
TAMU College Station - 62,185
TAMU Commerce - 12,000
TAMU Corpus Christi - 10,510
TAMU Tarleton - 10,500
TAMU Prairie View - 8,608
TAMU Kingsville - 8,067
TAMU West Texas - 7,843
TAMU International - 7,037
TAMU San Antonio - 4,000
TAMU Central Texas - 2,173
TAMU Texarkana -1,950
TAMU Qatar - 543
quote:Come on, Cecil... I think the problems are summarized even better by looking at the names of the schools.
Wow. Talk about under utilizing assets!
TAMU's problems are summarized very will just with those enrollment numbers...
quote:
- TAMU CS needs to be capped around the 40,000 mark like UCLA.
- Kingsville and Corpus Christi need to merge.
- TAMU Central Texas needs to merge with Tarleton or be cut.
- Commerce needs a huge infusion of resources since it's the #2 ranked system school.
- San Antonio needs a huge infusion of resources since it's the only system school in an urban environment that will be serving a significant population. There should also be a partnership between the San Antonio campus and the International campus, perhaps a merger.
- Texarkana and Qatar need to be cut. I understand Qatar is self-sufficient, but the system's attention needs to be spent solely on elevating system schools that serve Texans.
- It's probably too late now, but the TAMU System should have taken over the UH system when it had the chance. A&M would do better to serve urban areas where there's significant demand.
quote:They're not. And that's the point. They should be. We need to make them into good schools. You're making the exact point. It's not a static situation, as in "oh those schools aren't good enough, so we need a humongous Tier 1 CS campus"
Look at that list of UC schools and six of those eight schools are AAU members and the other two are still good schools. How many on the list of A&M schools are "good schools"?
quote:
So the A&M System would look like this:
TAMU College Station - 40,000
TAMU Corpus/Kingsville - 18,577
TAMU San Antonio/International - 11,037
TAMU Tarleton/Central Texas - 12,673
TAMU Commerce - 12,000
TAMU Prairie View - 8,608
TAMU West Texas - 7,843
That's much better than what it looks like now.
quote:
Grow those schools to 20,000-40,000 students and we just might have a university system we can be proud off. It would also be good to have a presence in Houston and DFW to go along with San Antonio. Commerce is in the DFW metro area as well as the Law School and the new Tarleton campus in Fort Worth, but there's nothing in Houston except the Galveston campus.
quote:If we really wanted to make higher ed in Texas more like the UC system (the good parts only, of course, don't copy the pension system for example), it would make more sense to
- It's probably too late now, but the TAMU System should have taken over the UH system when it had the chance. A&M would do better to serve urban areas where there's significant demand.
quote:quote:Come on, Cecil... I think the problems are summarized even better by looking at the names of the schools.
Wow. Talk about under utilizing assets!
TAMU's problems are summarized very will just with those enrollment numbers...
Look at that list of UC schools and six of those eight schools are AAU members and the other two are still good schools. How many on the list of A&M schools are "good schools"?
quote:I realize this was not addressed to me, but the short answer isquote:quote:Come on, Cecil... I think the problems are summarized even better by looking at the names of the schools.
Wow. Talk about under utilizing assets!
TAMU's problems are summarized very will just with those enrollment numbers...
Look at that list of UC schools and six of those eight schools are AAU members and the other two are still good schools. How many on the list of A&M schools are "good schools"?
Why do you think that is??
The UC System and A&M System have almost identical endowments of $13 billion and $12.7 billion. Meanwhile, UC has 243,000 students to educate and A&M only has 143,000....so we have roughly 60% more money to educate students. And yet our system schools are terrible and there's are world class. Why do you think that is??
quote:The SUNY system is organized similarly to the UC system in that it has its 4 doctoral university campuses in Albany, Buffalo, Binghamton, and Stony Brook for the top tier students, and then lower tiers of schools to serve other levels of students. Their main campuses just don't have the same prestige of the UC System, despite fairly low acceptance rates and relatively high incoming student credentials. Probably due to the simple fact that they have waaaaay less money to spend per student than the UC system.quote:If we really wanted to make higher ed in Texas more like the UC system (the good parts only, of course, don't copy the pension system for example), it would make more sense to
- It's probably too late now, but the TAMU System should have taken over the UH system when it had the chance. A&M would do better to serve urban areas where there's significant demand.
- Make a new system that includes existing Tier 1 publics and those that have the most plausible path to getting there. That would be A&M, tu, Tech, U of H, UT-Dallas, and maybe someone I'm forgetting.
- Merge UTSA and TAMUSA and push that to be another Tier 1 in the long run.
This, of course, would never happen unless there was a way to completely wall it off from anything related to athletics. And even then I'd put the chances somewhere just slightly north of snowballs in Hell.
It's interesting that although the UC/Cal State system is viewed as the model for balancing high end schools with serving the larger population in a public system, it really hasn't been replicated elsewhere. Look at the other large population states; most have setups more like what we have: Michigan and Michigan State. Wisconsin has a great campus in Madison and a bunch of lower tier campuses (the people at UW-Milwaukee like to think they're in the same league, but I don't think they are). Ohio State. I suspect it's related to when it all happened relative to the post-WWII growth in higher ed, combined with where population and economic growth was happening at the time. And intra-state politics.
quote:
4. A&M needs to draw the line at their current enrollment and especially in engineering
growing over 50 to 55,000 students is just stupid and greatly devalues the residential university experience
the TAMU System has multiple campuses that are way too small to be as efficient as they can be (universities down in the sub 15,000 enrollment range which is all but College Station) and most of them with the exception of Kingsville have engineering programs that are even smaller and less efficient for the overhead of having a school or college of engineering in place and the administration that goes with it VS the enrollment
compare this to the UT System where UTA, UTD UTEP and UTSA all have large and growing colleges of engineering and even UT-RGV and UTPB are in the process of growing theirs
there is no reason other than false pride and stupidity to have College Station explode in enrollment while other campuses sit at under 10,000 students and with engineering programs that offer 2-3 different degrees
5. A&M needs to stop crapping out system centers
kill the Midlothian stupidity and the Fort Worth Tarleton waste of cash and if anything have TAMU-Commerce shift their programs out of the dallas UCD turd and over to the Fort Worth Law School Building and then if Tarleton wants to join in there and offer a couple of actual NEEDED degree programs instead of some McDegrees have that happen
6. keep TAMU Central Texas as upper division only for the long term future
7. A&M Corpus and A&M Kingsville should be looked at for a possible merger of administrations similar to what happened with UT-Brownsville and UT-Pan Am into UT-RGV the duplication of administration is just a waste at schools so close and with modern communications technology
8. stop hiring morons for chancellors that believe their first job is to micromanage the College Station campus
quote:I've lived all over Texas and have been in California for the last 30 yrs.quote:
- TAMU CS needs to be capped around the 40,000 mark like UCLA.
- Kingsville and Corpus Christi need to merge.
- TAMU Central Texas needs to merge with Tarleton or be cut.
- Commerce needs a huge infusion of resources since it's the #2 ranked system school.
- San Antonio needs a huge infusion of resources since it's the only system school in an urban environment that will be serving a significant population. There should also be a partnership between the San Antonio campus and the International campus, perhaps a merger.
- Texarkana and Qatar need to be cut. I understand Qatar is self-sufficient, but the system's attention needs to be spent solely on elevating system schools that serve Texans.
- It's probably too late now, but the TAMU System should have taken over the UH system when it had the chance. A&M would do better to serve urban areas where there's significant demand.
So the A&M System would look like this:
TAMU College Station - 40,000
TAMU Corpus/Kingsville - 18,577
TAMU San Antonio/International - 11,037
TAMU Tarleton/Central Texas - 12,673
TAMU Commerce - 12,000
TAMU Prairie View - 8,608
TAMU West Texas - 7,843
That's much better than what it looks like now.
quote:
I'm here to tell you there's a reason UC can attract high talent and world class students to the likes of SB, Irvine, La Jolla, Westwood, etc...and as an alternative, Corpus, San Angelo, Pairie View, etc just don't compare. I shouldn't have to tell any of you 'why'.
quote:Show me a phd offered $150k/yr to live in Santa Barbara vs $150k/yr to live in kingsville and I'll show u a californianquote:
I'm here to tell you there's a reason UC can attract high talent and world class students to the likes of SB, Irvine, La Jolla, Westwood, etc...and as an alternative, Corpus, San Angelo, Pairie View, etc just don't compare. I shouldn't have to tell any of you 'why'.
The majority of students in both systems are in-state students. Those students are drawn to the academic reputation of the institutions vs. other in-state institutions, not the scenery. Although the UC system has the best scenery too.
quote:quote:Show me a phd offered $150k/yr to live in Santa Barbara vs $150k/yr to live in kingsville and I'll show u a californianquote:
I'm here to tell you there's a reason UC can attract high talent and world class students to the likes of SB, Irvine, La Jolla, Westwood, etc...and as an alternative, Corpus, San Angelo, Pairie View, etc just don't compare. I shouldn't have to tell any of you 'why'.
The majority of students in both systems are in-state students. Those students are drawn to the academic reputation of the institutions vs. other in-state institutions, not the scenery. Although the UC system has the best scenery too.
Students are likewise attracted to Ca, all else being equal.
The SharpPerry haters on this board are the only ones who can't see this
quote:Hey I love tx as much as you. But this: There's a reason property in Tx is cheaper than that in Ca. Same reason academics and others will chose Ca over Tx all else being equal.quote:quote:Show me a phd offered $150k/yr to live in Santa Barbara vs $150k/yr to live in kingsville and I'll show u a californianquote:
I'm here to tell you there's a reason UC can attract high talent and world class students to the likes of SB, Irvine, La Jolla, Westwood, etc...and as an alternative, Corpus, San Angelo, Pairie View, etc just don't compare. I shouldn't have to tell any of you 'why'.
The majority of students in both systems are in-state students. Those students are drawn to the academic reputation of the institutions vs. other in-state institutions, not the scenery. Although the UC system has the best scenery too.
Students are likewise attracted to Ca, all else being equal.
The SharpPerry haters on this board are the only ones who can't see this
so the options are a 900 square foot 2 bedroom apartment with a strict budget to make sure you can pay your rent every month, or a 3,000 square foot house with plenty of money left over for things like vacations, international travel, and luxury purchases?
My ass would be in Kingsville on a heartbeat.
quote:
Can this thread ****ing die already?
quote:
Sid, a scenery canard is beneath even your increasingly weak responses to the legitimate concerns being discussed.
quote:quote:Hey I love tx as much as you. But this: There's a reason property in Tx is cheaper than that in Ca. Same reason academics and others will chose Ca over Tx all else being equal.quote:quote:Show me a phd offered $150k/yr to live in Santa Barbara vs $150k/yr to live in kingsville and I'll show u a californianquote:
I'm here to tell you there's a reason UC can attract high talent and world class students to the likes of SB, Irvine, La Jolla, Westwood, etc...and as an alternative, Corpus, San Angelo, Pairie View, etc just don't compare. I shouldn't have to tell any of you 'why'.
The majority of students in both systems are in-state students. Those students are drawn to the academic reputation of the institutions vs. other in-state institutions, not the scenery. Although the UC system has the best scenery too.
Students are likewise attracted to Ca, all else being equal.
The SharpPerry haters on this board are the only ones who can't see this
so the options are a 900 square foot 2 bedroom apartment with a strict budget to make sure you can pay your rent every month, or a 3,000 square foot house with plenty of money left over for things like vacations, international travel, and luxury purchases?
My ass would be in Kingsville on a heartbeat.
It's hard to beat evidence my brother. Thx for giving me some.
quote:quote:Hey I love tx as much as you. But this: There's a reason property in Tx is cheaper than that in Ca. Same reason academics and others will chose Ca over Tx all else being equal.quote:quote:Show me a phd offered $150k/yr to live in Santa Barbara vs $150k/yr to live in kingsville and I'll show u a californianquote:
I'm here to tell you there's a reason UC can attract high talent and world class students to the likes of SB, Irvine, La Jolla, Westwood, etc...and as an alternative, Corpus, San Angelo, Pairie View, etc just don't compare. I shouldn't have to tell any of you 'why'.
The majority of students in both systems are in-state students. Those students are drawn to the academic reputation of the institutions vs. other in-state institutions, not the scenery. Although the UC system has the best scenery too.
Students are likewise attracted to Ca, all else being equal.
The SharpPerry haters on this board are the only ones who can't see this
so the options are a 900 square foot 2 bedroom apartment with a strict budget to make sure you can pay your rent every month, or a 3,000 square foot house with plenty of money left over for things like vacations, international travel, and luxury purchases?
My ass would be in Kingsville on a heartbeat.
It's hard to beat evidence my brother. Thx for giving me some.
quote:
Maybe ca system (decentralized UC system) isn't right for Texas? Maybe there's an advantage to focusing resources on one mega-campus vs many satellite campuses.
quote:
Stolen from the rivalries board
quote:
4. A&M needs to draw the line at their current enrollment and especially in engineering
growing over 50 to 55,000 students is just stupid and greatly devalues the residential university experience
the TAMU System has multiple campuses that are way too small to be as efficient as they can be (universities down in the sub 15,000 enrollment range which is all but College Station) and most of them with the exception of Kingsville have engineering programs that are even smaller and less efficient for the overhead of having a school or college of engineering in place and the administration that goes with it VS the enrollment
compare this to the UT System where UTA, UTD UTEP and UTSA all have large and growing colleges of engineering and even UT-RGV and UTPB are in the process of growing theirs
there is no reason other than false pride and stupidity to have College Station explode in enrollment while other campuses sit at under 10,000 students and with engineering programs that offer 2-3 different degrees
5. A&M needs to stop crapping out system centers
kill the Midlothian stupidity and the Fort Worth Tarleton waste of cash and if anything have TAMU-Commerce shift their programs out of the dallas UCD turd and over to the Fort Worth Law School Building and then if Tarleton wants to join in there and offer a couple of actual NEEDED degree programs instead of some McDegrees have that happen
6. keep TAMU Central Texas as upper division only for the long term future
7. A&M Corpus and A&M Kingsville should be looked at for a possible merger of administrations similar to what happened with UT-Brownsville and UT-Pan Am into UT-RGV the duplication of administration is just a waste at schools so close and with modern communications technology
8. stop hiring morons for chancellors that believe their first job is to micromanage the College Station campus
These points are insightful and make sense.
