Tramp, you call my statements ignorant, yet you do nothing to rebuke the arguments that Tech doesn't excel in any field of academia, or has a sterling academic reputation. Bottom line is this, a state university offering doctoral degrees shouldn't be beating their collective chests about ranking above 3000 JC and community colleges.

Another thing you need to look at is the placement of alumni around the United States. Aggies are strong in nearly part of the country because their degrees are respected by businesses in far-away states. I don't think a Tech degree carries much weight outside the panhandle of Texas, and certainly doesn't carry weight outside the state borders. Sorry, but that is reality.

Nevermind. I'm through trying to reason with ignorant people.



[This message has been edited by Tramp96 (edited 9/10/2003 3:39p).]

>>Tech's admission criteria are quite stringent, actually. <<

That's simply not true, tramp. Most of the kids I know going to tech are going there because they were turned down somewhere else. One was actually turned down by BOTH SWT AND SFA. He got into tech (at the last minute, no less). I don't know the details, but I do know he had less than a 1000 on the SAT.

I'm sure there are techies from West Texas and elsewhere that had good grades and good scores and wanted to go to tech. I have no doubt that they get transfers that had good grades at other schools. Perhaps the kid or the parent didn't want the kid leaving home the first year. But to call their admission standards "stringent" is a lie.

Two subjects here.

One. Leave Tech in the Big 12. I don't like them, but they deserve to be there. Who would replace them, Tulane? They are competitive and as deserving as Iowa State or Oklahoma State.

Second. Tech is not a bad school. I have worked with numerous Tech grads. Some are good, some are average. But if you consider all the schools in America (as Tramp96 is doing), they would be in the top 25%, all things considered. Tramp96 usually provides unbiased views from the Plains, so give him some love.

Give it up Techies....you are fighting a losing battle with no ammunition.

id rather have tech than say, baylor or smu...but between tcu and tech, that would be a tough choice.

"We will not tire..We will not falter..and We will not fail..."President George W. Bush

>>Tech is ranked in the 3rd Tier, admittedly, of Research I Universities. However...

This means that out of 3500 colleges in America, Tech is ranked in the top 150 (at least). Remember, Tier 3 is listed alphabetically, so the WORST Tech could be is 150. <<

Is this an example of a tech "education?" If so, it might prove the point you are trying to refute.

First of all, the "3rd tier" category you mention is for "national universities" (as you sort of alude to). There's not 3500 national universities in the US. US Snooze classifies them in about a half a dozen or so different categories -- regional, liberal arts, etc.

Southwestern in Georgetown, Trinity in San Antonio, and Austin College in Sherman are not national universities and not ranked with tech. These and other similar schools are primarily undergraduate schools with a few small graduate departments. They don't have law schools or business schools or anything else that would put them closer to the category of elite private schools (like many but not all ivy league, Univ. of Chicago, etc.).

tech is nowhere near the quality of the three schools mentioned above, and they aren't anywhere near the top 150, either. I will say that tech does have halfway decent grad schools. Their law school is attractive to many because 1) its a pretty decent school -- modeled after Baylor incidentally, and 2) its in-state tuition makes it attractive to those who don't want to or can't go to t.u. law or don't want to go to Cougar High.