Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
General Topics
The Swarm Lounge
A good read.... yes, believe it or not, from the AJC (Link)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="gthxxxx" data-source="post: 590487" data-attributes="member: 4310"><p>My personal guess is that the move towards higher grad rates is primarily due to administration resume padding by tackling the low hanging fruit to eke out higher ratings on mass consumer publications such as US News. I doubt it's due to economic related forces, since GT already has a captive audience by being heads above the other universities in engineering in the Southeast region, possibly since its establishment. There have also been an overwhelming number of applicants in state, out of state, and internationally for as long as I'm aware of. Hope scholarships have both a credit limit and grade requirement, so I don't see how that would directly impact selectivity and graduation rates. </p><p></p><p>I do agree that the limited capacity presents a problem and increasing selectivity is one method. From my personal experience, I'm of the opinion that the school needs to thin down by at least a third of its population to achieve a better equilibrium. However, GT could have also maintained its historically low retention/graduation rate but instead those rates have risen significantly over the years [1]. If the goal is to graduate better engineers, which would also enhance academic reputation, GT should have more faith in their in-house system as opposed to admission selectivity relying on external and potentially questionable, unreliable, and out-of-date measurements. With how far science/engineering advances year after year, there should be no problem in increasing difficulty of courses, not to mention the existing standard methods for achieving target results, e.g. the bell curve.</p><p></p><p>[1] <a href="https://irp.gatech.edu/sites/default/files/documents/FactBook/FactBook_2018_UPDATED%2014-05-2019.pdf" target="_blank">https://irp.gatech.edu/sites/default/files/documents/FactBook/FactBook_2018_UPDATED 14-05-2019.pdf</a>, pp 46-47.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="gthxxxx, post: 590487, member: 4310"] My personal guess is that the move towards higher grad rates is primarily due to administration resume padding by tackling the low hanging fruit to eke out higher ratings on mass consumer publications such as US News. I doubt it's due to economic related forces, since GT already has a captive audience by being heads above the other universities in engineering in the Southeast region, possibly since its establishment. There have also been an overwhelming number of applicants in state, out of state, and internationally for as long as I'm aware of. Hope scholarships have both a credit limit and grade requirement, so I don't see how that would directly impact selectivity and graduation rates. I do agree that the limited capacity presents a problem and increasing selectivity is one method. From my personal experience, I'm of the opinion that the school needs to thin down by at least a third of its population to achieve a better equilibrium. However, GT could have also maintained its historically low retention/graduation rate but instead those rates have risen significantly over the years [1]. If the goal is to graduate better engineers, which would also enhance academic reputation, GT should have more faith in their in-house system as opposed to admission selectivity relying on external and potentially questionable, unreliable, and out-of-date measurements. With how far science/engineering advances year after year, there should be no problem in increasing difficulty of courses, not to mention the existing standard methods for achieving target results, e.g. the bell curve. [1] [URL]https://irp.gatech.edu/sites/default/files/documents/FactBook/FactBook_2018_UPDATED%2014-05-2019.pdf[/URL], pp 46-47. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What jersey number did Joshua Nesbitt wear?
Post reply
Home
Forums
General Topics
The Swarm Lounge
A good read.... yes, believe it or not, from the AJC (Link)
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top