“I got out” bad for recruiting

[JacketFromUGA]

I thought TStan wanted to promote Tech as an elite academic school? Seems like the tradition of "getting out" would fit right in with that vision.

Not Elite. Unique.

 

[jacket_fan]

Talk about grade inflation. I would love to see statistics from the Aerospace department like the ones referenced above. (from the late 70s)

Grades were posted on the wall and there were several classes that had no As for the quarter. Just Bs down to Fs. No way there were 50% As...

And yes, I got out, and sweated just like all the other engineering students to do so.

 

[TheSilasSonRising]

As often as not, the "I got out" rears its whiney butt when we have losing records.

You got out - great. Get on with freaking life.

And if you want to claim to be competitive in P5, win some freaking games that matter.

The fans we need to attract to grow the program don't give a crap about our whiney azz difficulties as a jackazz 20 year old.

 

[AE 87]

As often as not, the "I got out" rears its whiney butt when we have losing records.

You got out - great. Get on with freaking life.

And if you want to claim to be competitive in P5, win some freaking games that matter.

The fans we need to attract to grow the program don't give a crap about our whiney azz difficulties as a jackazz 20 year old.

Why are you so angry?

 

[forensicbuzz]

Tecfh was brutal in the classroom. There were some that were able to study hard and maintain a good GPA. I can only count a handful of classes that my final grade didn't drop due to the final. The classes were hard, they were graded hard and there was an expectation by the faculty that they were going to teach the information their way, and if you didn't like it, too bad. I had a freshman chemistry class in 1987 with Neumann (Chem 1112) where there were 34 students. 28 F's, 4 D's, 1 C and 1 A. There were many HS valedictorians in that class. It was an eye-0pening experience for all of us.

 

[RonJohn]

Tecfh was brutal in the classroom. There were some that were able to study hard and maintain a good GPA. I can only count a handful of classes that my final grade didn't drop due to the final. The classes were hard, they were graded hard and there was an expectation by the faculty that they were going to teach the information their way, and if you didn't like it, too bad. I had a freshman chemistry class in 1987 with Neumann (Chem 1112) where there were 34 students. 28 F's, 4 D's, 1 C and 1 A. There were many HS valedictorians in that class. It was an eye-0pening experience for all of us.

Were you a Chem major? I took Chem 1101 and 1102 in Fall 1987/Winter 1988 and there were 200-300 people in those classes.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Tecfh was brutal in the classroom. There were some that were able to study hard and maintain a good GPA. I can only count a handful of classes that my final grade didn't drop due to the final. The classes were hard, they were graded hard and there was an expectation by the faculty that they were going to teach the information their way, and if you didn't like it, too bad. I had a freshman chemistry class in 1987 with Neumann (Chem 1112) where there were 34 students. 28 F's, 4 D's, 1 C and 1 A. There were many HS valedictorians in that class. It was an eye-0pening experience for all of us.

That's part of what I was getting at. I think TStan was a little off with his (tongue in cheek) comment about how we're not as smart as people think we are. Yes, Georgia Tech people are smart. There are also smart kids who go to other colleges. One big thing that makes us unique is the work ethic it instilled in people in order to get out. When I was in college, I went back through yearbook type books we had at the fraternity house, and pretty much decade by decade from the 50s, 60s, 70s, the average GPA on campus increased 0.1. It was like 2.4x in the 50s and I'm pretty sure it was very close to 2.9-ish when I was graduating in the mid 90s. When the professor has a curve and 10% F, 20% D, 40% C, 20% B, 10%A (or whatever) regardless of if everybody was a B student in high school or regardless of if the class was nothing but valedictorians, you can no longer survive because you are smart. You have to outwork everyone. That's the big difference. I think today's students are on average smarter, more talented academically, and have elevated our reputation from where it was. We are much more selective than we used to be. But I still think its a fair statement to say the school is not as hard as it used to be. That's not to say its not hard, but it is what it is when the GPA is so much more inflated. A 97% retention rate is a 97% retention rate.

I think that's where TStan should spend his time - not worrying about the "I Got Out" - but rather to speak to reality. Prospective students and prospective student-athletes shouldn't be scared about window dressing. The 97% retention rate dispels any myth that the school is extremely hard and you're going to fail out. Not any more. You show up, try hard, and put in the work, and you'll be fine. You may not make an A (or even a B, LOL). That's not the way it used to be. Use today's data to dispel any fears.

 

[HurricaneJacket]

“The few. The proud. The Marines.”

“I got out.”

One expresses pride in facing a challenge to become elite. So does the other. Only one of the two, though, makes for good branding.

I’m with Todd.

I've always thought something along the lines of The Few. the Proud. The Jackets would be a cool slogan

 

[Gold1]

I've always thought something along the lines of The Few. the Proud. The Jackets would be a cool slogan

Not really tho. Wouldn't be good for the program

 

[Animal02]

Talk about grade inflation. I would love to see statistics from the Aerospace department like the ones referenced above. (from the late 70s)

Grades were posted on the wall and there were several classes that had no As for the quarter. Just Bs down to Fs. No way there were 50% As...

And yes, I got out, and sweated just like all the other engineering students to do so.

Yeah....posted on the wall with your SS number as your student ID......those were the days

 

[AE 87]

It's been said before but perhaps needs repeating.

I don't know when the UselessNews effect kicked in, but, before that, Tech was easier in and harder out.

You couldn't get in as a stiff, but if you were top 10% (wag) of your class, especially in math, especially in-state, and maybe willing to start in the summer, you could get in.

However, you only had a couple of quarters to wake-up to the reality that you needed to study and work. Professors did not have administrators with retention and "satisfaction" statistics over their shoulders. I don't know freshman retention, but it wasn't 97%, maybe not half that.

Swim or sink was the pedagogy of Tech full stop, not just one class, no longer required.

I appreciate that Tech still challenges and pushes a more select student body. Still, I suspect the difference is greater than many appreciate.

I got in as a kid from FL because I was willing to start in the summer. I retook a Chem class and a Calc class because of Ds. I got out getting A's in 4th year AE classes. I'm sorry, but I'm proud to say, "I got out."

Is Dean's List still a 3.0?

 

[Skeptic]

Why are you so angry?

Obviously you have no clue about what's going on out there.

 

[BCJacket]

This is probably going to be a wildly unpopular opinion. I can't speak to how hard Tech was in the 'good ole days'. But as someone who attended both Tech and uGA (for a blessedly short time). Tech was easier.

At the cesspool, the professors were actively trying to fail kids. This was the early 2000's when President Adams was trying to make it a "public ivy". Which required a certain appearance of academic rigor. There were a lot of ridiculous trick questions on exams, weed classes, curves, etc. Half the class was hungover and only in class because their parents would get mad if they flunked out. (Not me, left the dump with a B+ GPA.) Granted, this was the business school. Not the Phys Ed. the football players take.

In contrast, at Tech; the quality of the students was so high, [most of] the professors had some respect for their students. The exams were content based. Know your sh*t? You'd get a good grade.

Now, you really had to know your stuff. You couldn't fake through it. But every person in the class was one of the top 3 smartest kids from their high school. We studied, we worked hard and we got good grades. I did have a class where the professor said he'd only give two A's. But ~70% of the class ended up with a B anyway.

Any shafting that happened was more due to the ridiculous bureaucracy on the Hill. ("Need a required class to graduate? Oh, that class is only offered every third Summer semester."; "You did pre-apply to apply to graduate 3 semesters before graduation, right?" My graduation application was rejected the spring I applied, because I hadn't re-applied to the School, not the Institute, after my second semester. Had to officially graduate in the Summer.)

I understand in the old days Tech was more about the exhibition of the difficulty. Competitive grades and all that. You could know your stuff and still get shafted. These days, I think Tech more so has very high, but fair, standards.

 

[jwsavhGT]

I appreciate what TStan has brought to the table, and I look forward to seeing what he has planned for the future of GT athletics but I will always proudly proclaim that #IGotOut in 1983. It's a badge of honor that I wear for my personal perseverance and my Mother's belief in my ability to accomplish the impossible.

 

[MountainBuzzMan]

That describes my E-mag experience to a freaking "T", pun intended.

Ahh E-mag. You either get it or you dont. Having to take E-mag I, II & III for my EE degree, I was sure I would never get out. But it ended up clicking

 

[tmhunter52]

This is probably going to be a wildly unpopular opinion. I can't speak to how hard Tech was in the 'good ole days'. But as someone who attended both Tech and uGA (for a blessedly short time). Tech was easier.

At the cesspool, the professors were actively trying to fail kids. This was the early 2000's when President Adams was trying to make it a "public ivy". Which required a certain appearance of academic rigor. There were a lot of ridiculous trick questions on exams, weed classes, curves, etc. Half the class was hungover and only in class because their parents would get mad if they flunked out. (Not me, left the dump with a B+ GPA.) Granted, this was the business school. Not the Phys Ed. the football players take.

In contrast, at Tech; the quality of the students was so high, [most of] the professors had some respect for their students. The exams were content based. Know your sh*t? You'd get a good grade.

Now, you really had to know your stuff. You couldn't fake through it. But every person in the class was one of the top 3 smartest kids from their high school. We studied, we worked hard and we got good grades. I did have a class where the professor said he'd only give two A's. But ~70% of the class ended up with a B anyway.

Any shafting that happened was more due to the ridiculous bureaucracy on the Hill. ("Need a required class to graduate? Oh, that class is only offered every third Summer semester."; "You did pre-apply to apply to graduate 3 semesters before graduation, right?" My graduation application was rejected the spring I applied, because I hadn't re-applied to the School, not the Institute, after my second semester. Had to officially graduate in the Summer.)

I understand in the old days Tech was more about the exhibition of the difficulty. Competitive grades and all that. You could know your stuff and still get shafted. These days, I think Tech more so has very high, but fair, standards.

When I was a freshman at Tech, several of my high school buddies were at UGA. I can still remember getting some calls from them on Wednesday afternoons inviting me to come over there to party. They were done for the week. Funny, but I never had the opportunity to make that trip...

 

[dtm1997]

As someone who recently graduated from Tech, the shaft is very much still around. I don’t know anyone in engineering who played video games and drank alcohol all day. I don’t care how Tech used to be; if you don’t put in the work, you’ll fail out. I had a class for which every single day I poured hours of intense study, effort, and every study strategy I knew into, not to mention the hours I spent in the professor’s office getting help on concepts that caused me to struggle, more than I put into any class before or since, and for my blood sweat and tears I got the only D in my academic career. Maybe Tech is easier than it was. Maybe that used to be every class. But to claim that Tech has gotten so easy that people are getting through without putting in work is frankly a huge insult to the people who are spending sleepless nights working like crazy. And sometimes the grades don’t reflect the amount of work; people can have comparative advantages and disadvantages after all. Sorry to go off on you a bit, but I promise that if anyone is getting through Tech with minimal effort, it’s because that person is so insanely smart that they don’t need to study.

Or they were a mid-90s Econ major...

 

[g0lftime]

When I started in 1964 we had a foreign language requrement, 6 quarters of PE, a year of mech drawing, etc. It took approximately 230 quarter hours to graduate. That is averaging 19 quarter hours to graduate on time. Most took close to 5 years rather than 4. I think the term originated because you finally 'got out'. When I came back in 1971 after 4 years in the Navy they had dropped some of those requirements for graduation and easier to graduate in 4 years.

 

[GT_05]

When I started in 1964 we had a foreign language requrement, 6 quarters of PE, a year of mech drawing, etc. It took approximately 230 quarter hours to graduate. That is averaging 19 quarter hours to graduate on time. Most took close to 5 years rather than 4. I think the term originated because you finally 'got out'. When I came back in 1971 after 4 years in the Navy they had dropped some of those requirements for graduation and easier to graduate in 4 years.

I’ve heard some folks refer to engineering as a 5-year major. I went under the semester system and I think civil was 135 credit hours at the time, which was similar to the other engineering disciplines. I think that a non-engineering BA or BS is typically 120 credit hours.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BCJacket]

When I was a freshman at Tech, several of my high school buddies were at UGA. I can still remember getting some calls from them on Wednesday afternoons inviting me to come over there to party. They were done for the week. Funny, but I never had the opportunity to make that trip...

Used to be the thing in Athens. Schedule all your classes as MW sections. You'd be in class from 8-6 MW, but then you'd have a 5 day weekend every week. Around the time I was there they phased out MW classes. Started doing only TR and MWF. And they'd put required classes on MWF sections so you couldn't just do all TR sections.

Tech, as I understand it, has pretty much always been a 6 day work week. But a decade or so out, my Tech buddies are the ones with the time and money to have fun.