AJC cruitin article

[herb]

Source for the 1240 and 1450 averages? I don't see how you get to 1240 if the middle 50% ranges from 1350 to 1500.

Last years incoming class had an average of 1384. https://news.uga.edu/uga-welcomes-l...lass has an average,average SAT score of 1384.

 

[forensicbuzz]

But without the necessary departmental structure. Most of these degrees are the result of combining minor studies within existing departments in several disciplines. We used to do that at my college to create the illusion that we had a broader curriculum then we did. And that's what it is unless there is a department of experts in a particular field that can curate the field structure for multi-disciplinary degrees like this and shepherd their own major programs. The econ, pub policy, and iA offerings have this and are a good step in the right direction. But let's take the School of History and Sociology at Tech as an example. It's main offer is a multidisciplinary degree in History, Technology, and Society. Everything that is a component of that degree is offered as a minor, not a major. So, unlike every other STEM university of its ilk (I checked Rice, Carnegie Mellon, MIT, and Cal Tech), Tech doesn't actually have a history major or a history department. Soooo … if I'm a Georgia high school kid with an interest in history I go to GSU, Ugag, Emory, or any of several other choices. I don't immediately think of Tech unless I really want to go there.

Could this be remedied? Sure. Tech has several history (sociology too) profs already. Hive them off, add to them, and the kid from high school who's interested in history has a place to go. Then use these departments to build a degree in history, technology and society as an addition. It could be that this isn't what the faculty at the SHS wants, but I know a couple of them and they complain about being unable to actually offer majors in their subjects. And it wouldn't be too heavy a lift to do this, imho.

Well, enough. This is my last word on the subject.

HTS or HST or whatever it's called now is a real major, with real professors. These are not professors borrowed from other schools. It has been around since the late '80s, at least. It's not cobbled together. Same thing with the Technical English degree, which wehn I was there was Language, Communications, and Culture (LCC). Now it's called something else. The Language department was a supporting structure but has been expanded and grown to provide legitimate degrees and support other degrees (like International Affairs). Tech does have a history major, my sister-in-law graduated in 1994 with one. It does have a history department.

I understand what you're saying, I just don't agree with your take. If you're a Georgia HS kid with an interest in History of Technology, you're not going to GSU or Georgia State or uga or Emory, you're going to Tech, if you can get in.

 

[takethepoints]

I understand what you're saying, I just don't agree with your take. If you're a Georgia HS kid with an interest in History of Technology, you're not going to GSU or Georgia State or uga or Emory, you're going to Tech, if you can get in.

But how many kids are like that? Not to many, I'd guess. If Tech had a history department - it doesn't, btw - then it would be easier to find for kids who might come to Tech and become more for it.

I am coming at this differently. Disciplinary specialization is the way knowledge develops, imho, and that's what Tech needs more of.

 

[jojatk]

But how many kids are like that? Not to many, I'd guess. If Tech had a history department - it doesn't, btw - then it would be easier to find for kids who might come to Tech and become more for it.

I am coming at this differently. Disciplinary specialization is the way knowledge develops, imho, and that's what Tech needs more of.

There's a major called Literature, Media, and Communication (LMC). Here's a little blurb on it:

"The Literature, Media, and Communication bachelor's degree offers several concentrations. The Bachelor of Science in Literature, Media, and Communication provides the analytical and technical skills required for a career in fields such as Media, Public Relations, and Literature. Graduates will have both significant theoretical and hands-on experience with novels, films, games, comic books, web pages, and scientific documents."

There are six areas of specialization and you choose two and your curriculum is focused on that. They have a very cool diagram on the site that gives some ideas about the careers (outcomes) that picking any two could lead to. The six areas are literature, media, communication, social justice, design, STAC (science, technology, culture). My daughter who is hoping to transfer to GT (GT is holding a spot for her and just has to get through her next semester with good grades and she's in so wish her luck!) is planning on pursuing this major. She is interested in the media and communications aspects but also psychology and how it impacts those parts of society and GT has all of that.

 

[takethepoints]

There's a major called Literature, Media, and Communication (LMC). Here's a little blurb on it:

"The Literature, Media, and Communication bachelor's degree offers several concentrations. The Bachelor of Science in Literature, Media, and Communication provides the analytical and technical skills required for a career in fields such as Media, Public Relations, and Literature. Graduates will have both significant theoretical and hands-on experience with novels, films, games, comic books, web pages, and scientific documents."

There are six areas of specialization and you choose two and your curriculum is focused on that. They have a very cool diagram on the site that gives some ideas about the careers (outcomes) that picking any two could lead to. The six areas are literature, media, communication, social justice, design, STAC (science, technology, culture). My daughter who is hoping to transfer to GT (GT is holding a spot for her and just has to get through her next semester with good grades and she's in so wish her luck!) is planning on pursuing this major. She is interested in the media and communications aspects but also psychology and how it impacts those parts of society and GT has all of that.

And I understand that kind of ambition. The problem with this is that there simply aren't that many kids like your daughter. There's also the problem of focus (tied to what I just said): finding a program where there's are people who have in-depth knowledge about " …
novels, films, games, comic books, web pages, and scientific documents" is really hard. I'm sure Tech has done so, but I'm also sure that if you wanted to put together a field on, say, English lit you'd be hard pressed to do with the present faculty.

Good luck to her, btw. I used to teach the types of courses (multidisciplinary) she will take and when it's done right (i.e. not by me) it can be very rewarding.

 

[jojatk]

And I understand that kind of ambition. The problem with this is that there simply aren't that many kids like your daughter. There's also the problem of focus (tied to what I just said): finding a program where there's are people who have in-depth knowledge about " …
novels, films, games, comic books, web pages, and scientific documents" is really hard. I'm sure Tech has done so, but I'm also sure that if you wanted to put together a field on, say, English lit you'd be hard pressed to do with the present faculty.

Good luck to her, btw. I used to teach the types of courses (multidisciplinary) she will take and when it's done right (i.e. not by me) it can be very rewarding.

Thank you.

My understanding is there's a fairly decent number of athletes in that program which is why I mentioned it.

 

[ThatGuy]

Did those rumors come from the AJC? I remember it mainly from message boards.

The AJC quoted Johnson as saying it happened, in the recent article where he finally breaks his silence about the previous coach's approach to things:

Another narrative that irked Johnson was that coaches on Collins’ staff were making recruiting visits to metro Atlanta high schools that had been passed over by Johnson’s staff. Johnson said that every spring, he had his assistant coaches visit every high school in the state, whether it had potential prospects or not. And then after making the visit, the coaches were required to call in to report in.

“And then we sent a letter out the next day from me thanking the schools for hosting them and having them by,” Johnson said. “Now, do you really think that, over that timeframe, if nobody went to those schools and they kept getting those letters from me, somebody wouldn’t have picked up the phone and called me and said, ‘Hey, Coach, we haven’t seen anybody from your staff’?”

Whether that's considered "confirmed" or not is up for debate, but he's going on record, so it's at least as confirmed as CGC's assertions.

 

[Roswellgoldmember]

The AJC quoted Johnson as saying it happened, in the recent article where he finally breaks his silence about the previous coach's approach to things:



Whether that's considered "confirmed" or not is up for debate, but he's going on record, so it's at least as confirmed as CGC's assertions.

The information came from Collins though, same with the lineman. I guess the AJC could of done a better job calling out Collins BS.

 

[orientalnc]

The information came from Collins though, same with the lineman. I guess the AJC could of done a better job calling out Collins BS.

If the AJC had run with a story at that time that CGC was not being truthful, this board would have erupted in anger. You can't say they are anti GT and and also withheld a negative story.

 

[forensicbuzz]

But how many kids are like that? Not to many, I'd guess. If Tech had a history department - it doesn't, btw - then it would be easier to find for kids who might come to Tech and become more for it.

I am coming at this differently. Disciplinary specialization is the way knowledge develops, imho, and that's what Tech needs more of.

I understand what you're saying, but Tech is doing exactly what you suggested. They are taking Liberal Arts majors (History, Literature, Modern Languages, etc.) and standing them on their heads by connecting them to STEM to create STEAM (which is a real thing).

STEAM is an integrative approach that builds student interest in science, technology, engineering, arts, and math as it develops a range of important skills. The multidisciplinary nature of STEAM addresses the ISTE Standards and reinvents learning by:

• Promoting collaboration among educators across disciplines to develop projects or challenges.
• Designing activities that use data to address real-world issues.
• Helping students apply higher-order thinking skills to open-ended problems.
• Allowing students to design and innovate.

The STEAM approach fosters innovation, values real-world application, builds content knowledge and provides hands-on learning opportunities for students. With STEAM, educators can capture the imagination and empower students to explore a universe of possibilities.

Tech has been doing this since the late 80's.

 

[GoldZ]

Last years incoming class had an average of 1384. https://news.uga.edu/uga-welcomes-largest-freshman-class/#:~:text=The class has an average,average SAT score of 1384.

SAT Total mid-range for students: 1350-1480

• This data is only for students who requested that we use their scores.
• This data is based on admitted students where the SAT was the strongest score if both SAT and ACT were submitted or if the SAT was the only test taken and sent.

 

[jacketup]

But how many kids are like that? Not to many, I'd guess. If Tech had a history department - it doesn't, btw - then it would be easier to find for kids who might come to Tech and become more for it.

I am coming at this differently. Disciplinary specialization is the way knowledge develops, imho, and that's what Tech needs more of.

Bachelor of Science in History, Technology, and Society | Georgia Tech Catalog

catalog.gatech.edu

 

[jacketup]

Johnson's last team had 3 starting offensive linemen--including both tackles--listed in the 280's according to the GT issued depth chart. This was for the Georgia game in 2018 and the listed weights are preseason weights. These kids tend to lose weight over the season. The 260 lb comment for some of them probably wasn't far off by the time Collins arrived in early December. I'll disagree with most on here and say that Johnson is spinning his crap. Also, his record doesn't compare with O'leary's and his suggestion (which involved some spin) that he did a better job than anyone since Dodd is BS. He is a smart guy, and he is good at self promoting in a way that he knows the average fan will buy. He had a mediocre record at Tech, and that is by an objective measure--wins and losses against FBS teams.

 

[JacketOff]

Johnson's last team had 3 starting offensive linemen--including both tackles--listed in the 280's according to the GT issued depth chart. This was for the Georgia game in 2018 and the listed weights are preseason weights. These kids tend to lose weight over the season. The 260 lb comment for some of them probably wasn't far off by the time Collins arrived in early December. I'll disagree with most on here and say that Johnson is spinning his crap. Also, his record doesn't compare with O'leary's and his suggestion (which involved some spin) that he did a better job than anyone since Dodd is BS. He is a smart guy, and he is good at self promoting in a way that he knows the average fan will buy. He had a mediocre record at Tech, and that is by an objective measure--wins and losses against FBS teams.

Jesus Christ, not this again

 

[CEB]

Johnson's last team had 3 starting offensive linemen--including both tackles--listed in the 280's according to the GT issued depth chart. This was for the Georgia game in 2018 and the listed weights are preseason weights. These kids tend to lose weight over the season. The 260 lb comment for some of them probably wasn't far off by the time Collins arrived in early December. I'll disagree with most on here and say that Johnson is spinning his crap. Also, his record doesn't compare with O'leary's and his suggestion (which involved some spin) that he did a better job than anyone since Dodd is BS. He is a smart guy, and he is good at self promoting in a way that he knows the average fan will buy. He had a mediocre record at Tech, and that is by an objective measure--wins and losses against FBS teams.

Bottom line; we never should have been in a position where we had two coaches jabbing and spinning in the first place. Spin is counterproductive BS, just as rehashing this argument is.
Johnson had a great career and was a great coach for Georgia Tech, by any measure. He didn't need to explain a damned thing to the press and especially not to Collins. I wish he hadn't. Neither were deserving of having their BS narratives indulged. Johnson is proud, and he has every reason to be, but I don't think there was any record to set straight and addressing it gave it unwarranted attention to the garbage coming from people totally unqualified to cast judgement, in my opinion.
On the other side, everything surrounding Collins has proven to be smoke, spin and BS. Collins needed to come in, and simply state that what the previous staff did worked for them and they had a lot of success, but we are bringing in a different approach to build on that success. Instead, the whole tone of the messaging was destructive and dismissive from the start. I don't know if that is 100% Collins' doing, either. Lots of GT people just ate it up, and I wouldn't be surprised to learn that it was encouraged by TStan or others. As fans, we wanted to be excited and we gave the guy the benefit of the doubt (we gave the benefit of the doubt to a lot of people involved, actually), but it's easy to see now how flat footed our AD was and how inept Collins was. Its maddening that there was so much ill will toward a departing coach that we got excited about the new guy chastising him on the way out the door and as he took a scorched earth approach to the program. Its embarrassing, and that's really the overall takeaway.

I am so happy that Key is here now. I have no idea where he will rank in terms of successful GT coaches, but I know he puts our program and our players above everything else. He loves what GT is, has been (warts and all) and believes in what we will do. He says what he means and does what he says, and I can't think of any better attributes for a GT coach at this moment in time.

 

[Roswellgoldmember]

Johnson's last team had 3 starting offensive linemen--including both tackles--listed in the 280's according to the GT issued depth chart. This was for the Georgia game in 2018 and the listed weights are preseason weights. These kids tend to lose weight over the season. The 260 lb comment for some of them probably wasn't far off by the time Collins arrived in early December. I'll disagree with most on here and say that Johnson is spinning his crap. Also, his record doesn't compare with O'leary's and his suggestion (which involved some spin) that he did a better job than anyone since Dodd is BS. He is a smart guy, and he is good at self promoting in a way that he knows the average fan will buy. He had a mediocre record at Tech, and that is by an objective measure--wins and losses against FBS teams.

Wow, novel take. Yea our offensive linemen weighed 260 under Johnson. He never accomplished anything that O'Leary did. He's the reason we've sucked for the last 4 years.

 

[Roswellgoldmember]

Bottom line; we never should have been in a position where we had two coaches jabbing and spinning in the first place. Spin is counterproductive BS, just as rehashing this argument is.
Johnson had a great career and was a great coach for Georgia Tech, by any measure. He didn't need to explain a damned thing to the press and especially not to Collins. I wish he hadn't. Neither were deserving of having their BS narratives indulged. Johnson is proud, and he has every reason to be, but I don't think there was any record to set straight and addressing it gave it unwarranted attention to the garbage coming from people totally unqualified to cast judgement, in my opinion.
On the other side, everything surrounding Collins has proven to be smoke, spin and BS. Collins needed to come in, and simply state that what the previous staff did worked for them and they had a lot of success, but we are bringing in a different approach to build on that success. Instead, the whole tone of the messaging was destructive and dismissive from the start. I don't know if that is 100% Collins' doing, either. Lots of GT people just ate it up, and I wouldn't be surprised to learn that it was encouraged by TStan or others. As fans, we wanted to be excited and we gave the guy the benefit of the doubt (we gave the benefit of the doubt to a lot of people involved, actually), but it's easy to see now how flat footed our AD was and how inept Collins was. Its maddening that there was so much ill will toward a departing coach that we got excited about the new guy chastising him on the way out the door and as he took a scorched earth approach to the program. Its embarrassing, and that's really the overall takeaway.

I am so happy that Key is here now. I have no idea where he will rank in terms of successful GT coaches, but I know he puts our program and our players above everything else. He loves what GT is, has been (warts and all) and believes in what we will do. He says what he means and does what he says, and I can't think of any better attributes for a GT coach at this moment in time.

I respect Johnson for not engaging in this while Collins was the coach. He showed some restraint.

 

[CEB]

I respect Johnson for not engaging in this while Collins was the coach. He showed some restraint.

100%!!
It really would've been in poor taste to let loose with it before Collins was gone. I'm glad he held it 4 years, but I don't think he needed to explain himself to anyone.

 

[takethepoints]

I understand what you're saying, but Tech is doing exactly what you suggested. They are taking Liberal Arts majors (History, Literature, Modern Languages, etc.) and standing them on their heads by connecting them to STEM to create STEAM (which is a real thing).

STEAM is an integrative approach that builds student interest in science, technology, engineering, arts, and math as it develops a range of important skills. The multidisciplinary nature of STEAM addresses the ISTE Standards and reinvents learning by:

• Promoting collaboration among educators across disciplines to develop projects or challenges.
• Designing activities that use data to address real-world issues.
• Helping students apply higher-order thinking skills to open-ended problems.
• Allowing students to design and innovate.

The STEAM approach fosters innovation, values real-world application, builds content knowledge and provides hands-on learning opportunities for students. With STEAM, educators can capture the imagination and empower students to explore a universe of possibilities.

Tech has been doing this since the late 80's.

Yes, and the approach has been out of date since the late 90s. What I'm saying is that the disciplines themselves have become more technically oriented and the kind of mix-and-match approach Tech uses is no longer necessary. To see what I mean, look at this:

https://www.cmu.edu/dietrich/philosophy/research/areas/science-methodology/theory-of-causation.html

Looks like something right in Tech's wheelhouse, doesn't it? But it's part of the philosophy curriculum, not stats or social science. It's something that the philosophers do up there; a direction, if you will.

I sympathize with the approach Tech uses; I've taught in a multidisciplinary core program myself. But not having the disciplinary structure makes that even harder. And having discrete disciplines meets the ISTE standards too (not that the bar is very high for that).

 

[forensicbuzz]

Yes, and the approach has been out of date since the late 90s. What I'm saying is that the disciplines themselves have become more technically oriented and the kind of mix-and-match approach Tech uses is no longer necessary. To see what I mean, look at this:

https://www.cmu.edu/dietrich/philosophy/research/areas/science-methodology/theory-of-causation.html

Looks like something right in Tech's wheelhouse, doesn't it? But it's part of the philosophy curriculum, not stats or social science. It's something that the philosophers do up there; a direction, if you will.

I sympathize with the approach Tech uses; I've taught in a multidisciplinary core program myself. But not having the disciplinary structure makes that even harder. And having discrete disciplines meets the ISTE standards too (not that the bar is very high for that).

I think this needs to be a long conversation over a bottle of New Riff or Old Elk (or if you're so inclined Highland Park 18). I need a better understanding of what you're pushing towards. I've directed all 3 of my older kids towards a Lib. Arts education (and will the younger 2, as well) because I truly believe in it. A philosophy degree at Tech would be amazing.