CPJ Press Conference

[Animal02]

It may say liberal arts but it's not really similar to a degree you'd get from another school in the same subject which would more often be a B.A. Pretty sure that's what he means.

The name of the college may contain "liberal arts" but they offer no such degree.
It is still a Science degree and still requires 4 semesters of Calculus.

 

[kittysniper101]

The name of the college may contain "liberal arts" but they offer no such degree.
It is still a Science degree and still requires 4 semesters of Calculus.

Please don't repeat something that's not true. It only requires 2 (and that was just the first I found). Engineering degrees don't even require 4 semesters of classes labeled "Calculus".

There are definitely a few watered down degrees at Tech available and the overall difficulty seems to be trending downwards as the administration focuses on the statistics that get us ranked higher. This is coming from someone who just graduated and is still here for grad school.

 

[Stonewall]

But the exposure garbage Keel keeps spouting and the money and resources that just aren't there and won't be there have me turned off to the move.

Speaking of resources not being here...you mean like when Bucky Wagner had to run across the street from campus to buy a football at the department store for the announcement of GS football's revival in the 80s? That's what you call no resources! And, a handful of years later Erk brings home the first NC. A lot of naysayers were proved wrong then and will be proved wrong again...

 

[jeffgt14]

I sat though a presentation at GT in which the College of Liberal Arts says you can get a liberal arts degree. But I guess I should believe some guy on a message board instead of them because he uses all caps.

The post I responded to stated not every athlete wants to be an engineer, as if that is all GT can recruit, and I pointed out that there are plenty of options. Another recent post stated that most athletes have to major in business. Again, not true, as it was 40 years ago when IM was about the only non-engineering/non-science major. There are more majors at GT than there were in 1990, and that was a pretty good year.

There are plenty of majors at GT. Academics aren't the problem. These kids aren't that focused on a major, or even academics--they want to know what the football program offers. And right now, it offers an offense that is very different from what NFL teams use, and you get to wear Russell apparel. Those things are more important to 18 year old football players than their major.

You took that too literally. My point was that you have 11 very broad, non-STEM majors to choose from at Tech whereas other D1 schools have much more.

 

[GTpdm]

You took that too literally. My point was that you have 11 very broad, non-STEM majors to choose from at Tech whereas other D1 schools have much more.

Let's keep in mind that these other D1 schools often have 2-3 times our student body, and probably more than 3 times our faculty size, so it's a lot easier for such schools to be able to support a broader range of majors.

Science and engineering curricula have extensive "educational infrastructure" needs--ever heard of ABET standards? Maintaining engineering accreditation requires a large number of dedicated faculty, in multiple STEM fields, in order to to cover all the necessities. (Does a degree in family development or recreational studies have any accreditation standards at all?)

Also the whole "the Regents/the Hill" won't create the majors we need is a naive load of rubbish. You do not simply walk into Mordor. You do not simply pick a selection of pre-existing classes off some list, and 'poof' create a major, as if you're picking items off a buffet.

I'm actually on a development committee for a new major at Tech. We will have to develop appropriate courses to flesh out the curriculum, hire dedicated faculty who have specialized knowledge in those areas, and establish a four-year schedule for the major--while guaranteeing that we can regularly offer the required courses in that major and still meet the other instructional demands of our department. It will be years before we are ready to pull the trigger on the major.

Those of you out there who want Tech to wave a magic wand and create "SA-friendly" majors need to understand the process. This is higher education we're talking about, not converting your garage into a man-cave.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

****** You do not simply walk into Mordor. ...........

Right, given that Gandalf and the elves controlled the air with the eagles, they could have simply flown the ring in ....... I read the trilogy to each of my kids at bedtime and we talked about that very point. Gotta think outside the box.

Seriously, thanks for working on creating other majors even if they are or are not SA friendly. With the declining college age demographic, the lack of funding for 99% of the families, and the increased availability of on line courses; GT is going to have to evolve or perish. We start off with a big lead, but leads can be blown by complacency.

 

[orientalnc]

I have a cool story related to Gandalf. My eldest son was was 12-13 and his little brother was six, and the elder bro read the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings aloud to little bro. Then he repeated the treat a year later. The third time he said, "you can read it yourself this time." And he did. Both brothers were Techies.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Right, given that Gandalf and the elves controlled the air with the eagles, they could have simply flown the ring in ....... I read the trilogy to each of my kids at bedtime and we talked about that very point. Gotta think outside the box.

You are forgetting the Nazgûl though. They could have engaged in air combat, right?

On majors at Tech, it is not a matter of whether there are "watered down" courses/degrees. In fact, that is a mischaracterization unless one is claiming that a specific course or degree used to be harder to obtain at Tech and has since become easier.

It is also not a question of if there are "easier" degrees to earn at Tech. Such a consideration only makes sense to discuss relative to the other majors at that same school. Of course there are always "harder" and "easier" majors at every single college. It is relative to each college.

So the points on this account about Tech is that a) the "easier" majors at Tech are still not "easy" or "easier" relative to what can be chosen at every other school and b) they are always going to be Bach. Science degrees. This point is really at the heart of the matter. There truly is a huge difference between those two degrees and it is not just a matter of how many calculus courses might be required to earn the degree.

 

[swampsting]

Speaking of resources not being here...you mean like when Bucky Wagner had to run across the street from campus to buy a football at the department store for the announcement of GS football's revival in the 80s? That's what you call no resources! And, a handful of years later Erk brings home the first NC. A lot of naysayers were proved wrong then and will be proved wrong again...

You know the whole thing about running across the street to get a football at KMart is indeed a myth, right? It's a helluva legend. But ... it didn't really happen.
85, however, happened and I have my framed photo of The Catch in honor.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

You are forgetting the Nazgûl though. They could have engaged in air combat, right?

On majors at Tech, it is not a matter of whether there are "watered down" courses/degrees. In fact, that is a mischaracterization unless one is claiming that a specific course or degree used to be harder to obtain at Tech and has since become easier.

It is also not a question of if there are "easier" degrees to earn at Tech. Such a consideration only makes sense to discuss relative to the other majors at that same school. Of course there are always "harder" and "easier" majors at every single college. It is relative to each college.

So the points on this account about Tech is that a) the "easier" majors at Tech are still not "easy" or "easier" relative to what can be chosen at every other school and b) they are always going to be Bach. Science degrees. This point is really at the heart of the matter. There truly is a huge difference between those two degrees and it is not just a matter of how many calculus courses might be required to earn the degree.

Two other key differences at GT, 1) professors don't care one iota if there students pass or fail, infact, GT's reputation as a "weed out" school is well founded, and 2) athletes get no preferential treatment from professors. In fact, they probably look at SA's with disdain.

On the other hand, factory school athletic handlers are rumored to use strong arm tactics with professors. There was an article on this very thing last year at FSU. The classes are easy as pie, the SA's get preferential treatment and if they don't, the AA handlers come down and lean on you like mafia thugs.

 

[Animal02]

Let's keep in mind that these other D1 schools often have 2-3 times our student body, and probably more than 3 times our faculty size, so it's a lot easier for such schools to be able to support a broader range of majors.

Science and engineering curricula have extensive "educational infrastructure" needs--ever heard of ABET standards? Maintaining engineering accreditation requires a large number of dedicated faculty, in multiple STEM fields, in order to to cover all the necessities. (Does a degree in family development or recreational studies have any accreditation standards at all?)

Also the whole "the Regents/the Hill" won't create the majors we need is a naive load of rubbish. You do not simply walk into Mordor. You do not simply pick a selection of pre-existing classes off some list, and 'poof' create a major, as if you're picking items off a buffet.

I'm actually on a development committee for a new major at Tech. We will have to develop appropriate courses to flesh out the curriculum, hire dedicated faculty who have specialized knowledge in those areas, and establish a four-year schedule for the major--while guaranteeing that we can regularly offer the required courses in that major and still meet the other instructional demands of our department. It will be years before we are ready to pull the trigger on the major.

Those of you out there who want Tech to wave a magic wand and create "SA-friendly" majors need to understand the process. This is higher education we're talking about, not converting your garage into a man-cave.

My wife is a a full professor at the U of Mich. As you said, developing a major is a multi year process, not only with the items you specified above, but the approvals required by the state...then there is the whole accreditation thing. There is a ton of politics involved. Even making minor changes to the curriculum to keep up to date with current practices takes a lot work, man hours and documentation. I never realized how much red tape, politics etc (much of it mickey mouse bs) existed at the university level until I married her. I get frustrated sometimes just listing to her discuss it on the phone with other faculty.

 

[Animal02]

Please don't repeat something that's not true. It only requires 2 (and that was just the first I found). Engineering degrees don't even require 4 semesters of classes labeled "Calculus".

There are definitely a few watered down degrees at Tech available and the overall difficulty seems to be trending downwards as the administration focuses on the statistics that get us ranked higher. This is coming from someone who just graduated and is still here for grad school.

Should have said four semester hours.......it got lost in the copy/paste......the Tech website has it formatted in cells.
http://www.catalog.gatech.edu/students/ugrad/core/corea2.php

 

[forensicbuzz]

You cannot get a liberal arts degree from any school. Depending on the university, you can get a Bachelor of Arts or a Bachelor of Science from a College of Liberal Arts. At Georgia Tech, you only have the Bachelor of Science option.

Either way, to say "you can't get a liberal arts degree from GT" is disingenuous. The point that was being made is that, unlike up until the early 90's, you can now get a degree from GT in something other than engineering, science or architecture. Joseph Pettit was interested in making GT one of the world's foremost technical university [using university in the broad sense, we're an institute, I know]. Dr. Pettit wasn't interested in anything other than academics, ergo the reduced focus on athletics. Towards the later part of his tenure, he realized the amount of money the Institute was losing due to a failing athletic program and brought Homer Rice in to fix the problem.

Pat Crecine was brought in from Carnegie Melon to globalize GT's brand and broaden the academic reach. He was extremely pro-athletics and supported all of the programs. It was under his leadership that we won our last MNC in football and went to the Final Four in basketball. He was instrumental in making GT the Olympic Village for the 1996 Summer Games and spearheaded the initial expansion of the campus facilities. Look at an aerial map of GT campus in 1987 and 2014, and you won't recognize them as the same place other than Ferst Drive. Dr. Crecine created the College of Liberal Arts because he saw the need to diversify GT's curriculum for both the student and the student-athlete. His down fall was three-fold: the engineering alumni were not happy about a "College of Liberal Arts" at Georgia Tech; The College of Management was rolled into the Ivan Allen College of Liberal Arts and the alumni from the IM program were up in arms about that; and, although he was visionary with respect to growth and program development, he had horrible people skills, coming across as arrogant and brash, and turning people off. He was also horrible at choosing the people surrounding him.

The Crecine regime was everything the current fans wanted in a Hill. The were pro-GTAA and wanted to win at the highest level in both athletics and academics. It's ironic that the big money guys, on both the academic and athletic side of the fence, ran him off.

 

[Blumpkin Souffle]

Please don't repeat something that's not true. It only requires 2 (and that was just the first I found). Engineering degrees don't even require 4 semesters of classes labeled "Calculus".

There are definitely a few watered down degrees at Tech available and the overall difficulty seems to be trending downwards as the administration focuses on the statistics that get us ranked higher. This is coming from someone who just graduated and is still here for grad school.

Because differential equations doesn't use calculus?

 

[iceeater1969]

My wife is a a full professor at the U of Mich. As you said, developing a major is a multi year process, not only with the items you specified above, but the approvals required by the state...then there is the whole accreditation thing. There is a ton of politics involved. Even making minor changes to the curriculum to keep up to date with current practices takes a lot work, man hours and documentation. I never realized how much red tape, politics etc (much of it mickey mouse bs) existed at the university level until I married her. I get frustrated sometimes just listing to her discuss it on the phone with other faculty.

If we loose 5 games this year please start a tread on curriculum issues in relation to football. Some thoughts for your consideration follow.
1. The problem which takes real effort to fix is the interpretation of the state of Georgia's definition of gt. The state board of regents is dominated by Uga alums who really pigeon hole our courses to be in support or our designation as a RESEARCH institute. This needs more wiggle room particularly in regards to courses that would give national recognition of gt past excellence in football administration.
2. We should have a sports management program that is moore technically based than other schools( the quality of these varies greatly from joke to very good - uga is pretty good??). Gt has a GREAT legacy of NATIONAL football and athletic AWARDS NAMED for former GT coaches and administrators. Yearly a national award is given to Best football player, best football coach, best assistant coach, best athletic director in the name of H,D,B, and R.. Question - are any named for uga coaches or admin?
3. As an aside and a serious question of reference = what are the national academic and academic administration awards given for best x,y,z NAMED for Gt academic greats 1,2,3. I would hope dean griffin has a dean of students award given in his name.
4 Around 20 years ago the gt prez came around looking to raise money from alums ( not from state ga) to modernize campus. Wallet open. dollars out. Buildings up. 5. When on campus for 40 year went to see buildings across the freeway. We found the gt puppetry center. (Since this is football blog - Would love to know number of football player in tech history has taken 2 or more classes in puppetry.) We have a degree program in robotics featured on puppets. At spring and 18th is the center for puppet arts - lots of kids see this and how there is science behind it and how it can lead to true robots. . I am good with that. As a gt football fan, perhaps the could model the triple option and mathematically break down the plays! See below

Summary
if we could get approved 1 ( liberalization of course guideline) and 2( tech based sports management and coaching course of study) with a commitment from hill to be ACTIVE in undergraduate and research programs that use gt athletics as labs, have the AD call WALLET OPEN.

Visualize - At Baylor I have seen what a change winning football can do even in a small place like Waco. If just a portion of this happened to Gt which is in ATL, the impact would be massive and permanent . We should tear down old dorm down next to north ave from tech wood to and freeway with sky bridge to BDS = up goes modern looking new tech sports major building with lighted sign visible from freeway ( brand gt sports!). Part of the facility would have a center for the public to visit. It would describe the state of Georgia/ gt tech sports program and have video displays that the greats in Georgia college history. A special statue them all together - include Dooley for sure - damn that guy could coach. The center is for the whole state.



Well time for football in 10 minutes - got to get set up.

 

[Animal02]

Visualize - At Baylor I have seen what a change winning football can do even in a small place like Waco. If just a portion of this happened to Gt which is in ATL, the impact would be massive and permanent . We should tear down old dorm down next to north ave from tech wood to and freeway with sky bridge to BDS = up goes modern looking new tech sports major building with lighted sign visible from freeway ( brand gt sports!). Part of the facility would have a center for the public to visit. It would describe the state of Georgia/ gt tech sports program and have video displays that the greats in Georgia college history. A special statue them all together - include Dooley for sure - damn that guy could coach. The center is for the whole state.



Well time for football in 10 minutes - got to get set up.

Disagree with tearing down old dorms.......those buildings give the campus character and a tie to the past. I don't think they should have town down the south end of the stadium either.....the stands yes.....but they could have preserved the exterior. There is no need to have everything new and shiny......in a few short years, those "new and shiny" will look old and dingy.......it takes a lot of years for something to obtain that historic look.