Northwestern South ??

[Jacket in Dairyland]

All this makes some sense, but I imagine that the chances of the Board of Regents adding courses or changing the curriculum for the sake of the football program are somewhere around zero. If changes come to the curriculum, they will come with complete disregard of the football program.

Sadly, you may be right. But I am trying very hard to be optimistic in these tough times. Money talks and we have wealthy alumni - or so we like to brag.

 

[boger2337]

As to point A, it is plausible that “The Hill” feels like they don’t want athletics to overshadow or taint the academics in some way. I hope they aren’t thinking this way because the fans will be hoping for things that will never happen. That would be awful!!!Realistically though, why can’t we be good at academics and sports?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jesus christ who cares about the academic. I mean it matters but it will never be ivy league nor should they want to be. Just be a strong school that's difficult academically for those who want the course load. If not, give them the option to have a different degree and work load. Those who put in the work will reap the rewards as people will know tech to have strong degrees in certain fields. Not every field needs to be top of the charts, it hurts too many other aspects of the school and prevents them from being well rounded.

 

[bobongo]

Sadly, you may be right. But I am trying very hard to be optimistic in these tough times. Money talks and we have wealthy alumni - or so we like to brag.

I'm being very optimistic. Just find players who want what we have to offer and bring them here. And do it now. The money of which you speak can be raised to augment the recruiting budget. To my way of thinking, it's a no-brainer. Why worry about pie in the sky when the pie is right here for the taking, if we'll just go out there and get it.

 

[jojatk]

As a GT alum I've always wondered why everyone needed to take some sort of calculus. I know why I needed to take it. It's pretty integral (yes, very bad pun) to aerospace engineering which was my degree. But why does someone getting a BS in Public Policy, or Psychology, or International Affairs, or International Affairs and Modern Languages, or Business Administration, or even Applied Languages and Intercultural Studies need any form of calculus at all? And that's not even having to do with athletics at all. I just don't know why those programs would need calculus.

I say that for three reasons. One is to point out that there are actually a number of areas of study in which one can get a degree that don't, on the outside, seem to have anything to do with calculus. And the other is to point out that there are, even at a glance, a bunch of degree programs that don't seem to have much to do with engineering (or hard sciences like physics or chemistry or biology or stuff like that). And the third is that I sometimes wonder if we market all of those other options really well. I ask that as a genuine question, not a suggestion that I think we don't market them well. I'm so far out of college and my HS freshman so far isn't really looking at things GT does so I haven't really concentrated any energy on how GT markets itself to those preparing to go to college and those who prepare our kids to go to college.

BTW there are actually some pretty cool minors offered such as one called Sports, Society, and Technology.

 

[stech81]

The problem is not the AD or money but the problem is :
the President of Georgia Tech . same thing happened in the 70's with Joseph M. Pettit . Fire CPJ won't help if you still have a president who don't care about football.

 

[OldJacketFan]

I don't how many time it has to be posted for folks to understand, TECH CANNOT ADD OR MODIFY DEGREE PROGRAMS WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE GA BOARD OF REGENTS. Plus new degree programs have to funded and staffed.

 

[Jacket in Dairyland]

As a GT alum I've always wondered why everyone needed to take some sort of calculus. I know why I needed to take it. It's pretty integral (yes, very bad pun) to aerospace engineering which was my degree. But why does someone getting a BS in Public Policy, or Psychology, or International Affairs, or International Affairs and Modern Languages, or Business Administration, or even Applied Languages and Intercultural Studies need any form of calculus at all? And that's not even having to do with athletics at all. I just don't know why those programs would need calculus.

I say that for three reasons. One is to point out that there are actually a number of areas of study in which one can get a degree that don't, on the outside, seem to have anything to do with calculus. And the other is to point out that there are, even at a glance, a bunch of degree programs that don't seem to have much to do with engineering (or hard sciences like physics or chemistry or biology or stuff like that). And the third is that I sometimes wonder if we market all of those other options really well. I ask that as a genuine question, not a suggestion that I think we don't market them well. I'm so far out of college and my HS freshman so far isn't really looking at things GT does so I haven't really concentrated any energy on how GT markets itself to those preparing to go to college and those who prepare our kids to go to college.

BTW there are actually some pretty cool minors offered such as one called Sports, Society, and Technology.

GREAT POST !!

 

[MWBATL]

All this makes some sense, but I imagine that the chances of the Board of Regents adding courses or changing the curriculum for the sake of the football program are somewhere around zero. If changes come to the curriculum, they will come with complete disregard of the football program.

Why not instead concentrate on doing something now to recruit good players nationwide who want to matriculate from a top notch school offering what we have to offer RIGHT NOW?

Admittedly, one must be political about this sort of thing. (that is to say, you must lie about it and disguise it.) The majors and courses to be added must be justified on academic grounds. Oh, it helps our athletic program too? Why, I never even thought about it that way! I guess maybe you're right....I will believe the BOR is the problem when I hear the Hill complaining about BOR obstruction. The Hill has simply not pushed this, imho.

The Hill is the problem. They will quietly watch while GT doesn't become a NW or Stanford or Duke....but they will play their fiddle while GT athletics becomes Tulane or Rice.

 

[MWBATL]

The problem is not the AD or money but the problem is :
the President of Georgia Tech . same thing happened in the 70's with Joseph M. Pettit . Fire CPJ won't help if you still have a president who don't care about football.

THIS.....this guy "gets it".

Peterson is the problem.

 

[boger2337]

Admittedly, one must be political about this sort of thing. (that is to say, you must lie about it and disguise it.) The majors and courses to be added must be justified on academic grounds. Oh, it helps our athletic program too? Why, I never even thought about it that way! I guess maybe you're right....I will believe the BOR is the problem when I hear the Hill complaining about BOR obstruction. The Hill has simply not pushed this, imho.

The Hill is the problem. They will quietly watch while GT doesn't become a NW or Stanford or Duke....but they will play their fiddle while GT athletics becomes Tulane or Rice.

I'll never understand why they dont care about techs athletics. It will only help the academics.

 

[GTBatGirl96]

I have to believe that there are enough Calvins out there each year (super smart, freak athletes) that we could get them and make a difference to our recruiting ranking. They currently all end up at Stanford (which is ranked #7 in the latest AP poll by the way) or ND. And before anyone posts about the number of majors at Stanford, I looked up what their football players are actually majoring in. Other than a few sociology/psychology majors and the guy studying Japanese/symbology, there seems to be a lot of overlap with what we offer. On the Calculus note, if they are smart enough to get into Stanford, a calculus class shouldn't faze them.

Of interest on that list, there's a senior OG from Milton GA majoring in ME. I wonder if we recruited him at all? Or if we were even considered? What about that Ravens player who recently retired to get his phd in math from MIT? I looked him up; he went to Penn State. Did we have the resources to identify him? Probably not.

We just need the resources to identify them. I'm not sure that the four people we just hired would be sufficient. It sickens me when a recruit mentions Stanford or ND as being high academic targets and we aren't in the list. We need to do a better job of marketing ourselves nationally so that WE are among the first that these high academic kids think of when they are considering colleges.

The kids are out there that can play football AND do the academic load. Until now, CPJ's hands have been tied trying to find them. I would really like to see what he could do with some of them. Now, if we have been identifying them and recruiting them, but they won't come because of the offense, then that's a different problem, but I seriously doubt we've gotten that far.

 

[stech81]

I know putting this here it will not get seen by as many as it would if I started a new topic but here goes;

I keep reading some on here some want Tech to add majors or take calculus out on some majors some agree some don't

I graduated from Southern Tech , so I try not to say what they need to do about academics because I didn't go to Georgia Tech . What I would like to know is if you are a sidewalk fan how you feel and if you went to Tech how you feel . This is only information I would like to see. I understand both sides. And if I had graduated from Georgia Tech I may not feel the same , Thanks

 

[GT_05]

I know putting this here it will not get seen by as many as it would if I started a new topic but here goes;

I keep reading some on here some want Tech to add majors or take calculus out on some majors some agree some don't

I graduated from Southern Tech , so I try not to say what they need to do about academics because I didn't go to Georgia Tech . What I would like to know is if you are a sidewalk fan how you feel and if you went to Tech how you feel . This is only information I would like to see. I understand both sides. And if I had graduated from Georgia Tech I may not feel the same , Thanks

The major determines the calculus requirement. In order to get around calculus, you have to offer majors that don’t require calculus which are often Bachelor of Arts degrees instead of Bachelor of Science degrees like GT offers. If GT wanted BAs, they would have to be approved by the Georgia Board of Regents. I suspect they would not approve any BAs that are currently being offered by Georgia State or UGA because GT is basically in the same service area.

Differential calculus is not that difficult. It would be much easier to tell a recruit that we can give them all the help they need to pass calculus.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Adadu]

The fact that the board refuses to add majors is the most stubborn and old headed **** I can think of. Crippling our athletics for zero reason other than being proud for forcing our athletes to overwork themselves.

 

[jojatk]

The major determines the calculus requirement. In order to get around calculus, you have to offer majors that don’t require calculus which are often Bachelor of Arts degrees instead of Bachelor of Science degrees like GT offers. If GT wanted BAs, they would have to be approved by the Georgia Board of Regents. I suspect they would not approve any BAs that are currently being offered by Georgia State or UGA because GT is basically in the same service area.

Differential calculus is not that difficult. It would be much easier to tell a recruit that we can give them all the help they need to pass calculus.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just curious what Calculus has to do with Public Policy? How about International Affairs and Modern Languages? Those are both degrees GT offers. If there's a reason then I'm all ears. I personally don't believe GT should make any changes to the curricula offered SPECIFICALLY to make it easier for athletes. I do wonder, though, what calculus has to do with some of the majors like the ones I just mentioned (and all the others I mentioned in my prior post).

 

[boger2337]

Just curious what Calculus has to do with Public Policy? How about International Affairs and Modern Languages? Those are both degrees GT offers. If there's a reason then I'm all ears. I personally don't believe GT should make any changes to the curricula offered SPECIFICALLY to make it easier for athletes. I do wonder, though, what calculus has to do with some of the majors like the ones I just mentioned (and all the others I mentioned in my prior post).

My question is this. What are the major differences between us and Virginia Tech? Do they offer more variety of degrees than we do???

 

[MidtownJacket]

I will say, I graduated with a BS in Public Policy. I actually ended up choosing Ga Tech over Duke and uNCheat because I wanted the BS desgree and believed the understanding of science and mathematics would be important in the future regardless of my job. Ultimately I ended up working in Management Consulting and am glad to have had the basic calculus and statistics courses we took at GT as it gave me an edge in building models. I was glad to have taken a programming course (granted it was python) as it helped me understand queries and macros.

This was when I was looking to go to GT (2003) and I believe it even more now. When IAC was recruiting me to GT they sold hard on the value of blending science, math and traditional liberal arts material.

 

[GT_05]

Just curious what Calculus has to do with Public Policy? How about International Affairs and Modern Languages? Those are both degrees GT offers. If there's a reason then I'm all ears. I personally don't believe GT should make any changes to the curricula offered SPECIFICALLY to make it easier for athletes. I do wonder, though, what calculus has to do with some of the majors like the ones I just mentioned (and all the others I mentioned in my prior post).

I’m not sure. Maybe nothing. Maybe calculus is a prerequisite for something they learn in other classes. The curriculum for those majors may or may not have been developed by Tech. I can’t speak for the BoR but in some college systems the curriculum is developed by the state and then adopted by the school. In those cases, the school has no latitude in the course offerings. If the major is institutionally developed, there may be some wiggle room but it probably still has to be approved by the state. Private schools have an advantage here because of less oversight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[takethepoints]

I will say, I graduated with a BS in Public Policy. I actually ended up choosing Ga Tech over Duke and uNCheat because I wanted the BS desgree and believed the understanding of science and mathematics would be important in the future regardless of my job.

The old adage is that you should take at least a few courses in college that offer useful material and that you know you will never study effectively on your own later.

I have an advanced degree in political science. I do a lot with applied stats in my work and people think - little do they know - that I'm really good at it. I'm ok, in fact, but my understanding of the basics of many stats I do is deficient because … I never took calculus. I have tried to educate myself on this but with minimal success.

It is true that many areas of study don't need a basic calculus course. Problem = many of those studies aren't on offer as majors at Tech and won't be. We need to take the maths as a given and get used to going after kids who aren't intimidated by them. There are Shamires out there that with more recruiting resources we could find and get to Tech.

Btw, the thread should be named "Purdue South?" They're more comparable. Better cheers too:

 

[Vespidae]

The Hill has little or nothing to do with the athletic program. We can scream all we want, but the reality is that athletics is the responsibility of the GTAA and always has been. The big problem for GTAA today is they raise far less money than comparable schools AND for the money they do raise, a good portion is going to legacy costs to cover coaches who have been fired and the debt on the facilities. The Hill's only contribution is non-cash and related to granting in-state waivers on tuition. That's it.

I would suggest giving TStan some room. He's got a vision, he's acting on it, and so far ... making more progress and any of his predecessors.