Northwestern South ??

[boger2337]

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.

Then we need to get more donations. Maybe convince Calvin to take photos and sign an autograph per fan at games for 50 bucks a piece. Start making moves and getting creative.

 

[TooTall]

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.

The Hill sets the academic standards for the school, which has a direct effect on the type of students we can get based on available majors and course requirements.

 

[Vespidae]

Dog wagging the tail ...

 

[bobongo]

Dog wagging the tail ...

Isn't that normal, that the dog wags the tail?

 

[4shotB]

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.



[/MEDIA]

You have had the Tech experience without the actual degree. We had to teach ourselves calculus (and physics, chemistry, etc.) as well!

 

[jojatk]

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:

So the question I'm asking isn't whether the majors offered elsewhere don't need calculus. I'm asking the honest question regarding what some of those majors need calculus for? And I appreciate the responses from those who have degrees in those areas who have said why they felt they needed that info. The reason I asked the question was because I know very little about those majors and it isn't obvious to me why calculus would be needed there so again, that's why I appreciate you all educating me about how you apply calculus in those areas.

 

[DaltonJacket]

Have we EVER had a Georgia Tech grad as President of our school ?? Anyone ?? Maybe that would help .....

Clough

 

[GT_05]

So the question I'm asking isn't whether the majors offered elsewhere don't need calculus. I'm asking the honest question regarding what some of those majors need calculus for? And I appreciate the responses from those who have degrees in those areas who have said why they felt they needed that info. The reason I asked the question was because I know very little about those majors and it isn't obvious to me why calculus would be needed there so again, that's why I appreciate you all educating me about how you apply calculus in those areas.

I’m not sure that you necessarily just take classes that apply to what you are doing with your major. I have a degree in engineering but I also had to take history like everyone else. Is it directly applicable to my job? No, but I feel like it was part of the “being well rounded” thing. As far as why someone taking public policy would need calculus, I would say to develop critical thinking. I would also say that math, in general, helps develop attention to detail. So I gave you a fuzzy reason why but there may be more concrete reasons for needing it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DaltonJacket]

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

Peterson is the problem.

....and this has kind of surprised me. Didn't the man play football at Kansas State??? (or did I dream that?)

 

[jojatk]

I’m not sure that you necessarily just take classes that apply to what you are doing with your major. I have a degree in engineering but I also had to take history like everyone else. Is it directly applicable to my job? No, but I feel like it was part of the “being well rounded” thing. As far as why someone taking public policy would need calculus, I would say to develop critical thinking. I would also say that math, in general, helps develop attention to detail. So I gave you a fuzzy reason why but there may be more concrete reasons for needing it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I appreciate the response in all its fuzziness... seriously I do appreciate it and those are good points.

 

[Vespidae]

Isn't that normal, that the dog wags the tail?

Yes. The Hill sets the standards and everyone has to meet it.

Other schools do it in reverse ... "What courses do we need to offer to field a competitive team?" ... that's the tail wagging the dog.

 

[MWBATL]

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

Personally, I would VERY much like to see us expand our curriculum to include a bevy of BA programs.

I do NOT agree with watering down existing programs.

I think our main issue is guys who simply want a different degree focus.

 

[MWBATL]

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.

So, I was too lazy to analyze the full list....I just looked at like the first 20 guys...but the top degree choices seem to be Sociology and Psychology, both of which I will wager are BA degrees with a ton of soft and fuzzy courses. I would be curious to see a numerical breakdown if someone else is not as lazy as me....

 

[GTBatGirl96]

I’m not sure that you necessarily just take classes that apply to what you are doing with your major. I have a degree in engineering but I also had to take history like everyone else. Is it directly applicable to my job? No, but I feel like it was part of the “being well rounded” thing. As far as why someone taking public policy would need calculus, I would say to develop critical thinking. I would also say that math, in general, helps develop attention to detail. So I gave you a fuzzy reason why but there may be more concrete reasons for needing it.

I took my son to an MIT info session a couple weeks ago, and it was mentioned that MIT requires 8 humanities credits, one per semester basically, even for the engineering degrees. The rationale was that if you are developing a solution to make someone's life better, it helps to have an understanding of the historical or socioeconomic context in which they live.

Similarly with public policy, as the other poster mentioned, I would think a background in calculus would help understand population or optimization models.

 

[GTBatGirl96]

So, I was too lazy to analyze the full list....I just looked at like the first 20 guys...but the top degree choices seem to be Sociology and Psychology, both of which I will wager are BA degrees with a ton of soft and fuzzy courses. I would be curious to see a numerical breakdown if someone else is not as lazy as me....

Mine was also an unscientific look (I am just as lazy), but the ones that jumped out at me as being common were the Science, Technology and Society. (It at least sounded a lot like HTS from a name perspective.)

 

[Vespidae]

I am fine with expanding the curriculum, but not to just be a me too to UGA.

UGA cheated to win the National Championship in 1981 by lowering its standards. This is what we are dealing with. Once you start lowering, there is no bottom.

 

[MWBATL]

I am fine with expanding the curriculum, but not to just be a me too to UGA.

UGA cheated to win the National Championship in 1981 by lowering its standards. This is what we are dealing with. Once you start lowering, there is no bottom.

To play Devil's Advocate here....how did it hurt Uga to lower its standards? How did it hurt UNC to lower its standards? How did it hurt ANY university to lower its standards for its athletics programs?

I understand *you* may not like it, but I fail to see how it has tangibly hurt ANY university involved. In every single case I am aware of, the overwhelming majority of quality students/courses/and professors was just fine and dandy and unaffected by any implied reputational harm.

 

[Jacket in Dairyland]

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.

Great post !!....Political comment, especially !!

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.

Understood ! So we don't work that angle ??

 

[Jacket in Dairyland]

To play Devil's Advocate here....how did it hurt Uga to lower its standards? How did it hurt UNC to lower its standards? How did it hurt ANY university to lower its standards for its athletics programs?

I understand *you* may not like it, but I fail to see how it has tangibly hurt ANY university involved. In every single case I am aware of, the overwhelming majority of quality students/courses/and professors was just fine and dandy and unaffected by any implied reputational harm.

The UW definitely lowered their standards when Barry Alvarez became head coach ! No one talked about it , but you could see the uptick in recruiting ( like Ron Dayne - great player and man , but no scholar ). The wins came and nobody looked back , and still don't. They get speed , big OLs, even guys from Samoa now . Do they talk about the lowered standards ? Not a bit ! They still tout their academic prowess - and they have quite a bit. Face it , we have been " played " by the BOR , and sold out by our President(s). The BOR wants UGA to be the big DWAG ....sic 'em woof , woof ! And we are supposed to be the "Nerds " , get our slide rulers out.

 

[Vespidae]

To play Devil's Advocate here....how did it hurt Uga to lower its standards? How did it hurt UNC to lower its standards? How did it hurt ANY university to lower its standards for its athletics programs?

I understand *you* may not like it, but I fail to see how it has tangibly hurt ANY university involved. In every single case I am aware of, the overwhelming majority of quality students/courses/and professors was just fine and dandy and unaffected by any implied reputational harm.

Since you need a history lesson, I will explain.

The University of Georgia earned the right to play against Notre Dame for the National Championship in 1981. Yet, eight of the SA's were deemed academically ineligible to play. A professor in charge was ordered to change the grades and allow them to play. She refused. They played and UGA won. She was demoted and fired.

The professor sued UGA and was awarded > 2.5 million bucks and settled for $1MM since the insurance company couldn't pay. The university president was forced to resign.

Now, if that's what you condone ... changing grades to allow SA's to compete ... let's just say your moral compass is not as accurate as mine.