Rumor Mills

[Cam]

GT has really raised the bar for who gets in and heavily increased their selectivity, but I think it's overall easier to stay in. Which is a good strategy to raise the prestige of the school and increase the alumni base. Not to say it still isn't difficult. But they aren't actively trying to fail people anymore. I think there are kids now who breezed through high school and never got a B who then get to college and break down when they fail their first test. A friend of mine couldn't handle that she got a C in chemistry when she put in minimal effort. She was lucky to get that.

 

[AE 87]

Posts in this thread seem to confirm my impression. When I went to Tech in the mid 80's, I think it was easier to get in and harder to get out (why we talk about graduating as getting out) than today.

I understand the "USNews effect," but I think it was better when it gave more people a shot and forced them to work.

 

[GTJoeBrew]

Posts in this thread seem to confirm my impression. When I went to Tech in the mid 80's, I think it was easier to get in and harder to get out (why we talk about graduating as getting out) than today.

I understand the "USNews effect," but I think it was better when it gave more people a shot and forced them to work.

I'm not sure if its much different now, but while I was there (2009 grad) there were a lot of options to stay in. M-Train was the preferred method for a lot of my buddies. That's probably a significant way they increased the retention rate. I do know that the AE department prided itself on how many people dropped out of the major. I took a flight dynamics course under a professors name that I can pronounce, but don't have a clue how to spell. He said to us on the first day that he was only going to pass 30ish percent of the first timers in the class. Needless to say, I was one of the 70%, but my hard hardheadedness made me take it with the same professor the next semester. I passed by a few points that time... Lol.

 

[Animal02]

I'm not sure if its much different now, but while I was there (2009 grad) there were a lot of options to stay in. M-Train was the preferred method for a lot of my buddies. That's probably a significant way they increased the retention rate. I do know that the AE department prided itself on how many people dropped out of the major. I took a flight dynamics course under a professors name that I can pronounce, but don't have a clue how to spell. He said to us on the first day that he was only going to pass 30ish percent of the first timers in the class. Needless to say, I was one of the 70%, but my hard hardheadedness made me take it with the same professor the next semester. I passed by a few points that time... Lol.

I had a statics class with a professor took 15 minutes to pronounce parallelogram. .. .it was 14 minutes of parawella......

 

[B Lifsey]

I had a statics class with a professor took 15 minutes to pronounce parallelogram. .. .it was 14 minutes of parawella......

I just spent 20 trying to read your reply

 

[AE 87]

I'm not sure if its much different now, but while I was there (2009 grad) there were a lot of options to stay in. M-Train was the preferred method for a lot of my buddies. That's probably a significant way they increased the retention rate. I do know that the AE department prided itself on how many people dropped out of the major. I took a flight dynamics course under a professors name that I can pronounce, but don't have a clue how to spell. He said to us on the first day that he was only going to pass 30ish percent of the first timers in the class. Needless to say, I was one of the 70%, but my hard hardheadedness made me take it with the same professor the next semester. I passed by a few points that time... Lol.

We had the M-Train in my day too. University retention was much lower iiuc

 

[alagold]

Yes there were some bad ones...but the drop outs were also desired. We had 500 start in architecture. The reality was that the upper level studios co UI of only handle about 50/ year.

On the other hand....my struggles at Tech have certainly helped lifelong. I was one of 500 to start in the Arch. program that year.....less than 50 graduated from the program....only about 10 are still in the primary field, and I have been as successful as most.

I had a roommate that was Arch one yr.That guy put in more hrs on study that I EVER thought about--and he had to for those projects. He graduated also.

 

[Blumpkin Souffle]

You must have gone to a different GT than I went to. When I was at Tech in the 1970's, there was close to a 50% freshman attrition rate. Tech was proud of it. Goodbye GT, Hello Viet Nam. There was no first year charity--or any other year. GT is not more rigorous than when I went there.

Now GT brags about a high retention rate. For 2011 freshmen, 95% after the freshman year and 88% after 4 years. (Source: GT website). The numbers have been steadily increasing over the years.

I get sick of the "we can't recruit because of academics" argument. We have more and easier majors and grade inflation as compared to the late 80's when Ross and Cremins were having success at recruiting. . And no GT coach has been more demanding than Boss Ross.

Nah we just raised our standards

 

[awbuzz]

...I literally never studied in HS. Never prepped for SAT or none of that crap. GT kicked my butt ... early.

AMEN!! Same here. Went on warning after 3rd quarter. GT was a bear. Made Dean's list last two quarters (Got out in '86)

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

You remember me talking about this guy as we were tailgating.
I even remember his name! haha.
I think He was ME c/o 32 lol

He might not be you but you probably had several classes together @Supersizethatorder-mutt.

 

[GTpdm]

But they aren't actively trying to fail people anymore.

Given how often I hear people on this board complain about our recruiting difficulties, why even post a comment like this? Does anyone really think that complaints about how we "try to fail students" at Tech won't deter potential recruits?

Besides--"they" (the Institute) has never tried to fail students--and by "they", I really mean "I personally, and no one I ever worked with in my 20 years teaching a so-called 'weedout' course at Tech".

You do realize that a teacher trying to actively fail students constitutes professional misconduct along the lines of a doctor trying to kill patients he deems undeserving of life, don't you? Is that really the the level of respect that you have for your alma mater, that you would accuse the faculty as a whole of systematic professional misconduct?

Yes, Tech is hard--but the faculty bust their asses to make that challenge manageable for as many students as possible. Not all profs are as good at it as I am (or as humble )--but then again, not all students come straight from Lake Wobegone. You would not believe some of the abject slackerhood I have to contend with (on a regular basis) in the courses I teach. Thankfully, most Tech students really are "all that"--and they are the only reason I haven't quit my job to become a pet groomer or something.

Don't assume the worst about The Institute (and yes--"trying to fail students" is the worst thing we could do) just because you had some bad experiences in hard classes. Tech expects a lot because the employers who hire our graduates expect a lot.

The challenges I faced at Tech are the best things that happened to me in my life (particularly, meeting @YJAlleyCat there and--eventually--winning her over). You will never catch me bad-mouthing any part of that experience, no matter how tough it was.

 

[Animal02]

Given how often I hear people on this board complain about our recruiting difficulties, why even post a comment like this? Does anyone really think that complaints about how we "try to fail students" at Tech won't deter potential recruits?

Besides--"they" (the Institute) has never tried to fail students--and by "they", I really mean "I personally, and no one I ever worked with in my 20 years teaching a so-called 'weedout' course at Tech".

You do realize that a teacher trying to actively fail students constitutes professional misconduct along the lines of a doctor trying to kill patients he deems undeserving of life, don't you? Is that really the the level of respect that you have for your alma mater, that you would accuse the faculty as a whole of systematic professional misconduct?

Yes, Tech is hard--but the faculty bust their asses to make that challenge manageable for as many students as possible. Not all profs are as good at it as I am (or as humble )--but then again, not all students come straight from Lake Wobegone. You would not believe some of the abject slackerhood I have to contend with (on a regular basis) in the courses I teach. Thankfully, most Tech students really are "all that"--and they are the only reason I haven't quit my job to become a pet groomer or something.

Don't assume the worst about The Institute (and yes--"trying to fail students" is the worst thing we could do) just because you had some bad experiences in hard classes. Tech expects a lot because the employers who hire our graduates expect a lot.

The challenges I faced at Tech are the best things that happened to me in my life (particularly, meeting @YJAlleyCat there and--eventually--winning her over). You will never catch me bad-mouthing any part of that experience, no matter how tough it was.

That may be the case now......but weeding people out definitely was the norm back in the late 70s early 80s

 

[Cam]

Given how often I hear people on this board complain about our recruiting difficulties, why even post a comment like this? Does anyone really think that complaints about how we "try to fail students" at Tech won't deter potential recruits?

Besides--"they" (the Institute) has never tried to fail students--and by "they", I really mean "I personally, and no one I ever worked with in my 20 years teaching a so-called 'weedout' course at Tech".

You do realize that a teacher trying to actively fail students constitutes professional misconduct along the lines of a doctor trying to kill patients he deems undeserving of life, don't you? Is that really the the level of respect that you have for your alma mater, that you would accuse the faculty as a whole of systematic professional misconduct?

Yes, Tech is hard--but the faculty bust their asses to make that challenge manageable for as many students as possible. Not all profs are as good at it as I am (or as humble )--but then again, not all students come straight from Lake Wobegone. You would not believe some of the abject slackerhood I have to contend with (on a regular basis) in the courses I teach. Thankfully, most Tech students really are "all that"--and they are the only reason I haven't quit my job to become a pet groomer or something.

Don't assume the worst about The Institute (and yes--"trying to fail students" is the worst thing we could do) just because you had some bad experiences in hard classes. Tech expects a lot because the employers who hire our graduates expect a lot.

The challenges I faced at Tech are the best things that happened to me in my life (particularly, meeting @YJAlleyCat there and--eventually--winning her over). You will never catch me bad-mouthing any part of that experience, no matter how tough it was.

I don't mean to get into a flame war, but don't make any assumptions about me. I graduated two years ago. I am still an active student in one of the PhD programs. My experiences in undergrad were very positive. The classes were tough, but they were fair. You mostly got out of the class that you put into it. I, like you, busted my *** and didn't complain. Hence why I gave an example of a student from Lake Woebegone who didn't do that and didn't gain my pity.

Sure there was one professor who showed up drunk to class the few times he didn't just make his TA teach. And sure there was the other professor who cared so little for the content he was teaching he'd often forget he had to go teach that day. But those two were mostly there for their high level research. I appreciated professors like yourself that actually did care for students. I learned a lot in their courses and a lot from what I gained visiting them during office hours. My comment about "actively trying to fail" is entirely based off of the comments I see so many say on this board in regard to their experiences decades ago. It was a hyperbole, but it's not an unfair perspective to form based on their testimonies. They make it sound like it used to be a living hell and, like I said in my original post, it's much better now. They've apparently changed their approach because it was a great experience for me.

Don't make assumptions about me because of a misunderstood comment. I am a proud alumn and supporter of Georgia Tech. I do whatever I can to spread how great of an Institute it is. If asked about difficulty, I say something similar to you. "It's difficult, but the professors, TAs, and help groups are all there to help you succeed."

 

[4shotB]

My comment about "actively trying to fail" is entirely based off of the comments I see so many say on this board in regard to their experiences decades ago. It was a hyperbole, but it's not an unfair perspective to form based on their testimonies. They make it sound like it used to be a living hell and, like I said in my original post, it's much better now. They've apparently changed their approach because it was a great experience for me.

I think your assumptions about the past are correct. "Back in the day" we were given the "look to your left, look to your right...1 of you 3 will get out" speech. And it was the truth. Pure Darwinism at work. It wasn't necessarily the smartest guys who got out either as you might think.But those of us who got out under those conditions wouldn't trade it it for anything...even the kinder, gentler ma Tech of today.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

He might not be you but you probably had several classes together @Supersizethatorder-mutt.

Har har har

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

That may be the case now......but weeding people out definitely was the norm back in the late 70s early 80s

And earlier

 

[Animal02]

I think your assumptions about the past are correct. "Back in the day" we were given the "look to your left, look to your right...1 of you 3 will get out" speech. And it was the truth. Pure Darwinism at work. It wasn't necessarily the smartest guys who got out either as you might think.But those of us who got out under those conditions wouldn't trade it it for anything...even the kinder, gentler ma Tech of today.

Yep....happen the first stay of studio with me.....but it was far less than 1/3 in the end...it was 1/10. Saw lots of very talented designers drop out because of the pressure.

 

[katlong]

I think your assumptions about the past are correct. "Back in the day" we were given the "look to your left, look to your right...1 of you 3 will get out" speech. And it was the truth. Pure Darwinism at work. It wasn't necessarily the smartest guys who got out either as you might think.But those of us who got out under those conditions wouldn't trade it it for anything...even the kinder, gentler ma Tech of today.

I'm glad I wasn't the only one who heard that speech. I can relate to what you said about who graduated. I certainly wasn't the smartest... But I was the most determined. It was at times brutal, but I would not trade my time at Tech for anything! I am so proud of that degree and how hard I had to work for it!

 

[tech_wreck47]

Wait, what's this thread about again? Lol

 

[33jacket]

For sure retention has changed to play the usnews game. Its a joke imo tech has totally left behind what they were. I digress

Lets hope mills is totally fine