Started By
Message
re: Are there any academic programs you would sacrifice to keep the football team
Posted on 7/3/13 at 4:17 pm to finestfirst79
Posted on 7/3/13 at 4:17 pm to finestfirst79
quote:
Thanks for clarifying, and maybe you're only a partial idiot... remains to be seen. I think there may be differences between schools and that's where our disconnect is. I took as many English classes as my History/German major roommate. Chemistry courses (which about killed me) and a couple of Logic courses that scofflaw didn't take, and lots of Calculus that he of course never came near and aren't specifically engineering courses. Obviously I didn't take as many history courses, but there were more than a couple. Short version, I got the college education you think I should have. As far as I know.
I think the problem is big universities tried to shoehorn in these newer programs to the old school academic model. And since they saw value in that model, they said you can major in these new disciplines that keep cropping up, but we still need to impart some elements of a classical education to you. And that's how you get this disconnect, where STEM majors wonder why in the hell they have to take Brit Lit or whatever (and of course never really get to see the value of this sort of education b/c they stop at the massive lecture hall 200-lvl style courses).
quote:
I'd also take issue with a day school sort of trade program providing the same education, even throwing out the English, etc. In my experience it was very competitive, and I can't see getting that same education from the University of Phoenix or whatever. My big wakeup call came in my senior year: I did pretty well on the SAT. By my senior year the incoming engineering freshmen had a higher average SAT score than I did. The average engineering student at A&M does not graduate with an engineering degree. So I tried harder :-)
When I say trade school I'm not thinking of any level of prestige. I'm definitely thinking a more definite boundary b/w blue-collar and white-collar, but I don't think of blue-collar work as intrinsically inferior (and I'm well aware how ENGR majors don't necessarily fall on either side, but in many cases bridge this divide). I could certainly imagine many extremely difficult and prestigious trade schools that focus solely on ENGR cropping up if universities were to pare down their curricula. Or, instead of trade school, just have small college's devoted exclusively to ENGR... doesn't Harvey Mudd do this?
Anyways, my entire point a/b cutting ENGR programs is that often times those majors resent the educational model that universities were founded on, and as such could probably construct a better model for themselves (afterall, they're ENGR's!)
1
Posted on 7/3/13 at 4:23 pm to UAFanFromNOLA
quote:
Because Alabama wants more research dollars, they recently upgraded all of the Biology and Chemistry buildings save one and are in the process of upgrading the Engineering buildings. It is absolutely a benefit to the student.
No. If Alabama cared a/b its students they wouldn't be slashing tenure tracks, having TA's teach classes, and engaging in an arms race to see who can pamper their undergrads the most. Alabama upgraded their facilities but not their teachers. Why? Because one shows up in the USNews rankings and another doesn't. If you really think going to an undergrad lecture class of 300 in a plush room is better for your education than going to a 20 year old room w/ 30 students in it then I'm not going to change your mind. But it's very clear what results in better education: teacher/student ratio. And Alabama - and almost every other state school - have little interest in paying their teachers more or hiring more of them.
Posted on 7/3/13 at 4:39 pm to CHSgc
quote:
...they said you can major in these new disciplines that keep cropping up...
Civil and Mechanical Engineering is new? What?
quote:
And that's how you get this disconnect, where STEM majors wonder why in the hell they have to take Brit Lit or whatever (and of course never really get to see the value of this sort of education b/c they stop at the massive lecture hall 200-lvl style courses).
I actually kinda sorta agree with this, but I don't see a solution and your's surely isn't it. Shakespeare has absolutely nothing to do with my job, but I kinda sorta wished I had been forced to take a class or two. Trouble is, I already had more required hours than any liberal arts-type person taking every English Lit. course available.
quote:
Anyways, my entire point a/b cutting ENGR programs is that often times those majors resent the educational model that universities were founded on,...
1) Tough shite. Take the class, study hard, and shut up. Personally I'm happy I had to take several English classes and those have without a doubt paid off for me.
2) A&M (as well as Arkansas, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, LSU, MSU, and (ah, now we get to the problem!) Clemson) were all founded specifically to churn out engineers, farmers, and soldiers. A long time ago, so you can't claim this is a recent "problem". They're just not getting the same college experience you think they should.
Posted on 7/3/13 at 4:41 pm to CHSgc
quote:For a lot of classes, there is hardly a need to have that small of classes. Is it really necessary for an introductory biology class to have 30 students when you can pretty much learn at the same speed and depth in a 300 person class? I have never had a professor that was unwilling to help after class or during office hours. Also, the upper level classes are much smaller and closer to 30 people per class. The labs being updated were really the big thing for us because we are capable of allowing more students to use the labs more efficiently than before.
If you really think going to an undergrad lecture class of 300 in a plush room is better for your education than going to a 20 year old room w/ 30 students in it then I'm not going to change your mind.
This post was edited on 7/3/13 at 4:43 pm
Posted on 7/3/13 at 4:55 pm to finestfirst79
quote:
Civil and Mechanical Engineering is new? What?
not even relative to western civilization itself is Civil Engineering a new concept.
This is a stupid argument no matter how you chalk it up to say that engineering programs should be turned into trade schools. There is a lot to be said about all of the aspects you learn in the engineering programs and from the others around you. I have an accounting degree but run a civil construction company, meaning I build a lot of sidewalks, subdivsions and general storm water projects. I could design basic projects with no issues and do it more efficiently than most engineering firms but I couldn't do the dynamic testing involved in storm water projects.
There is more to even simple projects that you can't learn in trade schools.
I would agree that before you get a degree, you should have to go intern at an applicable place for a year. A civil student could go work for a civil construction company like myself, storm water company or a civil firm. Mechanical would go work for a firm or an applicable company that puts the mechanical degree in practice.
There are too many engineering students coming out that don't know shite about real world scenarios that need a reality check. I just spent a month arguing with an engineer about a project and she kept telling me to build it her way instead of listening to a contractor that knows what they are talking about. Now she is asking me how we can fix the problems I was addressing to begin with.
Posted on 7/3/13 at 5:01 pm to CHSgc
quote:
If you really think going to an undergrad lecture class of 300 in a plush room is better...
I'm admittedly an old fart and things may have changed at A&M, but the only classes I had at A&M with anywhere close to 300 were Chemistry. I hated those and didn't learn anything, particularly after we figured out the multiple-choice test answers had a pattern - you could make a 100 if you knew 1/3 of the answers. But I digress. All engineering and math and English and History classes were more like 30. So I'm not sure what your point is.
I'd be really surprised if any engineering classes at A&M are over 50, and that's on the high side.
Posted on 7/3/13 at 5:06 pm to finestfirst79
quote:
Civil and Mechanical Engineering is new? What?
To mainstream university education? Yes. Engineering was originally learned by trade and became an accepted part of the educational model in this country by the mid to late 1800's. The university model wasn't conceived of w/ ENGR in mind, is all I'm saying.
quote:
2) A&M (as well as Arkansas, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, LSU, MSU, and (ah, now we get to the problem!) Clemson) were all founded specifically to churn out engineers, farmers, and soldiers. A long time ago, so you can't claim this is a recent "problem". They're just not getting the same college experience you think they shou
Exactly! Those schools were designed for that, so leave it up to them. USC will do just fine w/out its ENGR dept (and all the attendant R&D $$$'s), as I maintained.
This post was edited on 7/3/13 at 5:07 pm
Posted on 7/3/13 at 5:09 pm to Warfarer
quote:
There are too many engineering students coming out that don't know shite about real world scenarios that need a reality check.
I agree, and my "reality check" came in the Army before I could hurt anybody. But I don't see how this makes engineers unique. Yeah, engineers can actually cause deaths, but that's departing a bit from SC guy's complaints about not getting a "classic" college education.
Posted on 7/3/13 at 5:10 pm to wdeinttown
Journalism, the bastion of liberalism, would be the first program to go.
Posted on 7/3/13 at 5:12 pm to UAFanFromNOLA
quote:
For a lot of classes, there is hardly a need to have that small of classes. Is it really necessary for an introductory biology class to have 30 students when you can pretty much learn at the same speed and depth in a 300 person class? I have never had a professor that was unwilling to help after class or during office hours. Also, the upper level classes are much smaller and closer to 30 people per class. The labs being updated were really the big thing for us because we are capable of allowing more students to use the labs more efficiently than before.
Since those classes form the foundation for everything you learn afterwards, then yes, I'd say there is a need to have those classes smaller. And while I appreciate the anecdotal support a/b office hours, the point is that there are plenty of students who don't actively engage w/ the education process like you and get left behind. Additionally, while the professor may lecture, your feedback is assigned to TA's, so you're not even getting the full value of their experience.
This post was edited on 7/3/13 at 5:19 pm
Posted on 7/3/13 at 5:16 pm to finestfirst79
quote:
I'm admittedly an old fart and things may have changed at A&M, but the only classes I had at A&M with anywhere close to 300 were Chemistry. I hated those and didn't learn anything, particularly after we figured out the multiple-choice test answers had a pattern - you could make a 100 if you knew 1/3 of the answers. But I digress. All engineering and math and English and History classes were more like 30. So I'm not sure what your point is.
I'd be really surprised if any engineering classes at A&M are over 50, and that's on the high side.
300 is the top end. I don't know many beyond that. Not for long, though, as most universities are testing the waters on remote education.
And the optimal prof-student ratio is something like 15-1.
Posted on 7/3/13 at 5:31 pm to finestfirst79
quote:
I agree, and my "reality check" came in the Army before I could hurt anybody. But I don't see how this makes engineers unique. Yeah, engineers can actually cause deaths, but that's departing a bit from SC guy's complaints about not getting a "classic" college education.
I am not arguing anything near his side of things on dropping engineering. APAC used to take every engineer that they hired, had them bid a job and they had to go out and build the job at that cost. That was their reality check. The biggest reality check that most engineers to have is that most contractors can help them if they are willing to listen and learn.
Posted on 7/3/13 at 5:32 pm to danfraz
quote:
Nope
I will be in a clear minority but I still believe the academic side is the reason a university exist
Don't care what foolish waste if academic program people throw out there. Someone is enrolled in it for whatever reason
100% this.
Posted on 7/3/13 at 5:35 pm to CHSgc
quote:
...became an accepted part of the educational model in this country by the mid to late 1800's.
OK, so you're making more sense now. You think "mid to late 1800's" is new. I get it now, and good for you! Can we keep our toilets and refrigerators and radios and televisions and cars and phones and computers, or do those also not fit in with your model of the perfect society?
J/K... mostly. If you want to send all the SC engineering students to land-grant schools I'm sure they'd be glad to have them, assuming they qualify. And then you can harp all you want about USC providing a real college education.
My guess is you're a teacher? I honestly mean no offense by the question, I'm just curious how you got so screwed up
Posted on 7/3/13 at 5:36 pm to wdeinttown
wow, this thread got boring quick
Posted on 7/3/13 at 5:51 pm to finestfirst79
quote:
OK, so you're making more sense now. You think "mid to late 1800's" is new. I get it now, and good for you! Can we keep our toilets and refrigerators and radios and televisions and cars and phones and computers, or do those also not fit in with your model of the perfect society?
J/K... mostly. If you want to send all the SC engineering students to land-grant schools I'm sure they'd be glad to have them, assuming they qualify. And then you can harp all you want about USC providing a real college education.
My guess is you're a teacher? I honestly mean no offense by the question, I'm just curious how you got so screwed up
Careful, your chip is showing.
Posted on 7/3/13 at 6:04 pm to wdeinttown
quote:
You realize that a large percentage of Bama fans are unaware there is a college associated with their football team, right?
Dagger. This thread was over after the first response.
Posted on 7/3/13 at 6:48 pm to CHSgc
quote:
Careful, your chip is showing.
Oh I have plenty of chips, and I think I own up to them all. Had a girlfriend at A&M that thought mostly the same way you do but a bit worse - engineering was just about memorizing a bunch of tables to her. I'm just curious where you're coming from (that got you so screwed up in the head). Obviously not an engineer or business major or farmer/rancher or veterinarian or soldier. Teacher is my best guess. Maybe a doctor. You haven't exhibited enough a-hole tendencies to be a lawyer. But it has to be one of those, unless it's one of the fruity art majors... but it would be insulting to suggest that and I don't. I'm going with teacher.
Page 4 of 4
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News