Right. Which is why there will have to be a transition period of about 2 yrs. Any current GSU and ulm student with 60+ hrs will be allowed to finish their degrees. Their diploma might read: Grambling State College of Louisiana Tech University. In other words, effective immediately, both GSU and ulm would cease being universities. They would be designated a college within Tech. However, in a practicle sense, for their students with the 60 hrs, their daily routine would change very little. They would generally have many of the same faculty they do now, with some exceptions due to some consolidations, and mostly be able to complete the degree program they have begun.
Any current GSU/ulm students(less than 60 hrs) wishing to remain will have to apply to Tech, and meet the same entry requirements. Some would, many won't. At that point, they would have to seek entry into another school. As for the hours they have earned, how many transfer with them will be up to whatever school they apply to.
Grambling would slow down the process in MANY ways...... You get into MUCH more politics when trying to work a HBCU into the equation. We need to get LSUS and, then, work toward ulm. BPCC as a feeder........
LFR you need the "P 90 x"!!!!
Exactly, Champ. TECH/LSUS first. Set the precedent, chip away...one at a time. I actually work with a lady who is deeply tied at ULM, 2 degrees from there, and is on a first name basis with most of the leadership at ULM. She has said to me that the talk is "all over" ULM that they fully expect to be Louisiana Tech University @ Monroe in the not-too-distant-future.
For obvious political reasons, I see GSU as untouchable. The state of Louisiana can't consolidate it, and certainly can't consider closing it, unless they want another "Arizona" on their hands.
While I would love for there to be a Tech "system" so to speak or even just having these other universities fall under our umbrella I have to say I want no part of Grambling. Let them be. Too much baggage and political hurdles that don't result in a big enough gain. First order of business for ulM would be having their athletics compete at the D2 or 3 level. Too much money being wasted there right now.
Lets use Texas A&M as an example. Back in the 70's they were a sleepy little university with about 12,000 students, and today have an on campus enrollment of 50,000+. Their leadership saw the advantages that size gives you and committed to grow the university by doing what they do best. First class Engineering, Science, Agriculture departments that are the envy of the state, always with an eye toward "growth". They built bigger and more class rooms and expanded offerings to attract more students to little ole College Station. Bigger and better dorms to attract more students. Bigger and better athletic facilities too!! That should be our model for the La Tech campus in Ruston. To hell with merging LSUS with Tech!!! That's a trap we'll never get out of. Anybdy in SBC advocating a merger is no friend of LT Ruston!!! Our goal should be an on campus student population of 20,000+ by 2020. Make that happen then we'll discuss mergers, etc....
Last edited by TXDAWG81; 02-19-2012 at 06:29 PM. Reason: Spelling
I don't know the details, but I really support this merger. I can leave the rivalry side of things on the athletics side. It's painfully obvious that we have too many 4 years schools in this state. Tech, UL-Lafayette, UNO should probably each support student populations of over 20K. LSU can have some and the rest of the schools in the state need to have a minimal footprint. I think the LSUS merger is interesting. Obviously, as the 2/3rd biggest city in the State, Shreveport needs to be better served. My questions for you guys in the know is this...
1) I saw on the LSU-S website that they only require a 20 ACT for entrance. How do you guys make that jive with your standards. I think both of our standards are going up next year.
2) Will the schools be on entity or two. If one entity. It will be interesting to see if students on the Shreveport campus have part of their tuition donated to Tech athletics. Obviously that woudl be a huge benefit to you all. However, I can see that it would raise some problems with students 70 miles away.
I think this should save the state some money. Although, I think the real benefit would be merging Tech/ULM. We should still save money on administrative costs alone. It is very interesting to say the least. Unfortunately, I suppose it will likely put Chad McDowell out of a job.
I am with you on this one. I am not convinced of the benefits to Tech of a merger with LSU-S. There are plenty of benefits to other parties, I just don't see the benefits to us. I am not privy to how the finances would work out, so there may be something there that makes this a better deal than it appears to be to me.Lets use Texas A&M as an example. Back in the 70's they were a sleepy little university with about 12,000 students, and today have an on campus enrollment of 50,000+. Their leadership saw the advantages that size gives you and committed to grow the university by doing what they do best. First class Engineering, Science, Agriculture departments that are the envy of the state, always with an eye toward "growth". They built bigger and more class rooms and expanded offerings to attract more students to little ole College Station. Bigger and better dorms to attract more students. Bigger and better athletic facilities too!! That should be our model for the La Tech campus in Ruston. To hell with merging LSUS with Tech!!! That's a trap we'll never get out of. Anybdy in SBC advocating a merger is no friend of LT Ruston!!! our goal should be an on campus student population of 20,000+ by 2020. Make that happen then we'll discuss mergers, etc....