Back when I graduated in 2001, ULM and Northwestern would throw scholarship money at you. If you were majoring in education, business, etc., they would more than pay for school if you had good GPA/ACT, so it made sense to choose them. I could have doubled my scholarships choosing another school over Tech if I had wanted. And believe it or not, some of those schools do have some better programs than Tech does.
DR was great about setting goals and then ignoring them.
And long as Tech is working toward 15K, and even if it only gets to 13K or 14K in the next five years, that would be more steps in right direction in this area than DR ever came close to producing.
Part of the appeal of Tech is not being in 200-seat auditoriums for every class as a freshman or sophomore. Tech can maintain that appeal with steady growth and not just growth for the sake of growth.
I have to agree with this. ULM was going to pay me to attend there through TOPS, scholarships, fee waivers, etc, but they didn't have anything I was interested in studying, so I came to Tech instead. I seriously could've made more money attending ULM than holding down the part time job I did when attending Tech.
Also, a number of my friends and family are all ULM grads, and none of them are dumb people. My mom is an RN, uncle is a research pharmacist who also has a masters in Chemistry, best friend is a commercial flight instructor, and my girlfriend is finishing up pre-professional health studies on her way to cytotechnology/cytogenetics school in either Jackson or Houston. ULM isn't a bad place to study a handful of subjects, tbh. However, no one's choosing ULM due to academic "prestige" unless it's pharmacy. Just saying that they don't completely suck at everything. And really, when it comes to a college education, you get out what you put into it.
That said, a lot of area kids pick ULM because it's seen as an easy school to get into and it's inexpensive. It's also familiar in a way that reminds them of high school, so there's not that "OMG college is so big and scary" reaction when arriving on campus your first day. Most of their friends are there, it's close to home so they still have the mom/dad safety net, etc. Then there's the Delta --> ULM feeder programs for subpar students and non-traditional students that is a good option for a lot of people.
Unfortuntely, we have to grow as the additional tuition is critical to our survival with the State's disregard of higher education. Hopefully, its quality growth (ie. HS students with higher stats), but we must grow, whether you call it growth for the sake of growth or something else. Our growth will come from a larger portion of o/s Louisiana students as quality Louisiana HS students are limited. We need to grow 5%+ per year. Seems doable, but we have been a stagnate (small changes) university in that regard, so it will be a challenge. I am hopeful.
Growth for the sake of growth would be increasing enrollment 20% and increasing average class size by 25%. As enrollment grows, the infrastructure supporting the enrollment growth must keep pace.
Another term for growth for the sake of growth would be unsustainable growth.
Coming from a high school counselor--selective admissions is the best thing Tech has ever done in terms of improving the school's image and building enrollment. Predictably, there was an early drop but it has begun to build and more topflight students are interested in coming to Ruston. There's something about exclusivity that generates interest. Elite.
Have you considered those Dogs?