US News Third Tier

[parisdog]

Some engineering colleges actually do limit their enrollment. There are a certain number of spots and you apply to get into the college when you reach junior status once you finish all of the basic stuff.

This is why you see some college retention data where they can retain and graduate 95% of their engineering students. We don't operate that way at all, and I am glad that we don't. One of the great things (IMO) about Tech's engineering program is that as a freshman engineer you get to start from day one doing engineering.

We actually just finished revamping the freshman curriculum to make it more rigorous. With the (significanlty) more difficult curriculum or retention from freshman to sophomore is higher than it was previously (at least that is what the preliminary numbers are showing.) And like you mentioned, the ones that just don't want to do engineering are making that choice earlier.

We really are doing some cool stuff over here, I would encourage anyone interested to drop by and see for yourself sometime.

We haven't tried the pamphlets yet . . .

Dr.Dawg...what do you teach at Tech? I graduated in the ME program in 01.

[hisaw]

another good article, this time on clemson.

www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/06/03/rankings

[techboy09]

another good article, this time on clemson.

www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/06/03/rankings

I truly do hope that our fine institution does not partake in these kind of activities.

[DrDawg]

@ parisdog: I was just finishing my PhD in BioMedical Engineering in 2001 so we must have been in school at the same time. I actually teach the freshman and some sophomore and design classes. I rarely if ever teach any biomed classes, I am actually a member of the mechanical faculty.

@ insidehigher ed article: I haven't seen anything like that sort of manipulation going on at Tech. I am sure we try to make our stats look as good as possible, but I haven't seen anything where we actually change class sizes and such to fit the US News mold better. The worst part to me was how the other institutions were automatically ranked below average in order to improve Clemson, that is the single largest factor in the rankings. Yet another reason we need our alumni tauting Tech every chance they get, so that we can improve our perception through other means.

[mikedog]

That just sounds ignorant.

Could it be that the programs with high volumes of foreign students are in a specialty area that is attractive to foreign students? I think more goes into a decision than the nationality of the professors.

I think "ignorant" is a little strong, but no worries. My point was not to critique the nationality of professors, whether at Tech or elsewhere. In fact, I benefited from many EXCELLENT foreign professors at Tech. However, proficiency in the English language is a necessary skill to be an effective teacher. I encountered several foreign professors whose inability to speak fluent English hindered their effectiveness in the classroom. I surmise that the professors themselves would admit to that.

How does this translate to the exodus of U.S. students from certain majors? Foreign students come to the U.S. expecting to deal with a language barrier to a certain degree. For better or worse, U.S. students do not.

Universities across that country are struggling to strike the perfect balance between research and the classroom. Unfortunately, this effort is becoming increasingly difficult (with respect to certain departments) for a variety of reasons--one being the lack of U.S.-born ph.D candidates willing to bypass private industry for academia.

[Dawg06]

I truly do hope that our fine institution does not partake in these kind of activities.

I hope we are. Perception is reality.

[DrDawg]

I hope we are. Perception is reality

I hope we are doing the things necessary to accurately report the data in the most positive way possible. But to go so far as ranking all other universities below average just to increase our relative position is completely wrong.

Perception is not reality. One person's perception is their reality. To me that is a big difference.

[Dawg06]

Average Alumni Giving Rates:
19% - LA Tech
19% - Tulane
13% - LSU
7% - Nicholls
6% - Northwestern
6% - UL-Lafayette
5% - UL-Monroe
4% - Southeastern
2% - Grambling
2% - UNO
n/a - McNeese
n/a - Southern

[arkansasbob]

Average Alumni Giving Rates:
19% - LA Tech
19% - Tulane
13% - LSU
7% - Nicholls
6% - Northwestern
6% - UL-Lafayette
5% - UL-Monroe
4% - Southeastern
2% - Grambling
2% - UNO
n/a - McNeese
n/a - Southern

wow. that's good information. how is it calculated?

[Dawg06]

wow. that's good information. how is it calculated?

Alumni giving rate (5 percent). This reflects the average percentage of living alumni with bachelor's degrees who gave to their school during 2006-07 and 2007-08, which is an indirect measure of student satisfaction.

[arkansasbob]

Alumni giving rate (5 percent). This reflects the average percentage of living alumni with bachelor's degrees who gave to their school during 2006-07 and 2007-08, which is an indirect measure of student satisfaction.

i guess it doesn't include giving to athletic foundations (like taf)?

[Dawg06]

i guess it doesn't include giving to athletic foundations (like taf)?

I'm sure it does. Most of those people giving to the TAF didn't graduate from LSU.