|
|
|
|
|
I'm an asshole! What's your excuse?
No........... lsu, Tech, and ULL are 1st tier and there is no "flagship". They remain and the money is evenly spread between them (percentage wise by student body population). The NEXT tier is the regional colleges - UNO, Southeastern, Southern, McNeese, ulm, and Grambling. The THIRD tier is the Community Colleges (as described in the article).
Reward excellence......
I would take it as is right now. What you say would be better but it would never happen (read: less likely than his plan). I think it is wise for the state to focus on having a few really good schools rather than having lots of mediocre ones.Originally Posted by champion110
If I take off my blue binders for a minute this plan makes a lot of sense. The state has invested a lot of money over the years to make LSU the best school possible. I would say they haven't done a great job but there has certainly been progress. Having one institution that is the focus is probably a good idea. ULL and Tech are the clear other choices for the number 2 and number 3 universities. Each can serve a region of the state while also serving as a national research university.
The only other school I would consider keeping 4 year is southeastern. It wouldn't hurt my feeling for them to go to 2 year or whatever but the shear size of the school would probably mean it would be a tough one to get rid of and it serves southeast LA and south MS. I can't say that I know what there specialty is or how they have performed compared to the other schools but I see their size as a big factor in whether to keep them.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
