-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
MSU makes list of biggest college/degree $ wastes
- Thread starter WaGriz4life
- Start date
AllWeatherFan said:
I'm not at all sure most colleges teach critical thinking. If they did there would be more common sense in the world.
MT has 6 4-year pubic institutions: MSU, UM, MSU-Billings, MSU-Northern, UM-Dillon, and UM-MT Tech. Each one of these offer the baccalaureate in education and business. UM only should offer the degree in education and business, if this state were as cost-conscious and efficient as it claims.
What would that do to the other institutions? Well, Northern and Dillon should become community colleges in the state system. MSU-Billings and MT Tech should be upper division 2-year institutes. MT does not need 6 4-year schools. We need to look at 2-year degrees locally, and look to UM and MSU for 4-year degrees.
What I mean by MSU-Billings and MT Tech, is that students who have completed their lower division coursework at a community college (by that I mean all 2-year schools in the state) or at UM or MSU, could take their last 2 years at MSU-Billings or MT Tech. This way, those 2 schools would not have lower division offerings.
Why should they? Billings has Billings City College, and MT Tech has Highlands College to handle lower division programs. A lean & mean higher ed. system for MT, but it will never happen. ("OMG! We'll lose our athletic programs! Waa, waa, waa.")
What would that do to the other institutions? Well, Northern and Dillon should become community colleges in the state system. MSU-Billings and MT Tech should be upper division 2-year institutes. MT does not need 6 4-year schools. We need to look at 2-year degrees locally, and look to UM and MSU for 4-year degrees.
What I mean by MSU-Billings and MT Tech, is that students who have completed their lower division coursework at a community college (by that I mean all 2-year schools in the state) or at UM or MSU, could take their last 2 years at MSU-Billings or MT Tech. This way, those 2 schools would not have lower division offerings.
Why should they? Billings has Billings City College, and MT Tech has Highlands College to handle lower division programs. A lean & mean higher ed. system for MT, but it will never happen. ("OMG! We'll lose our athletic programs! Waa, waa, waa.")
Look, Hammer. MT Tech can offer the upper division courses for the petroleum engineering degree. The lower division courses, consisting of general requirements & whatever math/chemistry courses students need to go into the upper division of the program, can be handled at either UM, MSU, or any community college in the MT higher ed. system.Hammer said:
Lower division programs at MSU-Billings & MT Tech duplicate those at UM, MSU, & state community colleges. There is no difference between math/chemistry, etc. courses at those schools at the lower division (fr. & soph. levels). Why have all this unnecessary duplication?
Isn't that the point of this topic? I agree: Stop wasting $.
Forbes says that Montana Tech is actually a better school than UM. Maybe we should consolidate UM-Missoula into MT Tech.
Davey Deuce is on to something. To cut costs, maybe each institution in Montana should only offer 3 or 4 courses.
Oh, what's that? You want to take 142-Intro to 1890s Women's Fashion South of the Mason-Dixon Line? You're in luck; we're offering that in Lame Deer at Chief Dull Knife College this semester.
Oh, what's that? You want to take 142-Intro to 1890s Women's Fashion South of the Mason-Dixon Line? You're in luck; we're offering that in Lame Deer at Chief Dull Knife College this semester.
CDAGRIZ said:
Whoa! Three or four courses? Put down your copy of Das Kapital, comrade. You need: 1) Math or 2) science. Maybe one elective. I would suggest Casual Shooting.
CDAGRIZ said:
Ha!
Ok, have your fun. I probably presented an extreme case of saving money, which is the reason for this thread. Obviously, you're all rich enough not to care about how the present MT higher ed. system is wasting money, only in that MSU is doing it. Man, must be nice to be so rich you don't care how much tax you pay to support a money-wasting system.
Grizzoola said:
Careful. You are starting to sound like a wild-eyed right wing, lunatic. Taxes should have no place in the discussion if our kids are involved. However much you think you are paying, you're not doing enough.
All I'm trying to do, here, is expand on the point of this thread: wasting money. It's a cheap shot at MSU (a favorite whipping-boy on this board) to accuse the school of wasting money. Money is being wasted all over this higher ed. system & the biggest waste is what I've pointed out: a faulty, inefficient, expensive, and outmoded higher ed. structure/organization.cclarkblues said:Careful. You are starting to sound like a wild-eyed right wing, lunatic. Taxes should have no place in the discussion if our kids are involved. However much you think you are paying, you're not doing enough.
The point I'm trying to make is that the quality of our kids' education would not be affected by the cost-cutting measures I've suggested. In fact, it's a way of doing more for our kids and citizens, while charging less. Isn't that the mantra of good business?
Consider if you were the CEO of MT Higher Ed., Inc. Wouldn't you be looking at the cost/benefit of the 6 4-year units in your business? What units are duplicating services (instruction)?
Is this duplication necessary? Could we consolidate some of these services, saving money for us, while maintaining the excellence of our products/offerings w/o repercussions for our customers (students/citizens)?
All I'm doing here is carrying the thread's topic to a logical conclusion, which I think is workable. In the meantime, if this suggestion offends so many of you, then you are not serious of who/what is wasting money in higher ed. in this state. IOW, this thread is facetious & just one more petty, worthless, dig at MSU.
garizzalies
Well-known member
That's weird: it doesn't sound like you even attended college but somehow you sure are an expert on it.Grizzoola said:
To suggest that the average student can go from a community college straight to a 300-level petro class at tech made me laugh. Thanks, i needed that today.
Like most of your diatribes, they only sound crazy on paper. It's not until you actually try to apply the theory that the true absurdity can be fully appreciated. To that end, you may be on to something with some of the small schools, but not Tech....over my dead body. You have no idea what you are talking about. So. Just. Stop.
Despite your insults (which I've cut out), I'll respond. First, I've probably spent more time as a student and teacher in higher ed. than you. Second, ok, educate me: what is there about a 300-level "petro" class that a 200-level organic chemistry program does not prepare a student, whether at UM, MSU, or a community college?garizzalies said:
If there is some lack in a 200 chemistry program to prepare students for a 300 "petro" class, then MSU and UM could add a class to their 200 organic chemistry programs for students who wish to transfer to the "MT Technical Institute" to complete their degrees.
What's so special about "petro" classes? Aren't they simply advanced organic chemistry? Maybe the "MT Technical Institute" could provide a "remedial" class for those lacking abilities to enter your hallowed 300 "petro" class.
You're response is like most Montanans, who will defend the status quo of their local higher ed. institutions to the death, rather than streamline the system so that effectiveness will not decrease, but efficiency would increase. That's really your point (and fear), that the almighty MT Tech, a top institution in this country, no doubt, will suffer. It's all politically motivated, not educationally motivated.
What does it matter where you got your lower division classes? It's where your degree is awarded that counts. A degree from MT Tech will continue to be valued by industry, regardless of where its graduates received their lower division courses. We don't need duplicative lower division programs. These are generic and can be taught anywhere.
I will clarify something I said earlier: Even if MSU-Billings and MT Tech were 2-year upper division institutes, the degrees they award will be 4-year degrees. They could continue their graduate programs, provided candidates present qualifying credentials. Think of all the lower division overhead eliminated. Think of all the upper division overhead eliminated at Havre and Dillon.
So, go ahead. Continue to pay for a bloated, outdated MT higher ed. system, but don't come on here and raise the issue of wasting money at MSU. The entire system is corrupt, and the corruption starts with each Montanan.
Grizzly Oredigger
Well-known member
Go Diggers
garizzalies
Well-known member
CDA, i think i now understand your joke: it is pointless to argue an "unstoppable" theory from DaveyDuece. Great foresight there.
D2, I don't even know where to start. If you did attend college I assume you didn't finish or else you'd understand how some classes lay the foundation for later ones (and are sometimes taught by the same profs). Organic chem doesn't even touch geology so how exactly would it prepare you for advanced petro courses?
I don't want to maintain the "status quo" as you claim. All the small schools (other than Tech) can eat shit and die for all i care. As I said, you may be on to something but you're taking it way to far. You want to make tech a two-year school and believe it will somehow still maintain its superiority. That's dumber than putting a dome over WaGriz.
D2, I don't even know where to start. If you did attend college I assume you didn't finish or else you'd understand how some classes lay the foundation for later ones (and are sometimes taught by the same profs). Organic chem doesn't even touch geology so how exactly would it prepare you for advanced petro courses?
I don't want to maintain the "status quo" as you claim. All the small schools (other than Tech) can eat shit and die for all i care. As I said, you may be on to something but you're taking it way to far. You want to make tech a two-year school and believe it will somehow still maintain its superiority. That's dumber than putting a dome over WaGriz.
