More Texas Recruitement Info

[breathesgelatin]

Originally Posted by Kitemom

Oh to throw more into the flames. There is UT Health Science Center in San Antonio and Houston and UTMB. Which stands for UT Medical Branch in Galveston and is the med school. No one would ever confuse UTMB with Southwestern which is the name for UT Medical school in Dallas.

There's been so much talk lately about them starting a UT medical school that would be in Austin and a direct college within UT Austin. I think there's too much opposition for that to happen though. I personally don't know how much there is a need for it in the first place.

Speaking of public schools in Texas, did anyone see the recent thing where the legislature wants to consider starting a "third flagship public school"? I guess the idea is partially to take some of the strain off UT & A&M because of the 10% rule (well especially A&M). I don't get this idea. I thought that they were grooming Tech to take the "third flagship" role anyway and that it was already edging that way in the first place or even already there. And I also don't see why they would spend millions and millions of dollars into an entirely new school when they could use the money to build up places like Tech or even Texas State, where the basic infrastructure already exists. It's weird to me and I don't quite understand where the lobby for this is coming from.

It took me a long time to figure out in the first place that all the schools are part of different systems... In North Carolina every state school is technically part of the "UNC system" even if they don't have "UNC" in their name.

[em_adpi]

Originally Posted by breathesgelatin

Speaking of public schools in Texas, did anyone see the recent thing where the legislature wants to consider starting a "third flagship public school"? I guess the idea is partially to take some of the strain off UT & A&M because of the 10% rule (well especially A&M). I don't get this idea. I thought that they were grooming Tech to take the "third flagship" role anyway and that it was already edging that way in the first place or even already there. And I also don't see why they would spend millions and millions of dollars into an entirely new school when they could use the money to build up places like Tech or even Texas State, where the basic infrastructure already exists. It's weird to me and I don't quite understand where the lobby for this is coming from.

The 10% rule needs to be eliminated anyway. The population has grown so much; I'm pretty sure that's why UT had to introduce the CAP program.

To be honest, I never liked the 10% rule because the 'top 10%' of a high school class could vary from one school to another.

[epchick]

Originally Posted by em_adpi

To be honest, I never liked the 10% rule because the 'top 10%' of a high school class could vary from one school to another.

That's the reason I liked the 10% rule, it gave students from "less fortunate" school districts a chance to go to a good college.

Lets be honest---I was in the top 10% and I think i'm darn smart (along with the other 28 people who were in the top 10% w/ me) but I don't know if we could compete with people at more fortunate school districts in Austin, Dallas, etc.

But I know that when my cousin was a senior in HS (which was 2 years ago) the counselors told the seniors that they would no longer be accepted because they were top 10% that it was taken away.

There's been so much talk lately about them starting a UT medical school that would be in Austin and a direct college within UT Austin. I think there's too much opposition for that to happen though. I personally don't know how much there is a need for it in the first place.

Well the medical school in Houston is SOOOOOOO crowded and so hard to get into. What gets me mad about this idea, is that there have been plans for soo long to start medical schools in other places (Like El Paso) and the buildings were built and then the board, or whoever is in charge, kept taking away the funding. The medical school should have been opened in Fall '07 or fall '08 (i should have been part of the first class).

I know a lot of people got upset here, because the person who they put in charge of the medical school hired some AWESOME doctors from around the country---very well respected doctors in their field. Then he was fired and the doctors were told that if they came to El Paso they wouldn't have a job.

The reason the funding was taken away? Because they didn't think El Paso was "worthy" of having a medical school.....they wanted the med school in Austin or some place "better." I know El Paso isn't Austin, but I don't think its a bad place and we are a unique city. The medical school would benefit b/c they would see problems here that you wouldn't really see elsewhere.

Now we were told we got funding again, so we'll see what happens.

[breathesgelatin]

Originally Posted by epchick

That's the reason I liked the 10% rule, it gave students from "less fortunate" school districts a chance to go to a good college.

Lets be honest---I was in the top 10% and I think i'm darn smart (along with the other 28 people who were in the top 10% w/ me) but I don't know if we could compete with people at more fortunate school districts in Austin, Dallas, etc.

But I know that when my cousin was a senior in HS (which was 2 years ago) the counselors told the seniors that they would no longer be accepted because they were top 10% that it was taken away.



Well the medical school in Houston is SOOOOOOO crowded and so hard to get into. What gets me mad about this idea, is that there have been plans for soo long to start medical schools in other places (Like El Paso) and the buildings were built and then the board, or whoever is in charge, kept taking away the funding. The medical school should have been opened in Fall '07 or fall '08 (i should have been part of the first class).

I know a lot of people got upset here, because the person who they put in charge of the medical school hired some AWESOME doctors from around the country---very well respected doctors in their field. Then he was fired and the doctors were told that if they came to El Paso they wouldn't have a job.

The reason the funding was taken away? Because they didn't think El Paso was "worthy" of having a medical school.....they wanted the med school in Austin or some place "better." I know El Paso isn't Austin, but I don't think its a bad place and we are a unique city. The medical school would benefit b/c they would see problems here that you wouldn't really see elsewhere.

Now we were told we got funding again, so we'll see what happens.

It's true that at really good schools in Dallas, Houston, Austin, etc., that most of the graduating student body is probably qualified to enter UT. At the same time the University is supposed to serve the entire state, not people who happen to live in a rich school district (let's face it, good school districts are often rich ones).

In my time as an instructor I've only met one person who was admitted under the top 10% rule who seemed blatantly unqualified to attend UT. I think overall the quality of the student body is pretty high. I know they're aren't as intellectually motivated as the students I knew in undergrad, but I think that's partly something to do with the state university/liberal art college divide.

Sucks about the El Paso situation. I haven't been following it. I don't really have a strong opinion on a med school in Austin. People from other UT med schools can do their residencies at Austin hospitals anyway. I actually think UT is somewhat indifferent to the whole thing overall. Administrators are concerned about the startup costs taking away from other institutional goals. I know people involved in biology/biomedical engineering really want a med school because it would allow a lot of cross-pollination in terms of research opportunities, grant funding, etc.

Sorry to keep going back to the "third flagship" proposal but that was another thing that somewhat irked me about the proposal. It seemed a way to excuse not funding or building up schools like Tech or UTEP in under-served areas of the state in exchange for building a new school closer to the Texas population centers.

[breathesgelatin]

Originally Posted by em_adpi

The 10% rule needs to be eliminated anyway. The population has grown so much; I'm pretty sure that's why UT had to introduce the CAP program.

To be honest, I never liked the 10% rule because the 'top 10%' of a high school class could vary from one school to another.

UT hates the 10% rule. Right now they're admitting something like 81% of freshmen based on the ten percent rule. For A&M the number is much lower, so A&M isn't as worried about it:

http://media.www.dailytexanonline.co...-3279783.shtml

Personally, I see some good and bad to the top 10% rule. As a graduate student who's really interested in having UT increase its profile among Research 1 institutions, having the rule prevents UT from keeping enrollment down, forcing them to spend more and more on undergrads and preventing them from sending money to research and to grad students. At the same time, I don't blame Texas high school grads for going to UT over other schools (including A&M, bwa hahahaha).

I just don't know what other solution they're going to come up with to remedy it. I guess the idea of the third flagship school is maybe part of it--starting from scratch and presenting an alternative to people who maybe wouldn't go to Tech or A&M over UT but would be interested in starting something new from a blank slate? I am just skeptical about whether that would really work.

One thing batted around is switching it to the fact that if you were in the top 10%, you'd be admitted to *some* Texas state school. But it seems like that would required a lot of coordination/bureaucracy between admission offices.

[SWTXBelle]

Originally Posted by breathesgelatin

And I also don't see why they would spend millions and millions of dollars into an entirely new school when they could use the money to build up places like Tech or even Texas State, where the basic infrastructure already exists. It's weird to me and I don't quite understand where the lobby for this is coming from

EVEN Texas State? Did you know that admissions requirements for TX State are now higher than Tech? I love my alma mater, and would really like to see it get the funding it needs to be even greater. From a population standpoint, it is pretty well perfectly situated - 1 hour from San Antonio, 30 minutes (okay, 45 with traffic) from Austin, 2 1/2 - 3 and from Houston (depends where in Houston you are talking).

The lobby for this is coming from those who would profit from a new school. But I don't really see this coming to anything - not in this economy. It would cost far too much to start from scratch. And I'm sorry UTEP is still not gettin' any love - they really have been the red-haired step child for quite a while.

[breathesgelatin]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

EVEN Texas State? Did you know that admissions requirements for TX State are now higher than Tech? I love my alma mater, and would really like to see it get the funding it needs to be even greater. From a population standpoint, it is pretty well perfectly situated - 1 hour from San Antonio, 30 minutes (okay, 45 with traffic) from Austin, 2 1/2 - 3 and from Houston (depends where in Houston you are talking).

The lobby for this is coming from those who would profit from a new school. But I don't really see this coming to anything - not in this economy. It would cost far too much to start from scratch. And I'm sorry UTEP is still not gettin' any love - they really have been the red-haired step child for quite a while.

Oh man - didn't mean to imply anything against State. I guess I said that because I think that it's good to develop schools outside of Central Texas as well (as I posted above). But there's also an argument to be made that for the many people who want to stay in the Central Texas area Texas State really needs to be built up and funded properly. But yeah, even if there WERE the money to create a new school, I think it would be a stupid idea to do so and that it should be instead poured into the schools that are on the verge of reaching Research 1 status like Texas State, Tech, maybe UTEP... There could be others. I'm admittedly no expert on public universities in Texas.

One thing I've thought a lot about both in my home state of NC and in Texas is whether or not have the extra letters behind your name inherently regulates you to second class status. I'm thinking of UTEP, UTSA, UTA, UNC-C, etc. etc. I mean I know that's why so many schools are renaming themselves as Texas State did. I'm trying to think of schools that I think of as "elite" that have letters after their name. I guess UCLA is up there for sure. There may be others...