Tech

By KC

February 22, 2008 4:22 PM | Link to this

GT should add some liberal arts majors. Look at GT’s business school. We are in the top-10 for public Universities and top-25 overall. I have no doubt we could put out better liberal arts degree holders than UGA or GState.

As an alum, I would love the opportunity to take more classes to broaden my engineering degree. We do have psychology & history, but I wanted additional options.

By scooter11

February 22, 2008 4:42 PM | Link to this

Broaden curriculum only if you want a more well-rounded and larger student body. Might even increase attendance at football games. I’m sure you’d have quality offerings.

By jabster

February 22, 2008 4:47 PM | Link to this

How about sports journalism?

By LydiasDad

February 22, 2008 4:55 PM | Link to this

Yeah, that’s what Tech needs—more liberal arts majors. More student hating the country while contributing nothing useful to society.

By Bob Sacamano

February 22, 2008 5:06 PM | Link to this

LydiasDad… you’re an idiot.

Liberal Arts doesn’t mean “liberal” politically, although just every professor, whether they’re technical or liberal arts is going to swing left. That’s called college. Regardless, Liberal Arts means business, history, english, education, photography, journalism, film, sociology, anthropology, film, broadcasting, etc. As in, anything that isn’t a technical degree.

Idiot.

By jabster

February 22, 2008 5:07 PM | Link to this

Some serious proposals that would have Tech-worthy rigor and mesh well with the rest of the curricula:

1) Sports journalism, as I mentioned above. Help to make some local publications more, shall I say, “fair and balanced”.

2) Technical writing (don’t laugh until you’ve tried to hire a good technical writer)

3) Extensions of the HST/public policy programs to include programs in technology forecasting, futures, techno-sociology, etc.

4) Technical pre-law (intellectual property/patent law, etc.)

5) Sports biology/physics/pre-med

6) Nerd studies (just kidding-had to beat the UGA trolls to the punch).

By LydiasDad

February 22, 2008 5:13 PM | Link to this

Bob S. Ever known anyone with one of those degrees that supported the Iraq or Afghanistan war, or even understood it? Nothing you listed contributes anything USEFUL to society. I think I made my point.

By fred

February 22, 2008 5:15 PM | Link to this

Might as well add more sportswriters——ah, heck===you don’t need a “degree” to write.

“Sportswriter” is a classic/contemporary oxymoron (except for the most highly-respected Furman Bisher).

By jabster

February 22, 2008 5:18 PM | Link to this

Well said, Bob.

You could add technical education (something this country sorely needs) and Internet/online media (although I think the College of Computing may already be doing this).

By I Bleed White and Gold

February 22, 2008 5:21 PM | Link to this

I’m a Rambling Wreck from Georgia Tech and a Helluva Liberal Artist.

Nope. Just won’t fit the program.

By New Guard

February 22, 2008 5:26 PM | Link to this

Old guard. New guard. Who cares. Tech does not need any more liberal arts majors. All it would do is water down the quality of a Tech degree. Besides, it is called Georgia Institute of Technology for a reason. If you want to get a liberal arts education, then go to UGA. The state has two fine institutions, each serving a purpose.

By ArkyTech

February 22, 2008 5:31 PM | Link to this

GT now will have 7 of 9 games on the road. That’s brutal.

LydiasDad, “High 5” from this liberal arts major. That was a good one.

By Dooley

February 22, 2008 5:50 PM | Link to this

Not only no but HELL no.

By JacketGrad07

February 22, 2008 5:51 PM | Link to this

Never liberal arts at Tech, never ever never. Tech is the last great Public school that still believes that education should be useful, factual, and difficult. Other universities have given over to the popular American idea that college should be a drug induced journey of self discovery ending in a ´Playground Management´ degree (real major at UGA, look it up). For the sake of its students, its alumni (who will abandon the university in droves if they start seeing communications majors), and its dignity I sincerely hope that Tech will never, ever change.

By Matt Winkeljohn

February 22, 2008 6:37 PM | Link to this

JacketGrad07,

Can an alumni base abandon an Institute (not university) in droves when they don’t capitulate in droves in the first place?

Tech does not have a drove-like alumni base.

In my estimation, based on both observation and the opinions I’ve received (some solicited, some not) of some Tech graduates, it has a relatively small died-in-the-wool brand of conservative old gold-and-white passionites, a slightly larger group of moderately interested graduates and then a huge percentage of completely or nearly completely disinterested former students.

Matt

By LongBeachJacket

February 22, 2008 7:23 PM | Link to this

Matt - Actually, Tech has broadened the curriculum significantly over the past 25 years or so. A significant push was begin in this direction after President Pettit…under President Crecine.

I believe the trend has continued under President Clough.

Tech has realized that, as a top tier technical institution, students need to be able to relate in other areas of discourse to engage the world successfully.

So it has been done and, it probably has benefitted the athletic recruiting some as well…a fact that probably gets lost in a lot of the discussion.

What Tech should not do…nor do I think it will ever do…is broaden its curriculum specifically with the targeted objective of helping athletic recruiting. I think many alumni, young and old, would find that objectionable.

The gratification that comes from winning at Tech…when we do…and we will…is doing it the “Tech way”…which should be the “right way”…

GO JACKETS!!

By sam

February 22, 2008 9:11 PM | Link to this

Actually the institution of UNIVERSity started as a tool to broaden an individual’s knowledge not narrow it to one field. The idea of having majors is actually a relatively new concept. Just over a century ago, college students studied numerous fields, not just electrical engineering or chemical engineering. The goal was to attain higher learning and become more worldly, not close minded. Although GT is a fine INSTITUTE, it fails miserably at the concept of being a UNIVERSITY… yes I know GT has Institute in it’s name but it’s official classification is a UNIVERSITY

By JacketGrad07

February 22, 2008 10:18 PM | Link to this

First I can´t believe I used the word University to describe Tech, I appologize.

Sam: I agree, a century ago the concept of a University was to give a student a broad knowledge of the liberal arts, not a useful technical education. However that kind of education is rooted in the still more ancient idea that education was for ´gentlemen´, the heriditary, trust-funded, old-monied ticks that lived off the people who actually worked fora living. A century attending a University was an alternative to work, rather than a prepartion for it. Of course that kind of education is still just fine if you happen to have a trust fund set aside for you, but I believe that public institutions, at the very least, should focus on instilling real skills in their students. A Public University prepares you for a Airistocary that you´re not actually a part of, while giving their graduates few to no means to actually achieve their life goals. The Georgia Institute of Technology, in contrast, gives you the skills to move up in the world on your own merits.

By JacketGrad07

February 22, 2008 10:18 PM | Link to this

First I can´t believe I used the word University to describe Tech, I appologize.

Sam: I agree, a century ago the concept of a University was to give a student a broad knowledge of the liberal arts, not a useful technical education. However that kind of education is rooted in the still more ancient idea that education was for ´gentlemen´, the heriditary, trust-funded, old-monied ticks that lived off the people who actually worked fora living. A century attending a University was an alternative to work, rather than a prepartion for it. Of course that kind of education is still just fine if you happen to have a trust fund set aside for you, but I believe that public institutions, at the very least, should focus on instilling real skills in their students. A Public University prepares you for a Airistocary that you´re not actually a part of, while giving their graduates few to no means to actually achieve their life goals. The Georgia Institute of Technology, in contrast, gives you the skills to move up in the world on your own merits.

By jabster

February 22, 2008 11:18 PM | Link to this

I thought we fixed the Roof when we sent him to Duke…

By StingerSplash

February 23, 2008 2:32 AM | Link to this

Students at Tech aren’t there because the party scene is hopping or because they want to make sure they’ve got something to do on Saturday afternoons in the fall. They’re there because the school is one of the premier institutions, public or private, in the world. It’s education and scholastic endeavors first, not have a good time and oh my God I’m 24 and I have to pick a major like already, such as our dear friends about an hour and change east.

By Harry

February 23, 2008 3:28 AM | Link to this

I believe all changes to the curriculum must be approved by the Board of Regents. The Board is dominated by UGA grads. It is unlikely that any change that would put Tech on equal footing athletically would be approved.

By surfrider

February 23, 2008 3:33 AM | Link to this

When it rains it pours, well like the basketball team. As for Liberal Arts possibly but walk carefully as Tech has a brand name that has built up over decades and to get more majors to get more athletes in is a copout to some degree. It’s proven with the right coaches that it can be done…Dodd, Ross, Etc….Now there is some liberal arts movement or has been for 30 years or so. Can’t remember the name but some sort of Strategic Social Studies is is in place, Sam Nunn basically brought it in. Maybe it’s Science, Politics and Social Studies can’t remember the name but some of the early Arms control concepts were thought out in that arena. Maybe the liberal arts agenda can be explored and thought through a little more but be careful to not destroy the brand.

By Ga, Board of Regents

February 23, 2008 8:31 AM | Link to this

We turned down Bill Lewis & we will deny any attempts again. Liberal studies will go to your hated rivals.

By UGADAWG

February 23, 2008 8:33 AM | Link to this

HA HA HA…engineering school and you have a leaking building and the joke at the Coke…What marvelous skills you have!!!!!! You guys stink at building and Football!!!! We own you!

By Hillary Clit is a Crook.....

February 23, 2008 10:17 AM | Link to this

Like He-ll, Tech will not be dumbed down to fit the desires of IDIOT ajc reporters, most of whom graduated from an already dumbed down cow school call ugay….Fire all UGA grads NOW….

By addicted

February 23, 2008 11:04 AM | Link to this

Actually, Tech is in a ripe place to redefine what a liberal arts major actually is. Some of the new majors, like LCC, are doing really great stuff integrating Technology into their curriculum, improving the engineering degrees they partner with, as well as providing a fantastic and grounded liberal arts degree. I think Tech should add more liberal arts, but this should be a slow, and organic growth, and should only be done if its got a uniquely Tech flavor to it.

One thing Tech definitely needs to focus on is enlarging the Public Policy school, so ALL the state money does not keep getting filtered to U(sic)GA. Additionally, Tech could provide Mayor Franklin with better ideas than a prayer meeting to solve the water problem, if she would only bother asking…

By Dodd's Legacy

February 23, 2008 11:38 AM | Link to this

The decision to propose changes to the curriculum at Georgia Tech will only come from the people who have something at stake, namely the students, faculty, and alumni of Georgia Tech.

You are none of these, Winky. Butt out.

Tech is not a slave to its athletics department nor a cheap degree factory like ugag. Tech’s first mission is to educate.

By roylee

February 23, 2008 12:52 PM | Link to this

The whole idea of liberal arts at Tech is a bit of an unfunny joke. Let’s be honest about this. Tech really isn’t an American institution anymore. The real engine at Tech is the large bloc of Asisan students who use Tech for technical training which they take back to great places like Communist China. The Tech people like to flatter themselves and believe that these people respect them and the institutution, but the truth is a bit different. These people use the taxpayers of this state, who they certainly don’t respect, for a good technical education and a good time. Then they head back home. Is this also the type of liberal arts graduate that Tech would turn out? What a great thing for this state and nation.

By Concerned

February 23, 2008 2:05 PM | Link to this

My understanding has always been that you attend college (university or whatever you choose to call it) to get an education not a vocation. As far as someone saying that any liberal arts major contributes nothing to society, I think the ability to effectively communicate, through the written or spoken word, is sorely needed in any society.

By JacketGrad07

February 23, 2008 3:22 PM | Link to this

roylee: As a former OOS student, trust me we are not preying on the Georgia Taxpayer, we are subsidizing your in-state education. 4 years OOS at Tech are close to 100K, and you aren´t paying anything close to that in taxes. Same deal for international students.

By roylee

February 23, 2008 3:47 PM | Link to this

The Tech people would have you believe that they don’t need the taxpayers of this state (a bunch of rednecks). They will tell you that their corporate and private donors give Tech all the money they need- thank you very much. That being the case, you have to wonder why everytime the Legislature convenes the Tech people are down at the capital lined up with their hands out. Tech people are “international” and global, don’t you know. These rednecks in GA should just be glad to have them and hand over the cash. Tech people can be as globalist as they please. I just wish they would stop sending me a bill for it.

By NWatkins

February 23, 2008 9:02 PM | Link to this

I’m all in favor of Tech expanding its liberal arts programs, although that may be a biased view because I am graduating with a degree from the Ivan Allen College (economics). I will go ahead and say that the way our current IAC majors are structured still lend credence to the idea that Tech is, well, a technical school. Our English majors have to take calculus. What other school can say that? In addition, many of the IAC degrees are blends of other programs. Computational Media, for example, is a combined communications and computer science degree. Finally, the IAC classwork is structured around practical applications, much like the other programs at this school. International Affairs studies the way institutions work and how to affect those results. It’s this type of mindset that sets the IAC apart from other liberal arts schools.

As long as Tech can keep with that tradition, I say expand our liberal arts.

On a side note, during my 2nd year of school at Tech I was speaking with an economics major who was the same year at UPenn. I told him about the coursework I was doing and how it’s very reliant on math, and he said he hadn’t even heard of what I was doing. If that doesn’t reflect the difference in education you’re still getting at Tech, I don’t know what does.

By Less Concerned Jacket

February 23, 2008 11:23 PM | Link to this

LOOK, Coach H is fine. He’s out there trying to sign the very best players in the country/world, and for the most part he’s doing a great job.

There is no way these kids are telling Coach they are one and done. Basically, Coach is developing great talent and the NBA Scouts and Agents come calling entirly too early. It is what it is, but Coach H is the right man for Tech.

Imagine the alternative, Indiana, Texas Tech, Georgia, etc. Places where the infrastructure is falling apart. Despite out stuggles this year, we will continue to improve and we will compete for a COnference and National title in the very near future. LOOK, Coach H is fine.

By Kyle Olson

February 24, 2008 3:52 AM | Link to this

Theres a sign in the english hallway that says “Between 2000 and 2004 there was a 5.4 % decline in college graduate’s salaries” or something along those lines. Penciled in on that sign some wrote “if only people would stop majoring in communications and philosophy.” True Story.

By WFC

February 24, 2008 8:30 AM | Link to this

It seems as if we are discussing two entirely different topics here: academic needs and big time athletics (both near and dear to my heart!) My first suggestion, if you are interested in thse subjects, is to read Murray Sperber’s classic “Beer and Circus.” It is an eye-opener.

GT does NOT need to become a liberal arts university. We have enough of those. GT excels in producing people who can build buildings, dams, bridges, factories, computer centers, roads, hospitals, etc. and God knows we need all that.

The other side of the coin is that GT (unlike MIT or Cal Tech) is ALSO expected to compete in football and basketball with schools giving degrees in “playground management.” It simply won’t happen!

SOLUTION? GT and other “academic” institutions (Vandy, Duke, Rice, etc) should offer SOME degree programs geared toward jocks. I’m not one who demeans the intelligence of jocks. I spent fifteen years as an offensive coordinator in HS football and can testify that calling the right plays evry 25 seconds is every bit as difficult as the calculus I took at GT in 1967.

By son_sir

February 24, 2008 9:34 AM | Link to this

I agree with WFC’s last solution. I think to a certain degree, it’s already being done. Most sensible people, privately, see that you have to sacrifice a little of your academic pride IF you want to have a respectable athletic program. That’s true at most colleges and universities. Who are we kidding ? We all know, that, generally speaking, a silent distinction exists to varying degrees, depending on the school. The dilemna is, the success of your athletic program usually correlates to your level of academic sacrifice. GT just has to find a balance that it is comfortable with. I think CPJ will be able to get the kind of kids(they do exist), who will keep that gap between students and student-athletes as narrow as possible and still produce some positive results.

By Coolbreeze

February 25, 2008 9:55 AM | Link to this

Don’t do it. We call it “Tech” for a reason.

By Jacketnation

February 25, 2008 6:15 PM | Link to this

They have a lot of new programs at UGA; geared to fit the male student athletes. Garden hoe management, street ho management, livestock grazing managment, chicken science, advanced studies in nugget sauce…

By DawgBite

February 26, 2008 10:03 AM | Link to this

And still UGA has more Rhodes Scholars than you idiots. Jacketnation is still an imbecile. LMAO! What a nimrod.

By Employer

February 26, 2008 10:07 AM | Link to this

My UGA degree got me a bunch of very good cads operators from the trade school that make me alot of money. Give em a break.

By Employer

February 26, 2008 10:07 AM | Link to this

My UGA degree got me a bunch of very good cads operators from the trade school that make me alot of money. Give em a break.

By Hal

February 27, 2008 8:29 AM | Link to this

Have you ever asked yourself Why was Georgia State University was created when it simply could have been added on to Tech as another college? Have you ever asked why Georgia State never had a football team? Could it be that the Board of Regents after WWII decided unlike Auburn and Clemson in neighboring states to expanded their universities while Georgia created a whole new one? It because they were all UGA grads and saw the post war boom comming and the need for a more deversified curricula in Atlanta. Could it be they did not want to give those future students a chance to play sports at Tech and kept Georgia State football free? There is a good possibility that’s true.