(05-08-2018 01:55 PM)Boca Rocket Wrote:  Randon thoughts:
Back in the '80s UT had a "scholars" program and actively recruited the top students in the region. What happened with that? What is the average of tenured academics at UT?
What has UT done recruiting new blood out of top Universities? At one point there was the use of adjuncts(usually a cost savings measure), but I thought it brought in a few more movers and shakers, at least into the College of Business.

To me you have to have it all for students: Brick and mortar. Great academics and social life. Post University- a strong alumni network.

They do have the Honors College, I believe housed in the dorm next to the Field House. I know a few students in there, ..emmm.. a work in progress. But that's what I say it should be. If they are making sure those students are challenged beyond the normal courses and if they did select the candidates well, whatever their previous background they will rise to the challenge.

It's that "niche" I mentioned. What the football coach is good at. Finding the diamond in the rough's. The underdeveloped for whatever reason with a competitive spirit. Then providing the challenges. Those students will become what the higher academics enroll as Freshmen. After all, what's more important? What you let in or what you produce out?

As for the general population... that's the bigger work that needs to be in progress and why I keep referring back to the need to improve instruction.

(05-07-2018 08:20 PM)eastisbest Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 11:16 AM)PaulJ Wrote:  Not so sure from a marketing or recruitment or administrative view that UT ever viewed itself as a P5, but adding and improving buildings has allowed for enhancement of the learning, living and recreational environments-often to meet needs and demands of students. Also allows UT to compete with our peers in Southern Michigan and across Ohio, where majority of our students come from. And with 12 colleges, including professional schools, and 3000+ graduates each year it is also very difficult to characterize the student population including their learning and ability to succeed at school and after graduation. Yes the open enrollment policy draws often from unprepared and unmotivated students, but there are also many students with high HS GPA choosing to come to UT and do very well here and in careers (I know of hundreds I have taught). As to rankings, UT is hurt by low 5 and 6 yr graduation rates due to the open enrollment policy as those cohorts of students (largely in a few colleges) really draw down the numbers. But those students, plus College Credit Plus concurrent HS enrolled students, that get the total enrollment at a level (19,000) to provide revenue for sustaining the operation of the university.

It's shallow marketing and damaging to even intimate that UT is falling back on pretty buildings and aged recreational facilities to bring up academic quality.

The ONLY thing relevant to improved education, is improved education. Not the building in which it takes place.

UT is not ranked THIS low, because of open enrollment. And there's some chicken and eggs there too. If they hadn't fallen so far in the rankings, state would have had a difficult time mandating that open enrollment. The students didn't make this mess. Stop blaming them. And if you really think creating an atmosphere of "blame the student" will raise retention?

But given it exists, it is still UT's job to raise that student up and to RETAIN, not with lowering course standards or raising GPAs but by helping students develop learning skills. Focus one, and all else will follow. KISS.

buildings. smh

Open enrollment policy is not a state mandate, it is a directive of the UT BOT and yes admitting students with a HS GPA of 2.5 (and no ACT or SAT) has created an issue with several hundred students admitted who were completely unprepared academically to succeed at UT. This was an enrollment approach that dominated recruitment of HS students for many years, until major revisions to that approach in last few years. In recent years efforts have been made to address that situation including better advising and instructional support for those students, getting to succeed in as freshmen and direct them into degree granting pathways. But historically when their 1st year retention rate is under 50% and their 5/6th yr graduation rates are under 25%, it creates huge impacts to the scores recorded in the national rankings as they have made up between 20-30% of a freshmen class.

Higher education is a much more competitive endeavor then in the past, UT has to fight for students against a larger number and more aggressive recruiting efforts from dozens of peer institutions, made harder for all colleges with declining demographics in the marketplace of higher education. And yes the college experience, including buildings, athletics, the campus and recreational facilities are also important factors in attracting students-hence worth the investments. I agree that improved educational opportunities, instruction, and career pathways are also essential and areas UT has improved and still needs to work on-but so do many other colleges. Raising retention does start with better recruitment and higher standards (hence UT has raised its academic requirements in recent years), but also working hard to ensure freshmen succeed and continue academic progress to a timely graduation. There is evidence just over the last few years that progress on both fronts are being made at UT as retention and graduation rates are being to improve-those gains (along with alumni giving, increased research funding awarded, and national reputation surveys) are going to improve the national ranking scores.

It's not more competitive. There is a much higher segment of population going to college than anytime in US history. There is a much higher percentage of first generation students probably since the first University was put on land.

COSTs have risen. For a University to openly think they are going to attract the best of the best or those motivated to move up, become those alums that improve University standing by anything forward of better instruction and academic oportunity, is a doomed University. Pretty buildings and amenities are nice, but not first. Not second. Not third in the promotion. Unfortunately, there are too many in University leadership/marketing think they are the way. I thought Burns moved on?

It is most certainly more competitive, talk to anyone with a long professional career in college recruitment here at UT or any other college. Our peers, including two year community colleges, are all much more active and aggressive with marketing and promotion. I have one recent UT graduate in my family and one current HS student and I can attest to the wide reach many of our peer institutions have in regards to promoting and recruiting into our student market. Enrollment in all colleges in Ohio was down in fall 2018 as they tend to draw from local and regional populations that in our market, Ohio and Michigan are declining. Hence increased focus on concurrent HS student enrollment, adult learners, bridges from 2 yr community colleges, veterans, international students and other non from direct HS student populations. Costs and student debit has increased, but that is not unique to UT and in fact we remain very cost competitive in our marketplace, just look at publicly available data and comparison websites to see where UT stands in terms of total costs relative to our peers, even BGSU is more expensive than UT and has been for many years. No one is suggesting that a marketing and recruitment based solely on the campus, sports and buildings is alone going to draw in potential students, but they are factors. You may have noticed recent shifts in branding and messaging focus more on faculty and student successes and opportunities a UT education can provide-that is intentional and market profile driven. There have been significant changes in the administration, marketing and recruitment approaches at UT in recent years. I state this not from a personal, individual or isolated view or experience, but in knowing many of the people involved and efforts undertaken, plus 20+ years and my professional experience with recruiting, advising and teaching hundreds of students during that time. UT has plenty to offer and I can easily point to the success of our alumni from a wide range of colleges and degree programs, but also aware of the changes and issues facing recruitment and need to drive increased enrollment as the only means available to stabilize and strengthen the operating budget.

(05-08-2018 05:26 PM)eastisbest Wrote:  It's not more competitive. There is a much higher segment of population going to college than anytime in US history. There is a much higher percentage of first generation students probably since the first University was put on land.

COSTs have risen. For a University to openly think they are going to attract the best of the best or those motivated to move up, become those alums that improve University standing by anything forward of better instruction and academic oportunity, is a doomed University. Pretty buildings and amenities are nice, but not first. Not second. Not third in the promotion. Unfortunately, there are too many in University leadership/marketing think they are the way. I thought Burns moved on?

As someone who worked in admissions for just under a decade, this is not correct. The number of college bound high school seniors in Ohio has decreased in each of the last 6 years. Nationally, the number of college-bound high schools seniors has remained within a +/-1% from the previous year in each of the last 10 years, and all of the positive gains are in the South, not the Midwest. 9/13 4-year state institutions in Ohio posted Fall 2017 intakes that were smaller than their respective Fall 2016 intakes, and 8/13 have smaller enrollments in each of the last 3 years than their previous intakes. Most schools are incentivizing growth by increasing discount rates or building up concurrent enrollment programs (students who pay far less for the same product), which is a slippery slope that UT finds itself on at the moment...one that we're about to start sliding down soon enough.

As a comparative measure, UT's tuition and fees have risen at the 10th highest rate out of those 13 schools, however, their discount rate is the largest by nearly 10%, which means we're giving students 10% more of one of the most affordable tuition/fee structures in the state than any other University, and there are still people complaining about our costs without actually seeing what's happening here. Truthfully, the Blue/Gold and Tower Awards run out by the previous President/Provost royally ****** our bottom line to the point of the potentially catastrophic budgetary conundrum we're currently in. If we cut scholarships to normalize our discount rate, the students will be up in arms despite the fact that we'll still be in the bottom half for COA and we'll probably have an even more significant decline in enrollment, but if we don't we'll be running a $20M budget shortfall in the next 5 years which could hinder the ability for the University to even function. The fact that the state has been slashing funding support for institutions of higher learning at a rate never before seen because of the statehouse's loose understanding of education in general isn't helping matters at all. Schools everywhere are being forced to do more with less, then being told they're getting less, have to spend less, and still must do even more...it's an impossible situation, something HAS to give.