U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-12-2010, 03:00 PM
 
12,983 posts, read 21,117,726 times
Reputation: 4122

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsimms3 View Post
Board of Regents members graduating from UGA vs Tech: 12 to 4 (UGA:GT). Unbiased? Think again.

Endowments: You are correct in that Tech does not invest heavily in real estate or land. See This Link (http://www.gtf.gatech.edu/Asset_Allocation_20091130.pdf - broken link) for where the foundation's investments go. However, if you include all three of UGA's foundations, they are about a third the size of Tech's one, including the Arch Foundation, UGA Fundation, etc and including land holdings etc. Don't discount Tech's investments in RE in Midtown either, though. They are hefty hefty and are not part of the Foundation since they are owned separately by the school and aren't run as investments. Think Tech Square and nearby buildings in that regard.

Tech has raised an additional $925 million for a specific capital campaign since 2004 and plans to raise $1.5B from now til 2015 for a separate capital campaign (public announcement is taking place right now in the Student Center).

Tech's student body, myself included, is very very out of state already. When I first entered I had a small scholarship through a private local (where I'm from) alumni association. Lots of students have scholarships separate from the in-state HOPE and through the interest generated on the Foundation many graduate students receive Fellowships (an out of state fraternity brother of mine just received one). I still contend that Tech should get the hek out of the BOR and I personally don't give a care in the world what the other colleges in the state do. Tech should continue to foster its joint programs with Emory and a good working relationship with UGA and GSU, no matter what.

In today's Technique, the BOR "approved" demolition of the Bill Moore tennis center and construction and renaming of a new one. Why do they have to approve of such a thing when our funding for it thus far and as far as I know into the future came from private sources??? Huh? We are beholden to a bunch of UGA grads I tell you. Basically everything Tech does aside from HOPE is funded privately through interests from the Foundation, capital campaigns, and private gift giving fundraising for specific projects (like our soon to be retrofitted AMC, also to be renamed).

UGA is the state school. There are far more UGA students and alum and support bases in this state. UGA is more locally known, Tech is the most "international" and perhaps even the most out of state school in the state. UGA also has capital campaigns, etc, but it relies a lot less on them and receives more funding from the state. There would probably never be talk of privatizing UGA but it is on the minds of people afiliated with Tech, and for legitimate reasons.

Georgia Tech's pop (depending on the year) ranges from 32% to 40% out of state. Though a sizeable out of state pop for a state school anywhere, GT is still majority in-state students.

And the out of state pop is still lower from when I was there (mid/late 90's)...when it peaked at 46% during one of the school years.

The drop in out of state students happened because, until the late 90's, the tuition of out of state students was only covering 75% of the cost of their education. So, Georgia taxpayers were subsidizing 25% of the tuition of out of state students in the not too distant past!

I remember when the state/GT decided to increase the tuition in order to make sure out of state students were covering 100% of their education costs. One of the quotes was something like, "We want Georgia Tech to still be a bargain for out of state students, but not a steal..."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-12-2010, 03:36 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
3,472 posts, read 4,132,778 times
Reputation: 2177
I am right up there with you on that one.

If the Board of Regents can't get it through their thick skulls that a school's original academic mission is in danger of faltering when it wades too far into other categories, then the BOR should relenquish Ga Tech from its responsibility. UGA is already trying to crowd the medical institution industry by bypassing the Medical College of Georgia to create its own medical school, and now it wants engineering. What next, trade schools?

I would like to see Ga Tech become the MIT of the south, or something far better.

I can't believe that I am actually advocating for the privatization of a public institution!

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsimms3 View Post
I'm a Tech student and I'm not worried. I think it's good for the state, but considering how expensive it is to put in the necessary infrastructure to build a good engineering program, it will be a while before UGA's program is even able to compete with the Auburns and Floridas.

My only question is that not only is the Board of Regents in cahoots and a tough circle to crack for any of the schools, let alone Tech (it may have been tough for UGA in this case, but Tech is on the outside of the Board in comparison and it's much harder for Tech to get a approval for anything), now the money or lack thereof for Georgia Public Universities will be spread even thinner. Tech already relies on a large endowment that approaches the size of a good private school because the state doesn't really support it and can't support it anymore. With UGA's new engineering program and lack of a really large endowment, it will no doubt need support from the Board and the state, leaving other schools like Tech and GSU to dry.

I really think that Tech ought to go private (I have enquired about this and people say it will never happen). I know it was started as a public institition to serve the state of GA, but the state of GA does not help the school very much anymore (job creation wise too as a poster pointed out). I will most likely be leaving the state for a job and at least half of everyone I know graduating in December is doing the same. Tech has no problem raising money privately and in fact we have one of the highest alumni giving rates and one of the highest alumni average donation amounts. If we go private, the largely out of state out of country student body would likely not change and many students will be on scholarship or in fellowships regardless. This would also free up the state and the Regents to focus on UGA and GSU and Tech would not be beholden to the Board anymore (a Board that does not sympathize with Tech very much). And I might add that Tech and Emory already have a huge sharing or resources and programs.

Last edited by AcidSnake; 11-12-2010 at 04:39 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2010, 03:40 PM
 
Location: San Francisco
2,112 posts, read 5,148,453 times
Reputation: 898
Tech has very similar demographics to Emory with two exceptions: less Jews and more guys. Many in-state students have made special arrangements and I even know a few people whose families moved here a couple years in advance in part so children or child could receive in-state. My fraternity demographics are very telling. In-state students at Tech are virtually all from Atl metro, rarely from too far away. In my fraternity maybe 30% is actually "from" Atlanta or GA and another 20-30% are on in-state tuition or their families have since moved here, etc. One of my best friends (who is a girl at Tech, heh) is from New Orleans, but her mom bought a house in GA and transferred the deed to my her who found a part-time job in Atlanta that paid enough to cross the threshold where she could then receive in-state. I would view the 30-40% number with caution, and considering that 33% of students at Tech are at least originally from out of the country entirely; maybe now they live here (I have a fraternity brother from Sri Lanka who entered on out of state and his parents have since moved here to Atlanta, he graduated in state).

I do agree that GT out of state tuition is still a bargain. This year it went up to $28K, which was a considerable jump, but still the tuition is almost a steal compared to other top notch state universities like Chapel Hill and UVA and Berkeley. It's not exactly cheap living as a student in Midtown Atlanta, though, compared to other southern and midwestern college towns.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2010, 03:45 PM
 
7,113 posts, read 8,152,957 times
Reputation: 1777
Well clearly not all 12 were on board for the UGA/Georgia Southern engineering programs. And if there isn't any overlap, UGA/GT having 16 of the 18 BOR members suggests that if there is any domination, it is by those two schools.

But I don't see any unfair treatment of Georgia Tech. Almost any activity by any school needs clearance by the BOR and I doubt there has been refusal out of spite. Sports doesn't receive state funding but even that has to have BOR approval. Neither UGA nor Tech were keen for Georgia State to start football but even that passed the BOR's muster and they approved it. Naturally there is some politics going on but things have gone through despite UGA's strong objections such as Georgia State's law school many years ago. But what great injustices has Tech suffered at the hands of the BOR?

There may be downsides to being a state supported school but there are probably more benefits. Tech's academic programs and facilities are underwritten by the state as well as benefits and retirement plans for its employees. A school like Emory is buffeted more by fluctuations in the economy than Tech. Emory has no safety net.

As for GT's capital campaign, a lot of that is probably pledges over time. Tech doesn't have all that money in hand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2010, 04:32 PM
 
2,407 posts, read 2,621,960 times
Reputation: 903
Georgia can't compete with GT in anything academically. Remember when UGA's business program used to be a great program? Don't look know but GT has passed and lapped UGA's business school.

In Business Week's latest rankings GT jumped to the 23rd best in the country.

This was a foolish use of money because GSU or Southern Poly already have Enginerring programs that could've handled an increase in enrollment. This would've cost the state less, but in the end the UGA-loving BOR caved-in and screwed the taxpayers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2010, 04:43 PM
 
Location: San Francisco
2,112 posts, read 5,148,453 times
Reputation: 898
Mathman, I agree with some of what you say. I get mad when Tech gets all fussy about other schools receiving aid for certain programs or starting up new programs. Unfortunately you are wrong about how biased the state as a whole and the BOR are towards Tech, and a few other schools. UGA is it. Tech receives close to 100% of its support from private individuals and corporate partnerships; the state is too broke to underwrite or guarantee diddly squat aside from HOPE scholarships enabled by the lottery. Even many of the faculty are supported as endowed chairs or part of private campaigns to bring on professors. Their salary, research, benefits, and pension are supported privately. That is the simple truth. Tech is too expensive for the state to handle and no offense to the board or the state officials, but they are simply not talented enough to handle running Tech. It's a different beast and plenty of articles and research into the matter agree with me. Besides, I quit listening to you after this thread.

If GT goes private, GA freshmen who meet and maintain HOPE requirements can still receive HOPE aid like at Emory (well $4K a year). There are countless other sholarships available and student loans, which are a part of many students' lives no matter where they go. If you can't afford a masters or PhD then there are fellowships and other awards you can apply for. If Tech goes private, the top top students applying for the freshman class will be selected instead of the 60-70% having to come from the state of Georgia. My view is that if the state does not really serve Tech or keep its best interest in mind, then why should Tech's #1 priority be to serve the state via who it chooses to take in. If the state does a good job policy wise in keeping and growing businesses here, then Tech students will stay regardless of where they came from. It's the case at Emory where 30-40% of students are in-state already, and many who graduate matriculate to jobs here in the state regardless of where they came from.

Now with the multitude of business, law, medical, and engineering programs at state universities here in GA, if a student from GA is not competitive enough to get into Tech, there are at least three other solid and reputable state universities to choose from. If the student is competitive enough to get into Tech, but can't afford it, that student has many options to find a way to go. Nowadays if you are smart enough to go to Harvard and you can't afford it, you will be going regardless. Such is the nature of private schools where you enter based on your merit, not based on where you're from or even whether you can afford it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2010, 04:58 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
6,460 posts, read 7,313,852 times
Reputation: 4206
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsimms3 View Post
Board of Regents members graduating from UGA vs Tech: 12 to 4 (UGA:GT). Unbiased? Think again.

Endowments: You are correct in that Tech does not invest heavily in real estate or land. See This Link (http://www.gtf.gatech.edu/Asset_Allocation_20091130.pdf - broken link) for where the foundation's investments go. However, if you include all three of UGA's foundations, they are about a third the size of Tech's one, including the Arch Foundation, UGA Fundation, etc and including land holdings etc. Don't discount Tech's investments in RE in Midtown either, though. They are hefty hefty and are not part of the Foundation since they are owned separately by the school and aren't run as investments. Think Tech Square and nearby buildings in that regard.

Tech has raised an additional $925 million for a specific capital campaign since 2004 and plans to raise $1.5B from now til 2015 for a separate capital campaign (public announcement is taking place right now in the Student Center).

Tech's student body, myself included, is very very out of state already. When I first entered I had a small scholarship through a private local (where I'm from) alumni association. Lots of students have scholarships separate from the in-state HOPE and through the interest generated on the Foundation many graduate students receive Fellowships (an out of state fraternity brother of mine just received one). I still contend that Tech should get the hek out of the BOR and I personally don't give a care in the world what the other colleges in the state do. Tech should continue to foster its joint programs with Emory and a good working relationship with UGA and GSU, no matter what.

In today's Technique, the BOR "approved" demolition of the Bill Moore tennis center and construction and renaming of a new one. Why do they have to approve of such a thing when our funding for it thus far and as far as I know into the future came from private sources??? Huh? We are beholden to a bunch of UGA grads I tell you. Basically everything Tech does aside from HOPE is funded privately through interests from the Foundation, capital campaigns, and private gift giving fundraising for specific projects (like our soon to be retrofitted AMC, also to be renamed).

UGA is the state school. There are far more UGA students and alum and support bases in this state. UGA is more locally known, Tech is the most "international" and perhaps even the most out of state school in the state. UGA also has capital campaigns, etc, but it relies a lot less on them and receives more funding from the state. There would probably never be talk of privatizing UGA but it is on the minds of people afiliated with Tech, and for legitimate reasons.
I’m trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, since you are from out of state, but I don’t think you know as much about UGA or this state as you think you do.

UGA and GT in many respects are in the same boat, despite other differences.

I am not trying to make this a GT vs UGA thing. My family is from a long line of GA residents. My grandfather went to GT when it was a small school. I went to UGA and almost decided to go to GT. I actually grew up a Tech fan, but went to UGA for academic reasons (as is the topic of the post… Georgia traditionally split colleges up by type). I grew up with many neighbors that went to GT and many that went to UGA. Many people from my church went to both. They are both important to the State of Georgia and those that live here, so unlike some, I don’t want to put down either university.

I know the rhetoric of some at Tech against UGA can sometimes be strong, but home team pride or any rivalries aside for those us that have lived in Georgia for many generations GT and UGA are both really important to us. Things aren’t so UGA vs. GT as you make them out to be and you are also incorrect on your characterizations of UGA itself.

First Lets examine the budgets (I’m using 2009 figures, since those match both schools current factbooks and budget documents):

GT: State appropriation: $289,000,000 Total Budget: $1,142,900,000 % of state funds in total budget: 25% # of students: 20,311 State appropriation per student: $14,229

UGA: State appropriations: $445,319, 227 Total Budget: $1,206,454,173 % of state funds in total budge: 36.9% # of students: 34,885 State appropriation per student: $12,765

There are some minor differences, but for the most part both schools are in the same boat as far as state funding goes. UGA has a slightly higher percentage from state appropriations, but less per student. (This is only a guess, but I think this is caused by GT having a slightly higher level of research lab activity. It costs more, but it also generates more revenue for the university. The same thing happens at UGA, but not quite as much)

As far as international students go…GT does attract more as a percentage of the whole school. However, I wouldn’t underplay the international students at UGA. Most of the international students are in graduate programs at both schools. UGA has, being the states main liberal arts and agricultural college, has the types of graduate programs that attract fewer international students (drama, English, history, etc..), but we still attract many international students, especially in our science programs. GT’s undergraduate program had 893 international students (6.6%) and UGA’s had 938 (3.6%). The undergraduate population is more out of state at tech, but 9,199 (68%) of them are still Georgia residents. So, I still have trouble with this notion that GT is so extremely out-of-state that the state shouldn’t matter.

Also, UGA faces the issues when getting capital investments approved from the BOR. Much of our development is private investment. However, at both schools, for academic and research functions, the state does invest in capital funding of buildings. It is not all private or research funded. ($52m in state funding for the Clough undergraduate learning center, $64.4m of state funding for the Hinman buildings from the 2009 budget alone)

Also regarding land holdings… I was not referring to the campus and campus expansions itself. GT’s midtown holdings are primarily infrastructure for their own campus, research, student, and support services. UGA holds about 47,000 acres of land that is not apart of its campus. Most of it is in Georgia, but some is in other states and some is in other countries. For better or worse some of that land is apart of the assets UGA has to act like an endowment in the future, but it is not a liquid and some of it is more of a long-term investment/donation.

One quirk when comparing UGA and GT. GT includes 5% real estate holdings as apart of the GT’s foundation endowment. UGA’s real estate holdings are largely not counted as apart of our ARCH foundation, UGA foundation, or the university’s endowment fund.

GT has an impressive endowment. I am not denying that or taking away from that, but again you are unfairly underplaying UGA.

UGA’s formal endowment from the school and its two major fundraising foundations was $572.5 million, whereas GT has $1,237 million (That is 46.3%...13% higher than 33.3%) Additionally UGA last year had more monetary assets on hand in the athletic association, research foundation, and real estate foundation for a total of $127.2m. (572.5+127.2= 699.7) GT’s atheletic association has a $30m endowment and to further complicate things the GT Foundation plays the roles of UGA’s real estate foundation, research foundation, arch foundation, and UGA foundation combined, so some of the money that is counted in GT’s $1,237m and is not counted in UGA’s $572.5m

Conclusion. Things are not so clear-cut. GT clearly has a bigger endowment and that is impressive and in no way am I seeking to put that down or lower that. However, you are being fairly unfair to UGA and acknowledging what it has and how it functions.

As far as state funding is concerned, GT and UGA are in the same boat. You are overplaying UGA’s impact on the university system’s budget. You are also overplaying the effect UGA over impact at GT through the BOR. They have been lowering the budgets to both schools at large rates for many years. The relations (and problems) we have with the BOR and the State of Georgia Legislature are the same! The budget cuts and oversight in no way is UGA grads screwing over GT. Most of the cuts are also not directly caused by the BOR itself, but the state legislature and affecting both schools in extremely similar ways.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsimms3 View Post
Tech receives close to 100% of its support from private individuals and corporate partnerships; the state is too broke to underwrite or guarantee diddly squat aside from HOPE scholarships enabled by the lottery.
To be clear! the state of Georgia provides GT 25% of it's budget, so that lowers the amount of financial support to tech to 75%. Other parts of a universities' budget comes from patents, intellectual property rights, and student fees. So the amount of support from private and corporate partners are far less than 100% and less than 75%.

The Hope scholarship DOES send lots of money to GT through paying tuition and fees of the 68% of GT's in-state undergraduates that have maintained the requirements for Hope.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2010, 05:02 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
3,472 posts, read 4,132,778 times
Reputation: 2177
Having more engineering programs will work only if we can actually keep our graduates here in Georgia. Otherwise, we are simply providing bodies for another state's labor pool.

Labor, especially highly educated & specialized labor, must have the mobility freedom to create new businesses, or else simply simply pouring more money into them (educating labor) will be a wasted effort. Especially when that money spigot's gonna get tighter & tighter when the newly elected State & Federal Government Republicans get their way in the next year.

Decisions like this engineering program for UGA that the BOR made shouldn't have been made in a vacuum (This is the one situation that I actually agree with Gubna Perdue on). All variables must be considered & deliberated on in a patience manner.

Just my simple observation on the whole matter, anyways.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cwkimbro View Post

AcidSnake:

While I appreciate your sentiment and agree with you on that other issue.... Holding other issues/variables fixed...having more engineering universities in the state will be better for the state. I don't think that amendment, which you know I really don't like, will make our universities' effect on the state null and void.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2010, 05:45 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
6,460 posts, read 7,313,852 times
Reputation: 4206
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcidSnake View Post
Having more engineering programs will work only if we can actually keep our graduates here in Georgia. Otherwise, we are simply providing bodies for another state's labor pool.

Labor, especially highly educated & specialized labor, must have the mobility freedom to create new businesses, or else simply simply pouring more money into them (educating labor) will be a wasted effort. Especially when that money spigot's gonna get tighter & tighter when the newly elected State & Federal Government Republicans get their way in the next year.

Decisions like this engineering program for UGA that the BOR made shouldn't have been made in a vacuum (This is the one situation that I actually agree with Gubna Perdue on). All variables must be considered & deliberated on in a patience manner.

Just my simple observation on the whole matter, anyways.
I understand, but the Atlanta area has done a really well at attracting well educated talent, especially among the 20 and 30-somethings.

Companies also make decisions on proximity to universities to increase recruiting opportunities and in some industries/cases research opportunities.

For example... there is an effort to sell the GT, UGA, and Emory corridor as an excellent place for Life Science research to attract businesses that will take advantage of that (Innovation Crescent)

Those happen to be research programs where GT, UGA, and Emory has a large existing overlap.

I also have to say UGA hasn't created its own medical school. We are going into partnership with the Medical College of Georgia to create an Athens satellite campus and expand bio-medial research opportunities that can be combined with the other bio programs UGA already has.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2010, 06:26 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
3,472 posts, read 4,132,778 times
Reputation: 2177
I would be more convinced if Atlanta wasn't struggling with an unemployment rate that easily rivals that of the nation. Also, attracting rank & file workers is all fine and dandy but I would prefer that our state attracts & keep more "producers" & "brains" willing to create the opportunity.

As it currently stands, Georgia's laws do not support the ability for the "brains" to come out of the shell of a unprofitable company very easily to start their own opportunities, and any technology-type companies that will be lured here by our generous tax-exclusions will most likely be companies that were stagnating anyways & looking for an excuse to dump dead-weight & recoup some pennies in the process.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cwkimbro View Post
I understand, but the Atlanta area has done a really well at attracting well educated talent, especially among the 20 and 30-somethings.

Companies also make decisions on proximity to universities to increase recruiting opportunities and in some industries/cases research opportunities.

For example... there is an effort to sell the GT, UGA, and Emory corridor as an excellent place for Life Science research to attract businesses that will take advantage of that (Innovation Crescent).

Last edited by AcidSnake; 11-12-2010 at 06:49 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
View detailed profiles of:
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top