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.
SPSU, better known as Southern Tech, has experienced a lack of understanding from the general public and academia throughout its existence. The school was formed in 1948 as a division of Georgia Tech. It has always been classified as a degree-granting college by the U.S. Dept. of Education and the USG. My diplomas from Southern Tech have Georgia Institute of Technology on them listing GT as the parent school.
In the early 1980's when the effort to separate Southern Tech from Georgia Tech was being supported by Southern Tech administration, faculty, students, and alumni, GT was favoring complete absorption of ST into GT. A name change to Georgia Institute of Technology, Marietta and diplomas from GT were placed on the table. ST supporters weren't swayed by this and strongly supported separation, which we won.
In actuality, ST fulfills and has fulfilled more of the engineering needs in Georgia than does GT. Virtually all employers who hire GT and ST grads make no distinction in salary, title, or opportunity between grads of the two schools. A large percentage of employers prefer ST grads. I always have in my 50-year career. Advancement in engineering more often is based on performance than one's college. Southern Tech produces a different cut of individual than does Georgia Tech.
As so much emphasis has been placed on "rankings, tiers, and research," a look should be taken at the following intensive study on grade inflation- Grade Inflation | The Purdue Review
This is based upon the difficulty in earning an "A" at colleges and universities across the USA. Just because a university has high entrance requirements does not mean the school engenders high academic rigor. If a college has a huge applicant pool, as at UGA and GT, they will cherry pick high SAT scores. I attended UGA and Southern Tech. ST was far more difficult than UGA or any of the other three universities I have attended.
The merger between SPSU and KSU is a huge mistake. It was based upon politics and other factors with little to no information on the adverse effects that will follow. But then we are talking about cronyism and a lack of knowledge on behalf of the decision makers.
[SIZE=3][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]SPSU, better known as Southern Tech, has experienced a lackof understanding from the general public and academia throughout itsexistence. The school was formed in 1948as a division of Georgia Tech. It hasalways been classified as a degree-granting college by the U.S. Dept. ofEducation and the USG. My diplomas fromSouthern Tech have Georgia Institute of Technology on them listing GT as theparent school.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]In the early 1980's when the effort to separate SouthernTech from Georgia Tech was being supported by Southern Tech administration,faculty, students, and alumni, GT was favoring complete absorption of ST intoGT. A name change to Georgia Instituteof Technology, Marietta and diplomas from GT were placed on the table. ST supporters weren't swayed by this andstrongly supported separation, which we won.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]In actuality, ST fulfills and has fulfilled more of theengineering needs in Georgia than does GT. Virtually all employers who hire GT and ST grads make no distinction insalary, title, or opportunity between grads of the two schools. A large percentage of employers prefer STgrads. I always have in my 50-yearcareer. Advancement in engineering moreoften is based on performance than one's college. Southern Tech produces a different cut ofindividual than does Georgia Tech.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]As so much emphasis has been placed on "rankings,tiers, and research," a look should be taken at the following intensivestudy on grade inflation- Grade Inflation | The Purdue Review[/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]This is based upon the difficulty in earning an"A" at colleges and universities across the USA. Just because a university has high entrancerequirements does not mean the school engenders high academic rigor. If a college has a huge applicant pool, as atUGA and GT, they will cherry pick high SAT scores. I attended UGA and Southern Tech. ST was far more difficult than UGA or any ofthe other three universities I have attended.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]The merger between SPSU and KSU is a huge mistake. It was based upon politics and other factorswith little to no information on the adverse effects that will follow. But then we are talking about cronyism and alack of knowledge on behalf of the decision makers.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][/SIZE]
SPSU, better known as Southern Tech, has experienced a lack of understanding from the general public and academia throughout its existence. The school was formed in 1948 as a division of Georgia Tech. It has always been classified as a degree-granting college by the U.S. Dept. of Education and the USG. My diplomas from Southern Tech have Georgia Institute of Technology on them listing GT as the parent school.
In the early 1980's when the effort to separate Southern Tech from Georgia Tech was being supported by Southern Tech administration, faculty, students, and alumni, GT was favoring complete absorption of ST into GT. A name change to Georgia Institute of Technology, Marietta and diplomas from GT were placed on the table. ST supporters weren't swayed by this and strongly supported separation, which we won.
In actuality, ST fulfills and has fulfilled more of the engineering needs in Georgia than does GT. Virtually all employers who hire GT and ST grads make no distinction in salary, title, or opportunity between grads of the two schools. A large percentage of employers prefer ST grads. I always have in my 50-year career. Advancement in engineering more often is based on performance than one's college. Southern Tech produces a different cut of individual than does Georgia Tech.
As so much emphasis has been placed on "rankings, tiers, and research," a look should be taken at the following intensive study on grade inflation- Grade Inflation | The Purdue Review
This is based upon the difficulty in earning an "A" at colleges and universities across the USA. Just because a university has high entrance requirements does not mean the school engenders high academic rigor. If a college has a huge applicant pool, as at UGA and GT, they will cherry pick high SAT scores. I attended UGA and Southern Tech. ST was far more difficult than UGA or any of the other three universities I have attended.
The merger between SPSU and KSU is a huge mistake. It was based upon politics and other factors with little to no information on the adverse effects that will follow. But then we are talking about cronyism and a lack of knowledge on behalf of the decision makers.
With all due respect, if you have had a 50 year career then you graduated from Southern Tech back in the 1960's.
Georgia Tech has come a very long way since then, whereas today almost nobody outside of Georgia (and perhaps Alabama and South Carolina has even heard of Southern Tech. SPSU doesnt' even offer a doctorate program.
I have met a few grads from Southern Poly, and even though both were competent engineers... neither of them seemed quite as astute as an average GaTech student.
A simple glance at the admission requirements should be evidence enough of the difference in the caliber of students matriculating at the two institutions.
As for academic rigor... you might want to tread lightly regarding that subject. Georgia Tech is currently ranked #6 in the country for engineering (#5 on some lists). SPSU weighs in at #250.
Tarzanman,
I have worked with and hired scores of engineers from dozens of engineering schools. When the job has to be done, I will put a Southern Tech grad up against a grad from any other college. I have fired more GT grads than from any other school. Georgia Tech and Southern Tech are vastly different in mission and focus. GT is excellent when it comes to theory, high-level research, and preparation for academia. ST carries the ball when theory and application are joined.
I don't think I stated that GT lacks in academic rigor. My position is that for most engineering jobs requiring application, ST wins out. Witness the latest Formula SAE competition in which ST bested GT, a regular occurrence. This is a case where theory and application meet and the rubber meets the road, literally. ST did this in spite of being funded only to a fraction of what GT spent.
After you have fifty years experience and have run your own engineering company for 25 of that, your perspective might change.
Tarzanman,
In hiring new engineering graduates, I have made no distinction in starting salaries between a graduate from GT, ST, Auburn, Clemson, Tennessee, NC State, Maryland, etc. As to meeting academic standards at the two schools, there is no question as to which school has the higher entrance requirements. It is GT. But entrance standards alone don't determine success in the work place. By the way, Emory's SAT scores are higher than GT's. Does that make an Emory graduate more competent than a GT grad in their respective fields? Do the salary statistics for GT include those with graduate degrees?
Many companies prefer ST grads as do many prefer GT graduates. This is a company prerogative and reflects the performance required for their specific needs.
However, there is a large number of students who went to junior college, etc., who have successfully graduated from GT. Some entered a JC with SAT scores well below GT's or ST's average or even minimum scores. I have hired some of these engineers.
Have you read the link to the article in the Purdue Review? Grade Inflation | The Purdue Review The only two schools I know of in Georgia that have made this list are GT and ST. The conclusion can be drawn from the article that high entrance standards and academic rigor don't necessarily go hand in hand. Again, not slighting GT's academic rigor.
ST has the recent distinction of adding five new engineering degrees that are accredited by ABET with no deficiencies or
recommendations. The ABET committee that reviewed ST stated they did not know of any other engineering school that has received a perfect rating on an initial accreditation submittal. The same held true for ST's architecture program. This is not to say ST is better than any other school. But it does speak to the quality and dedication of ST.
The question arises, do you personally hire a significant number of engineers in your work? Have you had your own company for a quarter of a century that hires engineers? Have you been responsible for budgets of several million dollars?
When it's time to hire engineers, you go with those who can get the job done and provide the highest and quickest ROI. In my field, that's been ST grads.
Do you have a degree or degrees from Georgia Tech?
SPSU, better known as Southern Tech, has experienced a lack of understanding from the general public and academia throughout its existence. The school was formed in 1948 as a division of Georgia Tech. It has always been classified as a degree-granting college by the U.S. Dept. of Education and the USG. My diplomas from Southern Tech have Georgia Institute of Technology on them listing GT as the parent school.
In the early 1980's when the effort to separate Southern Tech from Georgia Tech was being supported by Southern Tech administration, faculty, students, and alumni, GT was favoring complete absorption of ST into GT. A name change to Georgia Institute of Technology, Marietta and diplomas from GT were placed on the table. ST supporters weren't swayed by this and strongly supported separation, which we won.
In actuality, ST fulfills and has fulfilled more of the engineering needs in Georgia than does GT. Virtually all employers who hire GT and ST grads make no distinction in salary, title, or opportunity between grads of the two schools. A large percentage of employers prefer ST grads. I always have in my 50-year career. Advancement in engineering more often is based on performance than one's college. Southern Tech produces a different cut of individual than does Georgia Tech.
As so much emphasis has been placed on "rankings, tiers, and research," a look should be taken at the following intensive study on grade inflation- Grade Inflation | The Purdue Review
This is based upon the difficulty in earning an "A" at colleges and universities across the USA. Just because a university has high entrance requirements does not mean the school engenders high academic rigor. If a college has a huge applicant pool, as at UGA and GT, they will cherry pick high SAT scores. I attended UGA and Southern Tech. ST was far more difficult than UGA or any of the other three universities I have attended.
The merger between SPSU and KSU is a huge mistake. It was based upon politics and other factors with little to no information on the adverse effects that will follow. But then we are talking about cronyism and a lack of knowledge on behalf of the decision makers.
As a SPSU Alumni and a one semester GT attendee, I fully rep this comment.
Many will abundantly choose style and quantity over substance and quality.
S/N: while the rest of the world outside of Georgia may not know of Southern Polytech very well, at least *here* they give us the foundation to work, gain experience, and earn higher salaries so we can move out into said world.
So, your suggestion is to ignore
1. Selectivity
2. Student test scores
3. Engineering program ranking
4. College/University ranking
5. Yearly Endowment
6. Average salary
7. Retention rate
8. Research grants
9. Faculty credentials
, etc and just about every other metric used to rate or compare colleges and instead to just take your personal word that SPSU, a college that only ranks fourth in the state of Georgia and is basically unknown outside of any states that don't border Georgia somehow has an academic program that is on par with the 107th ranked college in the entire world?
Get real.
Following your logic, just about every organization or governing body whose business it is to evaluate, accredit and compare institutions of higher learning are just.... wrong?
Delusional doesn't begin to describe your detachment from reality and established fact.
In any case, if you or anyone else are paying GaTech grads the same salary that you are paying SPSU grads then your hires are either the lesser accomplished alumni from GT, or employees who aren't sticking around for very long.
P.S. Anyone who mentions "grade inflation" and Georgia Tech in the same sentence clearly has no idea what they are talking about.
Taraznman,
Most of your above nine premises don't merit a response or have been addressed in my previous postings.
Ranking by whom and based upon what? Many rankings, if not most, are based upon research dollars and the number of graduate degrees. GT has a long history, ST does not. GT has a large enrollment. ST does not. GT has a large alumni base. GT has a large graduate school offering PhD degrees. ST does not. This doesn't preclude ST from producing competent, productive, bachelor-degree engineers. As has been clearly stated, GT and ST have two entirely different missions and turn out two different products.
GT created ST to fill the gap between the four-year engineering graduate and the industrial craftsman. They initially did this with a two-year degree. Col. Van Leer was directing GT toward a more theoretical mission that created the gap in the first place. He recognized the need for ST and envisioned it's growth and maturation. Van Leer championed this cause.
Since the inception of ST more of its faculty has come from GT than from any other school. Are you saying they are not qualified?
I have never stated that ST uniformly stands above GT. ST does excel in applied aspects of engineering. It's not difficult to find employers who will state this case.
It's interesting you state that I have hired "less accomplished" GT grads. Again, I've never had to fire an ST grad. The same can't be said for GT grads. I've hired those engineers who can hit the ground running, get the job done, and make the quickest possible ROI.
The question has been asked and artfully avoided- how many engineers have you hired in an effort to make your own business successful? Do you deal with multi-million dollar projects where excellence is a requisite? I have not seen a GT graduate who can make any more money, more quickly for me than can an ST graduate.
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.
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.
