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.
It is. But the genesis of UT Austin precedes the Morrill Land Grant Act, and even precedes the statehood of Texas.
The quintessential Land Grant schools are Texas A&M and Virginia Tech. They were founded from the very outset as "agricultural and mechanical" schools, with heavy emphasis on military training. Even today, such schools de-emphasize medicine or law, while keeping large departments in the agrarian arts. In many states, there's a "University of...", which is either not Land-Grant or has essentially repudiated its land-grant origins; and a "State University", which is academically secondary to the "University of...". An example is the University of Michigan and Michigan State.
But regardless, we're quibbling over minutiae of pedigree and prestige. The real distinction is between the venerable, selective universities - and the ones founded comparatively recently, with mission to "serve the community" rather than to aspire to push the end of knowledge via funded-research.
Returning to our topic, my enduring critique of the American economy and of American society is from the Right, not from the Left. America is too new, too flippant in its cowboy swagger. Fortunes are too easy to make, and too easy to lose. "Hustle", rather than scholarship or devotion to craft, is what's most rewarded.
I'd argue that part of the problem with our college cost issue is that the Michigan States of the world work too hard to emulate Harvard et al.... when they don't need to.
I saw my alma mater - 100 years ago a Normal School - in the late 20th and 21st century develop a variety of PhD programs and pursue a research mission. And for what? To rise in the rankings. All at great expense. So much so that if I were an 18 year old today with my same characteristics, I could not afford to duplicate my own college career. What's even more frustrating is that the research produced today is mostly second-rate, with the exception of a couple programs. So all that effort and expense mainly served to increase the students' costs and put more separation between tenured/tenure-track faculty and students.
Last edited by redguard57; 05-21-2019 at 02:32 PM..
I'd argue that part of the problem with our college cost issue is that the Michigan States of the world work too hard to emulate Harvard et al.... when they don't need to.
I saw my alma mater - 100 years ago a Normal School - in the late 20th and 21st century develop a variety of PhD programs and pursue a research mission. And for what? To rise in the rankings. All at great expense. So much so that if I were an 18 year old today with my same characteristics, I could not afford to duplicate my own college career. What's even more frustrating is that the research produced today is mostly second-rate, with the exception of a couple programs.
This is because in America we lack a credible vocational post-secondary track. It's either college or Wal-Mart (and sometimes both). If we had a proper bifurcation between academic and vocational tracks, starting in say middle-school, then we'd have fewer college-bound high school students. Colleges could then be proper colleges, or trade/tech/vocational schools. The U of Michigans could continue to aspire to lead the research-world, while the Michigan States and the Wayne States and so forth could have a more quotidian vocational function.
This would address both the inflation in college tuition and the "Prole Drift" of academic institutions.
It is. But the genesis of UT Austin precedes the Morrill Land Grant Act, and even precedes the statehood of Texas.
The quintessential Land Grant schools are Texas A&M and Virginia Tech. They were founded from the very outset as "agricultural and mechanical" schools, with heavy emphasis on military training. Even today, such schools de-emphasize medicine or law, while keeping large departments in the agrarian arts. In many states, there's a "University of...", which is either not Land-Grant or has essentially repudiated its land-grant origins; and a "State University", which is academically secondary to the "University of...". An example is the University of Michigan and Michigan State.
But regardless, we're quibbling over minutiae of pedigree and prestige. The real distinction is between the venerable, selective universities - and the ones founded comparatively recently, with mission to "serve the community" rather than to aspire to push the end of knowledge via funded-research.
Returning to our topic, my enduring critique of the American economy and of American society is from the Right, not from the Left. America is too new, too flippant in its cowboy swagger. Fortunes are too easy to make, and too easy to lose. "Hustle", rather than scholarship or devotion to craft, is what's most rewarded.
A&M is a land grant school and it opened before UT.
A&M runs very large multi-campus medical and dental schools and pharmacy schools plus a law school as well and it is a preeminent research power generally. A&M is everything from a coequal academic side partner with The University of California system at Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos to auto safety to a leader in Ag research - you can scoff at ag professors like Norman Bourlag who won and Nobel Prize and is oft credited with "saving" a billion people last century but I won't do that.
________________
Scholarship per se isn't well rewarded anywhere. For that matter where are these fantastic economies that reward scholarship and craft?
I'd argue that part of the problem with our college cost issue is that the Michigan States of the world work too hard to emulate Harvard et al.... when they don't need to.
Ding ding ding ding ding... we have a winner.
The rise of colleges as job-ticket issuing agencies, and the demand for such job tickets for even entry level positions and those with adequate OTJ training, has driven the demand for college slots to an absurd high... and, of course, it has to be a good college, so the vast tier of second-rate state schools have supercharged their marketing efforts (read: giant sports budgets) in order to justify stratospheric costs... often exceeding actual student costs of the truly first-rank universities.
IOW, it's become about buying the best job lottery ticket you can get, even if it represents 5-10 years of net earnings. But second rate is second rate... no matter how undefeated their football team is.
This is because in America we lack a credible vocational post-secondary track. It's either college or Wal-Mart (and sometimes both). If we had a proper bifurcation between academic and vocational tracks, starting in say middle-school, then we'd have fewer college-bound high school students. Colleges could then be proper colleges, or trade/tech/vocational schools. The U of Michigans could continue to aspire to lead the research-world, while the Michigan States and the Wayne States and so forth could have a more quotidian vocational function.
This would address both the inflation in college tuition and the "Prole Drift" of academic institutions.
I tend to agree with that largely adding only that while expanded research efforts have certainly increased college costs related backside payoffs have been incalculable.
Back to Norman Bourlag. His research was expensive and monumentally time consuming, much requiring decades - his research also saved untold lives.
I'm acquainted with one of the men who developed statin drugs, another Nobel Prize winner.....there is no way to properly value what he and his partner gave the world. The early research was very expensive and took a good number of years.
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.
