Facilities

Welcome Chris Klieman to K-State!
Hypeman
Posts: 1386
Joined: December 16th, 2018, 11:33 pm
Has liked: 130 times
Been liked: 150 times

Re: Facilities

Post by Hypeman » February 26th, 2020, 8:45 pm

tmcats wrote:
February 25th, 2020, 12:59 pm
i actually increased the contributions to $33 million from $19 million in amending my original numbers because the financial report shows a $14 million restricted donations release to revenue.

athletics is doing very, very well. we should be pleased not disappointed or somehow dismissive of that good result.
The academic side of campus argues that the increase in athletic contributions goes against academic contributions. Why does it cost $50 million more to run the athletic department than it did a decade ago? Some people are getting ‘rich’ on the backs of others. Mid-level Assistant coaches make more than head coaches did not long ago.

Hypeman
Posts: 1386
Joined: December 16th, 2018, 11:33 pm
Has liked: 130 times
Been liked: 150 times

Post by Hypeman » February 26th, 2020, 8:46 pm

Kid In the Hall wrote:
February 25th, 2020, 1:58 pm
To suggest that the successes (or failures) of the athletic department and the university are exclusive of each other is silly. While the athletic department may operate "independently" (the president does have oversight) it's unreasonable to suggest that there isn't always a bit of robbing peter to pay paul (which is to say that the athletic department raking in record levels of donations/contributions absolutely can/will have an effect on the university's ability to concurrently fundraise).

Now, to what degree - that's where the argument starts.
Precisely

Hypeman
Posts: 1386
Joined: December 16th, 2018, 11:33 pm
Has liked: 130 times
Been liked: 150 times

Post by Hypeman » February 26th, 2020, 8:53 pm

tmcats wrote:
February 25th, 2020, 5:54 pm
i always thought two-year degrees would be a good idea like for agronomy, bookkeeping, teaching, and the like. probably doesn't work for engineering and physics. but my gosh, some of these disciplines do not need four years of college.
Those two year degrees already exist at the community colleges. They have bookkeeping, LPN programs, teacher aide programs, paralegal programs, electrician programs, etc. Do you want your doctor, CPA, lawyer, kids teacher, or bridge builder etc. to have two years of community college?

Our country needs more education at a lower price, not less education at a higher price so we can keep paying millions that allow a few guys to play games coaching football. It’s really disgusting if you think about it. No other country ties these outrageous sports programs to their universities.

ToledoCat#2
Posts: 4148
Joined: December 2nd, 2017, 9:53 am
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 237 times

Post by ToledoCat#2 » February 26th, 2020, 8:56 pm

Open, well written by a product of our university system who obviously has a closed mind.

Do you not understand that your derogatory comments about me and others is proof positive that you are anything but all inclusive and universally understanding? Perhaps you skipped politically correct class the day inclusiveness was taught.

Plus, you have no idea how much time and money I've spent in my long life doing my best to make KSU the best. Criticism of KSU does not mean I don't care or love my alma mater. Think of it as "educational parenting."

It's a fair question about what someone with a degree in queer studies will do to use that degree in a career. As a taxpayer, I helped pay for those degrees.

ToledoCat#2
Posts: 4148
Joined: December 2nd, 2017, 9:53 am
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 237 times

Post by ToledoCat#2 » February 26th, 2020, 9:02 pm

Hyper, agree that sports spending is way out of line, but I try to rationalize it by remembering how much donations for academic facilities, scholarships, etc. went up when KSU started winning at football.

Also, I'm not sure that throwing money at higher education results in better education for our students. Need-based funding makes more sense when a need is identified and funding sought and found for it.

Hypeman
Posts: 1386
Joined: December 16th, 2018, 11:33 pm
Has liked: 130 times
Been liked: 150 times

Post by Hypeman » February 26th, 2020, 9:05 pm

wild@nite wrote:
February 26th, 2020, 5:19 pm
mustang wrote:
February 26th, 2020, 11:15 am


A two year program to teach? My daughter is an elementary teacher (Austin, TX) and there is a lot more content than a two year program.
No there isn't really. 2 years of general, then you start your "educational blocks" where you actually learn teaching strategies, followed by a student teaching semester. I went through the secondary and my kid went through the elementary curriculum. I can assure you, I learned very little in years one and two that have assisted me in my teaching expertise. Many, many teachers will tell you the same. Teaching is about developing a philosophy, learning classroom management strategies, learning to build relationships, learning liability, etc... Not sitting in a lecture hall with 200 others and being exposed to the poor teaching methods of a monotone lecturer who doesn't give a rip if you're even in attendance.
I don’t know about teaching degrees, but my field has gotten more complex over the years, and communication, statistics, writing etc have become more and more important. And those are things taught in the first two years of core courses.

Hypeman
Posts: 1386
Joined: December 16th, 2018, 11:33 pm
Has liked: 130 times
Been liked: 150 times

Post by Hypeman » February 26th, 2020, 9:09 pm

ToledoCat#2 wrote:
February 26th, 2020, 9:02 pm
Hyper, agree that sports spending is way out of line, but I try to rationalize it by remembering how much donations for academic facilities, scholarships, etc. went up when KSU started winning at football.

Also, I'm not sure that throwing money at higher education results in better education for our students. Need-based funding makes more sense when a need is identified and funding sought and found for it.
I don’t disagree. Unfortunately KSU is spending its scholarship money on high income kids that don’t have need in an attempt to get better ACTs and better rankings. That tends to be the wealthy KC suburban kids. I’m not sure that ignoring western Kansas kids is the university’s mission, but that’s what it’s doing.

Hypeman
Posts: 1386
Joined: December 16th, 2018, 11:33 pm
Has liked: 130 times
Been liked: 150 times

Post by Hypeman » February 26th, 2020, 9:29 pm

ToledoCat#2 wrote:
February 25th, 2020, 11:55 am
It will be a difficult chore to change the "elite status" that university profs/teachers believe they have achieved and are entitled to. Yet, that's what's happened in the last 50 years.

I told KSU in the 1980s it was funded "by the momentum of history" more than anything else. A large, entrenched entity like KSU is difficult to change quickly. Probably the most it can be shifted off its present course is 2-3% a year -- that includes mission and operating expenses.

++++++

And, back to the Iowa/Kansas comparison, Iowa's overall economy is just more vibrant and viable long-term than Kansas. That puts its students on a higher fiscal plane than Kansas students.
States like Iowa, Arizona, Wyoming and a few others have made smart decisions by having a small number of public institutions and giving them each their own niche. K-State is currently trying to go head to head with KU and WSU with programs. I suspect that will be unsuccessful.

One thing we don’t talk about is the loss of great faculty in the last decade. We’ve lost many of our best and many that ‘can’t’ get another job are being stuck here permanently. It’s sad to see what’s happened. I’d say reward the professors more so they will stay, but we don’t want to reward many that we currently have. We probably want to do the opposite.

User avatar
stlcatfan
Posts: 2022
Joined: September 9th, 2017, 7:45 am
Has liked: 868 times
Been liked: 257 times

Post by stlcatfan » February 26th, 2020, 11:25 pm

Hypeman wrote:
February 26th, 2020, 9:09 pm
ToledoCat#2 wrote:
February 26th, 2020, 9:02 pm
Hyper, agree that sports spending is way out of line, but I try to rationalize it by remembering how much donations for academic facilities, scholarships, etc. went up when KSU started winning at football.

Also, I'm not sure that throwing money at higher education results in better education for our students. Need-based funding makes more sense when a need is identified and funding sought and found for it.
I don’t disagree. Unfortunately KSU is spending its scholarship money on high income kids that don’t have need in an attempt to get better ACTs and better rankings. That tends to be the wealthy KC suburban kids. I’m not sure that ignoring western Kansas kids is the university’s mission, but that’s what it’s doing.
Can you explain to me how K-State is spending its scholarship money on wealthy suburban kids over small town middle class kids? I'm not disagreeing with you -- I just need to understand how this is happening. Say a kid gets a 30 on his/her ACT. Whether that kid is from Olpe or Overland Park, wouldn't they both receive the same academic scholarship from K-State or any other school? Or are you saying that K-State needs to put more scholarship money toward families with lower incomes so they can afford college? Of course, kids who come from poorer families qualify for more federal grants and loans, compared to kids from wealthy families.

Hypeman
Posts: 1386
Joined: December 16th, 2018, 11:33 pm
Has liked: 130 times
Been liked: 150 times

Post by Hypeman » February 27th, 2020, 8:06 am

stlcatfan wrote:
February 26th, 2020, 11:25 pm
Hypeman wrote:
February 26th, 2020, 9:09 pm


I don’t disagree. Unfortunately KSU is spending its scholarship money on high income kids that don’t have need in an attempt to get better ACTs and better rankings. That tends to be the wealthy KC suburban kids. I’m not sure that ignoring western Kansas kids is the university’s mission, but that’s what it’s doing.
Can you explain to me how K-State is spending its scholarship money on wealthy suburban kids over small town middle class kids? I'm not disagreeing with you -- I just need to understand how this is happening. Say a kid gets a 30 on his/her ACT. Whether that kid is from Olpe or Overland Park, wouldn't they both receive the same academic scholarship from K-State or any other school? Or are you saying that K-State needs to put more scholarship money toward families with lower incomes so they can afford college? Of course, kids who come from poorer families qualify for more federal grants and loans, compared to kids from wealthy families.
The wealthy suburban kids have higher ACT scores because of the private tutoring and ability to afford multiple attempts at the test. That’s factual. Kids from wealthy families will take it 6-8 times, use a tutor, and ultimately get higher scores. As a result, most of k-states scholarship money goes to kids from high income families that don’t need scholarships and can afford the tuition. You can look that up. Furthermore, beyond a baseline ACT, kids don’t perform better in college. The conclusion in the academic world is that ACT beyond around a 24, only correlates with family socio-economics. As a result, some schools are dropping ACT entirely.

As of last year, KSU is directing its recruiting budget almost entirely to the KC suburbs. That makes some sense. But, KSU has also increased the ACT scores needed for scholarships which only helps the suburban kids where the resources for getting a higher ACT are more accessible. Most western Kansas high schools don’t have the tutoring and guidance counselors dedicated to ACT that the suburban students have,

As a result, KSU’s recruiting and scholarship money is going to the suburban kids and the western Kansas kids are being left out and the will need to get more loans and or work long hours while going to school.

I’m not making this up, I was in many meetings listening first hand to the shift in focus. The current administration hired an east coast consulting firm who said this is what you should do. The justification is it will potentially help rankings. But it goes agains the land grant mission.

This is very relevant to the comments I see in this thread. People saying they are priced out of KSU and and going to Fort Hayes or many of the other more affordable schools. Unfortunately the administration is saying they don’t want you anyway, unless you’ll buy football tickets of course.

Post Reply