|
Post by Pinnum on Jul 9, 2014 9:47:10 GMT -5
I know the decision to add or eliminate a course of study is rather complicated, and I don't have enough data to know what majors fit best. I will mention a couple of things I would question, however, if I were on the board (which I do not want to be!). I and two of my brothers majored in economics, so I was surprised to learn a few years ago at my reunion that econ is no longer offered as a major. Econ seemed like a low-cost feature of the School of Business. I also have a brother who graduated from the University of Detroit's School of Engineering. He did his first two years at Bona's under the co-op program they had with U of D at that time. Does this program still exist? I pay little attention to the job market for recent college grads, but the last time I looked both engineering and econ grads seemed to be doing pretty well. I do not think there are any 3+2 engineering programs currently at SBU. The lack of an economics program is concerning since I would much rather hire an economics major than a business major--no matter the job. I did hear a lot from administrators (at other schools) that had a dilemma as students were shying away from the rigor of programs within a department electing to take the easier courses and as a result the majors that were the most beneficial to graduates and helped develop them most skills were not the programs that were viable. This is part of the problem with what I call 'trendy majors' like homeland security, criminal justice, and sports management. They are watered down and are much easier courses of study but lack what is necessary for the real development of a student. When you are trying to attract these students that shy away from the rigor you really hurt your university. SBU needs to do well at the classics. It is one thing to develop new majors that require minimal additional courses and you can just overlap courses with other majors while still demanding rigor but to develop new watered down majors is not good. What I like most about small schools is when the Education Major's general ed science course is the same low level science course as the biology major that wants to go to med school. Demand rigor in all subjects and you will produce great students... but also you will have attrition when students would rather not study. Edit: If anyone is interested, check out 'Academically adrift' www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/01/18/106949/study-many-college-students-not.htmlchronicle.com/article/Academically-Adrift-The/130743/
|
|
|
Post by class70 on Jul 9, 2014 10:51:00 GMT -5
Thanks for that informative reply, Pinnum. I was afraid that was the issue. I used to teach economics and finance, and the vast majority of my students were there only because it was a required course, many of them already with bachelor's degrees but needing the course to complete a needed prerequisite to get into the MBA program. With my own kids, I tried to steer them into the rigorous majors such as engineering and computer science, but they would have none of it. As those good old nuns in Catholic school used to tell us, "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink."
|
|
|
Post by bva on Jul 9, 2014 11:52:51 GMT -5
The Economics major was dropped in the mid-90's when Wickenheiser implemented the university's financial exigency plan, thus allowing him to cut several tenured faculty. There were very few majors and only a handful of students in the upper-level electives in the late 80's and early 90's.
There is currently an economics minor, which includes the core intro & intermediate micro/macro classes and an econometrics course offered through the Finance Dept.
|
|
|
Post by sbu79 on Jul 9, 2014 11:58:03 GMT -5
I have always sadly believed that Wickenheiser's strategy was to implement exacly what Pinnum spoke against in his post. I believe the University still suffers as a result. To be somewhat fair, his predecessors may very well have also been sliding down that slippery slope as well.
|
|
|
Post by Bonas08 on Jul 9, 2014 12:44:48 GMT -5
My major was finance, and I was able to get the minor in economics by basically only taking an extra class or two outside of the regular finance requirements. Plus it was with Dr. Paul, which was a win/win within itself.
|
|
|
Post by fjs64 on Jul 9, 2014 13:18:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by thesocalkid on Jul 9, 2014 13:48:02 GMT -5
SO WHY DON'T YOU GUYS ASK THE CURRENTLY ENROLLED STUDENTS WHAT THEIR OPIONS ARE AND WHAT THEY WANT IN AN EDUCATION.
Truth be known is that SBU is pushing a religious doctrine that is VERY UNPOPULAR and losing students because of it. (don't shoot me I'm only the messenger)
|
|
|
Post by Pinnum on Jul 9, 2014 14:22:54 GMT -5
SO WHY DON'T YOU GUYS ASK THE CURRENTLY ENROLLED STUDENTS WHAT THEIR OPIONS ARE AND WHAT THEY WANT IN AN EDUCATION. Truth be known is that SBU is pushing a religious doctrine that is VERY UNPOPULAR and losing students because of it. (don't shoot me I'm only the messenger) Losing students? You mean there is now attrition due to the reason you cited? The numbers have been largely static with regard to retention so I doubt that. www.sbu.edu/about-sbu/university-information/heoa-compliance/graduation-data-and-retention-information If you're saying students are selecting non-Catholic schools or Catholic in name only then that is possible but any student that is upset that SBU is Franciscan and teaches as such clearly didn't do their research before enrolling. You don't even have to be Catholic to appreciate the education. There are a good number of non-Catholics that enjoy the SBU education just as they do with BC or ND. With all that said, the religion does limit the pool of applicants. I find it interesting that the people who harp about just driving admission numbers have not made the claim that any of the Franciscan teaching or values should be compromised. It is definitely a balance between tradition and excellence when you have schools like SJFC stealing prospective students.
|
|
|
Post by jh on Jul 9, 2014 18:49:24 GMT -5
SO WHY DON'T YOU GUYS ASK THE CURRENTLY ENROLLED STUDENTS WHAT THEIR OPIONS ARE AND WHAT THEY WANT IN AN EDUCATION. Truth be known is that SBU is pushing a religious doctrine that is VERY UNPOPULAR and losing students because of it. (don't shoot me I'm only the messenger) Losing students? You mean there is now attrition due to the reason you cited? The numbers have been largely static with regard to retention so I doubt that. www.sbu.edu/about-sbu/university-information/heoa-compliance/graduation-data-and-retention-information If you're saying students are selecting non-Catholic schools or Catholic in name only then that is possible but any student that is upset that SBU is Franciscan and teaches as such clearly didn't do their research before enrolling. You don't even have to be Catholic to appreciate the education. There are a good number of non-Catholics that enjoy the SBU education just as they do with BC or ND. With all that said, the religion does limit the pool of applicants. I find it interesting that the people who harp about just driving admission numbers have not made the claim that any of the Franciscan teaching or values should be compromised. It is definitely a balance between tradition and excellence when you have schools like SJFC stealing prospective students. I think what he is saying is that the courses required by Clare College may be a bit much and a turnoff to many students - hopefully someone more aware of those requirements can speak better to it. I graduated in the 80s and we had the standard 9 hours of Theology and 9 hours of Philosophy - I do not know exactly how it compares to the requirements of Clare College.
|
|
|
Post by fjs64 on Jul 9, 2014 19:21:52 GMT -5
[/quote]I think what he is saying is that the courses required by Clare College may be a bit much and a turnoff to many students - hopefully someone more aware of those requirements can speak better to it. I graduated in the 80s and we had the standard 9 hours of Theology and 9 hours of Philosophy - I do not know exactly how it compares to the requirements of Clare College. [/quote]
When I attended (Class of 1964), you were required to take Theology every semester, therefore 8 total credit hours and 12 credit hours of Philospphy (Logic, Philosophy of Man, Epistomology, Ethics were the 4 courses).
|
|
|
Post by Pinnum on Jul 9, 2014 19:36:10 GMT -5
Losing students? You mean there is now attrition due to the reason you cited? The numbers have been largely static with regard to retention so I doubt that. www.sbu.edu/about-sbu/university-information/heoa-compliance/graduation-data-and-retention-information If you're saying students are selecting non-Catholic schools or Catholic in name only then that is possible but any student that is upset that SBU is Franciscan and teaches as such clearly didn't do their research before enrolling. You don't even have to be Catholic to appreciate the education. There are a good number of non-Catholics that enjoy the SBU education just as they do with BC or ND. With all that said, the religion does limit the pool of applicants. I find it interesting that the people who harp about just driving admission numbers have not made the claim that any of the Franciscan teaching or values should be compromised. It is definitely a balance between tradition and excellence when you have schools like SJFC stealing prospective students. I think what he is saying is that the courses required by Clare College may be a bit much and a turnoff to many students - hopefully someone more aware of those requirements can speak better to it. I graduated in the 80s and we had the standard 9 hours of Theology and 9 hours of Philosophy - I do not know exactly how it compares to the requirements of Clare College. That's possible. And if that is the case, it puts SBU in a catch 22. As I have stated, a lot of top students are turned off to SBU due to the low admission stats. At the same time students with low admissions stats don't like to be challenged through rigor. I would argue, and I think many would agree, that the philosophy (and Theology) courses at SBU are one of the key reasons that students develop the reasoning and rhetoric that they alums have been known and respected for. When you can't appease both camps (on one campus) which one do you try to appease? (Sent via mobile)
|
|
|
Post by pete on Jul 9, 2014 19:36:43 GMT -5
I have been trying to avoid this thread as long as possible.
I am sure few will agree but here is my way out......Assumption here is that higher ed is unaffordable unless you have no money.
Finalize the Hibbert acquisition and basically turn into a community college, with relatively low cost tuition that attracts students from a from a 50 mile radius. Turn it into a feeder systems so folks finish the last 2 years at SBU.
Suggestions of Law and Nursing majors are down right laughable. I have said it before and I will say it again, petroleum engineering is the way to go. Goes against the PC crowd but that is were the money is...... saved the Sabers and will likely save the Bills
|
|
|
Post by jh on Jul 9, 2014 20:15:55 GMT -5
I think what he is saying is that the courses required by Clare College may be a bit much and a turnoff to many students - hopefully someone more aware of those requirements can speak better to it. I graduated in the 80s and we had the standard 9 hours of Theology and 9 hours of Philosophy - I do not know exactly how it compares to the requirements of Clare College. That's possible. And if that is the case, it puts SBU in a catch 22. As I have stated, a lot of top students are turned off to SBU due to the low admission stats. At the same time students with low admissions stats don't like to be challenged through rigor. I would argue, and I think many would agree, that the philosophy (and Theology) courses at SBU are one of the key reasons that students develop the reasoning and rhetoric that they alums have been known and respected for. When you can't appease both camps (on one campus) which one do you try to appease? (Sent via mobile) Pinnum I dont think its because the Clare courses are so difficult - its because students have to take them and they are not very interesting to them. Socal Kid can correct me - but its not a choice of "watering down" to easier courses - we never took more than the 9hrs Theology & Philosophy - and I did not feel we were watered down. Some students wish to double major in the 4 years and the Clare courses interfere with that - thats not students looking for an "easy way out". Socalkid has a great suggestion - ask the kids for input....what made them choose SBU, what made their friends go elsewhere, if they could change 2 things what would it be? etc etc etc Wish I could offer specifics on the Clare more than that....
|
|
|
Post by sony on Jul 9, 2014 22:15:32 GMT -5
.... Ask the students who went elsewhere why!!!!
|
|
|
Post by jh on Jul 10, 2014 5:24:29 GMT -5
.... Ask the students who went elsewhere why!!!! If you run any business you want to know why people come and why people reject coming... or maybe you are kidding?
|
|