Huzzah, we can go back to arguing traditional vs non traditional.
Traditional should be the goal, again.
Non-traditional should go to UH-Downtown.
Housing mandate for single true freshmen not living with parents is needed to help bring about a more traditional campus.
Of course, that’s going to be hard for those that plan on studying Technology, which makes that move such an “incomprehensible” decision.
That takes us from being merely “commuter” to being “super-commuter” with over 4,000 undergrads who will be completely detached from campus life.
5 Likes
no…actually they (Khator and the BOR) are bending over backwards to create a traditional Campus, within the realms of what the University can do (academic improvements, academic building improvements, desire to land in a Power conference which is 99% full of Traditional Campuses), $40 million worth of Landscape improvements, athletic facility improvements, etc.)
The resistance is felt by FOUR major entities
- Non Traditional students who have 0% desire in seeing the university trend toward a Traditional Campus (I’m NOT talking about the outliers who end up on places like here…those are an extremely small %). Even though we have some non traditional supporters here.also.
- Politicians continuing to hold us back saying we will NEVER be a Destination Campus (i.e Whitmire)
Politicians are also responsible for the lack of a cohesive vision for developing the Third Ward to support a HUGE 50,000 student major public University. See #3 for more - Developers. Developers are still skittish to invest in developing the Third Ward. UH should create a committee, along with members for the Third Ward Management District, and research how the surrounding area around ALL of the P4 Universities are developed…actually see how they are supported. Yes, some are in SMALL towns…but Some P4 Universities are in BIG Cities (Seattle, Austin, Los Angeles, Chicago, etc.)
- The UH Stigma…We’ve talked about this multiple times. Texans have a very low opinion of UH as a viable option…even Sons and Daughter of proud alums would absolutely have no desire to attend UH. With that fact, target Traditional Students from cities from other states.regions that wan to go away to Texas for College.
If as in other threads, Moncoog will respond that Traditional Student= White student…nothing can be further form the truth and UT -Austin is a prime example.
UT-A has traditional students that are Hispanic, Asian, South Asian, African-American, etc. that are EXTREMELY passionate about their time at UT-A. I’ve met them!
WE ARE POWER FOUR NOW! We need to act like it!
3 Likes
yes…it is easily the most IMPORTANT element for the future growth of the university of Houston Main Campus.
Accepting a P4 Invitation cemented that importance, IN STONE!
Our leaders WANTED this!
We have satellite campuses to serve the needs of our non- traditional students.
1 Like
That’s what happened on the other string. People started saying that our school looked more like TSU than other schools.
And then suggested that if we had a housing mandate or became more traditional that it would somehow further “white privilege.”
That, of course, ranks right up there with Whitmire claiming that Hispanic families don’t want to send their kids off to college to live in the dorms.
I know that when I lived on campus at UH in the mid-90s, there were A LOT of Hispanic students living in the dorms, and members of other races. My next door neighbor one year at Cougar Place was Black, and another year, it was Asian (my third year it was a White guy).
My own Hispanic aunt sent both her kids off to Notre Dame where they lived in dorms for their entire careers.
That’s just a bunch of IGNORANT…BULLCRAP!!!
A traditional campus can CERTAINLY have members of every race and ethnicity.
Encouraging a traditional campus IN NO WAY furthers “white privilege” or is hostile to minorities or the poor.
That’s just STUPID.
seriously…some of these HATERS need to visit UT-Austin and see what a diverse student body of TRADITIONAL STUDENTS looks like.
Many here represent what I absolutely hate about many of our alums…THEY LIVE IN A BUBBLE and are afraid to envision that we can improve.
This is what Whitmire talks about when he says we will NEVER be a destination school.
He wants to cater to those, in our region, that live in a bubble,
UT attracts children of those families that do NOT want to live in a bubble.
2 Likes
Please show in the other thread where I mentioned that. You won’t find it.
Others have though. Go back and re-read the rest of that string.
People were saying we looked more like TSU. Good Grief. On other strings, when we talked about becoming more traditional, people incorrectly interjected that somehow we were saying that that means “more White,” which is nonsense.
And you incorrectly claimed that it was more expensive to live on campus than off.
There may be a minority of cases where you’ll see that, but on average, you save by living on campus. Trust me. I know from personal experience having lived on and off campus at different schools. I guess you don’t have any comparable experience in that regard, and as such, just don’t know.
No, I’m not. If that’s important to you, get the information yourself.
All programs should be subject to audit if there’s a question about how funds are spent.
Don’t end up being the reason this thread gets locked, too. I disproved your statements. Including the one that apartments with utilities included are not prevalent. You simply have an agenda that ignores facts.
On the contrary, I posted the facts about what it costs to live on campus versus the average costs of rent in houston sharing a two bedroom plus paying transportation costs.
The latter was higher. Those “facts” may not be to your liking, but you can’t change them just because they refute your assertions.
Cost is a BOGUS criticism there. That’s why even Whitmire wasn’t dumb enough to make them.
I mean I hate to hijack the thread hijackers. But traditional vs. non-traditionsl isn’t super relevant here. Because non traditional or not, the SFAC had been pretty willing to go along with the fees for the better part of a decade now.
What changed was Pez coming to them with an absolutely mailed in and ill prepared presentation. Which is why the Board kicked it back down to the negotiation table. Not overriding the students in favor of the admin is a pretty strong rebuke of the way they handled it.
3 Likes
I think that Lawbert’s post was the most reasonable.
When we start getting full Big 12 shares, I would say that the students will have a better argument. It’s tougher to be sympathetic until then.
Their case is not as persuasive right now.
It’s true that the department is making more now, but not so much right away, and in any event, there’s a lot of years of deficit spending to make up for.
Does anyone really think a group of 20 year olds should be the ones deciding the administration of a billion dollar a year institution ?
3 Likes
If they’re the elected representatives of the student body that the $1bn per year institution primarily exists to serve then yes, absolutely.
1 Like
They voted to institute student fees to begin with so they should have a voice in how it’s spent. Especially when the department they give money to is incompetent.
3 Likes
Come man…a group of 20 year olds have routinely saved our country in numerous wars.
I think their voice counts.
This recent attitude that 18-22 years should be treated like cuddled babies is nonsense…they are legally adults!
The issue is that the type of student we ACCEPT conflicts with the type of student we are building our campus to serve
5 Likes
And if that was the case that was initially laid out to SFAC in the presentation I would be more sympathetic to the admin’s side, frankly with that position I’m on the admin’s side
But waltzing in unprepared to make a case, unable or unwilling to answer reasonable questions expecting a rubber stamp, they deserve to sweat a bit.
They are.
And given that their money is being given to athletics, I got it.
But as I said, their argument will be stronger in a few years when we’ll be making $40-$60 million per year than now when we won’t be making that much, and are coming off of years of “super deficit” spending.
Define traditional vs non traditional, meaning people that live on campus or demographics, ie more student population like TT, TCU etc etc