Daniels response...what have others heard?

[BoilerBonz]

actually everything I said is correct. If the student isn't top 25%, there's a good chance they will need to go to a less competitive school. There's more demand and less resources. Welcome to globalization.

Globalization doesn't require a state institution to raise admission standards on in-state applicants.
Regardless, I have no complaint about this particular effect of the tuition freeze. I've thought for sometime that Purdue should raise standards for in-state applicants -- thus following an admission model more like U Michigan's, as opposed to MSU's.

But we shouldn't pretend it's not happening.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

Globalization doesn't require a state institution to raise admission standards on in-state applicants.
Regardless, I have no complaint about this particular effect of the tuition freeze. I've thought for sometime that Purdue should raise standards for in-state applicants -- thus following an admission model more like U Michigan's, as opposed to MSU's.

But we shouldn't pretend it's not happening.

Yes it will. If there's more demand without an increase in resources, the university will naturally be more picky. Even if all your students were in state, and your application pool doubled but your admissions pool stayed the same, what do you think would happen to the admission standard? It would go up because you would take the best. It's supply and demand.

 

[BoilerBonz]

Numerous students that are/were top 10% at premier schools in Indiana that have been denied admission.

Two students that are neighbors that were accepted at Ivy League schools, but denied acceptance by Purdue.

One student that was accepted at more than 20 other schools, including every other in-state school to which they applied, but denied acceptance by Purdue.

Students that received the highest academic scholarship available at other schools, the Presidential Scholarship, yet were denied acceptance by Purdue.

It is indeed more competitive today than it was in the past, but what you had said is absolutely not correct, and Purdue is indeed consciously denying more than qualified in-state students at the expense of out-of-state and international students, which plays a large role in why they are able to maintain the tuition freezes...and it is not public knowledge.

Note too that ISU just announced plans to add a School of Engineering and grow enrollment by 20%. This as a result of much higher standards for direct admit into popular majors at PU and IU. IU also is admitting more out-of-state and international students to offset the relative decline in funding from the state. But IU isn't compounding the problem by freezing its tuition, as has PU.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

Note too that ISU just announced plans to add a School of Engineering and grow enrollment by 20%. This as a result of much higher standards for direct admit into popular majors at PU and IU. IU also is admitting more out-of-state and international students to offset the relative decline in funding from the state. But IU isn't compounding the problem by freezing its tuition, as has PU.

To me this is the proper response. Other institutions should see opportunity here. If Purdue chooses exclusivity over tuition hikes then others can and should fill the void.

 

[BoilerBonz]

Yes it will. If there's more demand without an increase in resources, the university will naturally be more picky. Even if all your students were in state, and your application pool doubled but your admissions pool stayed the same, what do you think would happen to the admission standard? It would go up because you would take the best. It's supply and demand.

As a state institution, Purdue is not obligated to respond to increased demand from out-of-state or overseas. And increased demand from in-state applicants would only raise admission standards if Purdue was at capacity enrollment with in-state students. So globalization has nothing to do with it! What we're seeing is a result of an intentional increase in admissions standards for in-state students at Purdue, and IU. Now, it is true that neither Purdue, nor IU, would be able to raise in-state standards if there wasn't excess demand from out-of-state and international applicants. But it's also true that if the state of Indiana had not flat-lined funding for Purdue and IU, beginning about 15 years ago, neither would need the higher out-of-state and international tuition to survive, financially. And Daniels is just compounding this problem, of less state funding, by freezing Purdue's tuition.

 

[BoilerBonz]

To me this is the proper response. Other institutions should see opportunity here. If Purdue chooses exclusivity over tuition hikes then others can and should fill the void.

Ok, now you're recognizing the elephant in the room! Purdue is choosing exclusivity! I'm fine with that, as a resident of the state, because my kids make excellent grades in high school and will be admitted to Purdue, regardless (I think?). And they'll be effectively getting an exclusive education -- equal or better than many elite private schools -- for less than it costs me now to send them to a private high school.

I LUV IT! But let's recognize that this is a huge change in Purdue's historical mission and not pretend that others aren't being adversely affected by this.

 

[JohnnyDoeBoiler]

I think you're referring to Daniels' agenda, not Burke's. Regardless, I can't agree with you on this one. IMO, Daniels' "agenda," which is the current basis for funding K-12 education in Indiana, is not against public education. It's against the monopoly previously enjoyed by local public schools, which was, and is, abused by the ideologically-motivated NEA. The voucher system allows access to private schools by those who could not otherwise afford it, and charter's must admit a diverse demographic. Maybe the public schools work where you live, JDB; in which case, I'm happy for you. But they sure has heck don't work where I, and a lot of other Hoosiers, live. So I'm thankful the state implemented Daniels' K-12 funding policies.

Regardless, I'm done on this one -- don't want to debate K-12 ed here.

I'm pissed at both...got my dufus' mixed up.

 

[JohnnyDoeBoiler]

I think you're referring to Daniels' agenda, not Burke's. Regardless, I can't agree with you on this one. IMO, Daniels' "agenda," which is the current basis for funding K-12 education in Indiana, is not against public education. It's against the monopoly previously enjoyed by local public schools, which was, and is, abused by the ideologically-motivated NEA. The voucher system allows access to private schools by those who could not otherwise afford it, and charter's must admit a diverse demographic. Maybe the public schools work where you live, JDB; in which case, I'm happy for you. But they sure has heck don't work where I, and a lot of other Hoosiers, live. So I'm thankful the state implemented Daniels' K-12 funding policies.

Regardless, I'm done on this one -- don't want to debate K-12 ed here.

I want to clarify some things that aren't true. I work in Tippecanoe County at a local high school that is regarded as one of the best in the state (not West Side). Why are we looking at public schools as a 'monopoly'? Again, when you try to run education like a business, students suffer. Do you know that the schools in Indiana were given $90 million by the State yet $30 million of that went to private, voucher, and charter schools. The issue with that is that student population accounts for roughly 10%-15%. There is an unequal funding that is taking place that is hurting our public schools. Where I work, we are unable to hire the number of teachers to truly be fully staffed and schools are starting to see they are unable to hire fully qualified teachers due to shortages. I have a four year degree from Purdue University yet am paid at roughly the same amount as a high school graduate.

Daniels, and now Pence, have openly said they want to dismantle the public school system as it currently stands and in their place have come privatized schools that don't work. For your reading, I linked a 2014 article that points to almost half of these 'charter' schools are failing...not just struggling, but failing.

http://www.wthr.com/article/nearly-half-of-indianas-charter-schools-doing-poorly-or-failing

 

[BoilerBonz]

I want to clarify some things that aren't true. I work in Tippecanoe County at a local high school that is regarded as one of the best in the state (not West Side). Why are we looking at public schools as a 'monopoly'? Again, when you try to run education like a business, students suffer. Do you know that the schools in Indiana were given $90 million by the State yet $30 million of that went to private, voucher, and charter schools. The issue with that is that student population accounts for roughly 10%-15%. There is an unequal funding that is taking place that is hurting our public schools. Where I work, we are unable to hire the number of teachers to truly be fully staffed and schools are starting to see they are unable to hire fully qualified teachers due to shortages. I have a four year degree from Purdue University yet am paid at roughly the same amount as a high school graduate.

Daniels, and now Pence, have openly said they want to dismantle the public school system as it currently stands and in their place have come privatized schools that don't work. For your reading, I linked a 2014 article that points to almost half of these 'charter' schools are failing...not just struggling, but failing.

http://www.wthr.com/article/nearly-half-of-indianas-charter-schools-doing-poorly-or-failing

Charters are "failing" (as it's measured) at about a 50% rate because almost all are located in areas where the public schools fail at a rate of 100%! And the private school I have to send my kids to sure as heck isn't failing! And I have to send my kids to private school because my local public school in abysmal! It didn't used to be -- but it sure as heck is now! Yet, if my residence was a few blocks over, the local public school is still just fine. But I can't send my kids there because my local school has a geographic monopoly, and that school receives a portion of my property taxes, no matter how bad it is! Vouchers simply allow someone to take a portion of what the state would put towards their local public school and apply it toward a private school. But this is means tested and I earn too much to qualify so I get to pay for two schools, my kids' private school and the local unaccountable monopoly public school. Regardless, I'm happy that those who earn less, and qualify, can now afford to CHOOSE private school, as a result of the voucher program. And the state puts proportionally more into privates and charters because those school receive no local funding. IMO, we need public funding of schools, but we don't necessarily need public schools, especially not in urban areas where they trap families into failed schools based on geography. Again, I think what Daniels and Pence have done for K-12 ed in Indiana is great!

You need to pull your head out of the NEA's Kool-Aid bucket, it's poison.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

I want to clarify some things that aren't true. I work in Tippecanoe County at a local high school that is regarded as one of the best in the state (not West Side). Why are we looking at public schools as a 'monopoly'? Again, when you try to run education like a business, students suffer. Do you know that the schools in Indiana were given $90 million by the State yet $30 million of that went to private, voucher, and charter schools. The issue with that is that student population accounts for roughly 10%-15%. There is an unequal funding that is taking place that is hurting our public schools. Where I work, we are unable to hire the number of teachers to truly be fully staffed and schools are starting to see they are unable to hire fully qualified teachers due to shortages. I have a four year degree from Purdue University yet am paid at roughly the same amount as a high school graduate.

Daniels, and now Pence, have openly said they want to dismantle the public school system as it currently stands and in their place have come privatized schools that don't work. For your reading, I linked a 2014 article that points to almost half of these 'charter' schools are failing...not just struggling, but failing.

http://www.wthr.com/article/nearly-half-of-indianas-charter-schools-doing-poorly-or-failing

so they're failing yet standardized test scores are going up, AP participation up, graduation rate is up, grades for the schools themselves are improving...ok lol

 

[boilermaker75]

I am not knowledgeable on other aspects of this argument, but I posted this part on the bball board as well.

Regarding current trend of In state and international freshman:
In MDs Sept letter....
"We were thrilled to welcome our largest freshman class in recent history, roughly 500 students larger than last fall. The 7,243 new freshmen include more Hoosiers than recent years and a record number of students from minority backgrounds, up about 17% from last year’s class. By design, we reduced the number of international students in the freshman class by about 10%, but we are very pleased that they will be a diverse group in terms of country of origin, adding to our global and dynamic student body"

Yes Hoosier enrollment at Purdue, and overall enrollment at Purdue, has gone up this year. That was needed to keep the tuition constant. The consequence is that the number of students is greater than the capacity, which will hurt quality. Engineering can handle about 1900 First Year Engineering students. This year FYE enrollment is 2077.

Next year these students have to find professional schools to go to. ME and BME are at capacity and institute minimum requirements from FYE to enter. So these extra 177 will have to go somewhere else. ECE has some bottlenecks in lab space. For ECE 27000, which all sophomores take, a lab is run at every available time slot. There are discussions to add Saturday and or evening labs, which will not be desirable to students.

Purdue's honors college is also oversubscribed,

http://www.jconline.com/story/news/college/2016/08/20/purdue-students-bumped-out-new-dorm/88956890/

 

[banshee90]

Can you get it into your head? The reading program was not working. Incoming students were not reading the books. It was a waste of money.

The reading program was dumb as ****, I was in it for the very first year it was rolled out. Why the **** did purdue waste my money on a ****ing book like no one read!

 

[BoilerBonz]

The reading program was dumb as ****, I was in it for the very first year it was rolled out. Why the **** did purdue waste my money on a ****ing book like no one read!

Well, if you didn't read it, how do you know it was dumbas*?

 

[JohnnyDoeBoiler]

Harry Truman...probably the last real President this country ever had...said it best:"The Buck stops here." Well, President Daniels, you didnt want the mess, but you got it so solve it. Same for Berghoff! I would suggest $25 @ student each semester till things catch up with the rest of the World. Plough the money straight into the Athletic Department.

Didn't there used to be a student fee for athletics but a few sour grapes decided to try to sue Purdue because they didn't watch sports? Isn't there a fee for the use of the CoRec...kind of seems similar IMO.

If Purdue went with a $50 fee per year, it would generate $2 million in extra funds for the football program...want to know where money to direct to increased recruiting budgets and yearly spending to maintain proper equipment in places like the Mackey and football weight rooms comes from...? This right here.

 

[JohnnyDoeBoiler]

Charters are "failing" (as it's measured) at about a 50% rate because almost all are located in areas where the public schools fail at a rate of 100%! And the private school I have to send my kids to sure as heck isn't failing! And I have to send my kids to private school because my local public school in abysmal! It didn't used to be -- but it sure as heck is now! Yet, if my residence was a few blocks over, the local public school is still just fine. But I can't send my kids there because my local school has a geographic monopoly, and that school receives a portion of my property taxes, no matter how bad it is! Vouchers simply allow someone to take a portion of what the state would put towards their local public school and apply it toward a private school. But this is means tested and I earn too much to qualify so I get to pay for two schools, my kids' private school and the local unaccountable monopoly public school. Regardless, I'm happy that those who earn less, and qualify, can now afford to CHOOSE private school, as a result of the voucher program. And the state puts proportionally more into privates and charters because those school receive no local funding. IMO, we need public funding of schools, but we don't necessarily need public schools, especially not in urban areas where they trap families into failed schools based on geography. Again, I think what Daniels and Pence have done for K-12 ed in Indiana is great!

You need to pull your head out of the NEA's Kool-Aid bucket, it's poison.

And why do you think those schools fail? It is a much larger system wide issue rather than the 'monopoly of the public school' as you state. I could literally dive in to a 5 page post about the issues but you said it yourself. Vouchers are taking money from struggling schools and adding them to private or charter schools. How is that fair at all? And unless you can point to a school that literally graduates 0% of it's student base, then you can't say your public schools are failing 100% of the time.

So here is a very generic question that you can answer: Should the girl who is the first chair flute player...stands about 5'3 and weighs about 120 pounds...be expected to dunk a basketball just like the varsity starting center who is 6'8 and weights 220? If you said 'no,' then why did they and still attempt to judge students on ridiculous testing that proves nothing and standardized tests that are so generic and flawed, they are some what useless. BTW, I am not saying that all testing is bad and that SAT's and ACT's aren't useful. What I am saying is that if you want schools to improve, maybe give the power back to the classroom teacher and increase their salaries and wages and maybe you'll start to see students achieving at higher levels.

I am a damn good teacher and love what I do. Did I get in to it for the money? Nope, and most teachers will tell you the same thing. But poor pay and being dumped on sure doesn't help the recruitment of more teachers that may choose other lines of work instead. Want to see schools improve in the state of Indiana? Increase funding for our teacher salaries and continued education and watch more higher ability-college bound students WANT to become teachers and STAY teachers.

Like my father, who was a teacher, told me: 'Not everyone can go to college, and that is fine. We need people to pick up our trash and to lean bathrooms. We also need people who can weld, change oil, and provide other services that aren't likely to be taught in school.' Want to see a change in our school system in Indiana...create technical high schools where students can learn skills that they can adapt and use after their graduate high school because not everyone wants to go or be ready to go to college

 

[banshee90]

Well, if you didn't read it, how do you know it was dumbas*?

I read the stupid book, no one else I know actually read it.

 

[BoilerBonz]

I read the stupid book, no one else I know actually read it.

Fair enough.

 

[BoilerBonz]

And why do you think those schools fail? It is a much larger system wide issue rather than the 'monopoly of the public school' as you state. I could literally dive in to a 5 page post about the issues but you said it yourself. http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2016/10/preparing-pass-baton And unless you can point to a school that literally graduates 0% of it's student base, then you can't say your public schools are failing 100% of the time.

So here is a very generic question that you can answer: Should the girl who is the first chair flute player...stands about 5'3 and weighs about 120 pounds...be expected to dunk a basketball just like the varsity starting center who is 6'8 and weights 220? If you said 'no,' then why did they and still attempt to judge students on ridiculous testing that proves nothing and standardized tests that are so generic and flawed, they are some what useless. BTW, I am not saying that all testing is bad and that SAT's and ACT's aren't useful. What I am saying is that if you want schools to improve, maybe give the power back to the classroom teacher and increase their salaries and wages and maybe you'll start to see students achieving at higher levels.

I am a damn good teacher and love what I do. Did I get in to it for the money? Nope, and most teachers will tell you the same thing. But poor pay and being dumped on sure doesn't help the recruitment of more teachers that may choose other lines of work instead. Want to see schools improve in the state of Indiana? Increase funding for our teacher salaries and continued education and watch more higher ability-college bound students WANT to become teachers and STAY teachers.

Like my father, who was a teacher, told me: 'Not everyone can go to college, and that is fine. We need people to pick up our trash and to lean bathrooms. We also need people who can weld, change oil, and provide other services that aren't likely to be taught in school.' Want to see a change in our school system in Indiana...create technical high schools where students can learn skills that they can adapt and use after their graduate high school because not everyone wants to go or be ready to go to college

I could go on for 4 or more page as well, but I'll try to be succinct. First, nothing you wrote after the first paragraph is relevant to anything I wrote before, so I won't address that. Regarding what seems to be the main point of your first paragraph: "Vouchers are taking money from struggling schools and adding them to private or charter schools. How is that fair at all?" Obviously, you're not thinking about "fairness" from the perspective of the students, or the parents of the students, who wish to escape under-performing schools. Furthermore, the revenue behind the voucher isn't the birth right of the local public school, except from the perspective of the NEA, an organization devoted singularly to the interests of employees of conventional public schools (note that charters are public schools, too) ... but not to the interests of students, the parents of the students, and certainly not the interests of the general public and the taxpayers. In Indiana, the state's contribution to the K-12 education follows the student in the case of those who qualify for vouchers. I recognize that the NEA hates this because they don't want the conventional public schools to have to compete for the funding that follows students or to be held accountable by parents. The monopoly that public schools in Indiana once enjoyed certainly made life easier for them, I get that, but it was a terribly unfair system for middle-class and poor families trapped in under-performing schools. And the NEA's solution, of forcing such families to stay in those under-performing schools, won't solve the problem. And if your Tippecanoe County school district is hurting for funding, there's a simple solution. Pass a local referendum to supplement public school funding, but don't try to extract those funds from voucher families, whose students don't attend your public school ... because that would be terribly "unfair."