Jackrabbits lead the way

[89rabbit]

Whether it's in an athletic venue or in a classroom SDSU is playing on a different level! ;D

From the Argus:

http://www.argusleader.com/sports/Fridayarticle5.shtml

Student athletes fare well in class

MADISON - Student athletes at the six state-run universities do well academically when compared to the student body as a whole, according to a report prepared for the state Board of Regents.

The grade point average of all student athletes outpaced the GPA of the general student population, the report said.

It looked at data for students enrolled during spring and fall terms in 2003.

The grade point average of student athletes at individual universities ranged from a high of 2.89 at South Dakota State University in Brookings to a low of 2.6 at Black Hills State University in Spearfish. . . .

Go State! ;D

[filbert]

Re: Jackrabbits lead the way

That's really not too much of a spread . . . all SD colleges should be proud of keeping the "student" first in "student-athlete."

[filbert]

Re: Jackrabbits lead the way

More SD College news.

In summary, SD's state university system will be:
1.  SDSU, flagship, statewide, inclusive, D-I
2.  Mines and USD, selective, specialized
3.  NSU, BHSU, DSU, USDSUSDSUSDSU, regional, inclusive.

I can live with that.

http://www.argusleader.com/news/Fridayarticle3.shtml
Two colleges may get pickier
By DORIS HAUGEN
Associated Press

published: 12/17/2004

Regents OK plan to study entrance standards

MADISON - The Board of Regents told two state-run universities Thursday they can continue plans for tougher student admissions standards but urged administrators to consider what the change might mean for higher education as a whole.

Presidents of the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology and the University of South Dakota outlined their plans during a meeting at Dakota State University in Madison.

Regents took no immediate action but told administrators they could continue to study the idea for possible change in the future.

"Personally I'm not philosophically opposed to this," Harvey Jewett, regents president, said. "But we do have to provide wide access (to students). That's clearly our mission."

Charles Ruch, president of the School of Mines and Technology in Rapid City, said higher admission standards would boost the school's reputation as a science and engineering university.

SDSM&T does not have the programs needed to adequately help students who come to the school ill-prepared in math and science, Ruch said.

Unlike a liberal arts university, which can offer more flexibility to a student who wants to explore several options, the curricula for SDSM&T programs are more defined, he said.

They require solid academic performance and prepare graduates for professional practice, said Ruch. Students who aren't academically prepared often have trouble with their course work, and many drop out, he said.

"We can do a better job with the limited resources we have if we focus," Ruch told regents.

USD President Jim Abbott said tighter admissions standards at the Vermillion school make sense as a way of attracting students of high academic caliber.

"We believe a phased-in increase in standards would be a good move for us and for the system," said Abbott.

As high school student numbers continue declining in South Dakota, universities need to find new ways of attracting graduates, he said.

"In a declining market ... it makes sense for at least one and in this case two institutions to have more of a selective strategy," said Abbott.

Currently, minimum admissions standards are the same at all six state-run universities, said Tad Perry, regents' executive director.

Policy requires students to meet certain high school course requirements. A student also must have an ACT composite score of at least 18 or rank in the top 60 percent of their graduating class.

Regent Richard Belatti of Madison said he feared higher admissions standards might mean too many students wouldn't be accepted.

"It seems anybody should be able to go to our University of South Dakota," Belatti said.

Regent Pat Lebrun said the proposal meshed with the goals of higher education in South Dakota. Students with strong academic abilities need to be challenged and will look somewhere else if they feel the quality of education isn't tough enough at a state school, she said.

"You know there is a market for these students," said Lebrun. "And there is no reason why there can't be a market for these students in South Dakota."

If the change is approved, regents will need to make sure it doesn't appear the higher education system has two tiers, said Peggy Miller, president at South Dakota State University in Brookings.

"I would urge you to look at these changes in the context of all the programs," Miller said.

Ruch said the School of Mines would classify applicants into three categories based on ACT scores, the ACT math sub-score and high school grade-point average.

He told regents the admission standards would be raised gradually, with a two-year transition period for South Dakota students and a one-year phase-in for nonresidents.

At USD, the change would be made over three years, said Abbott. As proposed, students would need a minimum ACT score of 21 and a high school class ranking of 50 percent.

[OK_Jackrabbit]

Re: Jackrabbits lead the way

It says something positive about higher education in South Dakota that the Board of Regents not only asked for those figures about student athletes, but also published them.

Nobody in Oklahoma would dare ask for GPAs for OU student athletes. The news would undermine our quasi-professional athletic program. In Oklahoma, the state's self-worth revolves around the OU football team's record... because there is little else here.

It's sad, really, and those GPA numbers make me miss South Dakota even more.

[SDSUFAN]

Re: Jackrabbits lead the way

If these admission requirements were in affect in 1959, I would have been allowed on the SDSU campus to work maybe but not to learn.  If this is an attempt to push the marginal students towards Brookings, thank you Jim.

I think laying those high standards on an 18 year old is a mistake, because people mature in terms of intellectual abilities at different places in life. In my own case, I was not ready for college right out of high school. I left SDSU after two quarters and worked in another part of the country for two years and came back. I was not a 4.0 student, but was able to get above average grades.  I dont know how these new policies  affect the non-traditional students. For instance I guess I would now have to take the ACT, since that was not available back in 1959.

To get back to topic, our student athlete requirements are going to be higher than what we they were at D2.

Judging by Peggy Millers comment if SDSU were to implement a policy of this type it would be selective by courses of study which does make sense.

I dont understand Abbott position in offering this policy to the regents.  He says on one hand that enrollment among traditional students is declining and we are raising requirements.  If the budget is centered and built around an enrollment level, raising admission requirements could have a declining effect and the quality of students would most likely decline too, but since USD has a monopoly on Law, Medicine and Accounting majors, a higher GPA requirement is probably all ready in place, so this makes no sense at all.  

[Jacks99]

Re: Jackrabbits lead the way

Hopefully the 2.89 average can make it over the 3.0 mark someday.

With the average at 2.89, there are still some low marks.

I think the admission standards are fine where they are at for SDSU. Top 60% isn't too much to ask for "higher education". If there is a will to go there anyone can find a way, just may need help financially.

[jackrabbit1979]

Re: Jackrabbits lead the way

Besides this as the Land Grant School i believe it is one of our missions to offer education to as many people in south dakota as possible. I know the admissions office and SDSU itself has a goal of giving students a chance to prove themselves at the university. If a student wants to improve their life through education they should have that chance. If they don't succeed once they get there, they will probably learn some very important life lessons during that process as well.

[Rabbitlivinginverm]

Re: Jackrabbits lead the way

I agree that admission standards are just fine as they sit now. But if they want to raise their standards, that's their choice. I'll admit that coming out of H.S. I was not what you would call an "honor student." I met 1 of the 3 requirements to get in to SDSU. In my first couple of years things did not go well for me acadmically. By the time I graduated I increased my GPA significantly. Now as a graduate student (not at SDSU or USD), I haven't received a grade lower than an "A", while working full-time. I have SDSU to thank for this. They gave a struggling freshman who showed up for class once a month a second chance 8).

Go Rabbits ;D
I'm off to K.C.
Go BRONCOS ;D

[OK_Jackrabbit]

Re: Jackrabbits lead the way

Besides this as the Land Grant School i believe it is one of our missions to offer education to as many people in south dakota as possible.

Jackrabbit1979 is exactly right.

Passed in 1862, the Morrill Act gave each state a grant of 30,000 acres of public land for each senator and representative. The land was sold and the money from the sale was put into an endowment to support public land grant universities. It was just the first of several such grants. The Vermont Congressman, Justin Smith Morrill, who proposed the act saw it as an opportunity to make education accessible to people from all walks of life. It was an opportunity bill and was proposed largely in response to the elitism of eastern and European universities.

SDSU is South Dakota's land grant university. The opportunity represented by land grant universities is something to be proud of, and keeping them open to a wide variety of people is important. Let USD shut out certain people because they don't want to deal with students who may need a little remediation in order to show their true potential as human beings.  I don't think elitism is anything to be proud of. I'm proud to have been professor at a land grant university.

[jackmd]

Re: Jackrabbits lead the way

I have absolutely no problem with USD increasing their admission standards. This is something they have been discussing for some time now. There will always be the option to decrease them again, if needed. Certain students will be accepted on a "probationary" basis, I guarantee that.

As for SDSU, the mission is different and our admission standards should remain liberal to reflect that. However, the honors programs and certain majors must hold onto their higher admission criteria in order to preserve the overall quality of those enrolled. It doesn't make any sense to take a freshman who was a marginal high school student immediately into a difficult area of study, hence, certain criteria are required for certain majors. This is why there is a college of general studies.

I say, the more students enrolled at SDSU, the better. The less students enrolled at USD, the better.

[SDSUFAN]

Re: Jackrabbits lead the way

I have absolutely no problem with USD increasing their admission standards.  This is something they have been discussing for some time now.  There will always be the option to decrease them again, if needed.  Certain students will be accepted on a "probationary" basis, I guarantee that.

As for SDSU, the mission is different and our admission standards should remain liberal to reflect that.  However, the honors programs and certain majors must hold onto their higher admission criteria in order to preserve the overall quality of those enrolled.  It doesn't make any sense to take a freshman who was a marginal high school student immediately into a difficult area of study, hence, certain criteria are required for certain majors.  This is why there is a college of general studies.

I say, the more students enrolled at SDSU, the better.  The less students enrolled at USD, the better.

I agree whole heartly with all you said, I am repeating myself, but some people are just not ready for college.
There are people on campus at this minute and hour who are blowing it in terms of academic success and the standards should not be raised to the point that there is no second chance.
I believe they once had a amensty program at SDSU where you could get your transcript removed and start over. In my own case, I paid for a .9 GPA for the full four years I was there, but was totally unware of such program until I talked to James Pedersen who used to be in the Admissions office. My transcript still stands, but would have loved to be in on this program.

Maybe something like that is not fair to the bright and motivated like Casey Estling who manage a 4.0 in his stay at SDSU. You have to see it from that angle too.

Like you said some are allowed in at USD on a probationary basis and that apparently has been going on for a long time.

Bill Janklow who forgot to or was not allowed to graduate from Flandueau High Schools went to Vermillion without a diploma. But no matter how the Gov appears today, I do give him credit for getting above average grades while bluffing the admissions office about the request to see his high school diploma. This is a true story since he told this to Brian Lamb on Cspan. This is getting off topic.

I guess as others have said where there is a will there is a way in gettting an education no matter where the standards are set. Another example, Rudy, but lets not go there. ;D

[sports_buff]

Re: Jackrabbits lead the way

[quote author=SDSUFAN In my own case, I paid for a .9 GPA for the full four years I was there,
[/quote]

Was this a typo? If not it explains a lot.

[1stRowFANatic]

Re: Jackrabbits lead the way

I dont understand Abbott position in offering this policy to the regents.  He says on one hand that enrollment among traditional students is declining and we are raising requirements.  If the budget is centered and built around an enrollment level, raising admission requirements could have a declining effect and the quality of students would most likely decline too, but since USD has a monopoly on Law, Medicine and Accounting majors, a higher GPA requirement is probably all ready in place, so this makes no sense at all.  

I agree this really does not make any sense at all, and was shown by SDSM&T's President's comments about not being a liberal arts school. USD does NOT have a monopoly on Law, Medicine & Accounting majors at the undergraduate level where the standards apply. During my three years at the law school the number of SDSU vs USD undergraduates was very similar with neither one ever having more that 3 or 4 than the other.

While this may be a good move for SDSM&T, IMO it will not work out for USD. The number of students in the area served by USD is declining. The have decided to limit the number of students out of that pool even further. In addition, the students at the top of this group are very heavily recruited already by schools around the country and it begins early.

My son has been fortunate to score very high on standardized tests, and we have already begun to receive letters from high level academic institutions around the country. Will the students from this region that are recruited by the Ivy League Schools, Michigan, Stanford, etc. go to USD? Most likely only for some reason OTHER than academic reasons. This means USD will have even less students to choose from for enrollment.

What does this mean for SDSU? It means that what has generally been considered the other major university in SD will most likely decline in attendance even further. However, political pressure will be put on the Board of Regents to do things to help stop this slide, and that will include pressure on SDSU because funding will in part go where the political pressure forces it.

As an alum of both SDSU and USD, I do not think this is a good move for USD. As the funding decreases because enrollment declines, this will be one more plan that gets scrapped. USD needs to figure out what it does right, do that better, and the rest of their programs will follow. Constantly trying to change what its mission means that USD will never succeed in its mission. Just five years ago, USD was lobbying the legislature and the regents to increase the number of programs available to lure more students in, because a number of their programs were severely underattended. Now they want to limit the students that can get in.

I just don't get it. SDSU was bad for going D1 because it was going to limit the opportunities for SD kids according to critics of the move. Supporters of the move say it gives SD kids a new option. How can this move by USD do anything but limit opportunities for SD kids? The highest scoring kids can already get in to the school, and they have put nothing forward as to how they are going to increase the academic levels of the programs.

Sorry this is so long.

[SDSUFAN]

Re: Jackrabbits lead the way

1st row:
Granted the medicine and law schools include numerous SDSU grads, but the use of the word monoply was applied to the specific school of the six state assisted universities in South Dakota. SDSU does not have a medical or a law school that I am aware of. If you want those disciplines you go to Vermillion, cant say in Brookings. I did not imply that all undergrads for these schools came from USD. Who else offers law? medicine? That is what I am refering to when I used the word monopoly.

As far as accounting, SDSU has improved in this area since I left in 1965, but still does not offer a complete major, nor do they have all the courses to sit for the CPA exam. I know that too has changed in that 150 hrs are now required to sit for the exam. Several have to be accounting and finance. Again, this study has be completed at Vermillion. Maybe the accounting major courses can be completed by satillite and/or in Sioux Falls, but USD seems to have exclusive rights to this particular major, and what I would call a monopoly.

[SDSUFAN]

Re: Jackrabbits lead the way

Was this a typo? If not it explains a lot.

Let me explain. First of all when I started at SDSU, there was a quarter system that was later replaced by a semester system. My .9 GPA was for one quarter of grades. I got something like 1.1 for the other quarter and thats when I dropped out. I came back later and had a few 2.9's and mostly 2.5, but those two low ones made the cummulative low and I finished low despite of having some success. Thats what I meant. I hope you understand sports bluff. ;D