Re: SDSU not the biggest anymore
I think most would agree that USDSU has a valid mission. I think you are 100% right that their needs to be a way for non-traditional students to get an education. I also believe you are right that "People are not going to quit jobs. . .for an education". Meeting the needs of the Sioux Falls non-traditional student is, and should be, USDSU's mission. So far we are in 100% agreement, I think.
If you feel, like some of the powers that be in Sioux Falls, that USDSU mission should duplicate the missions of the better established universities. . .well then we will have to disagree. I think what concerns folks on this board (what you call fear) is that for political reasons, the State of South Dakota will waste precious resources on duplicated efforts. As you so eloquently pointed out SDSU has needs (as do all the Universities) and each year the State has asked the Universities to do more with less. So if there are less resources to go around, for what we already have. Why would we want to be redundant by assigning the same mission to USDSU?
My last point address the Scobey Hall comment. Which looks surprisingly like a quote from Buster dated Feb. 8th 2004:
http://diaafootball.com/cgi-bin/yabb...6012404;start=
South Dakota State / Jackrabbit football / Re: What did SDSU ever do to the Argus?? Feb 8th, 2004, 1:12pm
The reason people in Brookings so detest USDSU, it seems, is because they've done it better. The classrooms are not full of crappy broken desks, shoddy equipment, and designed from converted offices and dorms. I recall classes I had on Scobey hall -- what a joke. They're the kind of rooms better suited to brutal interrogations than education.
My answear then, as it is today, is that USDSU is one building shared with a Vo-tech that was built 10 years ago, if that . SDSU is a Doctoral Granting Research University that has been around for 123 years with hundreds of building. Some of these building are over 100 years old. Not really a fair comparison. Perhaps it would be a more meaningful comparison if you were to pick a building on campus that is a little closer in age. :
Go State!
Originally posted by Roger
If you feel, like some of the powers that be in Sioux Falls, that USDSU mission should duplicate the missions of the better established universities. . .well then we will have to disagree. I think what concerns folks on this board (what you call fear) is that for political reasons, the State of South Dakota will waste precious resources on duplicated efforts. As you so eloquently pointed out SDSU has needs (as do all the Universities) and each year the State has asked the Universities to do more with less. So if there are less resources to go around, for what we already have. Why would we want to be redundant by assigning the same mission to USDSU?
My last point address the Scobey Hall comment. Which looks surprisingly like a quote from Buster dated Feb. 8th 2004:
http://diaafootball.com/cgi-bin/yabb...6012404;start=
South Dakota State / Jackrabbit football / Re: What did SDSU ever do to the Argus?? Feb 8th, 2004, 1:12pm
The reason people in Brookings so detest USDSU, it seems, is because they've done it better. The classrooms are not full of crappy broken desks, shoddy equipment, and designed from converted offices and dorms. I recall classes I had on Scobey hall -- what a joke. They're the kind of rooms better suited to brutal interrogations than education.
My answear then, as it is today, is that USDSU is one building shared with a Vo-tech that was built 10 years ago, if that . SDSU is a Doctoral Granting Research University that has been around for 123 years with hundreds of building. Some of these building are over 100 years old. Not really a fair comparison. Perhaps it would be a more meaningful comparison if you were to pick a building on campus that is a little closer in age. :
Go State!
Comment