HonestAbe1981

Follow

Comment history

Heard on the Hill: Missouri town wants KU to get rid of Jayhawk mascot; Kansas State's Rhodes scholarship claim a little misleading; prices increase for colleges across the country

There is nothing wrong with puffing up distinctions in any business - its a competitive marketplace. However, the deceptive marketing tactics that KSU regularly and strategically uses are misleading and unfair to students. KSU's "mistake" of reporting a much lower acceptance rate than they actually had this past year cost them 11 spots in the US NEWS rankings.

KSU fails to, as Paul Harvey would say, tell "the rest of the story". This one example will paint the picture. I've heard KSU staff simply say to students "we have the #1 ranked architectural engineering program in the country". What they fail to mention is that is a ranking they made up after they realized they had the #1 architectural engineering program for a land grant institution without a medical school. Enough said.

You say to consider the time and resources used by state universities to denigrate one another. My response would be consider the time and resources that KSU puts into twisting facts and causing confusion in the marketplace. Its a strategy they have employed for years, and unfortunately, people accept much of what they say as true. I for one, refuse to drink their grape juice.

September 16, 2011 at 8:46 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Looking ahead

Oneeye: you're highly annoying and post on far too many articles with an arrogant and negative attitude that leads people to believe that you are 1. connected and 2. an expert. If you were either, you wouldn't be making ignorant comments like "broke as broke gets". As someone who is a member and volunteers for the Alumni Association I know first hand that the organization is one of the farthest reaching throughout Associations throughout the entire country and offers programs that actually impact KU - student recruitment efforts, legislative lobbying efforts, Kansas Honors Programs, and many other programs that are both fun and create positive feelings toward KU.

Open your other eye and maybe you'll stop making uninformed comments.

April 21, 2011 at 10:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

KU athletic director Sheahon Zenger at home on the road on outreach tour

A couple of you obviously don't know much about fundraising and obviously don't know that a lot of money exists in Kansas outside of Kansas City. Some of the largest KU donors either live in or are from the western and central part of the state.

March 7, 2011 at 11:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Sources: Bubba Cunningham to be KU's next athletic director

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

December 15, 2010 at 1:45 p.m. ( )

Statehouse Live: Brownback's budget director has recommended lower taxes, higher tuition, vouchers

You are absolutely correct. This budget director is short-sighted.....without higher education these services wouldn't be available - everyone benefits.

December 9, 2010 at 3:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Give new KU administration a chance

I'll go ahead and re-post my comments on Dolph's article from yesterday. The state needs to eliminate the Board of Regents in its current form entirely. I'll also say that a University is a business whether anyone wants to admit it or not - with large Endowments, sky rocketing tuition, and demands for universities to produce graduates that are prepared and contribute to the economy, it has to be ran like a business.

The state of Kansas is far behind in many areas when it comes to higher education. The Regents admissions standards are embarrassing (so are the proposed new standards). Kansas is one of the least populated states in the country (a declining population to boot), and we have one governing board trying to manage and set policies for 19 community colleges and 6 regents institutions. It's a one size fits all approach, which isn't effective.

Admissions standards obviously need to be tougher, but when are other important conversations going to start taking place in light of declining state support and declining population? Why do we have duplication of programs at various universities - seems like an obvious drain on state resources. Many states governing boards ensure only one of their institutions offer architecture or engineering or business. Do we need the number of higher ed options we currently have? - I doubt it.

The Regents need to make some tough decisions. 1. Eliminate program duplication 2. Establish a pecking order for admissions. Kansas has numerous options for access to higher ed if you can't make it at the top schools in Kansas - prove yourself and then transfer 3. The community colleges need their own governing board and the large universities collectively need their own board.....I'd go so far as to say that KU and KSU need their own Regents boards - a lot of large universities have their own boards - those universities are progressive are able to make quick decisions and avoid to political BS that exists in higher ed today.

Its not rocket science - Admissions standards are the trigger point. If universities are allowed to be more selective, they have a better prepared student body. Rankings go up. With higher rankings you attract top faculty. With top faculty you attract more research dollars. Rankings go up even more - the end result is a much large return on investment to the state of Kansas.

Regents and KS politicians need to stop over thinking this stuff and stop trying to keep everything fair. This approach will continue to handcuff the state of Kansas higher education system.

December 9, 2010 at 11:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Admissions action

The state of Kansas is far behind in many areas when it comes to higher education. The Regents admissions standards are embarrassing (so are the proposed new standards). Kansas is one of the least populated states in the country (a declining population to boot), and we have one governing board trying to manage and set policies for 19 community colleges and 6 regents institutions. It's a one size fits all approach, which isn't effective.

Admissions standards obviously need to be tougher, but when are other important conversations going to start taking place in light of declining state support and declining population? Why do we have duplication of programs at various universities - seems like an obvious drain on state resources. Many states governing boards ensure only one of their institutions offer architecture or engineering or business. Do we need the number of higher ed options we currently have? - I doubt it.

The Regents need to make some tough decisions. 1. Eliminate program duplication 2. Establish a pecking order for admissions. Kansas has numerous options for access to higher ed if you can't make it at the top schools in Kansas - prove yourself and then transfer 3. The community colleges need their own governing board and the large universities collectively need their own board.....I'd go so far as to say that KU and KSU need their own Regents boards - a lot of large universities have their own boards - those universities are progressive are able to make quick decisions and avoid to political BS that exists in higher ed today.

Its not rocket science - Admissions standards are the trigger point. If universities are allowed to be more selective, they have a better prepared student body. Rankings go up. With higher rankings you attract top faculty. With top faculty you attract more research dollars. Rankings go up even more - the end result is a much large return on investment to the state of Kansas.

Regents and KS politicians need to stop over thinking this stuff and stop trying to keep everything fair - life isn't fair. The current as*backwards approach will continue to handcuff the state of Kansas higher education system.

December 8, 2010 at 9:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal )