Quote:
Originally Posted by tbailey1138
By turned down no applicants, I meant that they did not have to stop accepting applications due to being full or turn down those who met minimum requirements. It's pretty much implied that they won't let you in if you don't meet the requirements.
If you had read the article as well, you would have also noted a few key quotes, among them: ""That was partly intentional...," Thompson said of the expected drop this year. "Looking back at what we have available with residence halls and classrooms, we thought our goal of 4,700 was a better goal to work with."" This means they had intended to lower freshman numbers to 4,700 but did not have to do so as acceptable applicant numbers were down.
Also, the lower number of overall students was a quote from a WVU official themselves, "Overall attendance was “around 28,800 last year,” Thompson said, but in 2009-10 attendance could be “500-600 lower.”" So it would seem that they may not completely make up for the loss in freshman.
As for the rec center increase, it was for higher utility costs and was less than $20/semester for students. Hardly "a significant increase" and nothing to do with the CTC.
The whole point of my comment though was to show that we have 2 strong higher education institutions in this state and to refute your comment about MU only being able to increase enrollment by taking the applicants WVU turns away. It still stands though, WVU did not have to turn acceptable applicants away and MU is expecting a 5-10% increase in enrollment.
|
I guess we could debate ad nausium the reasons why Marshall's enrollment might increase somewhat this year, but it is clear that WVU is trending toward more selective admissions and that will not only help West Virginia, it would also likley benefit Marshall and the other smaller institutions in the State. I am certain Marshall administrators would like to be able to attract more students without discounted tuition rates, and after a several year run of declining enrollment any increase would have to be a welcome one.
The rec center fees raise of $20 (per term) brings the total fee to somewhere in the vicinity of $170 if my memory serves me correctly. They can hype it as projected utility costs if they choose, but since the facility only opened 4 months ago, and since the gas company is actually trying to reduce rates at this time, it seems a little suspect to me. Then again, as you know I am suspicious of a lot of stuff Kopp is doing, so admittedly I could be off base in the assessment.
Since you live in Huntington, I know you are aware of the disgruntled faculty and staff who are bearing the brunt of low tuition rates, and program creation using existing resources, in the form of salaries well below the norm. There is obviously a price to pay, whether intended or not, for Dr. Kopp's methodology. He will be long gone before we know how well his gambles turn out.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
