Apparently the state rep for san angelo decided to work a deal behind Angelo State University's back to join them to the Texas Tech system. The whole town's pissed off it seems.

As an ASU grad, I'm curious to see how this works out.



http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2007/feb/23/asu-might-change-systems
http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2007/feb/23/breaking-news---texas-state-chancellor-asu-departu/

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't theyre satelite campus in Abilene like one classroom in some building downtown?

Reporter News article

story about Texas State system and ASU as well as this info about Tech in Abilene

quote:

---

Texas Tech in Abilene

# The Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center School of Pharmacy is under construction in the 1700 block of Pine Street. The school, housed in a 36,000-square-foot building, will open in the fall with 40 students who will work through four years of courses to earn a doctor of pharmacy degree.

# The Texas Tech University Small Business Development Center, 500 Chestnut St., sixth floor, hosts workshops and offers other programs

# Texas Tech University at Abilene, 302 Pine St., offers doctorate and master's level programs in computer science and a master's degree in software engineering.

# Hendrick Family Health Center, 1857 Pine St., became Texas Tech Physicians of Abilene on Sept. 1.

# Future family doctors get on-the-job training in the Texas Tech University Rural Family Medicine Residency Program, a longtime collaboration between Hendrick Health System and Tech.

# Under consideration: In September 2006, Tech officials announced that an architectural design studio is being considered in Abilene. It would be located at 302 Pine St. in the same building as Texas Tech University at Abilene, a graduate engineering program. The studio would serve two purposes: To give students practical experience while aiding Abilene and surrounding communities; and to give those municipalities resources to help conceptualize potential projects.

---

Its crazy that you need 4 years of school to count out 32 pills and then put them in a bottle.

you might want to know what happens when someone is taking multiple pills and how they might interact

Nah. That takes all the fun out of it.

Anybody know if the new Tech College of Pharmacy is a seperate entity from it's school in Amarillo? The reason that I ask is I'm curious to see if they will be hiring any new faculty or broadcasting lectures from Amarillo. I teach at a College of Pharmacy outside of Texas and it would be nice to look at an oppurtunity like that close to home.

New Dean hired

Included in the forgivable loan will be an incentive to secure four high-paying research jobs at the pharmacy school, Tram reported. The salaries for the four jobs would total more than $350,000 annually

The community has pledged $12 million to open a branch of Texas Tech's pharmacy school. The first class of about 40 students would enroll next fall. The branch will employ 42 full-time people by the time the first class graduates in 2011.


Student applications are coming in

Tech's commitment to Abilene to increase



I haven't heard anything specific about teaching jobs, just assumed there would be some. With 160 something students and 40 something employees, you'd think a portion of that would be teachers/instructors/professors. . .




[This message has been edited by TheSheik (edited 3/24/2007 6:04p).]

Thanks for the info Sheik. I am kind of specialized in that my expertise is in psychiatric pharmacy. I'll have to check to see if they have defined the type of faculty they will be hiring.

It seems strange that the tech alignment would happen. The Agricultural school has worked with the A&M Research station much in the past. But probably not as much as I might have thought.

Sad day for ASU if it happens, TTSA just doesn't sound right, TAMSA does.

TAMUSA does sound good. But everyone I've talked to seems happy about TTUSA

When all this started, they said they would not change the name from "Angelo State University". We'll see what really happens, though.

TT Pharmacy school might be alright if you are male....female, minority or handicapped....look elsewhere.

Miller et al V. TTUHSC

quote:

---

Lucinda Miller, a former professor of pharmacy practice, sued Texas Tech for sex discrimination in the denial of tenure and retaliation for complaining about the discrimination in violation of Title VII and Texas state laws, as well as pay inequity in violation of the Equal Pay Act.

In 1997, the Texas Tech School of Pharmacy hired Miller as a professor and co-plaintiff Elaine King-Miller (no relation) as associate dean for outcome assessment. The university assured them that they would be considered for tenure immediately. During the hiring process Miller was told that that the institution was prohibited from paying her more than a specified base salary and $5,000 as an administrative stipend, although Miller later discovered that other professors were paid more. The university allegedly made similar comments to King-Miller, who also discovered that other associate deans were paid more....

---

There was a lot of behind-the-scenes creepiness going on around this case. I heard some stuff alleged about the administration of the Amarillo Pharmacy School that would be amazing if true.

God help me if my hometown university gets associated with that school in Lubbock.

getting closer, if not already done

from the ARN and San Angelo Std Times

Just waiting on Gov's sig. done deal.

p-wonk-

You have the same thoughts that I had until my father-in-law explained that basically TSU(nee SWT) was doing everything it could to get ahold of the Carr money at ASU.

While I absolutely detest the fleas.... I am afraid this will be a good deal for Angelo State.

With that said, at least I only transferred some summer school hours in to A&M, while Mrs.EMc77 actually has a Masters from there. She claims her diploma says nothing about fleadom so it doesn't diminish for her work!

I think that ittech will also set its sights on the Carr money, perhaps with more success. It's been a smooth courtship thus far, with the sand fleas saying what ASU wanted to hear in order to acquire an institution with a solid academic reputation. With the state's population centering east of I35, it's a bad move for ASU in the long run. No matter how much ittech screams, "look at me!" they will never achieve the status they desire, simply because they do not have the history, the endowments, nor the population to pull it off.

What I hate is that Tom Green Co has become sandflea bandwagon central..... Angelo has a decent size Ag population, but it seems like more of today's people want a party college education in lieu of a real one......

No doubt tu and the Ags could have blocked this had they thought it would be so beneficial to the fleas that it would adversely impact the flagships. Perhaps they're following the old adage, "Never interrupt your enemy when he's making a mistake." (Or something like that.)

There are so many misinformed posts on this thread that I don't even know where to begin.

First off, I highly doubt that Angelo State University is going to rename itself to Texas Tech University -- San Angelo. In fact, part of the reason why Angelo State left the Texas State system is because it didn't want to change it's name to Texas State University--San Angelo, which would look pretty silly. Texas State is trying really hard to become more respected, so they pretty much wanted Angelo State and everyone else in the system to play second fiddle.

EMc77, I have no idea what you are talking about. There's all sorts of people at Angelo State just like anywhere else. In fact, a lot of the "party college" people I've met were at A&M. From what I've seen and heard, people at Angelo State generally don't care about Texas Tech. Remember, San Angelo is the EXACT same distance (within eight miles or so) from Austin as it is from Lubbock.

Bucketrunner, I'm sure that there's legal documents that state that the Carr money goes to Angelo State students only. I don't think it's a piggy bank that anyone can break open.

As far as your comment about the state's population centering east of I-35, what does that have to do with education? Texas State is farther east than Texas Tech and I doubt the academics at Texas State are much stronger than Tech's. I agree with you though about Texas Tech never being able to improve itself; it's always going to remain stagnant.

Texas A&M University -- San Angelo sounds just as bad as Texas Tech University -- San Angelo and Texas State University-San Angelo.

c-jags, this was NEVER a backroom deal, so I don't know where you get your information from.

I don't like Tech, but I think it will be a better deal for Angelo State to partner with them than Texas State. But the problem is that Angelo State is a growing school, so eventually it's going to be a rival school to Tech.

Coconut, I believe you may be misinformed.

quote:

---

c-jags, this was NEVER a backroom deal, so I don't know where you get your information from.

---

When I said "behind their back" it was not Angelo State University that pursued this from the beginning. It was Darby.

The departing and incoming president didn't know about it until it was in the news.

quote:

---

Joseph C. Rallo, the lone finalist to replace Hindman as president, said he was not aware of the effort to align ASU with Texas Tech.

---

http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2007/feb/23/asu-might-change-systems/

quote:

---

Departing ASU President James Hindman said he had heard speculation and rumors about the move for about five or six months, but said he didn’t know anything official had been decided until he saw media reports Thursday night and Friday morning.

---

http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2007/feb/24/asu-students-alumni-staff-want-more-info-proposal/


So yes. When your current and incoming president don't know about it until it's a news release... YES. it is going behind somebody's back. Again... I'm not saying it's a bad thing or that I don't like the transition... I do and I think it will be good for ASU to get out of the TSU system.



The first report was filed Feb 23rd.
http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2007/feb/23/asu-might-change-systems/

quote:

---

Darby confirmed Thursday that a delegation of ASU boosters met this week in Austin and expressed their desire to Gov. Rick Perry to take ASU out of the Texas State University System.

---

"Delegation of ASU boosters" = people who wanted this done and met together.

i.e. Not a University sanctioned group. So ASU itself didn't pursue this and it was done in a manner that I would call "behind their backs"

I'm not saying it was done maliciously or anything. It just was brought up and done very quickly w/out a lot of public discourse until the final months leading up to a vote. And the administration of ASU had very little to do w/ this move at the start. The move started outside of their realm of power especially since they can't really pursue that as members of the TSUS system.

[This message has been edited by c-jags (edited 8/15/2007 10:52a).]

Also.

As a recent grad of ASU who worked for the university for 5 years and one of my best friends has been the student body president and VP the last 2 years...

TSUS was coming after the Carr money. No question. They had started the process to move administration from ASU to San Marcos or Austin and charge a few million a year.

TSUS has already tried to make SHSU and Lamar become TSU Huntsville and TSU Beaumont. Fact.




ASU is a party school that tries to be like tech (on the students end)

Also... you'll find the student population is very Tech and TU centered. More students wore other schools clothing than ASU's.

I occasionally wore A&M shirts and was jeered fairly often.

I think ASU is going to benefit from this in the end. I think tech is more credible than TSU in the end. TSUS has been pushing TSU as the flagship school ever since they required "A member of the Texas State University System" on every piece of letterhead or emblem that ASU presented. Tech regionally makes more since and fits the profile better.

Tech has said ASU and the Carr stay

http://www.angelo.edu/services/transition/index.htm

I think that could change later on but for now it will stay the same.

[This message has been edited by c-jags (edited 8/15/2007 10:49a).]

The city of San Angelo overall backed the move. The student associations overall backed the move. Many people who opposed the move eventually dropped their opposition.

It doesn't matter who came up with the idea. It received a lot of support, enough support for it to pass Congress. The proposal was in the San Angelo newspaper several times before it even came up to a vote, so it was hardly something that happened behind people's backs. People actually discussed it openly beforehand.

You said above:

"...decided to work a deal behind Angelo State University's back..."

Angelo State University does NOT consist of only one or two presidents. You also have the facility, the student body, and the city. If this deal didn't receive wide-spread support, it would not have went through. But it did receive wide-spread support from the school and it did go through.

"i.e. Not a University sanctioned group. So ASU itself didn't pursue this and it was done in a manner that I would call behind their backs"

So the students who pay tuition to go to Angelo State and the alumni are NOT considered to be Angelo State University? I don't know about that. I can kind of see your point about the administration not being involved in the decision as much as you think they would've, but then again they've had plenty of problems with the Texas State University System so it's not like this was a move they were totally against. If the administration felt that it was "behind their backs" and if they had a huge problem with the proposal, they would've put up a big fight. That didn't quite happen.

"It just was brought up and done very quickly w/out a lot of public discourse until the final months leading up to a vote."

So several articles in the San Angelo newspaper is not considered to be "a lot of public discourse???" Almost everyone associated with the school who paid attention knew this was happening months before it went up for a vote.

"Delegation of ASU boosters = people who wanted this done and met together."

So obviously it didn't occur behind Angelo State University's back if there was a delegation that actually supported the move.

All I'm saying is that it wasn't quite the "closed meeting" decision that you made it sound like. It wasn't like something that people read about in the news only after it happened. Deals that happen "behind people's backs" usually benefit few people at the expense of many people. That didn't quite happen here.

I agree with you, I do think moving to Tech's system will be a lot better than playing second fiddle to Texas State. Right now, Texas Tech isn't as uppity about it's institution as Texas State is. However, that might change in the future. Angelo State is going through a lot of improvements and enrollment will probably hit 10,000 in the not-too-distant future.

I think the whole "Texas Tech is in our geographic area" argument they used to pass the bill was BS, however. Lubbock is 200 miles in another part of the state. San Angelo at least has vegitation and water! Can't find that in Lubbock.

I know that Texas State tried to change the name of SHSU and Lamar. That's why there was another bill in Congress that prohibited the university systems to change their names from historic people, i.e. Sam Houston and Lamar. I think that bill passed, too. Texas State tries to model itself like the University of California and all of their campii, but the thing is, California has a lot more people and it's a lot more urban. Having two schools named Texas State University-San Marcos and Texas State University-San Angelo would sound pretty pretentious and dorky considering that few people outside of Texas have ever heard of the two cities. That, and it would turn into a huge nightmare because kids would accidentally send their financial aid information to one school or the other.

Texas State is really pushing itself to become a flagship, but they have a long way to go and you don't get there by stepping on everyone else's toes all the time.

"ASU is a party school that tries to be like tech (on the students end)"

You hung out with the wrong crowd, then. In fact, I knew several people who got accepted to UT out of high school, but went to ASU because it was a smaller school. They weren't the party hardy types, either. You are going to find kids like that wherever you go, including A&M. I've heard just about every school in Texas referred to as a "party school." Many kids in college want to party, that's a fact of life.

As far as the students who love UT and Tech, you got to realize that the school is 200 miles away from both, so there's going to be quite a few people from Austin and the Lubbock area who grew up around UT and Tech. But yes, I think it's stupid to go to one school and worship another school. That said, a lot of them are just Big 12 fans and Angelo State is not a member of the Big 12.

But if you think Angelo State is bad, you ought to go down to Texas State. Very little pride there, although it's starting to grow. Angelo State will develop a stronger sense of pride once it gets bigger.

"I occasionally wore A&M shirts and was jeered fairly often."

I hate to say it, but A&M is a "love it or hate it" university.

"I think ASU is going to benefit from this in the end. I think tech is more credible than TSU in the end. TSUS has been pushing TSU as the flagship school ever since they required "A member of the Texas State University System" on every piece of letterhead or emblem that ASU presented. Tech regionally makes more since and fits the profile better."

I agree. I think Texas State is academically on the same level as Tech, but Tech has been on that level for a lot longer. Plus, it's in the Big 12 so people assume that Tech is just as good as UT and A&M although that's not really the case. Tech realizes that they are never going to improve, unlike Texas State, so Texas State is going to be a lot more pushy.

BTW, I do think a degree from Angelo State is better than a degree from Texas Tech. It doesn't carry the same connotations that the degree from Tech does.

If I had to chose either school, and I wanted to work for a company ran by UT and A&M alumni, I would go to Angelo State.

Coconut,

My comment about the population shift has to do with political influence. The more people, the more representatives, the more folks in your corner when they're needed.

I've watched ASU grow from a junior college to a really great university. Somehow, seeing it hitched to tech kind of tarnishes its academics, to me at least.

quote:

---

If I had to chose either school, and I wanted to work for a company ran by UT and A&M alumni, I would go to Angelo State.

---

while i disagree w/ a lot of what you say that's just funny. and true.

i'm sorry. i just don't see it how you do. I don't think that this was an ASU sanctioned move from the beginning. I'm not saying they didn't get behind it or support it eventually. They obviously did.

I just still believe Darby pursued this outside of the university administrations blessing. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

And if anything you must have graduated from a department held in the Carr or MCS buildings if you don't believe the kids party there. I didn't... but maybe it's because I was in Comm, Kines and Business classes for the most part.

quote:

---

That said, a lot of them are just Big 12 fans and Angelo State is not a member of the Big 12.

But if you think Angelo State is bad, you ought to go down to Texas State. Very little pride there, although it's starting to grow. Angelo State will develop a stronger sense of pride once it gets bigger.

---

agreed.

quote:

---

coconutdecline

There are so many misinformed posts on this thread that I don't even know where to begin.

---

I'm so glad you showed up coconut, we've been sorely missing the knowledge and experience that you so abundantly exhibit.

Bucketrunner, point taken. However, I don't see how moving from the Texas State system to the Texas Tech system tarnishes the academics at ASU. Texas State is not a better school than Texas Tech. If I had to pick between the two based on academics, I'd pick Tech, but thankfully I never had to make that choice. No way I'd want to stay in Lubbock for that long.

c-jags, I think we agree on a lot, actually. Just not the statements on how "there's trouble brewing" and how the situation was made "behind everyone's backs." When I think of a political move that's made behind everyone's backs, I think more along the lines of a "closed door" deal that only benefits a few people at the expense of everyone else. That didn't happen here. Because everyone got onto the bandwagon, I don't see how it was any sort of "trouble."

Someone took the initiative to get the ball rolling, yes, but the end result it was a decision that everyone accepted and he probably saw that in the beginning.

I don't really care to discuss it any longer, though. I just think you blew it out of proportion, that's all.

I didn't say that the kids didn't party at ASU; I said that you are going to find party kids EVERYWHERE, including UT and A&M. That's just the nature of the beast.

Also, if you are going to go to grad school at UT or A&M, it's also probably better to go to ASU than Tech. I'd imagine if I had a Tech degree, I would be shut out of social activities at A&M.

TheSheik, if you have a degree from A&M, maybe you should put it to use and come up with a better reply than that.

yeah, well bite me

Angelo State sucks. HTH

I voted against Prop 1

and I think it could be argued that Texas State IS better than Tech

I will agree with you there, but Tech probably carries a little more prestige than Texas State just because Texas State was just seen as a regional university up to a few years ago. Tech is also a regional university but it's been considered an alternative to UT and A&M.

I think in the long run Texas State will overshadow Tech. Tech's out in no where and will remain stagnant.

I was at Angelo State for an academic year. Horrible school. It felt like a junior college for San Angelo kids, and because their high school cliques carried over, they didn't give a damn about anyone else from out-of-town. The majority of good students from the San Angelo high schools went elsewhere for college so the San Angelo kids at Angelo State were mostly bottom of the barrel in maturity.

There's no school pride and more people go to the San Angelo Central football games than the ASU football games. The locals didn't really give a **** about ASU. I grew to hate San Angelo with a passion. Didn't care for many of the locals at all. Having a weak economy brings the worst out of people.

As far as the school being Tech and UT oriented, I strongly disagree. There were way more A&M caps and shirts worn than any other school. In fact, a few friends of mine and I watched a lot of A&M games. The losers who wanted to go to Tech but couldn't wore Tech gear the first week of class or so, but they eventually knocked it off. Hardly anyone wore any UT garb.

San Angelo is NOT a college town at all.

WestTexasCat

I agree with just about everything you said.

San Angelo is not a college town. As much as I enjoy the town itself (for scenery, lakes, hunting, food, downtown attractions, and people) the city does several things to impede the university. The fact that they will not let ASU shut down Johnson St for campus use echoes that. It's basically saying to ASU that "we don't care if it impedes the university, we think a shutting down a tenth of a mile stretch of a road will impede our town more."

And more people do show up to a central game than ASU game. That's sad but true. It probably doesn't help that guys like me will stay home and watch A&M if it's on.

The university is working itself up though. They have instilled a masterplan to get the university larger geographically and numerically. I hope San Angelo doesn't crap on that like they normally do.

The San Angelo Central and Lakeview Kids do suck up the school (on their end). I hung out with very few of them them in my 4 years there.

Who I did find myself with were other kids from small schools in west and central texas and we had a great time w/out the Central snobs. If you couldn't find other people than I'm sorry. They did suck.

quote:

---

As far as the school being Tech and UT oriented, I strongly disagree. There were way more A&M caps and shirts worn than any other school. In fact, a few friends of mine and I watched a lot of A&M games. The losers who wanted to go to Tech but couldn't wore Tech gear the first week of class or so, but they eventually knocked it off. Hardly anyone wore any UT garb.

---

I don't know where in the heck you went to classes at Angelo State but that statement is not true unless you were in the ag department.

IN NO WAY, was A&M the t-shirt choice of that school. I have no idea how you can make that statement unless you were there in the 90's.

I worked on campus and there was a rule sent out in an email that said almost to the letter "If you are a student worker at ASU, stop wearing other school's clothing e.g. University of Texas, Texas Tech, North Carolina, Duke, etc."

Do they still have bells ringing to end classes like in hs???? ( true, they did ring when I took summer classes to transfer down to A&M to keep from taking the dreaded "eliminator" classes in the 70's)