|
|
Post by standiego on Apr 5, 2024 11:24:23 GMT -8
you are correct
The SDSU has shown support for SDSU athletics in a variety of ways that include getting backing from Alums/ Business in getting the Snapdragon facility built and she has been at the various events
She has continued to say SDSU Aztecs from the PAST - Present and into the Future
But there are unhappy people about the ' Mascot Issue " and they continue to put their jabs out there whenever they can - and consider that the main issue for President of SDSU
Did see there was going to be a study about expanding Viejas - maybe needed or simply see if it could be built near Snapdragon and then convert Viejas to other needed facilities
|
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Apr 5, 2024 12:22:56 GMT -8
If I read this right we don't meet the 70 doctoral research degrees which is a threshold for R1. We're a long ways from that so I don't understand how we can be an R1 institution next year. I read it the same way. Colleges that spend at least $50 million in research and development and award 70 or more research doctorate degrees will be able to attain the coveted R1 status under forthcoming changes to the Carnegie Classifications system that debuted Wednesday. Maybe it will be a sliding scale of dollars and doctorate degrees? Otherwise, we are decades away from R1. And yet we keep hearing we are on track for R1 classification by 2025. So there must be other criteria involved. Oregon has about 3,900 graduate students enrolled. SDSU about 4,700. OSU (5,600) and Wazzu 5,300). All three of them are R1 universities (Oregon is a AAU school) and we do more research than Oregon). Perhaps this criteria is to help those schools with small student bodies obtain R1 status. |
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Apr 5, 2024 12:52:11 GMT -8
I read it the same way. Colleges that spend at least $50 million in research and development and award 70 or more research doctorate degrees will be able to attain the coveted R1 status under forthcoming changes to the Carnegie Classifications system that debuted Wednesday. Maybe it will be a sliding scale of dollars and doctorate degrees? Otherwise, we are decades away from R1. And yet we keep hearing we are on track for R1 classification by 2025. So there must be other criteria involved. Oregon has about 3,900 graduate students enrolled. SDSU about 4,700. OSU (5,600) and Wazzu 5,300). All three of them are R1 universities (Oregon is a AAU school) and we do more research than Oregon). Perhaps this criteria is to help those schools with small student bodies obtain R1 status. From the source. www.acenet.edu/News-Room/Pages/Carnegie-Classifications-to-Make-Major-Changes.aspxNew, clear R1 threshold: The R1 methodology has changed significantly over time, with the 2005 update adding a 10-metric formula that involved a normative, relative, and complicated process that left an unclear line between the R1 and R2 designations. This methodology also put institutions in competition with one another to gain entrance into an R1 designation that was capped at a certain number. In the 2025 Carnegie Classifications, the updated methodology will use a clear threshold to define the highest research designation: $50 million in total research spending and 70 research doctorates. In the new methodology, any institution that meets the threshold will be classified as R1: Very High Research Spending and Doctorate Production. The R2 threshold, with that classification now called “High Research Spending and Doctorate Production,” will not change from the current level of $5 million in research spending and 20 research doctorates. State has 25 phd programs (https://grad.sdsu.edu/prospective-students/masters-doctoral-programs) and $192M in research. It will be decades if not never before State attains R1 status. |
|
|
|
Post by 01aztecgrad on Apr 5, 2024 13:47:57 GMT -8
And yet we keep hearing we are on track for R1 classification by 2025. So there must be other criteria involved. Oregon has about 3,900 graduate students enrolled. SDSU about 4,700. OSU (5,600) and Wazzu 5,300). All three of them are R1 universities (Oregon is a AAU school) and we do more research than Oregon). Perhaps this criteria is to help those schools with small student bodies obtain R1 status. From the source. www.acenet.edu/News-Room/Pages/Carnegie-Classifications-to-Make-Major-Changes.aspxNew, clear R1 threshold: The R1 methodology has changed significantly over time, with the 2005 update adding a 10-metric formula that involved a normative, relative, and complicated process that left an unclear line between the R1 and R2 designations. This methodology also put institutions in competition with one another to gain entrance into an R1 designation that was capped at a certain number. In the 2025 Carnegie Classifications, the updated methodology will use a clear threshold to define the highest research designation: $50 million in total research spending and 70 research doctorates. In the new methodology, any institution that meets the threshold will be classified as R1: Very High Research Spending and Doctorate Production. The R2 threshold, with that classification now called “High Research Spending and Doctorate Production,” will not change from the current level of $5 million in research spending and 20 research doctorates. State has 25 phd programs (https://grad.sdsu.edu/prospective-students/masters-doctoral-programs) and $192M in research. It will be decades if not never before State attains R1 status. It’s seems it’s not a requirement to support 70 different programs, it’s awarding 70 Phds per year. The faq about why they are making the change states that they’re making the change so schools that do a lot of research in a small number of fields would still qualify as R1. That statement wouldn’t make sense in the context of increasing the number of programs a school needs to support. Link Added link. |
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Apr 5, 2024 14:01:59 GMT -8
From the source. www.acenet.edu/News-Room/Pages/Carnegie-Classifications-to-Make-Major-Changes.aspxNew, clear R1 threshold: The R1 methodology has changed significantly over time, with the 2005 update adding a 10-metric formula that involved a normative, relative, and complicated process that left an unclear line between the R1 and R2 designations. This methodology also put institutions in competition with one another to gain entrance into an R1 designation that was capped at a certain number. In the 2025 Carnegie Classifications, the updated methodology will use a clear threshold to define the highest research designation: $50 million in total research spending and 70 research doctorates. In the new methodology, any institution that meets the threshold will be classified as R1: Very High Research Spending and Doctorate Production. The R2 threshold, with that classification now called “High Research Spending and Doctorate Production,” will not change from the current level of $5 million in research spending and 20 research doctorates. State has 25 phd programs (https://grad.sdsu.edu/prospective-students/masters-doctoral-programs) and $192M in research. It will be decades if not never before State attains R1 status. It’s seems it’s not a requirement to support 70 different programs, it’s awarding 70 Phds per year. The faq about why they are making the change states that they’re making the change so schools that do a lot of research in a small number of fields would still qualify as R1. That statement wouldn’t make sense in the context of increasing the number of programs a school needs to support. Link Added link. This may be the case and your FAQ points that direction. I’d that is the case, then State may make the cut. The article mentioned a dozen or so falling out and a dozen or so falling into R1. A more hopeful scenario. |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Apr 5, 2024 15:51:43 GMT -8
From the source. www.acenet.edu/News-Room/Pages/Carnegie-Classifications-to-Make-Major-Changes.aspxNew, clear R1 threshold: The R1 methodology has changed significantly over time, with the 2005 update adding a 10-metric formula that involved a normative, relative, and complicated process that left an unclear line between the R1 and R2 designations. This methodology also put institutions in competition with one another to gain entrance into an R1 designation that was capped at a certain number. In the 2025 Carnegie Classifications, the updated methodology will use a clear threshold to define the highest research designation: $50 million in total research spending and 70 research doctorates. In the new methodology, any institution that meets the threshold will be classified as R1: Very High Research Spending and Doctorate Production. The R2 threshold, with that classification now called “High Research Spending and Doctorate Production,” will not change from the current level of $5 million in research spending and 20 research doctorates. State has 25 phd programs (https://grad.sdsu.edu/prospective-students/masters-doctoral-programs) and $192M in research. It will be decades if not never before State attains R1 status. It’s seems it’s not a requirement to support 70 different programs, it’s awarding 70 Phds per year. The faq about why they are making the change states that they’re making the change so schools that do a lot of research in a small number of fields would still qualify as R1. That statement wouldn’t make sense in the context of increasing the number of programs a school needs to support. Link Added link. Yes, it is 70 awarded PhD's per year, not 70 different PhD programs. With 4,700 grad students I have to think we have at least 70 that meet the criteria each year. Again, I think the new criteria is more about schools that are distinguished but have low enrollment. We are doing close to $200M in research, almost 4 times the requirement for research dollars. |
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Apr 5, 2024 17:05:28 GMT -8
It’s seems it’s not a requirement to support 70 different programs, it’s awarding 70 Phds per year. The faq about why they are making the change states that they’re making the change so schools that do a lot of research in a small number of fields would still qualify as R1. That statement wouldn’t make sense in the context of increasing the number of programs a school needs to support. Link Added link. Yes, it is 70 awarded PhD's per year, not 70 different PhD programs. With 4,700 grad students I have to think we have at least 70 that meet the criteria each year. Again, I think the new criteria is more about schools that are distinguished but have low enrollment. We are doing close to $200M in research, almost 4 times the requirement for research dollars. If so then they should have written, "At least 70 candidates awarded PhDs per year." |
|
