No one is going to donate to get the university out of debt. The University needs to be careful. OSU and OU were recently reported to be looking at putting public options for undergrad degrees in Tulsa proper. Tulsa has to capture its own academic market soon or they may not have one left to use at all.
And that’s the ultimate point and dilemma. It’s why only uniquely qualified leaders are successful University President. Between saving the free world and being elected President, Eisenhower is considered to be one of the worst university presidents at a major university — Columbia. It took several decades for the school to undo the damage he did to their faculty retention and endowment hits.
Now you are learnin’ boy-o. You’re getting the picture slowly. TU is in debt up to its eye balls, it’s big ticket students can’t come to campus anymore in huge numbers, the donors are in an economic downturn, there are fewer kids going to college and that number is set to plummet in 2026 and lower priced competitors are set to undertake some vulture capitalism.
we all knew...we all understood. It's in the past and a mistake one who might get a 2nd chance at a dream job would never make again...unless you're Kelvin Sampson or Bruce Pearl
I am not sure TU can build anything with actual walls and a sub-area there. That area was specifically put in because of all the construction TU did along Delaware and is used as a flood retention pond and drainage area to prevent flooding of Delaware Avenue.
GM tried that with Cadillac and went bankrupt. Agree on toning down the social justice warrior stuff. Its a mistake to think that type of stuff appeals to all kids, especially those within 400 miles of Tulsa.
The “we’re like TJC but 4 year and like OU but small” approach seems doomed to fail - those wont meaningfully give anyone a reason to come. The social justice stuff is pretty interesting. Kids are increasingly focused on finding value and meaning in what they do and the institutions they’re part of. It would have to be woven into the overall value proposition somehow but would be an interesting differentiator for a growing market segment, in a geographic region where it stands out. And if done right, it can cut across traditional divisions - Catholics care as much about helping poor people as atheist liberals do. I suspect TU hasn’t put that much thought into it but I wouldn’t disregard it so quickly. In the current environment I’m not sure “above average and otherwise just like everyone else” is going to cut it. Something to be different in a way that matters is probably necessary. Especially since we don’t need 30,000 students every year. A lot of people wouldn’t like it but you can’t please everyone and trying is the sure way to be nothing to anybody.
I know you know but others on here don’t: we don’t really own Gilcrease. It’s essentially a management affiliation agreement. To a certain extent, Stead was playing University Prez version of the game The Sims, and it was an option he saw missing that other players had, especially OU. So he had to build it that round. On the other hand, the reasons for the deal boiled down to things we won’t talk about here. But it remains the right decision in hindsight, despite how nonsensical it seems then and now. Some deals net gains that aren’t measured in money.
Partially true. For reasons I’ve never truly understood, TU is a less expensive option than OU for the last ten percent or so of the students admitted to TU. That’s something that isn’t well publicized for a variety of reasons but it’s been true for several decades. I would guess it is students with high test scores but mid range GPAs who show other signs of academic promise. They get significant financial aid which essentially is a rebate on tuition price that makes the school competitive with any other school in the area.
I'm glad we had this discussion.
The hard thing about financial aid (and admissions) is that it’s used to accomplish several different goals, which often will be contradictory for individual students. The question is how do you weigh and balance those goals for every potential aid grant and in total. It’s really complex and a complicated data problem. There are now companies that make AI tools to help ensure optimal aid allocation to balance the different goals. I judged a startup competition where one was participating and their early results showed revenue gains of 16% for their users, which is huge since its basically all profit. That would be what - $7 or $8 million per year for TU? Forget the new TV contract. TU would be wise to focus a lot of energy on being an early adopter of new technology designed for university operations. There’s a bunch of really cool stuff coming out and its a chance to get a competitive advantage.
They do and for a few years now. It’s not a competitive advantage because we aren’t competing against that many schools and they all use the same type of tech. It does help save money by avoiding categories of students they shouldn’t be pursuing.
Let's us Smoke on Cherry Street then... Not the best prime beef offered by Mahogany, but one helluva good steak and if you want to add a nice cigar you can do that.
If they’re using tech that’s been out for several years, that’s an issue. New solutions are a lot more effective and “smarter.” That’s like saying they’re competitive with everyone else because their flip phone is a cell just like everyone else. Well maybe not so much but the competitive advantage comes from being an early adopter on more advanced services rather than hanging out in the “what everyone else uses”.
They’ve used emerging technology from the beginning and they are currently evaluating the latest products. These folks know what they are doing. They are a national university. All of the people who develop these products are knocking on their door. They aren’t missing out. You can trust me on that.
The vast majority of national universities are well behind the technology forefront. I’m happy to hear that we’re much more sophisticated and proactive than most other schools....... but technology adoption is like Lake Woebegone - everyone’s well above average, if you don’t believe it just ask them.
It kinda feels like we’re trying to be the biggest video rental store chain behind Blockbuster and Hollywood Express.....
Unless the law was changed in the last 20 years a state school cannot be located in Tulsa or Oklahoma City. This was set up early in state history. It always seemed strange to me as most states have major universities in state capitals and major cities. When I was looking for an affordable education I had to end up in places like Tahlequah, Ada, Alva, Weatherford, etc. (I had no interest in the huge classes I Stillwater and Norman).
Former Oklahoma history teacher and soccer coach here (and editor of the the textbook used in OK schools in the 90s.) OU and OSU, like TU, pre-date statehood. The territorial legislature selected Norman and Stillwater because the citizens of those counties donated the land located near railroad depots for that purpose. UCO was founded at the same time under the same theory. There is no legal obstacle to the legislature creating a 4 year school in Tulsa. The complications are merely political and logistical. In about 5 years, demographics will also be a problem unless the school is small and marketed towards the children of immigrants who are first in family to attend college, which would be a good idea.
Yeah, it’s starting to look more and more like the disgruntled donor class is feeding these stories and because it’s slow in March, the World is willing to play along. You could change the date on that article to 1985 and nobody could tell the difference. They’ve viewed that building as outdated and needing asbestos remediation and have been trying to tear it down at least since the school used the same excuse to level Westby into a parking lot for some lazy and loud faculty and built ACAC with that little used palace of a faculty lounge. No one doubts the reality that the building needs to be leveled. But the University has more compelling realities right now and lacks the will to deal with the logistical problems that would result from 18 to 24 months of disruption that would come with not having adequate facilities for the users of the building — something a beat writer should have considered and forced TU to address publicly.
