>9100 top 10% students admitted for Fall 2008

Colleges and Universities A-Z The University of Texas at Austin
41

<p>just want to make a quick comment to FoxShox who commented on the 1240 SAT score.</p>

<p>I had an 1190 and was admitted into UT with just 3 years of High School. I am white, male, middle-class. </p>

<p>In my opinion, the 1240 might have something to do with living abroad. I was an exchange student in Chile my junior year of High School and my English DRASTICALLY changed while living abroad.</p>

<p>Honestly, a 1240 is a great score.</p>

<p>And I agree whole-heartedly on how the top 10 rule limits creativity within the UT Austin community. Culture here is limited. Not many people bring innovative ideas, world-views, etc. to the table here. I really feel left out sometimes. </p>

<p>But, you still find those amazing people who are just like you here. It's a huge school.</p>

<p>Good luck to your son!</p>

42

<p>
[quote]
Uhh have you been to Austin before? There is NO more room to expand. Unless they start teaching out of the Stadium.. you can't just allow more people into the school. There isn't enough on campus housing to accommodate all these people, nor is their enough competent staff members either...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You are correct in that expanding the main campus is quite time consuming and not viable. However, UT does have other land in Austin and could move some parts of the school to a "second campus". As for housing, there is plenty of close off-campus housing coming online and I do not see that being an obstacle either.</p>

<p>However, UT does not WANT to expand, nor should they. UT, like any University of it's stature, wants the quality of students to improve. Obviously, this is a special circumstance in which many of the quality students may be being denied admission. However, the solution is not to just let them in. The solution, is to try and minimize the amount of lower quality students getting it. That could be accomplished by altering the 10% rule to a smaller percentage (3 to 5%). That would be in the best interest of UT and would be much easier to implement.</p>

43

<p>Well I remember you from that chat room, and if I remember correctly your doing some Latin studies stuff, and you living abroad in Latin America might be a little bit more relevant than an SAT score. And for your major in particular, SAT score really isn't that important. But if your going to have someone come into a math intensive major in Engineering or the like, and they can't break 600 on their Math section, they shouldn't be able to get in.</p>

44

<p>foxshox, I hate to disappoint your grand theory, but SAT score goes into the criteria for everyone who isn't top ten. It's just about as significant as rank.</p>

<p>SAT is very important no matter what if you are not top ten.</p>

45

<p>I'm pretty sure they're trying to get it changed to the top %5 rule, considering they basically have no choice in their applicant pool, and they are starting to get sued by upset families who think they didn't get in because they weren't a minority. I don't think it's UTs fault, that's how it is for every state school in Texas I believe.</p>

<p>I only know of about 2 people who got into UT Austin who weren't top ten. About 15 from my school are going (may seem like a lot, but my high school is like 20 miles from UT). A lot of really capable students from my AP Physics class got rejected. Admissions was really tough for a lot of colleges this year. My advice is to pack your stuff with extra currics, awards if you can, and try -really- hard on essays if you aren't top ten.</p>

<p>When I was a freshman my high school told us about the top ten rule in a glassy eyed attempt to manipulate us, so a good majority of the class are hell bent on being top ten. At this point it's pretty much a game, and the highest ranked are the most "popular". Meanwhile my history teacher criticisms the program because Rufus at Jebidiah High gets to go to UT for having the best pig in his 20 person high school, while AP Phys science fair winners are screwed over and basically deferred to another UT campus for a year before they can go to Austin.</p>

<p>Oh and Health Science Tech is a medical program, usually over a few years, which cam get you certified in being a Certified Nurses Aid, or Phlebotomist, or something. It was incredibly easy at my school, and I think you'd have better luck impressing people by simply taking honors/AP classes, specially if you wanna get into UT and aren't in top ten.</p>

46

<p>If Rufus had the best grades at Jebidiah High, let him in.</p>

47

<p>Yes, why should Rufus be hurt because his school offered FFA and not AP Physics? If he's doing the best with what the school he attends gives him, then he definitely should have the right to attend UT.</p>

<p>It's simple: if you can't get in at your current level of academic achievement at your current school, you have two options. You can perform better or you can go to another school. I know of at least two boarding schools in Texas for each gender (San Marcos Baptist is coed, Hockaday in Dallas for girls, and Marine Military in Harlingen for guys). If there are private schools in the area, you could try them. If you go to a private school, you could go to the local public school. You could sell your home and move to a lower-income neighborhood, and chances are the school won't be as competitive (not knocking on low-income people, but as a whole low-income schools perform worse than higher-income schools). OR, if you really want to go to UT, you can work hard and get your class rank up. If your school's rank system rewards you for taking easy classes, take them. If your school rewards you for taking hard classes, take them. If you get rank points for raising the best pig, do that.</p>

<p>You have plenty of options. If you choose to stay in your current environment, and don't get in to UT, then you blew that chance. I'm sorry, but 80% of the state (the portion that doesn't live in Plano) agrees with the law 100% (according to a Statesman survey). There are definitely ways for you to achieve what you want under the law, and if you aren't willing to find a way to do that, then maybe you don't want to go to UT badly enough.</p>

<p>UT, or any other state school, should not under any circumstances be obligated for their admissions criteria to follow that of any other college. I'm sorry that UT's criteria is different than Harvard's. You need to deal with that and decide if you can achieve both or need to focus on just one. Besides, kids who are admitted to the very top schools are also admitted under the top ten law and/or regular admissions. I've heard of kids getting rejected by UT and getting in to Baylor and SMU. Those are fine schools, but they aren't at either UT or Harvard's level. I have never heard of a single example of a student who was rejected by UT and admitted to any Ivy League university. Maybe a Tufts or an NYU, but not at the Ivy level.</p>

<p>Simply put--if you REALLY want to go to UT, you can figure out a way to do that. Otherwise, you ought to quit putting your efforts into whining about a law that isn't going to change and instead put your efforts into getting into UT.</p>

48

<p>A quick comment about school size. I am a Texan and a product of state higher education, I believe successfully so although it has been many years (BS Texas Tech, MS Tex A&M, Wife UT, SOn about to enter 2008 (yes top 10%)). A much better alternative to making UT-Austin bigger is to upgrade other universites to make them more acceptable. </p>

<p>A&M is very good, and has for the last couple of years a larger freshamn class than UT-Austin. OTher schools and I believe as a Red Raider that Texas Tech, and probably Univ Houston, U North Texas or UT-Arlington and possibly UT-El PAso need to have a committment to improving their education and stature. The state has grown too much to limit ourselves to two flagship schools.</p>

<p>And I have no problem maintaining UT-Austin as well as A&M at a International level.... we just need to fund and reward other unvierstites as well....</p>

<p>a late night commentary</p>

49

<p>"I have never heard of a single example of a student who was rejected by UT and admitted to any Ivy League university."</p>

<p>Someone from my school who wasn't in top 10% got into Rice, which I assume is Ivy level.</p>

<p>Anyways, there are loopholes for competitive schools to send their students to UT. Especially the summer freshman semester, which in addition to allowing some non top 10% students for the fall semester, adds even more with this program. Although I have to admit that the rule is not that great. Wouldn't geographic diversity be better than ethnic diversity? You get OOSers who bring regional flavor as opposed to different races but speak and act relatively the same. I know I am generalizing a lot, but I'm just trying to make a point that OOS and internationals can not only bring diversity, but may offer better things to the table based on their performance in high school because of higher grades and test scores. The rule limits further expansion by disallowing heavily qualified people not residing in TX to be admitted.</p>

50

<p>"but they aren't at either UT or Harvard's level"</p>

<p>Lol, where did that random comparison come from?</p>

51

<p>My comment was because kids are saying that "well, UT's not accepting more qualified applicants because of the law." And people have used comparisons such as that one. And I'm simply refuting that as false.</p>

<p>Hobbie, for one, Rice is not quite Ivy level. It's a good school, and better than UT for all but Business and Communication, and maybe Engineering, but it is nowhere near a Harvard or Yale. It might approach the level of Cornell or Brown, but still has a ways to go. Second, did that kid get in to UT? I'm not saying that you can't get in outside the top ten percent to top schools, I'm saying that the kids who are getting in to top schools are also getting into UT as part of the 18% who aren't top ten kids.</p>

<p>And honestly, Texas has a LOT of geographic diversity. You have a very Southern culture in East Texas, a very Western culture in West Texas, a Southwestern culture in South Texas, and a quite cosmopolitan culture in places like Austin and Dallas. OOS kids are a nice addition but in my opinion are not necessary for campus diversity. But you are sorely mistaken if you think that "different races" "speak and act relatively the same." In Texas there is a very big cultural divide between ethnic groups, and there is a noticable addition to campus life when you add in these flavors. Maybe in some suburban high schools "different races" act the same, but I guarantee you a Latino kid from McAllen and an African-American kid from Oak Cliff and a white kid from Odessa are going to have very different cultural upbringings, adding BOTH racial and geographic diversity to campus life.</p>

<p>The law also does not hurt "heavily qualified" people. Very qualified kids are still being admitted under the system (though most very qualified OOS kids are using the school as a safety and often don't attend). It's kids who, while having decent SAT scores and rank and extracurriculars, aren't outstanding, are losing places. And I do think that OOS kids should have to meet a higher standard if they want to attend a university that's primary purpose is and should be to educate the people of Texas. In my earnest opinion, no OOS student should be admitted unless EVERY Texas applicant is given a place. While that would never happen, I think our great state has the diversity and international flavor that this would cause no great loss to the school or state.</p>

<p>Powers is showing an unwillingness to adapt the University's admissions system to the law, and instead is complaining about a law his predecessor thought was vital to campus diversity and also saw as one of the reason's for the university's rapid rise in reputation. I firmly disagree that the University should admit a "piano virtuoso," as Powers mentions in his editorial, solely on that virtue, for any given major. I think someone who is musically talented should be admitted to the College of Fine Arts on that virtue. But should he receive a place in McCombs simply because of that fact? That's what Powers is implying should be the case.</p>

<p>If he wants to give "exceptionally talented" kids a shot, Admissions should reserve a number of places for those students. Otherwise, those kids should have to meet the same criteria as everyone else. While not holistically reviewed, the criteria is holistic in that it covers a wide range of points and not simply grades or test scores.</p>

52

<p>"Simply put--if you REALLY want to go to UT, you can figure out a way to do that. Otherwise, you ought to quit putting your efforts into whining about a law that isn't going to change and instead put your efforts into getting into UT."</p>

<p>Eh, I don't know if this was directed at me or not, as I'm neutral to the whole thing. UT has been trying to get the legislation to change the rule for years, so they could at least have the choice to choose from their applicant pool. I agree that it's possible to get into UT by not being top ten, but I think that UT should have the choice to decide who they think is qualified enough to admit. I also believe that UT being forced to admit top ten from every school affects students who are generally more qualified, due to spacing and what not, as well. I also believe that people speaking out against a law is not necessarily "whining", and it is better to speak against a law than trying to figure out how to work around a system that could force a student to jump through hoops.</p>

<p>"UT, or any other state school, should not under any circumstances be obligated for their admissions criteria to follow that of any other college."</p>

<p>I agree, and they shouldn't be force to base their admissions criteria over a law from the 90s either.</p>

<p>UT</a> president speaks out against top 10 percent law - Top Stories</p>

<p>Edit: Looks like it will change.</p>

<p>Senate</a> OKs changes in top 10% law | Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Texas Regional News</p>

53

<p>Nope it won't change. The Senate article is from the 2007 session, and it died without even making it to the floor in the House. They will have to wait until January 2009 to change it unless a special session is called this summer (and Perry is an Aggie so he wouldn't). The 2009 bill, even if it somehow managed to pass, wouldn't take effect until the Fall 2010 admissions cycle anyways.</p>

<p>The law may have been written in the 90s, but it is still valid today, and yes, UT actually SHOULD be forced to base their admisssions criteria on the laws of the State of Texas.</p>

<p>Neither Faulkner nor Powers has never spoken out about the law until this year--because it works so well. Faulkner, in fact, repeatedly commented on its virtues. Powers is only complaining now because the rich white people are putting a lot of pressure on him because their kids aren't getting in.</p>

<p>And my post was not directed at anyone in particular, but at people who complaining about the law as a whole.</p>

<p>UT does have the choice: 18% of applicants were not automatically admitted. As the population of graduating HS seniors is reaching a peak, this percentage will rise, probably toward the 50/50 mark found in the late 90s and early 2000s. It's only been in the last 3 years or so that the percentage has jumped, because those years have a larger number of graduating Texas seniors. UT also has not increased its class size, but the population has increased by 20%. As the numbers level out, the law will have less and less of an effect on admissions.</p>

<p>I strongly disagree with the university spending money to try to change a law that in the long run helps it tremendously. If I were paying tuition next year, I would have a serious problem with any of my tuition dollars going to that cause.</p>

54

<p>That was from last year? Okay. Even if nothing happens until 2010, I still think that it's good to try. Perhaps the law helps tremendously, but if UT had more choice I believe that would help as well. (Assuming this whole thing isn't inspired by the complaints of "rich white people", as you claim)</p>

<p>18 seems like a terribly small number to me, but at least they have -some- choice. Of course I agree that UT should follow the law, but I don't think that the law should control UTs admission decisions to that extent, but of course, UT is a state school, so that's always open for debate. I don't have any comment about the "rich white people" bit, I'd prefer to think that this is about admissions freedom, rather than "rich white people" trying to get their way.</p>

55

<p>The people that have been the most adversely affected by the top 10% law have been kids who attend competitive suburban 5A (large) high schools, such as Plano (as has been mentioned) in the Dallas area, Kingwood or The Woodlands in the Houston area, Westlake in the Austin area, etc. It is difficult to get into the top 10% at these schools because you have a huge number of motivated kids (and parents) who strive for excellence (which is what you would wish for all kids in all situations, but realistically isn't the case). That is where the comment of "rich white kids" comes into place. </p>

<p>The legislators from these areas have been trying to have the 10% rule changed, in some form or fashion, for a number of years. It is the inner city and rural legislators who have formed a block to impede any changes to the law. Powers is trying to put pressure on them to make some changes, but as long as it is in their constituents benefit to keep the law as is, it will not change. </p>

<p>As was shown in the 2005 and 2007 sessions, even though there were enough votes to get changes passed in the Texas Senate, it failed in the House.</p>

<p>Powers is also asking Texas alums and interested parents to try to pressure these legislators. The best use of all of our typing would be to, instead of "b**ching" on a college website, write our legislators and demand change.</p>

<p>Here's an interesting quote from an article in the San Antonio paper</p>

<p>
[quote]
As Caney Creek High School Principal Greg Poole recently told The Courier: "There is no doubt that the 10 percent rule, as it stands now, provides opportunities for my students that they otherwise did not have," he said. "It absolutely has been beneficial as it stands.
But it helps conceal an underlying problem: there are real differences in performance between Texas high schools, and now, instead of one consistent standard of academic merit, admissions are based on the accidents of geography. A student who might not have made the top 10 percent at one campus may be a top scholar at another and could gain admissions to a top state school.
This cannot continue. The goal of our public, tax-supported universities should be to produce the best scholars in the nation. That goal is undercut by the current admissions law.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yep, pretty much sums it up!</p>

56

<p>Yeah, that person got capped.</p>

<p>what i don't like is how students have to not take honor courses, or change schools to "beat" the system, which does not reflect a learning environment. it turns texas education into some sort of game where you go school-hopping and class-diving until you find the school/class where it would place you within top 10%. this would dilute the competitiveness and academic achievement at high level schools where students get hampered by the current rule.
i know this doesn't apply to all students but it seems like thats the general consensus on this thread on what you have to do if UT is your dream school. it ruins the focus of high school and worsens texas education, especially the top schools in the state.</p>

57

<p>
[quote]
The people that have been the most adversely affected by the top 10% law have been kids who attend competitive suburban 5A (large) high schools, such as Plano (as has been mentioned) in the Dallas area, Kingwood or The Woodlands in the Houston area, Westlake in the Austin area, etc. It is difficult to get into the top 10% at these schools because you have a huge number of motivated kids (and parents) who strive for excellence (which is what you would wish for all kids in all situations, but realistically isn't the case). That is where the comment of "rich white kids" comes into place.

[/quote]

The Woodlands is not a top suburban HS in the Houston area, it's not even ranked in the Houston Chronicle's annual list of top 80 HS in the Houston area. Just because it is a rich area doesn't mean the kids are smart all the time. I go to a middle class to upper HS and it is ranked in the top 15</p>

58

<p>I have to disagree with the last poster about the Woodlands being a top school. It is ranked in Newsweek's Top High Schools List. Also, the Chronicle rankings they point out do not include the Woodlands as one of the school's being compared because it has a ninth grade center. This is stated in the list details. Being in the top 10% at the Woodlands is quite a feat.</p>

59

<p>Being in the top ten at the Woodlands is no harder than most other schools in the same socioeconomic bracket. When your graduating class has 1000 kids, a lot are top ten.</p>

<p>I'd say the best public comprehensive school in Houston is Memorial, and the best school period Carnegie, DeBakey, or Kinkaid.</p>

60

<p>well, the Woodlands is an all-right school thinking about the economic disparities with woodlands kids and those from the Montgomery area. and there are the usual asian vs. everyone else problem there too. I went to Seven Lakes in Katy. not too bad to go top 10 percent.....unless you have too many electives.</p>