<p>Is the financial aid real and not FA packaged in loans at these two schools?</p>
<p>GMT, I’d say the % plan isn’t reaching far enough if the proportions of Blacks and Hispanics are still so low. In theory, yes. But that’s what Garre tried to tackle- how to refine the results. I think his explanation was clumsy.</p>
<p>For me, the word “preference” misleads. Do any of you see this differently when the phrase is “racial consideration?” Because preference implies it, over everything else, which we can argue is not so.</p>
<ul>
<li>as with many schools, just looking at the % of kids getting aid or average aid, doesn’t represent actual financial support.</li>
</ul>
<p>GMTplus7,</p>
<p>No. How did you figure UT to be cheaper? </p>
<p>I do not want to veer off the point I was trying to make. Cost not rigor could be the cause for the difference in graduation rates between the two schools.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>When do you decide when the proportion is high enough?<br>
When it reaches the proportion of the Blacks & Hispanics that live in Texas?<br>
When it reaches the proportion that live in the U.S.?</p>
<p>@smileygerl,
You said the schools meets % of NEED, not % of tuition.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Here is the thing with statistics. They can be viewed a hundred different ways. Of the Black and Hispanics that actually attend UT, how many were extended admission but chose not to matriculate? You can literally peck the landscapes of admissions like a chicken and the bottom line there is no admission procedure that will satisfy 100% of the people, 100% of the time.</p>
<p>To toss in another issue, how many undocumented students are admitted to UT each year under the x% rule who stay the course and graduate, only to not be employable because they do not have proper documentation? Here in Austin we read stories about it all the time. Should we not allow these students to matriculate and funnel the tuition grants and scholarships to students that can graduate, join the work force and give back?</p>
<p>And last but not least. The University of Texas at Austin is UT. UTA is the University of Texas at Arlington.</p>
<p><a href=“Houston Independent School District / Houston ISD Homepage”>http://www.houstonisd.org/site/default.aspx?PageType=3&ModuleInstanceID=114943&ViewID=7b97f7ed-8e5e-4120-848f-a8b4987d588f&RenderLoc=0&FlexDataID=63098&PageID=31467</a></p>
<p>Review the schools where the valedictorians and salutatorians are planning to go (check the races) and you will understand UT’s problem.</p>
<p>The rule exists to have a level playing field for all races but many choose not to attend. UT has plenty of Hispanics but I suspect if they were not using this holistic approach, the African Americans may not even be 4%.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The only thing that UT is REQUIRED to satisfy is the law. </p>
<p>Grutter v Bollinger permits schools to admit a critical mass of minority students to create a diverse student body. Grutter v Bollinger has a Catch-22 in that it does not give guidance on how many students constitute a critical mass, but says if a school actually defines what a critical mass is, then that is a quota and it is illegal.</p>
<p>“One can have doubts about the qualifications about the people who have received preferences (whether racial, legacy, geographic, or athletic) without being a “hater”.”</p>
<p>Yes, and that’s entirely consistent with what I said. You might read my post again. I said that racists grab onto AA, not that everyone who opposes AA is a racist.</p>
<p>Thanks for the correction, collegeshopping.<br>
GMT, I leave the issue of critical mass to the courts to supervise. I can only say that, based on what Garre was trying to say, it seems to do with reduced feelings of “isolation” and avoiding the smallish percentage feeling like “spokespersons for their race,” which I take to mean, getting beyond the old word, tokenism. </p>
<p>You and I can’t define it, only have opinions. I’m sure you realize the courts often leaves things incompletely clarified. So, we know the acceptable framework and often grope to reach goals in the right or legal way. </p>
<p>This all would be simpler if all kids had equal educational opportunities, equally stable home lives and mentoring, etc. We’re not there.</p>
<p>GMT,</p>
<p>You are correct, my mistake I thought it met tuition. It is impossible to know the out of pocket cost for each student. </p>
<p>I looked at the standardized test scores for both schools and they are pretty much equal. Is it illogical to assume rigor would be similar at both schools?</p>
<p>I do not think you can exclude cost as one possible cause for graduation differences.</p>
<p>“The Yeti, the second gunman on the grassy knoll and the broken hearted student who can’t get into the state flagship. Which one is the bigger myth? I’d go with the student. Folklore tells the tale, but the facts just doesn’t back it up.”</p>
<p>Both nephews, twins, in TX, rigorous private school, were denied at UT Austin. One will be going to A&M, the other is going OOS. “Broken hearted” is a bit extreme, but they both would be going to UT, had they been accepted there. For those kids going to very competitive high schools and a number of the private schools, the rule does have its casualties. It’s an incentive to send your kids to a high school that is not so competitive, I guess.</p>
<p>But it’s a tough situation for all states that have highly desirable state schools. I have a brother whose kids can’t get into the state schools they want in VA. They have great grades, in fact, one would have made the top 8% of her class, but this is not TX, but the test scores are an issue. I have friends in GA with the same problem. With HOPE, getting into GTech and UGA has become really competitive. I don’t know what the best answer is. It seems that UT and A&M have come up with a reasonable solution. That race is one of the holistic factor is at issue with this Supreme Court case. I am sure the justices are well aware that the ruling will have far reaching consequences at many universities and programs. of race is struck out as a factor entirely. </p>
<p>I think it will be eventually. The question is whether it is now time.</p>
<p>
If we take a survey (for example) and find that 5% of minority students feel isolated, is that enough to warrant the use of racial preference? What about 1%?
Yes, this does bring to mind Justice Stewart on pornography…“I know it when I see it” ;)</p>
<p>If the Grutter framework creates a double bind - several of us seem to think it does - then that makes speculation on the upcoming decision much harder in my opinion. Is it possible for the Court to clarify Grutter without gutting it (as Justice Sotomayor asked in oral argument)?</p>
<p>Other than probably the type and mix of students, political leanings and rural location, Texas A&M is a very comparable school. They are highly ranked for engineering, business and sciences. They also throw money at students to show up.</p>
<p>@smileygerl, After I posted, I also thought SES may be impacting grad rates. Which is one reason UT wants high SES students, it wants to drive up it’s metrics (retention and grad rates).</p>
<p>UF does give need based FA (at the cost of giving little to any merit based aid). Using College Navigator…based on average net family income of $48K to $75K, the average net price at UT is $17,075, while at UF it’s $4,458. (wow…thats painful…)</p>
<p>In-state total expense is $25,392 at UT and 20,013 at UF (about 3.5K of the delta is tuition, the rest R&B).</p>
<p>Etherway (not prepared for the Class Rigor, or for the expenses), UT current admission is (in some cases) not matching the right kids for UT. You’re not doing the kids any favors by making them take on more debt than they can handle…and then having them drop out (or transfer).</p>
<p>Something has to change (outside of this SCOTUS case).</p>
<p>"Other than probably the type and mix of students, political leanings and rural location, Texas A&M is a very comparable school. They are highly ranked for engineering, business and sciences. They also throw money at students to show up. "</p>
<p>That may be true. But my nephews both would have preferred UT. One turned down A&M even with money, I believe to go elsewhere, and the other is going there, but would have gone to UT had he been accepted there. That A&M “throws money at student to show up” and UT does not, tells me that they are not very comparable in terms of which one is preferred.</p>
<p>Not necessarily. UT terminated national merit and guaranteed money while A&M retained it which makes a difference for those who want to be given merit money upfront. I know several students who are national merit finalists who did not get a penny from UT while they had tuition covered at A&M and could get additional money from the departments. </p>
<p>The pecking order for top students has been UT followed by A&M but recent declines in UT football vs A&M’s success in SEC may change the pecking order in a few years.</p>
<p>cpt, could you describe the stats for these Texas twins? I’m kind of curious to see real world examples of reasonably good students from strong HS’s who didn’t make the x% cut in Texas.</p>
<p>Umm, Misterk, ordinarily I would, as most of the examples I give are not in real time and place but these are. And I’ve probably given out a bit more info than I should have. They are not in an unusual situation from what I understand, as they go to a very competitive high school where most of the kids would be good candidates for a top school, and the 8% rule really is a problem, though many of them, were accepted holistically, as they both were to A&M which has the the same auto admit that they did not make. Getting into UT Austin appears to be more difficult.</p>
<p>I can tell you that a few years ago, a young man did not get accepted to UT Austin with a 1400+ 2part SAT and a 3.8 average. He was accepted at Cornell and went there. He was also accepted at A&M. I don’t know if he would have given up Ivy to go to UT, but he did not have that choice. Neither of his sisters got into UT either, and both were honor students, graduated with that distinction from TX high schools, but not 8%, They did not have quite the SAT scores that their brother did, but one did get into Wm &Mary, and the other, I don’t know. </p>
<p>I don’t live in TX, so I don’t know how the % cut works. There must be some high schools that don’t rank, and how UT and A&M treat them, I don’t know.</p>
<p>“Grutter v Bollinger permits schools to admit a “critical mass” of minority students to create a diverse student body. Grutter v Bollinger has a Catch-22 in that it does not give guidance on how many students constitute a “critical mass”, but says if a school actually defines what a “critical mass” is, then that is a quota and it is illegal.”</p>
<p>This is the very heart of the question. Quotas are illegal, and achieving “critical mass” requires something that “looks like a quota and quacks like a quota.” It’s only natural to hope Fisher will resolve the issue once and for all. That’s unlikely. Hopwood didn’t solve it. (SCOTUS declined the Appeal.) Grutter hasn’t resolved it. It’s highly unlikely the next court case will resolve it either, or the one after that … unless of course some really smart CC poster has a race-neutral way to achieve equal access to various student groups that have markedly different qualifications. A blind lottery would do that … every HS graduate gets an equal shot at one of the 15,000 UT freshman slots. Is that really preferable to the current system?</p>