<p>no, argbargy, I don’t think there needs to be Meeting minutes. </p>
<p>I am attempting to figure out the connection between a school in which 94% get turned down while applying and a mortgage in which the applicants were accepted, but to a predatory lending program. </p>
<p>I understand what YOU want me to see. But, I’m trying to see it and I do not.</p>
<p>Here’s the thing, not everyone who is qualified for admssion to the Ivies is admitted. There are all sorts of splinter groups, midwesterners, for example, who could just as easily claim discrimination based on your thinking, but it’s not discrimination, in the way that you want us to think of it.</p>
<p>Its not clear. I’d imagine that the gaming goes on between the 5-25%ers. The top kids might be setting their sights higher and for their secondary school rigor matters. Clearly it is better to get an A in the regular version of the course than a C or B- in an honors, so their might be a whole set of honors capable kids who are playing it safe. </p>
<p>And in the case of a free elective spot why would you take AP Physics when you Public Speaking or Studio Art or whatever passes for a easy A at your school. </p>
<p>Another side effect of the policy is that it essentially enshrines class rank in Texas. I think rank is one of the pooer metrics so it being deemphasized would be good. </p>
<p>Some Texas students, including those in Katy ISD, now earn extra grade-point credit (5.0) for certain designated Pre-Advanced Placement courses.</p>
<p>But Texas higher education commissioner Raymund Paredes argues that no statewide consistency exists for such courses and that they can vary widely in quality and rigor across districts. Extra points should not be given, because there is no way to tell just how rigorous those classes are, he said.</p>
<p>The proposed rules are a little complicated. Grades would be determined on a four-point scale, with A’s receiving four points and an extra point given only for Advanced Placement, International Baccalaureate and dual-enrollment courses that permit college credit.</p>
<p>The extra point would include only courses in English-language arts, mathematics, science, social studies and foreign languages. Extra credit for all pre-Advanced Placement courses would be eliminated."</p>
<p>why would you take AP Physics when you Public Speaking or Studio Art or whatever passes for a easy</p>
<p>Well, to get into a most selective private, as a STEM kid. Gaming gpa is pretty transparent, once you look at the transcript. Gets flagged fast, in holistic. Off the matter of Texas, for a moment, not only does rigor matter, but the right rigor. Relevant to your proposed major. You can’t show you are ready for, say, engineering, with only physics1 and stats. </p>
<p>Not to mention, lots of TX kids don’t want UTA, are applying to great schools all over the country.</p>
<p>Apparently the Jian Li investigation is continuing, and has been open for 6 years (since 2006). When the claim was first filed, an article reported that OCR discrimination cases are usually resolved within 6 months. Whatever one wants to infer from this, it cannot be that the allegations are <em>obviously</em> baseless.</p>
<p>We are getting off-topic here but my point is that WHATEVER system you have you encourage people to maximize their results under that system, and sometimes that has unintended consequences. </p>
<p>The school valedictorian and cohort are probably always going to look for challenging courses. They arent so interested in needing a TTP admit. But for kids in the top 25% you have given them an incentive to pump their GPA at the expense of the type of course and rigor they take it at. If there is no advantage to your GPA why take an Honors course when your goal is to get a UofT seat?</p>
<p>go back and look at the CDS we were posting yesterday. The percentages of admits from these areas are significantly lower than from the east. Also, girls are in the 60% of all college enrollees at this point and are represented at only 50% in these schools. </p>
<p>Also, I’ve been quite civil to you. I would expect you to remain the same, per the TOS. thank you.</p>
<p>though, mathgrl WAS a pretty funny shot, I must admit.</p>
<p>ETA: Oh yeah, and nice try, but could you PLEASE explain the connection between your countrywide lawsuit and the Ivy admission policies? Feel free to consult with an attorney, such as Hunt.</p>
<p>dis·crim·i·nate<br>
/disˈkriməˌnāt/Verb
1.Recognize a distinction; differentiate.
2.Perceive or constitute the difference in or between. </p>
<p>6% in. 94% out. Somebody differentiated between these groups.
Pretty clear to me.</p>
<p>Edit- although I’ll admit you could say there is a difference between discriminating against and discriminating between. Still, I think you understood what she was trying to say. I took out my nasty comment.</p>
<p>*Thank You for your interest in Argle Bargle U.</p>
<p>We are an accredited four year degree granting institution interested in our professors teaching to the highest level. Therefor our desire is to select students with the highest academic credentials, because that will result in highest possible median academic student as an lecture audience. </p>
<p>Our Academic Index admissions formula is as follows:
50% weight to SAT score / 160
50% weight to GPA * 20</p>
<p>There are 1000 seats available in each class and they are awarded on the basis of Academic Index calculated to nearest hundredth. Any positional ties are awarded on a lottery basis. </p>
<p>Please so not include whiny admissions essays. They wont be read.
*</p>
<p>There- I have constructed a non-discriminatory system. You could have kids that are advantaged by it, but no one is explicitly disadvantaged. The criterion applied to everyone is exactly the same. No one gets “pluses” for being a legacy or because of their skin color or non-academic factors. No one is excluded for being insufficiently vibrant. </p>
<p>re: Countrywide. Read what I wrote before. The government sued them and extracted a payment because of a discriminatory outcome, not because there was an explicit discriminatory policy. You guys think there is no case unless someone is on a hidden mic stating a prima facie discrimination is a policy- not necessary at all. In fact the Federal government was upset that there was not a systematic overall policy- the fact that a disparate outcome resulted from localized decisions rattled them. </p>
<p>In the Countrywide case the former CEO had been very vocal about doing outreach to minority communities. It was hardly the case that he was against them.</p>
<p>Ooh, if Hunt is an attorney, then I believe that makes at least two here (not me.)</p>
<p>The point is, some get admits, most don’t. For one group to claim it was purposely directed against them, requires some 'splaining. That’s what we await.</p>
<p>Arg, go back to “it’s more than stats” and “not enough seats.”</p>
<p>Harvard reported 14000 4.0 kids. Which 2000 index kids would you accept? What if the results, measured by matriculants, didn’t show the “fairness” in your system? Since not all high schools are created equal, is it fair to base results on some external test scores? Does that discriminate? </p>
<p>Some here don’t agree with you. It would help if you could skip the putdowns and show you’ve reflected on other perspectives. Frankly, I’ve enjoyed seeing how some posters (many of us argued on another thread) are open to this as a disussion, sometimes (even if barely) conceding a point before getting back to their way of viewing. I respect that.</p>
<p>I have a good friend who is an admissions officer at a top 50 LAC. He tells me when they get a transcript, they discard HS-weighted GPA and they discard any classes that are not math-science-language-english-history…in other words, studio art grade is discarded completely only to be considered if you are applying to be an art major. But it’s not in the GPA that this LAC assigns to the student. UCs have their own formula which discards freshman grades…I imagine every school has something like this.</p>
<p>Funny thing is, some schools look at rigor as more important than GPA, and some don’t. There are a lot of different systems to try to “game” in the US.</p>
<p>You constructed a system that does not discriminate…or does, based now on scores. So maybe that’s the flaw. Now explain the proof that Asians are a target group for bias, in holistic. What’s wrong with Asians? In your opinion.</p>
<p>Weighted or unweighted? How do you equalize across schools? Do you not know, or do you not care, that the grading scales at Andover, Short Hills High, Ruralville High and Innercity High are quite different?</p>
<p>I’ll add to that: SAT superscore or single sitting? Are retakes allowed? Can argbargy U eliminate kids with SAT prep courses and tutors are does it just accept that unfairness?</p>
<p>And is argbargy U seriously going to give a kid with a 4.0 in easy classes more weight than a kid with a 3.8 in super advanced classes?</p>
<p>ANY formula can be gamed, exploited, taken advantage of. ANY formula. And someone, somewhere will complain about the inherent unfairness of it.</p>
<p>(Also, I am not sure how many kids will want to go to argbargy U since it may or may not have various team sports, musical groups, clubs, gay kids, straight kids, a critical mass of any race, a gender balance of 50-50 or close and whatever else smart kids look for in colleges these days).</p>