@HRSMom I personally know kids who didn’t apply to the local charter school (Academy for S&T) because they wanted to ensure they got into UT. I don’t think people are transferring out because of the 7% rule, but people do consider it when applying to specialized, small(er) schools(TAMS, DeBakey, etc) that usually provide a higher standard of education.
I actually know a number of families who did move their kids out of our public hs and into less conpetitive private schools for that reason. We chose to stay and don’t regret it, but obviously it did come at a cost. I’m not going to whine about it because my kids got a great public education; we are not exactly underprivileged and we do have other good college options (mostly outside of TX, unfortunately). But the dilemma is a real one.
The fellow who started that last lawsuit Fisher vs UT, is prepping for another. He is asking for the stats of kids who did not get admitted and I do believe this is at the undergraduate level vs law school which Fisher’s case was based on.
Actually, Fisher was a freshman applicant. As frustrated and disappointed as I am, I don’t support the Fisher or any other litigation over this. I don’t see how my son’s legal rights have been violated. I just wish they would come up with a better system.
I wish they would develop the UT and A&M system so there would be multiple universities that were attractive to students, similar to the California system. We need to give the students more choices and become less focused on UT.
In regards to Fisher v. UT, the question is whether the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment permit the consideration of race in undergraduate admissions decisions. Justice Thomas stated that “there is nothing “necessary” about the benefits that flow from racial diversity in higher education, so there in no compelling state interest to promote it.”
However, Fisher’s case did not ask the Court to overrule precedent that allowed universities to consider diversity a compelling interest that justified race-based admission policies, so UT’s admission policy remains in place.
Personally, I don’t agree with the 7% (granted, I do come from a small, competitive private school), but the issue is that the remainder of in-state freshman (the other 93%) have race considered as a factor in admissions, which I believe the top 7% rule is already aimed at addressing.
Nonetheless, I believe replacing any x% rule with a wholly holistic review - including affirmative action - would benefit UT as a whole, and many lawmakers have argued for this as well.
GTAustin, I agree. Texas has grown so big, as has its college aged population, and the number of university spots hasn’t kept up. I always put in a plug for UTSA. It started off as a small, sort of rural, commuter school and now it has 30,000 students and a wide array of offerings. Good place to do CAP and many students are so happy there they don’t transfer. It isn’t quite a traditional residential college, but there are more and more apartments (university owned? idk) within walking distance of campus, more on campus activities, including football and other sports, more interesting spots for young people nearby.
I did not know that UTSA was that big. I do know they have a great cryptosecurity program. I do think students need to look beyond UT at these other schools for good programs. My own DD is at UTD for CS turning down UT for it. Lots of reasons and a better fit for her.
I think the emergence of UT-Dallas could help, and if UTSA could join them that would be even better.
Abad if there isn’t one, maybe Texas and Oklahoma could work out a reciprocity agreement for public schools.
Right now it’s as hard for an OOS applicant to get into UT-Austin as it is to get into Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, UVA, etc. That’s actually fine with me, as a public flagship’s main mission at the undergrad level should be to educate its state. But when you basically have to be in the top 7% of your hs class to get in – and for everyone else it’s a reach – i think you need to look at increasing supply. You do that not by making UT bigger, but by improving other public options and, thus, increasing competition for all that high-quality demand.
@prezbucky, I agree with you. The state legislators, several years ago, did make a push for more Tier 1 universities. Unfortunately, they never came through with the money and right now are talking about a pretty drastic cut to public universities. I read recently, UT’s cut was going to be 19% and only 12% of their funding comes from the state now dropping it to less than 10%. I don’t know if the cuts to UTD, UTSA, UTPB etc. will be as drastic. We seem to be going the wrong direction.
Well state funding is just one source of cash – schools need to market themselves.
UTD did have a successful endowment campaign and raised over $200 million from private sources. I hope they can keep the momentum going.
TX legislature in session now. No bills filed so far to change auto admission rules.
[QUOTE=""]
No bills filed so far to change auto admission rules.
[/QUOTE]
Nor should there be. It’s bad for people outside of the top 7% of their class, but without it, UT would probably have no incentive to serve actual in-state residents anymore, and would be free to chase that sweet international student money.
They already have no incentive if their budget is only 9% from state funding! It’s not an incentive, it’s a pair of handcuffs!
@calgal99 our school is larger D16’s class size was 601 and they had a very different acceptance rate than what you described. Is what you saw this year inline with your school’s acceptance rate for the last few years or has there be a drastic change?
Here’s the acceptance info I have for our high school class of 2016
Of the 225 students who applied to Texas A&M, 199 were admitted. Of those, 72 attended, and only five were in the top 10 percent of their class. The University of Texas had 301 students apply, and 246 were admitted, but only 80 attended. Of those, only 27 were in the top 10 percent of their 601 member graduating class. For what ever reason we have plenty of kids that are clearly not top 7% getting into UT Austin.
My guess is the reason that those admitted to UT ended up not attending is because they didn’t get admitted to their major or they got a better financial aid package elsewhere and few ended up at higher ranked schools.
My D16 only applied to OU so she’s not in those stats;-)
My question is when does a school stop being a state school because its funding from the state is so minimal. In Pennsylvania, Pitt and Penn State are receiving only about 5 to 6% from the state. They call themselves semi-state schools.
3scoutsmom, yes there has been somewhat of a change this year. We had at least 9 who are top 10 percent with very good test scores capped. Last year there were 9 students who were admitted and went on to attend UT from a class of 373. This year there are only two who were offered full admittance with one young man who was capped with the 32 ACT who was at the 7.3 percent rank of the class. The class val. is going to Yale so this school does produce good students. My point in all this is that we also have a son who chose to attend University of Arkansas instead of a Texas School. He chose Arkansas for it’s business school and is very happy there. He looked at other Texas schools after he found that he probably would not get in Texas last year and when we toured and when we attended the new student meetings we were shocked at the number of Texas kids now attending U of A. They are making a mark on our state’s students and just maybe we need to be looking at spending more on our other schools to compete for all the other kids who don’t get into UT or A&M. Our daughter this year who was capped at UT will be attending A&M and she is very happy as it was both her and our first choice. But lots of kids are going out of state and that is sad for our future
On another thread, California parents lament the CA system and say how much better the Texas system is since in California basically only the valedictorian of each high school can consider UC Berkeley guaranteed (not major, just admission, like UT) and for ucb /UCLA it’s top 3% basically. Top 9% end up at UC Merced which is like Texas State. If course. The difference It Texas is that they have 23 CSU’s on top if the 9 UC’s, some of which like CalPoly or sdsu are better than 'lower UC’s '…
@MYOS1634, so who is attending the high ranked UC schools? Is there a minimum % for CA students or are all the seats going to OOS and internationals?