<p>
</p>
<p>If the senate approves the house compromise, this will be the new admissions method for UT. It’s the way the business school and engineering do it already.</p>
<p>About the 1500 SAT score requirement - would that still be part of it? Even for someone in the top 1% of his or her class? </p>
<p>I think the admissions research tables show that between 2003 and 2008, about 380 top 10% students were automatically admitted with a total score for two sections of the SAT less than 1000.</p>
<p>Does the 10% limit on nonresidents apply to just the freshman class, or is it for the whole undergraduate population?</p>
<p>This mornings paper indicated that the law passed, and will be in effect for the next 6 years, BUT not until the 2011 year. So juniors can get by under the 10%, current sophmores will come under the new law.</p>
<p>“I think the admissions research tables show that between 2003 and 2008, about 380 top 10% students were automatically admitted with a total score for two sections of the SAT less than 1000.”</p>
<p>That’s about 60 students each year who realized they didn’t need to waste their time taking the test. Admitted doesn’t mean enrolled.</p>
<p>Trying to figure this out. About 3% of the automatically admitted (top 10%) students who enrolled 2006 to 2008 had two-part SAT scores under 900 and about 7% of the automatically admitted (top 10%) students who enrolled 2006 to 2008 had two-part SAT scores between 900 and 990. (I don’t know where I came up with the 380; I must have mis-tallied.) The data are in Table 4a of the most recent admissions research report on top 10% students (Report 11). <a href=“http://www.utexas.edu/student/admissions/research/HB588-Report11.pdf[/url]”>http://www.utexas.edu/student/admissions/research/HB588-Report11.pdf</a></p>
<p>These students have been running at about 2-3% + 6-7% of the automatically admitted (top 10%) who enrolled. </p>
<p>171 under 900 in 2006; 298 between 900 and 990 in 2006
131 under 900 in 2007; 326 between 900 and 990 in 2007
139 under 900 in 2008; 336 between 900 and 990 in 2008</p>
<p>I think the new law would exclude this subset of students (if about the same subset of people who were under 1000 in the two-part SAT are under 1500 on the three-part SAT).</p>
<p>But I am not sure.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Could be because people in the top 10% know they are an AUTO admit, so scores don’t matter! I know many kids at my son’s highschool who knew they were going to UT (one app and done), knew they didn’t need to study or prepare for the SAT, so they didn’t…</p>
<p>They also didn’t write very good essays either - because it didn’t matter in the least…</p>
<p>My son told me of one guy who drew a picture with letters in the space for the essays, he obviously knew that he didn’t need to impress an adcom with his eloquence ;)</p>
<p>Don’t know what kind of student he’s turned out to be though…</p>
<p>Just to clarify, that UT Top 10% link charts Texas High School Graduates rather than then entire freshman class. And, … drum roll, please…, that FAMOUS 81% comes from page 9 (and other UT sources) which addresses TEXAS HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES NOT THE ENTIRE FRESHMAN CLASS. </p>
<p>Anyway, those low scorers could be star athletes who just got “passed” in high school. Could be legacies. Could be daddy knew someone or had big bucks. Could be they were sick the day of the test and retook the test with a better score later and the lower score was still included in the overall stats. Could be any number of reasons for the scores. IIFC, the Top 10% showed high success rates on their UT GPA and matriculation. </p>
<p>The Texas High School Graduates <900 SAT:</p>
<p>2007 Top 10% = 131 and non-10% = 41
2008 Top 10% = 139 and non-10% = 16</p>
<p>So, Texas students do get in to UT with low rank, low GPA and low SAT for whatever reasons.</p>
<p>From the report - The Texas High School Graduates - Not so interesting is the Top 10% on the mean score scored higher prior to 2003 when it flipped with the non-10% scoring higher. Both groups were very close with the largest gap in '08 showing the 10% scored 66 points less though only 11 points less when averaged. </p>
<p>Of course none of this has anything to do with oos and foreign students and their scores.</p>
<p>Right, 81% of the 94% of the 2008 freshmen who graduated from Texas high schools, not 81% of the total number of 2008 freshmen</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-texas-austin/659587-fall-2008-class-94-15-graduates-texas-high-schools.html?highlight=admitted#post1061897072[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-texas-austin/659587-fall-2008-class-94-15-graduates-texas-high-schools.html?highlight=admitted#post1061897072</a></p>
<p>The new thing is, I think, that even if you are in the top 1 or 2% of your class, if you don’t at put a tiny bit of effort into the SAT, you will no longer be an auto admit.</p>
<p>I agree with the 10%'ers goofing off but thought that opinion wouldn’t be well recieved here since posters got upset when I said the 81% was a sham. If they aren’t going after a scholarship, then why bother. It’s likely, but until the t’s are crossed and the i’s are dotted we won’t know if the SAT/ACT will be a factor in the future or not. Even if they’re required to get 1500/2400 they’re still not going to have to put out any effort so adding that to the ruling is a waste of ink. And even more so when you’re “supposedly” raising the stakes to 75% of the total freshman class.</p>
<p>I say “supposedly” because in reality the stakes haven’t been raised at all because that’s already what UT’s real numbers are showing. Per the link above for the freshman class of 2008:</p>
<p>Total freshmen enrolled - 6715
Total Top 10% enrolled - 5114</p>
<p>Equals - 76%</p>
<p>Of course, giving back the slots the freshmen class should have had all along (1200 according to the legislature) would absorb any population increase so you’d be back to even-steven if not a bit ahead of the game. It all was a game and I resent my tax dollars wasted and the legislature’s time lost.</p>
<p>I dunno, I don’t see anything in the stats that would indicate that low scoring top 10% freshmen sandbagged the SAT. Low SAT scores seem to accurately predict low GPAs for both groups. Top 10% fare slightly better in GPA on the breakdown, which I would attribute to better discipline that got them in that group in the first place.</p>
<p>I would agree that the 75% mark simply maintains the status quo — maybe worse, since it won’t take effect for a couple of years. Given the changes to the bill, I actually don’t think it will matter if it passes or not.</p>
<p>Right, 81% of the 94% of the 2008 freshmen who graduated from Texas high schools = 76% of the 2008 freshmen. The upward trend in these proportions is the problem.</p>
<p>The UT president predicted that the proportion for 2009 freshmen was expected to be about 86% of the students from Texas, maybe 86% of 94% = 80.8 of the 2009 freshmen;
then the proportion for 2010 is predicted to be higher than that;
then the proportion for 2011 freshmen will be pushed down to 75%
by the new law.</p>
<p>Without the new law, the UT president had predicted that by 2013, all admits from Texas would be top 10% students and that by 2015, no one from outside Texas could be admitted.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/03/05/0305topten.html[/url]”>http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/03/05/0305topten.html</a></p>
<p>Yes, I understand you’re coming at this from a oos perspective and that’s fine. Yes, I understand the upward trend and all but if UT hadn’t been decreasing the freshman class size each year there very well might not be such an increase in percent. Smaller class size = larger proportion of 10% = more Chicken Littles running around proclaiming the sky is falling.</p>
<p>“But some lawmakers said UT Austin has aggravated the problem by reducing the number of freshmen it accepts each year. Lawmakers said the university has voluntarily reduced the size of its freshman class by 1,200 students since 2002. UT Austin has created its own crisis under the top 10 percent,” said state Rep. Armando “Mando” Martinez, D-Weslaco. "</p>
<p>[Bill</a> sets University of Texas at Austin bar at top 8% for admission - El Paso Times](<a href=“http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_12425454]Bill”>http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_12425454)</p>
<p>I felt sorry for the UT admissions people who were trying to create departments with, for example, art majors and music majors, departments that require special talents, when they were having less flexibility than any other college in the U.S. with respect to which freshmen they could choose - and the problem was getting worse every year. Something had to give.</p>
<p>It’s crunch time. Last Action: 05/30/2009 H Senate concurs in House amendment(s)-reported </p>
<p>[Texas</a> Legislature Online - 81(R) History for SB 175](<a href=“TLO”>Texas Legislature Online - 81(R) History for SB 175)</p>
<p>…so did it pass? Sorry, I just kind of skimmed the thread.</p>
<p>is the new legislation passed will it admit more people in '10 fall or what.</p>
<p>The legislation comes into effect for admissions for the class entering in 2011. The law did pass that UT may cap the number of top ten students admitted at 75%.</p>
<p>It passed both houses but Perry hasn’t signed off on it. It appears that in 2011, UT will admit about the same as they did this year but that number will be the limit for now on until they increase the class size. Click on “text” tab to read the final version. </p>
<p>[Texas</a> Legislature Online - 81(R) Bill Stages for SB 175](<a href=“TLO”>Texas Legislature Online - 81(R) Bill Stages for SB 175)</p>
<p>Could the university cut each class size by half, for example, still satisfying 75% of admits being from the top 10% (more like top 4-5%)? Or is the university forced to meet a minimum enterring class size?</p>