<p>Automatic college admission policy has been implemented in Texas, Calif. and Fla.</p>
<p>By Kelly Fraser, Daily News Editor. The Michigan Daily. 4/14/08 </p>
<p>A state lawmaker has proposed a plan that would guarantee admission to any of Michigan's 15 public universities to students in the top 10 percent of their class at Michigan high schools.</p>
<p>The plan, modeled after Texas's decade-old 10-percent law, was introduced last week by State Rep. Rick Jones (R-Grand Ledge), who said the plan would ensure that students from rural farming communities or urban areas would have the same access to education as students from affluent suburbs.</p>
<p>Critics of the plan say it would infringe on the independence of Michigan's universities and force them to admit students who don't meet a college's academic standards.</p>
<p>Wow... WOW, I'm sorry but that is absolute "BULL*****"!</p>
<p>As theloneranger has posted in another thread, this is gonna cause some great Michigan schools (Ann Arbor is a nice example since everyone knows them) to fall and sink just as much (and unfortunately) as UT has.</p>
<p>Also, California's policy last time I checked is top 4% and a guarantee into A UC school but not a specific one.</p>
<p>I'll just post my response that I posted onto the article itself:</p>
<p>As a Texan who will attend UT next year, I believe the law will have both good and bad impacts on Michigan.</p>
<p>Texas has seen the number of graduating seniors skyrocket while the number of admissions offers to UT has stayed roughly the same. This means that, while the 1998 entering freshmen were 41% top ten students, the class will now be 81%. It hurts the university's ability to admit outstanding students from very competitive schools and for uniquely talented kids to receive offers.</p>
<p>However, many minority students in Texas attend majority-minority schools and these schools are often poorly funded, offer few or no advanced courses, and really do not prepare for college but rather for success on NCLB-mandated jokes of tests. The kids at these schools could work their tails off and STILL not have a chance to get in to UT without this law, so in this case it is very positive.</p>
<p>I think, for UT, and as it would prove for UM-Ann Arbor and for MSU, the percentage admitted is too large. Perhaps for the top tier of schools, a top 5-7% law would be better than a top 10% law. I think that it is okay if 50-60% of the entering students are from the top ten percent of in-state schools, but beyond that it not only hurts qualified outsiders but also qualified in-state students who either barely miss the cut, or worse would make the cut if only their schools issued a class rank.</p>
<p>Pam Jones should avoid comment to newspapers on subjects she is not well informed about. Texas does not just have one or two public university systems. There are SIX public university systems in Texas, all of which are autonomous from one another. The UT system is the most expansive and well funded, but the others, particularly the TAMU system, offer great educations to a large number of Texans.</p>
<p>I hope this bill passes but with amendments to protect the flagship institutions from being overrun with automatic admits.</p>
<p>Great idea, but details need to be refined. For example, top 10% of graduating class and a minimum score on the math & CR sections of the SAT I, or three SAT IIs, or a minimum score on the ACT. States need to fight to keep their best & brightest at home. Taxpayers are entitled to state funded universities serving their residents. Each university could set its own standardized test score minimums, but the top 10% rule would remain as a requirement so that unmotivated high test scorers don't leapfrog the top 10% of each graduating high school class.</p>
<p>I definitely would not say that UT has fallen and sunk at all...I'd actually say that it has the highest prestige and success it has ever had.</p>
<p>I don't know Michigan's particular problems...is UM dominated by suburban types? Are the urban minority students and poor rural kids getting shut out of the good colleges? Because if so that would be a great plan, but otherwise I don't know if it is necessary.</p>
<p>And Cali's plan is helpful because their 4-year public school system isn't designed to educate all of the kids in the state. I think I read the plan was for the top 10% of students to attend UCs, 30% to attend CSUs, and 60% of college students to attend community colleges. Those kids from poor urban and rural schools who never really had a shot at making it to a UC campus before now do. The UC system is the best undergraduate state system in the country. If UT, UTD, and TAMU were all in the same system and there were maybe 2-3 more top-notch public schools in Texas like them, that would be similar to UC. That's why kids can get a good education guaranteed but Berkeley and UCLA don't have to give up any standards. Also, the small percentages and the fact that they shuffle kids to schools like Merced and Davis allows the top-tier schools to artifically boost their ranks, something which UT doesn't and shouldn't care to do.</p>