Texas top 10% HS admissions challenged (again)

Parents Forum
1

<p><a href="http://www.theeagle.com/stories/022707/texas_20070227006.php%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.theeagle.com/stories/022707/texas_20070227006.php&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
AUSTIN - For a third straight session, a legislative fight is brewing over proposals to cap the number of students automatically admitted to Texas universities under the state's top 10 percent law.</p>

<p>The University of Texas at Austin has campaigned to change the law for years, saying it limits its ability to recruit talented students who aren't at the top of their graduating classes. But several key senators have blocked any attempt to change the bill and vow to do the same this year.</p>

<p>The House Higher Education Committee met Monday to discuss several bills that would tweak the law in different ways.</p>

<p>The leading proposal would require universities to accept only 50 percent of their freshman classes under the admissions rule. Priority would be given to students who complete the advanced high school curriculum. The rest of the students would be admitted according to their percentile rank until the cap is reached.

[/quote]
</p>

2

<p>Why a cap? Just get rid of the law altogether. Being in the top 10% of your high school class is not all that impressive.</p>

3

<p>I hate this because in my area there are great schools and deplorable ones. I know of kids who transfer to these deplorable ones where a 2.8 is top 5%</p>

4

<p>I agree. My D's school has a big bunch of high achievers at the top, making a nice/average GPA like 3.4 or 3.5 less than the top 25%. These second or third quartile kids score well on the SATs, though so it's hard when a state school is so strict. Our state (NJ) gives merit aid in the state schools with a strict table formula that factors in rank and SAT. Kids in an easier school with easier courses can get aid if they can break 1150 on the SAT and the top 15%. But kids who score 1300 or higher and rank lower than top 15% are out of luck. Our school does't rank, but does provide a quartile or decile. I've heard of kids in this high school moving out of district to a nearby town just for rank issues. I guess when a state is dealing with many thousands of kids, it's impossible to make exceptions on a case-by-case basis.</p>

5

<p>Tanyanublin, I am quite skeptical that NJ students are switching districts in any great number, just to improve their "ranking." NJ districts are among the strictest in the nation when in comes to residency considerations. Just attesting that you've moved into a district will not guaranteed resident status in a particular NJ school district. Public school Administrators spend extra efforts in NJ to determine whether or not a student that recently moved to the town should pay tutition.</p>

6

<p>Very true. I have met several who have moved into neighboring towns in the middle of high school...not just the child but the whole family....to address the ranking issue. One, the son of two attorneys, did so several months ago. The other, a high school sophomore, did so last summer. I'm certain that it's not very common...seems a little over the top to me...but there it is. I know what you are referring to when you talk about residency. I think that there are far more kids trying to get into good school districts by fudging their residency than there are trying to get out, though. It's a different issue.</p>

7

<p>I can tell you a little bit of the background regarding the top 10% rule in Texas. Quite a while ago, maybe 15 years, UT at Austin was sued by some denied European-American applicants to the law school because their application scores were higher than some accepted minority applicants. The lawsuits resulted in a reversal of UT's Affirmative Action based selection process. In an effort to increase chances for minority applicants without actually selecting them for admission, they started the top 10% program. So, any of Texas high school's top 10% graduates are eligible for admission to any state of Texas school.</p>

<p>When you think about the history of this law and the result, the situation is exactly the same as it was during the Affirmative Action years...highly qualified students might have to give up their seats to less well qualified students, though not necessarily because of race.</p>

8

<p>More the reason to get rid of the law, 1down22go. Texas high schools are a joke and you can't expect everyone to handle the coursework at A&M or UT just because they graduated in the top 10%.</p>

<p>There's kids that can't even transfer into A&M or UT but are more capable than a lot of the top 10% students.</p>

9

<p>Excuse me! TX schools are NOT a joke! Are there some? Of course! Are there in virtually every part of the country? You bet! But when the Katrina kids came, our school had to start remedial classes for them, because they were so far behind. The state even waived those kids taking the TAKS test in order to graduate, because everyone knew that those kids would skew the resultds and they wouldn't be able to graduate until we brought them up to standard. Our school and our district has placed numerous kids into HYP, SWAP, etc., and they are thriving. Those kids last year did a power point for the teachers of our school thanking us for preparing them so well that they are getting A's and A+'s at those tough schools, so please don't tell me that the education isn't there if you want it. D's friends who went to A&M and UT (in top 10%) are doing very well, and have not needed any remedial work. Another friend who just missed the 10% was finally admitted to A&M as a legacy, and she is doing brilliantly! The only other one that needed remedial work was admitted due to legacy status on a probationary summer program, and then admitted to the fall semester after the remedial work, but she wasn't even close to the top 10%. And it's the kids who can't cut it at schools like ours that are playing the rent-an-apartment and send kid to the inner city school game in order to get them into that magical 10%. There is no win-win solution. Do we give the kids from the inner city a chance or do we not? Is the flagship state U supposed to be for our state kids first, then for others? Lots of difficult questions to resolve. And there are the programs for the kids that aren't in the top 10% to go to certain feeder jr colleges, and if they do well, they get admitted to UT. So they can prove themselves, get some remedial work, and still get in later. After all, it's the diploma that counts, not where you attended the first 2 yrs.</p>

10

<p>I wasn't defending or condemning the top 10% rule; just explaining why it exists. It was simply an effort at increasing racial diversity at the flagship universities without using selective affirmative action.</p>

11

<p>1down22go;</p>

<p>While the Texas law has had an impact (reportedly positive) on racial diversity, the law has been a great boon for kids whom were previously underrepresented on the UT-Austin campus; rural students. There are many rural areas in Texas and legislators from those regions are keen to keep the Top Ten policy in place. A similar issue (but not a similar law) exists in Virginia, wherein high achieving applicants from the excellent schools in the Washington DC suburbs bitterly complain that NoVA students are rejected at U of Virginia in favor applicants from the rural/small town southwestern and southside regions of the state.</p>

12

<p>{quote]The University of Texas at Austin has campaigned to change the law for years, saying it limits its ability to recruit talented students who aren't at the top of their graduating classes.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Please note that The University of Texas at Austin is saying the 10% rule limits its ability to recruit but that it does NOT say it precludes the admission of talented students who do not make the 10% cutoff or attend a school syste that does not comply. </p>

<p>The reality is that very few --if any-- talented students are rejected by UT-Austin, especially when including the CAP and Summer admissions. The biggest noise against the 10% rule comes from very large public schools where making the top 10% is about the only chance to earn an acceptance at a selective schools. Fwiw, there are other ways to earn a direct admission at a Texas flagship school, including scoring over 1300 on the old SAT. </p>

<p>In Texas, we do indeed have many VERY good schools, but also have a good number of "Bubba" schools that live from "Fridays under the lights" and mostly fail to prepare their kids for college. But, what could you expect from such a large and diverse state. </p>

<p>All in all, Texas is trying very hard to address its problems, and the 10% rule is far from being the biggest problem, although it is not the panacea some believe it to be.</p>

13

<p>
[quote]
The University of Texas at Austin has campaigned to change the law for years, saying it limits its ability to recruit talented students who aren't at the top of their graduating classes.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Please note that The University of Texas at Austin is saying the 10% rule limits its ability to recruit but that it does NOT say it precludes the admission of talented students who do not make the 10% cutoff or attend a school syste that does not comply. </p>

<p>The reality is that very few --if any-- talented students are rejected by UT-Austin, especially when including the CAP and Summer admissions. The biggest noise against the 10% rule comes from very large public schools where making the top 10% is about the only chance to earn an acceptance at a selective schools. Fwiw, there are other ways to earn a direct admission at a Texas flagship school, including scoring over 1300 on the old SAT. </p>

<p>In Texas, we do indeed have many VERY good schools, but also have a good number of "Bubba" schools that live from "Fridays under the lights" and mostly fail to prepare their kids for college. But, what could you expect from such a large and diverse state. </p>

<p>All in all, Texas is trying very hard to address its problems, and the 10% rule is far from being the biggest problem, although it is not the panacea some believe it to be.</p>

14

<p>From an article I read in the Houston Chronicle, two of the strongest opponents of the changes are Senators Rodney Ellis of inner city Houston, and Senator Royce West of inner city Dallas. These two, combined with the afore mentioned representatives of the rural areas of Texas, will undoubtedly be able to block any changes. That's been their MO for the last few years.</p>

<p>Here is an article about it from the chronicle:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/4584025.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/4584025.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>But, I will add to what xiggi said, there is a lot of hysteria about noone getting admitted outside of the top 10%. It is complete bunk... My oldest son wasn't even in the top 1/4 and he got in two years ago, but he was a NMF and over 1500 SAT. There are a bunch of kids at my middle son's hs who are beginning to hear of admissions, they are mostly top 1/4 with decent scores and good ec's - basically what it takes to get into any good college.</p>

<p>I'm not saying that the top 10% law is a good thing and something that shouldn't be ammended, but it is what it is, and everyone knows the consequences of it if you're in a TX highschool (they preach it from 9th grade on).</p>

15

<p>
[quote]
Excuse me! TX schools are NOT a joke! Are there some? Of course! Are there in virtually every part of the country? You bet!

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, actually, Texas high schools and public education for the most part are a joke. If public education is not a joke, then why do you think that people who can afford it send their kids to PRIVATE academies (elementary and high schools)?</p>

<p>Besides that, it seems like a lot of the engineering majors in Texas come from the exact same top tier high schools in Texas. If high schools in general in Texas were not a joke, the engineering departments would have more dissimilarity amongst its students.</p>

<p>But of course when the government forces people to pay taxes to pay for public education, you can't expect the best. Anyone can cruise through high school and get a diploma in Texas. Diplomas do not mean a thing here in the state. Really the only reason to make good grades in high school is so you can go to A&M or UT.</p>

<p>
[quote]
But when the Katrina kids came, our school had to start remedial classes for them, because they were so far behind.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>What, and you think that's proof that Texas education is better than Louisiana education? Most of those Katrina "students" were the offspring of section 8 welfare recipients and convicted felons. You'll also find that in inner-city Dallas and Houston schools.</p>

<p>Hell, most of the decent people affected by Katrina LEFT before the storm hit and they didn't the federal government to move them around from place to place.</p>

<p>
[quote]
The state even waived those kids taking the TAKS test in order to graduate, because everyone knew that those kids would skew the resultds and they wouldn't be able to graduate until we brought them up to standard. Our school and our district has placed numerous kids into HYP, SWAP, etc., and they are thriving. Those kids last year did a power point for the teachers of our school thanking us for preparing them so well that they are getting A's and A+'s at those tough schools, so please don't tell me that the education isn't there if you want it.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So basically what you are telling me is that the State of Texas lowered its education standards for a bunch of New Orleans students who couldn't cut it in Texas schools, and that's supposedly proof that the public education in Texas is superior to Louisiana? Hahahaha!</p>

<p>
[quote]
D's friends who went to A&M and UT (in top 10%) are doing very well, and have not needed any remedial work. Another friend who just missed the 10% was finally admitted to A&M as a legacy, and she is doing brilliantly!

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The problem with this statement is that you haven't stated WHAT MAJORS at A&M and UT these "kids" you know went into. A&M and UT are not really one entire university but rather a group of different colleges (the departments) on one campus. There's plenty of majors at both schools which are easy to get into and easy to cruise through.</p>

<p>You make it sound like these Katrina evacuees were not getting a proper education in Louisiana, then all of the sudden succeeded at Texas schools and went on to excel in rough majors (although you haven't said so) at UT and A&M. I seriously doubt that.</p>

<p>
[quote]
send kid to the inner city school game in order to get them into that magical 10%.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This is total hogwash. You honestly think that someone who wants to go into A&M or UT as a freshman is going to risk their lives by going to some gang-ridden, inner city school just so they can get into the top 10% and be automatically accepted? Hahahaha!</p>

<p>But I do see your point; the top 10% rule needs to be abolished. Applicants needs to be accepted on an individual basis, not because they were in the top 10% of ANY high school in Texas.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Do we give the kids from the inner city a chance or do we not?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Why do we need to give them a chance? How about they WORK like everyone else instead of getting a free ride by the government? That's what "giving them a free chance" translates to.</p>

<p>LadyWashington, the fact that not a lot of rural students go to UT Austin has LITTLE to do with academics. It has more to do with the fact that rural students, who spent most of their life in the country, are not suddenly going to go to school in the middle of a city. That's too much of a transition at one time. Personally, I'm more comfortable with what's familiar to me and I'd imagine that's the same with rural students.</p>

<p>Xiggi, we're talking about freshman admissions, which is what the top 10% law applies to. CAP and transfers do not count. Hell, most people in CAP weren't accepted into UT as freshmen; that's why they are in CAP.</p>

<p>The other problem with your argument Xiggi is that I know a lot of people who go to UT and A&M from what you would consider to be "Bubba" schools. I think people expect the high schools to do all the work. It's the STUDENTS who should prepare themselves the most, not the high schools. You can't expect a high school to make an exceptional student out of someone with no drive. The ones that went to UT and A&M from Bubba schools had the drive.</p>

<p>Ag54, your son should be able to get into any school in Texas without the top 10% rule. He distinguished himself. But I don't think you should be automatically accepted based on just your class rank alone, especially when so many Texas high schools are lax. The problem is that there's too many students who aren't as capable as your son, ag54, who are getting into any school in Texas just because of the top 10% law. They are getting in while doing less work as your son.</p>

16

<p>hah Tx high schools are a joke? Memorial, Clear Lake, Bellaire, Woodlands, Klein and Plano schools are in my opinion a few of the very competitive schools in Texas that also provide a great education (just look at AP scores!). It's well known in Houston that only the top private schools (Kinkaid, St. Johns, St. Agnes) are really that great.</p>

17

<p>Annn, all you did was name off a handful of high schools in predominant areas with high property values, thus plenty of education revenue from property taxes. Most of your examples are in Houston. What's important is the AVERAGE.</p>

<p>The fact that you just named off a couple of high schools that are very well-known in Texas proves my point. These schools are well-known because they are, for the most part, good and are way above average.</p>

<p>But I wouldn't consider Plano to be that great of a school with the rampant drug use up there.</p>

<p>Just about any student in the state of Texas with an IQ over 100 can pass through a Texas high school with relative ease. But the real problem is all the fluff classes in high school.</p>

<p>I thought we were talking about the entire state of Texas, not just Houston.</p>

18

<p>anyone with an IQ above 70 (actually people with an iq below it, too) can pass through a texas igh school with ease if they choose easy courses and levels. and even the houston private schools mebntioend arent outstanding. ii have friends from sta gnes and strake that came to clements and found it harder, or who went to texas state/utsa level schools and still had a hard time</p>

19

<h2>"But, I will add to what xiggi said, there is a lot of hysteria about noone getting admitted outside of the top 10%. It is complete bunk... My oldest son wasn't even in the top 1/4 and he got in two years ago, but he was a NMF and over 1500 SAT."</h2>

<p>Oh ag...here we go again...lol! For every personal story about top quartile kids getting in at Texas, there are opposing stories like those of kids at my d's school. There we had NM Commended kids not offered fall admissions despite applying early in the process, graduating with a DAP transcript, being AP Scholars and having enough AP credit to almost qualify for sophomore status. Their rank? Top 11-13%. Also MANY kids in the top 20% capped to UTSA or UTA...good kids with legitimately difficult coursework and solid SATs.</p>

<p>I think one of the main problems is there is a lot of disparity in what being a top ten percent kid means. In our district, there is no additional weighting for AP or Honors; so we have a lot of kids who game the system and make the top ten percent by not taking a rigorous courseload. My d, who was a NMF and took every AP she could manage was outranked by at least 25 kids who took not one AP class. But, in the neighboring school districts, you have kids who receive 15 and 20 points added to their grade averages for Honors and AP classes. If there is going to be a law that places so much emphasis on one attribute, then the State of Texas needs to make sure that attribute is computed in the same manner by all Texas students. As it stands now, Texas and A&M have no basis to turn down a kid who took nothing but the bare minimum academic coursework required and has barely acceptable SATs, no meaningful extracurriculars, an inability to write....essentially a lackluster candidate, if that kid is in the top ten percent of their graduating class.</p>

<p>If the law worked by increasing diversity at the flagships, I would say it's worth keeping with caps. But it hasn't worked. The percentage of Hispanics and African Americans at these schools has not materially increased in the years the law has been in place and the student body most definitely does NOT reflect the population of college-aged students in Texas, especially Hispanic students.</p>

<p>Imho, it's ironic to see conservatives fighting to go back to AA and holistic evaluation of college applicants. But that is what would be best.</p>

20

<p>
[quote]
No, actually, Texas high schools and public education for the most part are a joke. If public education is not a joke, then why do you think that people who can afford it send their kids to PRIVATE academies (elementary and high schools)?</p>

<p>...</p>

<p>The fact that you just named off a couple of high schools that are very well-known in Texas proves my point. These schools are well-known because they are, for the most part, good and are way above average.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Does anyone else see contradictory paragraphs?</p>

<p>Hi-Power makes the incorrect assumption that private K-12 education is always superior to public K-12 education. Come to my county and you'll see that's not the case.</p>