<h2>"Fwiw, there are other ways to earn a direct admission at a Texas flagship school, including scoring over 1300 on the old SAT."</h2>
<p>xiggi - Isn't this loophole only available at Texas A&M?</p>
<p>@ UT the loophole is to enroll in the summer program.</p>
<p>I remember a study done few years ago. They found that almost 75% of kids in Texas were able to go to the two flagship state Us, UT and A&M.</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."</p>
<p>sure it has...now we have more bubbas</p>
<p>^ Yes...summer program was forced on our NMC/AP Scholars/DAP kids who were top 11%. It stinks....they were exhausted from an extremely strenuous senior year academically, AP exams and just wanted a summer off for fun with friends. Instead they were in classes within a few weeks of graduating. How irksome that some of the hardest partying kids who took no APs or Honors got fall admissions into UT. (grrrrr)</p>
<p>But it was better than the alternative... a year at UTSA.</p>
<p>(Simba!! rofl...more bubbas is not something we need here in Texas....lol!)</p>
<p>Let's just put it this way, I'd get into UT if it weren't for the top 10% rule. So much of each freshman class is reserved for only top 10% applicants. It's kinda sad when I have a 3.46 and I'm in the 26% percentile, and just down the road at the next nearest H.S. that would be top 10% worthy.</p>
<p>As a Texas resident and living in one of the high profile good-public school districts where lots of high achieving kids complain bitterly about the 10 percent rule, I am in general for the 10 percent rule. As Xiggi explained, for those yearning for UT-Austin there are other alternatives to get in such as the CAP and summer entry. Now for my gripe, the Texas legislature has been mandating great "thou shalts" to the public universities such as "thou shalt admit the top 10 percent" and then the legislators generously cut back on the dollars to fund their "thou shalt" mandates. The state of Texas in general provides a third or less for the funding of its public colleges/universities versus over one-half in the 1980's. The UT's and A&M's have a right to complain.</p>
<p>In addition to the funding issues, UT is complaining because it does not have room to go out and aggerssively recruit out-of-state and internationals, and also is losing the top in-state talent.</p>
<p>I never said that every private school outperforms every public school, fabrizio. Please do not make assumptions based on things I've never said.</p>
<p>Also, fabrizio, did you not see where I said that Texas high schools are a joke FOR THE MOST PART? So how in the world can you make the conclusion that I said that every private high school in Texas is better than every public high school in Texas when I only said FOR THE MOST PART? I didn't say ALWAYS, but I said FOR THE MOST PART.</p>
<p>Man, you must be a product of a lower tier public high school in Texas.</p>
<p>What I AM saying is that private schools for the most part are way better that public schools. They have to be otherwise no one would send their kids to one.</p>
<p>ldmom06, I know what you mean. A friend of mine went to a high school which awarded a higher GPA to those that took AP classes. That's an individual school policy, not a state policy. That said, I don't really know if someone should be totally out of luck for getting admitted into A&M or UT as a freshman just because they didn't take the AP courses. To me, the AP program just shows that the students have the initiative to succeed by taking the classes.</p>
<p>If you think that students who did not take AP classes in high school should be denied admission to A&M and UT as a freshman, then I disagree.</p>
<p>However, the instant a flagship school starts lowering admission standards to let in minority kids, state law or otherwise, is the instant that school is no longer a flagship school to me. People need to start working as hard as everyone else to get in, not rely on state laws or race based admission standards to get in. I've met PLENTY of Hispanic kids that were smart enough to get into UT on their own merit, not becuase they happened to be born Hispanic.</p>
<p>The people that want race based admissions are the ones that simply aren't smart enough to get into school other.</p>
<p>It also displeases me to see a school like UT boast about their level of education, yet at the same time they worship their football quarterback who wouldn't have even been able to get into UT if he didn't play football. Hell, some of them only go to college to play football and pick BS majors which don't interfere with their football. What a joke.</p>
<p>Simba, that study you stated has no basis if it doesn't also include how many students were in the study and their academic credentials.</p>
<p>lonestardad, just because there are alternatives doesn't mean that they are desirable. I think the CAP program sucks. I wouldn't want to spend two years at UTA when my heart was set at going to UT Austin. That and it's ridiculous for high GPA students who aren't in the top 10% due to the sheer size of their senior class to get rejected when kids at another school, with a lower GPA and smaller class, get in due to the top 10% rule.</p>
<p>I don't think a bright kid with a high GPA from a large high school should be passed for admission because the state law dictates that some kid with a lower GPA from some inner-city school who's in the top 10% of their class is automatically in.</p>
<p>But I agree with you about the funding issues.</p>
<p>Let's review your words, Hi-Power.</p>
<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)?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I treated the words "for the most part" as describing public education. If you're saying that you meant to use "for the most part" to describe both Texas high schools and public education, well, you wrote it, I'll trust you.</p>
<p>Indeed, you've never said "every private high school outperforms every public school." You just made the assumption that families with the financial means to send their children to private school do so always. Either admit your question is flawed and back away or if you refuse to do so, then be more careful with your modifiers next time. Thank you!</p>
<p>Man, you must be a product of a lower tier public high school in Texas.</p>
<p>The irony. Your attempt to insult my intelligence has backfired by highlighting your questionable mastery of English comprehension and reasoning. Kindly notice my location, which is Georgia. Not Texas. Have a nice day!</p>
<p>I think the 10 percent rule is the fairest standard overall to "level the playing field". It says any kid in the top 10 percent from Podunk, Texas to Richville, Texas has guaranteed admission to any state university. That's a pretty good deal. Kids from more privileged backgrounds can complain about it being unfair, but inherently their superior high school education and family support systems give them a leg up for being successful in any college they choose versus (for argument's sake) Hispanic kids from the poor Edgewood school district in San Antonio, Caucasian kids from poor rural West Texas districts, or black kids from inner city Houston or Dallas. So some privileged kids and parents may continue to grouse and complain, but they would never trade places with the top 10 percent poor kids from the other side of the tracks (or school districts). And again this comes from a parent in one of the privileged school districts who is very happy his sons got their superior high school educations and said "that's the way it goes" when they did not make it to the top 10 percent.</p>
<p>"Simba, that study you stated has no basis if it doesn't also include how many students were in the study and their academic credentials."</p>
<p>actually that study was very comprehensive and done by researcher(s) at Princeton. They looked at data from several years.</p>
<h2>"If you think that students who did not take AP classes in high school should be denied admission to A&M and UT as a freshman, then I disagree."</h2>
<p>I did not say this Hi-power. But what I did say was that a candidate who was lackluster in all areas except a ginned up rank created by a local grading system that allows for gaming should get in line behind outstanding candidates who rank outside the top ten percent merely because they opted for a strenuous courseload and unfortunately reside in an area that causes them to attend a highly competitive public school.</p>
<p>Furthermore, my complaint is that holistic evaluation plays no part in the admissions of approximately 70% of the latest freshman class at Texas and about 50% of the same at Texas A&M. These students essentially could have submitted their rank to either flagship and not bothered to take the SAT, participate in extracurricular activities, submit an infernal number of essays or counselor/teacher recommendations for admission into the universities as a whole. They could have just had their h.s. counselors fax over rank and the colleges could fax back an acceptance letter. Imho, this is not how you build a great university.</p>
<p>Even the most competitive of colleges at UT seem to rely too much on rank for program admissions. There is no excuse for this since no law requires UT to only accept the top 2% to McCombs for example. It's just a bad, bad trend that is seemingly contagious and doesn't accomplish what was originally intended....racial diversity. I suppose it's great if the top ten percent law increases the number of rural kids at the flagships; but the law was adopted for the purpose of increasing racial diversity. If it doesn't get the job done, then it needs to go away.</p>
<p>Idmom06,</p>
<p>I thought about applying to Texas a few months ago. I read that even if a student is in the top 10% of his class, he still needs to complete the Texas Common Application for admission.</p>
<p>I think he'd have to write a few essays and submit recommendations (application has to be complete), but he wouldn't have to do volunteer work or participate in extracurriculars.</p>
<p>fabrizio: You are correct. Also remember that top 10% only guarantees you a spot. You may not get the major you want to study.</p>
<p>"actually that study was very comprehensive and done by researcher(s) at Princeton. They looked at data from several years."</p>
<p>Yet you have not posted the rest of the data. All you've said is the summary, without posting the data, and where the research came from.</p>
<p>If you meant it in that context, ldmom, then I agree with you. But I don't think you HAVE to go to an AP class in order to get into UT or A&M. I agree with you 100% on the rest of what you say. However, being in extracurricular activies during high school DOES help your chances at getting a scholarship. True, it might not help with admission requirements at all but at the very least you can get some scholarships.</p>
<p>The good thing though is if you can't get into UT or A&M, you can also bust your butt somewhere else and transfer in. For someone that's gifted that shouldn't be hard to do. Except you can't really transfer in to the business school at either university directly.</p>
<p>fabrizio, I've never made the assumption that every single well-to-do family sends their kids to a private school. Please quit putting words in my mouth. But I'll tell you one thing, there's a good reason why a lot of them DO send their kids to private schools and it isn't just because they can afford to.</p>
<p>I really don't care where you're from, fabrizio, because it's obvious to me that I wouldn't want to come from your background. You have to have intelligence in the first place for me to insult it, and the fact that you can't even understand the phrase "for the most part" and that you read words that aren't even there doesn't really change my judgment.</p>
<p>If you live in Georgia, then what do you know about the CURRENT situation with public schools in Texas? Not enough to be a part of this thread it seems.</p>
<p>lonestardad, it's not the state's damn business to "level the playing field" when it comes to education and the economy. The ones that have the best chance of contributing to the economy should be the ones that get the nod towards a good university, not someone from X racial background.</p>
<p>Money isn't really an issue when it comes to admission standards, so I don't think saying that kids from "more privileged" backgrounds has any bearing on admissions. The fact is that there's a lot more kids who CAN succeed that do NOT go to inner-city schools than vice versa. So why are the inner-city schools getting an upper hand?</p>
<p>I almost went to an inner-city high school myself until my parents became the wiser and put me someplace else. I know exactly what they're like, and succeeding academically is NOT the top priority at those, regardless of all the movies you watch. I had a friend of mine that DID go to an inner-city school who was pretty bright. He could have succeeded at ANY high school in Texas; he didn't need a handout from the state (top 10% rule) to succeed.</p>
<p>My problem with Texas public educations, and the Texas legislature in general, is that they ASSUME that Texas public high schools are, on average, great institutions. That's why I have a problem with the top 10% rule. By law, they have to allow some slacker with a 3.25 GPA at a less competitve school, like an inner-city school, in as long as he's in the top ten percent. However, for some kid who's not in the top 10%, but in say the top 20% at a really good, really competitive high school, it's a crap shoot for him to join. Just go over to the UT-Austin message board on this site and you'll see what I mean. Generally bright students that have to sweat bullets.</p>
<p>I met a girl once that was in the top 11% of her class and still couldn't get into UT. I don't know if she could have handled the coursework or not but I'd imagine that there's other high schools in Texas where she would have been in the top 10% and then automatically accepted.</p>
<p>If the high schools in Texas are not the same academically, why is the State of Texas assuming that they are as far as top 10% admissions? All it turns into is a big "diversity" mess that screws over more people than it helps.</p>
<p>fabrizio - </p>
<p>I was speaking conceptually. For admission to the university, top ten percent guarantees your spot in COLA (Plan I) at a minimum. AND unfortunately, rank plays a far too important role in an applicant's admission to competitive colleges/majors like McCombs, journalism, Plan II, etc..., regardless of quality of essays, ecs or SATs.</p>
<p>Reliance on rank, seemingly, makes the rest of the application process to be merely 'going through the motions'.</p>
<p>"Yet you have not posted the rest of the data. All you've said is the summary, without posting the data, and where the research came from."</p>
<p>don't be lazy. If you want to check the data go do it yourself. Think google.</p>
<p>Hi-Power,</p>
<p>Your new sentence, "But...there's a good reason why a lot...DO send...," is much clearer than the old sentence.</p>
<p>For someone who "really [doesn't] care where [I'm] from," you must have had a lapse of judgment when you assumed that I came from a 'lower-tier' public high school in Texas. (Despite the fact that my location says Georgia, which doesn't border Texas.)</p>
<p>And since you don't care where I'm from, then you shouldn't mind my participating in this discussion, unless you're embarrassed that a high school senior is exposing your shoddy sentence construction.</p>
<p>Hi-Power, let's review your words once more, because it appears to me that your memory is a mere shadow of what it used to be. (I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.)</p>
<p>
[quote]
No, actually, Texas high schools and public education for the most part are a joke.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>In context, Texas high schools is referring to Texas public high schools, which is a subset of American public education (i.e. it is a specific example.)</p>
<p>You then mentioned "public education for the most part." Hence, you were no longer writing simply about one part of American public education; you were writing about the whole. You went from the specific to the general. In previous posts, you claimed that Texas high schools are atrocious. With the quoted sentence, you expanded that claim to the whole of American public education. Thus, according to you, not only do Texas (public) high schools suck, most (public) high schools in other states also suck.</p>
<p>It's not my fault that your writing is poor. Please don't blame my "lack of intelligence" for one of your problems. If you have the time, I recommend that you purchase Strunk and White's The Elements of Style. I believe you will find it enlightening.</p>
<p>Once again, have a nice day!</p>
<p>Idmom06,</p>
<p>
[quote]
Reliance on rank, seemingly, makes the rest of the application process to be merely 'going through the motions'.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I see your argument, and yes, that seems to be the case.</p>
<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>
<p>And why is that a bad thing? This law is doing exactly what it was intended to do which is why the upper middle class is screaming so loud. I think it is a good thing and will in the long run improve the economic base of poorer school districts in Texas, increase diviersity in Texas universities in a fair manner with resorting to racially based affirmative action quotas where kids are admitted from separate racially based pools of applicants, and in the long run tap hithertoo untapped human potential in the state which will benefit all Texans.</p>