<p>Are you people ragging on "high achievers", since when is it bad. I do see the bad in the admission rule for other people yes it is unfair but why take bad about the kids who worked so hard to get the GPA and SAT scores they did? I dont understand. It's almost like some parent's and student's are looking down upon people for who do very well instead of just barely making it.</p>
<p>The fallacy with some of the thought processes here is the assumption that those who currently don't get in to UT because of the top 10% rule would get an admit to UT if the rule didn't exist. Some of them might but not all would. UT is committed to enrolling as diverse a student body as possible - all kinds of diversity - not just racial. I do think UT should have some more flexiblity in determining who gets an admit but I also think some level of automatic admit (maybe top 5%) is a good thing. UT is a state school, funded by tax dollars. As such, it is tasked with ensuring that it educates a diverse student body from all walks of life in the state. Not all top 10% kids choose UT, many have other schools, outside of Texas as their first choice schools. I just don't think that a kid should be automatically tracked to a particular University/college simply because of where or to whom he was born.
UT has published lots of information and research on the performance of their top 10% admits. Believe it or not, those kids do as well as and sometimes better than those who enter UT with much higher stats. Check it out.</p>
<p>The folks screaming the loadest about the 10% rule, most of whom are upper middle class kids and parents from well funded suburban school districts don't like the results I have a couple of possible solutions for them. One is to tell their legislators and gonernor to pump more money into the university system so there are more slots and the schools can dig deeper than 10%. A second option is to do something to improve the funding and hence the quality of the crappy schools in the state and athird is to move to a poorer school district and see if you can just slide in by ranking in the top 10%.</p>
<p>Dropping this rule without putting more tax money into the system will neither improve your chances or make the system more equitable. What UT and A&M will do if the rule goes away is have three separate admissions pools with set asides for each and region quotas within them. Whites will compete against whites, blacks against blacks, and hispanics against hispanics and each group will have to have regional diversity. This of course is illegal but that is a law that can't be enforced and is exactly what Michigan does now thought hey will lie right through their teeth about it if asked.</p>
<p>Yes there are some problems with this system but by and large it is fair, merit based, and color blind plus it allows the taxpayers of the state to improve the situation if they so desire and are willing to cough up the tax dollars.</p>
<p>higherlead - </p>
<p>First, the purpose of the top 10% law was to promote racial diversity and to address the fact that the racial makeup of the student body at Texas flagships did not mirror the racial makeup of college eligible students in the state of Texas. The law has not accomplished this prime directive. The increase in Hispanic and African American students at UT-Austin and Texas A&M has not significantly increased since implementation of the law. Logically, since the law doesn't work, it seems there is no reason for the law.</p>
<p>Furthermore, to consider just one parameter in an admissions decision doesn't make sense unless that paramenter is computed in a consistent manner across all schools in all parts of the state. If the state can't figure out how to make rank a comparatively meaningful number, they have no business implementing a law that places such importance on that number.</p>
<p>"it seems there is no reason for the law."</p>
<p>Yes if you want to go back to an affirmative action quota system that is as harmful to the beneficiary as it is to society in general there is no reason for it. OTOH the mere fact that racial diversity has remained the same or slightly increased under a system that is merit based and color blind is a plus in my book. What is keeping minorities out now is finances and that is a lot easier to fix than racial suspicion.</p>
<p>The fact that the folks screaming about the 10% rule are the very same ones who have it in their power to increase and redirect state resources put towards public education and who have disproportionately sucked up those resources is neither surprising nor cause for alarm as far as I am concerned. Rather it is a sign that the system is working. Throw more rsources into the system and take the percentag to 15 if you want. Make one more flagship. Better yet if you thing it terrible that a 3.0 can put you in the top 10% in some school throw more resources in that direction and make it harder to get there.</p>
<p>The bottom line is there always has to be a way to ration a scarce resource and this one seems to make a lot more sense to me than either racial quotas or biased standardized tests or the economic discrimination that results in poor kids going to poorly funded schools.</p>
<p>"and who have disproportionately sucked up those resources is neither surprising nor cause for alarm as far as I am concerned."</p>
<p>Whoa...how do you figure? I pay a grand a month in property taxes of which the majority goes to my school district who must immediately surrender a chunk of it to the state for 'redistribution' to poorer school districts under the Robin Hood law. I know this will change soon, but for years this is the system under which we have been forced to operate. So who is sucking up whose resources???</p>
<p>Well my guess is your schools are better funded than the average Texas school hence the Robin Hood bill and your schools probably used to and may still send a disproportionate number of students to the state flagships because they are getting a better education.</p>
<p>Now I don't doubt your taxes are high and the Robin Hood bill stings but if we don't do something to improve outcomes in the poorer school districts and tap the potential of the kids in them we will be the poorer for it in the long run.</p>
<p>well put higherlead!</p>
<p>I'm probably going to get bashed for this, but the admission results from my s's highschool (upper middle suburban public) belie the top 10% hysteria. Of the 23 kids (I personally know, as they are friends of my s's, there may be more) who were top 1/4 (but not top ten %) who applied to Texas, 19 of them were admitted, most in summer, a few regular fall. 3 kids that were second quarter (but close lower than 30%) were admitted, the rest were capped. These results are similar to what we experienced two years ago with our oldest and his friends. Most of the kids admitted were girls - maybe there is a sex discrimination thing going on (Truly JK ;))</p>
<p>So, I still believe that kids who do well, but are out of the top 10% at competitive hs's, whether public or private, have a very good chance of being admitted. This must be based on their total applications - rigor of course load, number of APs taken, extra curriculars, essays, etc.</p>
<p>i was going to read all the post, but... heck its too long.
anyways...</p>
<ol>
<li>i am texas senior who got admitted to UT</li>
<li>i worked hard.</li>
<li>i think the purpose of threads are to express your opinion on issues and to gain understanding ,not debate who's right or wrong or even to offend anyone (which seems like what ppl are doing.)</li>
<li>I have no idea if texas schools are easier but you can shove it up your...</li>
<li>HOOK EM!!!!!</li>
</ol>
<p>thank you</p>
<p>Ow, Sialo! Talk about 'hook em!'</p>
<p>YES SIR! hoook EM!! AWWWW!!!!</p>
<p>
[quote]
</p>
<ol>
<li>i am texas senior who got admitted to UT</li>
<li>i worked hard.
[/quote]
</li>
</ol>
<p>however, you also testified that:
[quote]
It came to me when i was senior ( right now) that maybe i could further "how to" in getting good grades by asking top ten people how to maintain good grades. i was ranked 30/450 back then and there was still room to improve...and thus, i seeked different advices. In which many friends said the same thing.</p>
<p>"dude, we don't work that hard, we just copy each other for homework and settle the ranking in test and quizes" (number 4)
"man... i really dont' think i even deserved to be in top 10" (number 2)
" i never worked at all for grades" (number 8)
"work hard, its that simple" (number 1)
"i dunno...i just do my work" (number 6)</p>
<p>I will admit that i cheated numerous times in class work to attain better grade, and by doing so, some where along the path to my education, i also lost the joys of learning b/c such value didn't seem to emphasizes as much as what is written in student's academic transcript.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Will UT still want to hook you if they knew this about you...</p>
<p>an article on the background of the top 10% Texas program and one similar in Florida:
<a href="http://www.diverseeducation.com/artman/publish/article_7132.shtml%5B/url%5D">http://www.diverseeducation.com/artman/publish/article_7132.shtml</a></p>
<p>
[quote]
Florida and Texas both have automatic college admissions programs for top high school graduates. But one program is facing intense criticism while the other has been largely irrelevant.</p>
<p>In the 1990s, Florida and Texas stopped using affirmative action as an admissions factor for public universities. Instead, they opted for programs that grant top high school seniors guaranteed admission to its state universities. </p>
<p>Lately the Texas program, signed into law by then-Gov. George W. Bush in 1997, has a huge bull?s-eye attached to it. Critics say Top 10 Percent takes admissions discretion away from state universities and hurts deserving high school seniors who aren?t in the top 10 percent of their graduating classes. The Texas Legislature has already defeated one bill that would have watered down the program?s impact, and there have been attempts to repeal the Top 10 law altogether. </p>
<p>A measure is currently winding its way through the Texas House of Representatives that would cap the number of Top 10 students coming into a state university?s freshman class at 50 percent. This would free up the remaining slots, which could be filled using other admissions criteria. </p>
<p>By contrast, there?s no push to dismantle or modify Florida?s Talented 20 program, which was created by Bush?s younger brother, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, in 1999. Critics say the Talented 20 isn?t in anyone?s crosshairs because its always been focused more on rhetoric than substance. </p>
<p>Texas? Top 10 law stems from Hopwood v. Texas, a 1996 lawsuit filed on behalf of White University of Texas Law School applicants who believed they were denied admission in favor of less qualified minority applicants.
As a result of the case, Texas received a federal order to scuttle race-conscious state university admissions. Not wishing to derail a system that had been making gains in minority enrollment, Texas politicians, college administrators and faculty established the Top 10 program.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm probably going to get bashed for this, but the admission results from my s's highschool (upper middle suburban public) belie the top 10% hysteria. </p>
<p>So, I still believe that kids who do well, but are out of the top 10% at competitive hs's, whether public or private, have a very good chance of being admitted. This must be based on their total applications - rigor of course load, number of APs taken, extra curriculars, essays, etc.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Ag54, you'd only bashed by people who prefer anecdotes over real facts. While there are students who are accepted automatically at UT and may not have very competitive stats, students who ARE rejected despite being competitive are truly exceptions, if not part of urban legend.</p>
<p>It does not take much more than a quick look at the detailed statistics posted by UT, or a look at the results of UT admissions to learn the reality. </p>
<p>There is always a lot of noise about the 10% rule when the automatic admits start receiving admission letters. It usually dies by April 1st when the reality sinks in ... only to start again the following October, especially when Colt McCoy throws 7 TD's per game.</p>
<p>PS I hope the BHP came through for your son.</p>
<p>Nah, he didn't make it, but he's ok with it, still very excited to be a Longhorn next year :)</p>
<p>Thanks for asking!</p>
<p>xiggi --- just wanted to clarify your earlier post. The 'over 1300' on the SAT only applies to TAMU, not UT. My d applied to UT with an SAT over 1300, her school doesn't rank, her 1st and 2nd choice majors were in the College of Liberal Arts and she was CAPed which for us is the same as 'not accepted'.</p>
<p>
[quote]
xiggi --- just wanted to clarify your earlier post. The 'over 1300' on the SAT only applies to TAMU, not UT. My d applied to UT with an SAT over 1300, her school doesn't rank, her 1st and 2nd choice majors were in the College of Liberal Arts and she was CAPed which for us is the same as 'not accepted'.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes, that is absolutely true. I could have been more specific when I wrote, "
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>I'm sorry to hear about the CAP. As Ag54 pointed out, many students are asked to attend the summer school, but this is the first time I hear an 1300 SATer being "politely" turned down. Fortunately, it seems that you have become an AggieMom, which is a truly wonderful school. I'm sure you'll enjoy all the traditions, including the unfortunate new one of defeating UT in several national sports. :D </p>
<p>Best of luck to your Aggie D.</p>
<p>Thanks xiggi. I was actually 'aggiemommy' to my son first, class of 2004, but my daughter is more the 'liberal arts' type and had UT as her first choice. I think the non-ranking high school may have hurt her abit. Everything else seemed to be strong, she had a 730 on her SATII Writing, her GPA is 3.5ish, she has 7 AP classes on her transcript, lots of ECs and awards, strong essays and I suppose strong recommendations as they were from teachers of her best classes. She was also NM Commended. Very disappointed to say the least, but we are moving forward.</p>
<p>Congratulations to all that got in where they wanted!</p>
<p>My d's class, unfortunately, had many similar stories to that of aggiemommy's daughter. At our school I don't know of any outside top 15% who were accepted unconditionally. Most of ours in the top 15%-25% range were capped. A lot of our top 11-15 percenters were offered summer admissions. And those summer admits were kids with 10+ APs and Nat'l Merit Commended status. For pete's sake, one summer admit was a top 11% kid, NM Commended who won first place at the State NHD competition (and rec'd the Nat'l Bronze) and recognition from the State Board of Education with my daughter (they were on the same team). </p>
<p>I do know ag54's high school is definitely considered more prestigious than ours academically...perhaps that is why the borderline kids there rec'd more benefit of the doubt. But, I wouldn't consider it accurate or factual to extrapolate based what has occurred at any ONE high school. Furthermore, the experiences of the kids at my d's school are no more anecdotal than those of ag54's kid's school.</p>
<p>Again, there are many reasons why the top ten percent law is not a good idea. What happened to aggiemommy's d and my daughter's friends illustrate just one of the reasons.</p>
<p>Perhaps it is my years working in college admissions that influences my opinions; but I will always believe that holistic evaluation and consideration of all parts of the application as well as ethnicity and life experiences yields a more meaningful student body. Why bother to have an admissions staff if we allow the government to legislate away their ability to do their jobs?</p>