Texas top 10% HS admissions challenged (again)

Parents Forum
101

<p>The fact that I see the problem does not automatically mean I have the solution. In fact I don't think there is "one" solution.</p>

<p>Here's one area. </p>

<p>I believe our schools are doing a poor job of differentiating between the needs of the college caliber student and the student who needs to be learning how to get a good paying job. We tend to split the difference helping neither. I think we could start there and solve some problems. </p>

<p>My first suggestion would be to look at what's happening in Texas and adjust accordingly. Within a few years Texas will officially be a majority minority state. Many districts are already that way. Looking at present demographics (which I certainly hope to see change) a substantial percentage of that population will not be able to consider college a viable option for the average kid. (That top 10% scholarship idea would come in handy for those that may be best suited for college). Presently African American and Hispanic Texans are nor faring as well economically as whites. Fewer minority kids graduate or even attend college. Why not do some testing and counseling and let (all) kids who desire to go a different way opt out into a training program of some kind? How about the oil and gas industry?</p>

<p>In my area we are in the nascent stages of a gas boom. Good jobs are out there for trained folks. I went to an expo in Ft. Worth a couple of weeks ago and companies were begging for skilled workers (heck, any workers). TCCC has already established some programs to meet the needs of these companies , what's keeping high schools from doing the same? Inertia? Get those kids in some on the job training programs where they are paid as apprentices for their labors as they learn skills that will employ them for their life. (I met a twenty-five year old toolpusher on a rig recently. Six figures for running a rig that cost $60K a day. 25. No college. What an opportunity we have .) </p>

<p>And around here "vocational track " in high school is not adequate at all. There are no training programs for breaking down a pump, working with controls and valves. Few things translates seamlessly to the oil or gas patch. </p>

<p>Everyone needs to be able to read and write , take part in our self-governance, engage in their own healthcare decisions, enjoy the fullness of their civil rights, and understand their responsibility as citizens but does every kid need to learn Chaucer?</p>

102

<p>I'd like to amend my clunky thoughts in paragraph two. I took a phone call and my editing was limited. The point I was trying to make about demographics was not ethnic or racial but socioeconomic. If demographics stay the same (I certainly hope we address the inequities there) we will have more poor Texans in a decade than we have today. Demographically speaking, I don't think it's our richest Texans who are having the most kids, so I'll surmise that the population in a decade will contain a greater percentage of poor kids of all colors in our public schools. For many of the average or below average students from those poor families college is not really a viable option. We should recognize that before the problems get worse and establish meaningful alternatives. </p>

<p>(I've already covered an idea for the top 10%, poor or not. ;) Maybe if the boom goes well we can afford to bring it down to top 20% with an income limit.)</p>

103

<p>
[quote]
My S had a 2160 SAT, a 3.56 uw GPA (yes, a bit low), and extremely excellent ec's, and he squeaked by being accepted as a summer admit to UT-Austin. He is home schooled, so no class rank.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Do not look at the summer acceptance as "squeaking in." You do not need to look further than the formula, "absence of a class rank + high SAT = summer acceptance." It's now been several years since UT unveiled its policy that forces many graduates of the very competitive private schools or homeschooled kids to start in the summer. </p>

<p>In most cases, students who start in the summer end up their freshman year with junior standing and avoid the many remedial classes that UT has to offer to the hordes of students who did get in via the automatic 10% but were ill-prepared by the average high school system in Texas.</p>

<p>The most unfortunate part of the summer acceptance is that, in the eyes of some, it represents a backdoor entance or is viewed as as being developed to help students transition from HS to college with an extra semester. </p>

<p>UT could accomplish the exact same results by correctly labeling the advanced entry as as .. advanced program. Were UT to change the name, you'd see the same "elitist" frenzy that now marks the top 10% to move to the Texan suburbs. Conversations among mothers living in the "right" Zip codes in the aisle of Tom Thumb would invariably start with, "Oh, your kid did not get into the summer advanced program and HAS to wait until September. Bless your heart, dear! By the way, did yours get into San Jac?"</p>

104

<p>LOl. Xiggi, you KNOW it would happen just like that! Advanced AP/IP Elite College Summer Program Entrance to UT. They'd be storming the barricades.</p>

105

<p>Curmudgeon, keep digging deeper in your notes and experience, and you might discover how small the UT 10% real problem is compared to the huge problems in our K-12. The quip that the longer a kid stays in school, the dumber he's getting is, unfortunately, not all that jocular. </p>

<p>Our schools are not working, and the fact that Texas is not faring worse than the rest of the nation is hardly a cause for celebration. Our current system that is poisoned to the core by special interest groups which are overjoyed by a system that rewards incompetence and mediocrity needs a complete overhaul. </p>

<p>The reality is that we need different schools, including the vocational and technical schools you describe. Alas, it also means that we not only need a different stable of administrators and teachers but also the courage to admit how bad the current system is. A good start would be to clip DRASTICALLY the wings of the organizations that forced this precarious state onto the generations of students during the past 50 years. </p>

<p>In the meantime, we'll keep hearing from the teachers how the TAKS and NCLB is precluding teachers to teach more important subjects such as music, sports, and ... ECs. Yes, teachers want our students to spend MORE time on ECs and less on pesky subjects such as math and reading. Yes, bring on more of the fuzzy subjects that cannot be measured or verified, and stop the insanity of having to "teach to the test." </p>

<p>And what a great job they do at ... teaching. Sickening!</p>

106

<p>curmudgeon, I agree that Texas schools are trying to push every child into the same path. What would happen if every child WAS a business major at UT or A&M? </p>

<p>In two years we'll get to the year that every public high school Junior has to pass Physics. THAT should be fun!!!</p>

107

<p>xig, I'm probably right there with you about the need to clean slate this thing but does that mean we have to wait on everything? I would sure hope folks could look past their own immediate self-interest and see that the problem is much greater than any "10% rule being unfair to suburban kids" issue. Why do we have to accept that every Texas 4 year campus except UT (and many would say TAMU) is always going to be less desirable than LSU, Oklahoma, or Arkansas for the kids sitting at the 11%-25% mark?</p>

108

<p>missy, aren't we there? My son is class of '10, and he thinks he has to have physics. But, yeah, he graduates in two years, so maybe that's what you meant.</p>

<p>As Emily Latella would say, "Nevermind." :)</p>

109

<p>At our high school, not a lot of people take Physics because it is a difficult class. I predict that the first year everyone on campus has to pass the course, it will still be taught the same way and there will be mass failings and thus, mass parental protests. By the time my 6th grader gets there, I predict that the course will be dumbed down enough that it resembles the physics class they used to take in 8th grade.</p>

110

<p>I just love reading the musings of my favorite cc posters -- thanks for the morning diversion. :)</p>

<p>Back to my nap, now.</p>

111

<p>From where will the teachers who CAN teach Physics come? The curriculum won't get dumbed down because of the failing of student or their inability to pass the class. The first step should include giving ALL the projected teachers one of the standardized tests that cover Physics and make the results available to parents.</p>

<p>After all, should a teacher who sits in front of 15-20 eager students not been able to pass the same tests that are expected from his or her graduating class? It gets a LOT harder to solve problems without the Teachers' Edition of text books! </p>

<p>Of course, we know how devastating those results would be for basic courses such as English and Math.</p>

112

<p>"much greater than any "10% rule being unfair to suburban kids" issue."</p>

<p>I don't see it as unfair to suburban kids at all! Just because they are more able to afford expensive test prep, come from better educated families, attend schools with more academic and EC choices (and might have better conversation around the dinner table, or there might actually be food on the dinner table) isn't any particular reason to reward them. (and they are far, far more likely to be able to afford private educations.)</p>

<p>The state has a legitimate interest in preventing the establishment of a permanent underclass, especially since by educating the top 10% of folks from such classes, new leadership can be established for entire communities.</p>

113

<p>Curm has noted:</p>

<p>
[quote]
I believe our schools are doing a poor job of differentiating between the needs of the college caliber student and the student who needs to be learning how to get a good paying job. We tend to split the difference helping neither.</p>

<p>For many of the average or below average students from those poor families college is not really a viable option. We should recognize that before the problems get worse and establish meaningful alternatives. </p>

<p>Get those kids in some on the job training programs where they are paid as apprentices for their labors as they learn skills that will employ them for their life. (I met a twenty-five year old toolpusher on a rig recently. Six figures for running a rig that cost $60K a day. 25. No college. What an opportunity we have .)</p>

<p>And around here "vocational track " in high school is not adequate at all.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I agree that we are spending a lot of money trying to pretend that the end product of public primary and secondary education will be college graduates.</p>

<p>According to the 2006 Census figures: for all 26-year-olds (born in 1980, more or less), a little more than half had attempted college, but only just over 25% had completed a bachelor's or higher degree. Half of those who attempt college don't graduate within 7-8 years of HS.</p>

<p>College prepatory education is wasted on 3/4th of the students and it does everyone (taxpayer and student) a disservice to ignore this fact. I see the problem as being able to identify and correctly place each student on the appropriate track.</p>

<p>Also, doesn't the use of magnet schools help achieve this identification of able (but possibly economically disadvantaged) students in the urban large school districts? At least these students get the level of education that assists them in benefitting from college. </p>

<p>I think that there is going to be a real problem with an acknowledged vocational track and channeling students into that track because it doesn't fit with social engineering. Some parents would not be able to handle it if their son or daughter was not college tracked.</p>

<p>I have several friends whose kids did not go to college from suburban school districts like Coppel who have found mid-management positions with different services companies. In most cases it is the parents who are worried about this lack of a degree not the employed young adult.</p>

<p>If the statistics are correct, 3/4th of the HS graduates are living their lilves without a college degree.</p>

114

<p>07dad, why can't we start it without us putting a kid anywhere? We'll let them opt out. "Hey , kid. College prep or this job training program where you might be able to make more than your dad by year 2? (or more than curmudgeon by year 5.;) ).You choose."</p>

115

<p>curm--</p>

<p>I see the magnets as allowing some to exercise such an option. As you pointed out, the vocational track is next to nonexistant. I agree that if we retooled this part of the educational menu, letting the kid "opt" for vocational or college prep would be more viable.</p>

<p>Unfortunately, at the age that the option would need to be made, it is probably going to be the parents who decide. As we know from reading CC, some parents lack "perspective" (shall we say) when it comes to the expectations they place on thier kids.</p>

<p>But, I basically agree that some realistic option to under serving both college and vocational bound kids needs to be developed. </p>

<p>PS, I like my mechanic better than several acquaintances with PhD's.</p>

116

<p>
[quote]
I like my mechanic better than several acquaintances with PhD's.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You probably would like him even better if he were part of a profession that needed certification obtained after a rigorous professional education. Unfortunately, in our current education context, the most prevalent certification for mechanics, plumbers, carpenters, or masons is nothing else but the glorious title of being a poorly educated high school dropout. </p>

<p>How do we really expect people to learn the skills if there are no decent schools nor competent teachers? Right now, we HOPE that young people will acquire the skills to build homes or keep cars running ... on the job. </p>

<p>No wonder we have such a high level of planned obsolence.</p>

<p>PS The importance of having a college degree is not *that *great. However, the cost of dropping out of high school without ANY marketable skills. or a dismal level of literacy is incredibly important. While the easily identifiable statistics compiled by the U.S. government are cause for concerns, the real statistics on high school dropouts and literacy are nothing short of alarming. </p>

<p>PPS I'm pretty certain that Mini will opine that this is by design as we need more cashiers and floor sweepers at Wal*Mart.</p>

117

<p>OT: LOL, I'm sure mini will opine just that, xiggi. But it's not as if you and I are completely innocent of the same almost criminal consistency in our postings. I can pick your posts out as easily as I'm sure you can pick mine out. I don't think we even need to see each others names anymore. (Reading newest to oldest, I sometimes DO recognize your posts before I see your name. )</p>

118

<p>Hey, are there any high schools left that even have an auto/body shop any more? My high school even had a building trades class where during the course of a school year, the students built a whole house. Then they'd sell it and buy the land and materials for the next year's house.</p>

119

<p>They should consider doing what CA does... the top 12% is determined by a combination of GPA and SAT (and I think SAT IIs, but less so). These are formally or informally converted into points. Points are then ADDED for: -1st generation to college, underperforming high school, single parent homes, etc. The state of CA has the advantage of nine campus, with Berkeley being the most difficult to get into, followed very closely by UCLA, then a big gap to UCSD, then a small gap to UCSB, UCI and UCD, then a gap to UCSC, than a big gap to UCR and UCM.</p>

<p>So there is a lot of room in CA's treatment to find room for the top 12% according to their ability and life challenges (but not race per se, which was outlawed some years back).</p>

120

<p>
[quote]
Unfortunately, in our current education context, the most prevalent certification for mechanics, plumbers, carpenters, or masons is nothing else but the glorious title of being a poorly educated high school dropout.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I agree that HS vocational training along with courses in life skills (read a map, balance an account, read and understand a newspaper, family planning, basic contract principles) would be much better than dropouts w/o skills. </p>

<p>Curm mentioned vocational internships. Having worked in Dallas and Austin in the late 1960's and after college in 1972-73 as a carpenter's assistant to support myself (1-A, remember the "draft" = no college level job), I know that the skilled carpenters had learned their craft on the job, not in training schools.</p>

<p>Xiggi mentioned more formal training. I understand that in union states (unlike right to work states like Texas) that may be available after HS.</p>

<p>With many states passing laws to penalize employers who hire illegals, the building trades have needs for qualified people and/or are going to have to train the dropouts. In Oklahoma, Tulsa was reporting a severe shortage after their illegal alien employment law passed.</p>