<p>I have a friend with a 2190 and top 8% who got CAP'd. As for myself, at the time that I applied I had a 2310 superscored SAT and 2270 single-sitting SAT score (1510 combined CR+M) and I was top 26.2% (I am now top 25%), and I got PACE'd. On the other hand I know kids that were like top 35% and had SAT scores barely scraping 2000 who got in. Why is there such a huge discrepancy? I understand that choice of major makes a difference but this is really strange Imo. I am a little bit disappointed (as I am sure anyone else would be in my shoes) and I hate to admit, a little bit jealous. So bottom line is, what is up with admissions? If students with stellar stats have been rejected, why are the average UT SAT scores so low? I thought I had a sure shot at getting into UT after looking up average SAT scores but apparently not. Why does UT choose some students with ridiculously low stats over students with much higher stats?</p>
<p>Maybe they don’t accept you because they know you’ll probably get accepted to numerous other top-level schools. Some people call this “Tufts syndrome” or Yield protection. </p>
<p>Major and class rank matter.
Google for HB 588
<a href=“http://www.utexas.edu/student/admissions/research/HB588-Report13.pdf”>http://www.utexas.edu/student/admissions/research/HB588-Report13.pdf</a>
go to the last page for the formula used for various majors
<a href=“http://www.utexas.edu/student/admissions/research/HB588-Report13-part2.pdf”>http://www.utexas.edu/student/admissions/research/HB588-Report13-part2.pdf</a></p>
<p>Exactly that’s how I was screwed over. I changed my major from cns to undecided because I needed a calculus requirement (am in pre-calculus) I knew it was not going to be good. So I cashed it online where it said after decision have been made for this cycle the we will change your major, so basically my decision was made on the wrong school. That’s why I am and have appealed. Hopefully these are good reasons otherwise i just wasted their time and mine.</p>
<p>Major matters. My friend who is roughly in the top 40% got in with an art history major</p>
<p>I am one of those people who got into UT (Cockrell) with a fairly low SAT score, 2000. Aside from scores though, I had an abundance of EC’s related to math and science, plus my essays were pretty decent as well. Scores aren’t everything I guess</p>
<p>I suspect the low test score averages people look at come from autoadmits from schools that prepare the students poorly. The top 7% of the bottom 10% of the schools in Texas likely don’t prepare their students for high test scores, I would expect. So I think their average test scores might not reflect the scores they would CHOSE to have if there was no auto admit requirement. </p>
<p>I agree with other posters that the major chosen seems to make a big difference as well.</p>
<p>This year, I think it came down to supply and demand. For CNS, if you are admitted to the university, you are admitted to CNS. Engineering is not that way, as they have additional barriers and are not an open college. I suspect a ton of top-7%ers chose CNS (CS, Bio, Chem, PreMed, etc.) That’s why you’ll see folks with 1950 SAT get accepted to ECE and folks with 2130 get rejected to CNS. </p>
<p>Collegevettng is likely correct. If Texas were free to use admissions criteria similar to other big state universities and to admit 35% out-of-state students, its entering-class statistics would likely be much like Michigan’s if not better. I can’t find admission information for Michigan just for OOS students, but I expect that test scores, class rankings, and selectivity for OOS students would be similar to the top private schools. This really boosts Michigan’s statistics. Texas takes just 5% OOS, so no matter how strong this group is, it has little effect on Texas’ overall class statistics. The Michigan brand name is stronger nationally for OOSs, but its undergraduate and graduate programs are very comparable. Over time, Texas could attract similar caliber OOSs to fill approximately 1/3 of its entering classes.</p>
<p>And the population of the State of Michigan is just one-third that of Texas. I don’t think the quality of Michigan high school students are significantly different for those in Texas. It stands to reason then that there must be more very qualified in-state students applying to Texas than to Michigan. So if Texas could take the cream of in-state students, it’s statistics for in-state students would likely exceed the statistics for Michigan’s in-state students.</p>
<p>The state of Texas has a unique situation/problem. As @Beaudreau mentioned, Texas has 2 flagship universities to serve a population of 26 million (and growing). Michigan has 2 flagships (UM, MSU) to serve a population of 10 million (and that has plateaued). The numbers alone point to UM having far more admissions flexibility than UT. Moreover, Texas’s demographics puts even more pressure on its universities. Nearly 27% of Texas residents are 18 or under, while only 23% of Michigan residents are 18 or under.</p>
<p>75% of all admission to UT will continue to be automatic under the top-N%. I suspect that, unless CNS changes its “open college” policy, it will become even more challenging to get admitted outside the top-N% rule. 5% will be OOS and 20% will be in-state, discretionary.</p>
<p>Heck, even Texas A&M is starting to struggle with the automatic admissions. Allegedly, all Engineering slots were taken by automatic admits in the November time-frame. My son has a friend who was Blinn’d at aTm and accepted to ECE at UT.</p>
<p>Test scores are just a number. The fact is if you are 1850 or higher is shows you are “ready” for college, some would even place that number lower. So adcoms are forced to look deeper into an application. They pick apart ECs. It is not enough to be in band for four years. What did you do with your four years in band? Did you go to all-state, were you a leader, did you change your program for the better? And then the ECs like Chess Club and Robotics…you have take the typical and make it extrodinatry. It is not about the EC, it is about what you did with it. Did you take that Robotics EC and place first in your state at competition. Now your EC matters.</p>
<p>Essays also matter. Did you “speak” to the person who read it? Did it leave them thinking “We NEED this student.” Did you fill it will descriptive language the painted a picture instead of words that just told a story?</p>
<p>Judging applicants by numbers is useless. Some kids don’t test well. A 1900 shows aptitude, and mixed with a National win in a DECA competition, makes for a good McCombs Student. Did you have the flu when you scored 700 on your Math SATs but blew your INTEL competition out of the water? Those are things that matter and there is no set of numbers that can ever paint the full picture.</p>
<p>
True, but as I recall college was test after test ad infinteum.</p>
<p>Consider also that for some majors, test scores just aren’t as important. My son was admitted as a music performance major and his admittance was based on his audition. He has good grades (top 12% at a competitive HS) and decent (though probably not to UT’s academic admission standards) test scores. </p>
<p>We were told by the fine arts college that if the music school accepts you (based on audition), the university will usually accept you too as long as you are in the top 50% of your class. And if the university doesn’t want to accept you due to poor grades/rank/scores, the school of fine arts would try to work with them on your behalf. </p>
<p>I imagine this is the case for athletes and other fine art majors as well.</p>