I just saw a 60 Minutes story on the policy in Texas that automatically guarentees that the top ten percent of all Texas high school students get into UT. I remember hearing about it and it sounded like an interesting policy for keeping diverse admissions into Texas schools but looks like its got some of the same problems as affirmative action with students from mostly white higher achieving schools losing out if they didn't graduate in the top ten even if they have better grades and SAT scores from students who graduated in the top ten of lower achieving mostly minority schools. Another problem looks like UT can't handle the influx of top ten students and they want to cut back the amount of automatic admissions. OTOH the president of UT was saying that overall though the quality of students, interms of graduation and other performance rates, has been the best in UT history even while diversity has increased under the top ten program.
That was a repeat of a program that originally aired in October.. The only update was what they said at the end.. nothing changed during this legislative session. Overall I'm against the 10 percent rule.. I think it is unfair to all students.. Everyone knows its just a way around affirmative action.. I got into UT as an 11 percenter.. on my own merit.. most of the top ten percenters I went to high school with got TERRIBLE scores on their SATs, and they never took the advanced courses so they could maintain a 4.0.. this ended up sending a whole bunch of academically deficient students to college with no questions asked. Half of them couldn't write a complete sentence, while the other half couldn't plot points on a graph. So to me it's not a question of minorities getting into college, it's more about rewarding those who are most deserving/try hardest. Personally, I'd rather have an affirmative action system than a veiled system that hurts all students academically.
It's just the latest flavor of the month to try to remedy the culture problems that exist in the home of the underrepresented minorities that keep them from making the test scores to get in on their own merits.
If it is hurting all students academically how does that explain that according to the president of UT that overall UT students are doing better than ever academically? I don't a horse in this race because I no longer live in Texas but am just curious about how its working out.
Probably because of three factors.. 1) grade inflaton (almost every year overall GPAs go up at universities) 2) even the "poor" top percent kids are still smart.. just not brilliant. 3) those students don't comprise a large portion of the UT student population . I'm saying it hurts them academically because they're not encouraged to challenge themselves in high school, it creates a "race to the bottom" in terms of course difficulty in order to maitain a higher GPA. I discussed this with my roommate, who also graduated in 2001, tonight. He had the same experience in high school.. most of the students in the top ten percent were not taking advanced courses and not trying to strengthen their academic weaknesses, be it math or english. By having the top ten percenters not have to 1) get a decent SAT score or 2) write an essay in order to get into college, you in essence discourage students from striving to better themselves in places where it matters most.
I guess you ignored the part where they said the students from the lower income schools are performing just as well as the other UT students. The problem with the Top Ten percent rule is that it has worked too well and guys like you are left to your old company lines like you just recited.
I support affirmative action more than the ten percent rule, but I view them as both nessecary evils to end the cultural divide in education.. however, I think it needs to be altered severely to be more fair to texas students. I'm not a republican supporting any party line, but I am a recent graduate from texas public education who has seen the effects of this law first hand.
I think that problem is solved at high schools that have a different grading scale for advanced/honors classes (5.0 for an A). A student that has a perfect 4.0 taking all regular classes would at best barely be in the top 10%.
We had that scale at my school, it was circumvented however by students loading up on AP courses in what they were good at, and taking remedial courses in the stuff they were bad at. I often ended up getting sub 4.0 grades in the AP classes I wasn't naturally good at (namely math), but I learned a lot more and was far more challenged than I would have been in some regular course where all you did was watch movies.. p.s. this scale solves the problems at higher ranked schools, but it does not help lesser schools much as the top ten percent GPA threshold may be around 3.5
I agree that the rule may cut out students who go to better schools may be unfairly rejected for admission but the point I was making is that the kids who the program was intended to help have proven that they are able to handle the course load. The success of these kids has proven that not all of the problems with inner city schools are at the homes. These kids perform as well as they need to be top students at their high schools. The problem is the schools' standards are too low. The cream always rises to the top.
It amazes me how the MERITfolx seem to think the 10 percent rule keeps them out Meanwhile. . . there are about 50% of students admitted to UT who are 1. not in the top ten AND are not as merit-worthy as a donnymost Do they scream about that???? nnnooooooo I mean their is a LARGE number of folx getting into UT who . . if u looked at those LEFT OUT . . .are not deserving but well . . DADDY donated a building or the ole. . . MY DADDY IS A TEX-EX [or in my case and OLE AG] but of course that is not unfair. . .at least until second generation Minorities start coming in then it is an issue. . . hhhmmm strangely enough [A&M] 1st non corp black folx came in mid to late 70s their kids are coming to college now and all of a sudden the second generation thing is sssoooooooo unfair now. . . . . Rocket River
Many people that are rejected from the school could handle the course load. That's a very weak measure of success of the program. In fact it proves nothing at all. It should be about letting in those who have earned the right to go there by meeting the admissions criteria.
LOL - love the "woe is me" self-pity speech. I challenge you to find one person on this board who is against affirmative action, yet supports legacy admissions.
But your initial post said the kids didn't belong and you were clearly wrong. That's my point. Yes there is still an argument that deserving kids are left out, but the kids who are getting in perform. Edit: The success of the program does prove one thing, there is a problem somewhere that is in the school system. If all the problems were cultural, obviously these kid wouldn't perform as well as their peers.
Did you just tell me that I was "clearly wrong"? Uh, no. My initial post said that they couldn't make the test scores to get into college. I was talking about the SAT and other admissions tests there, not some test once they get admitted. That is very clear in my post. You are clearly wrong.
99% of any person's education is acquired OUTSIDE of the classroom. Until under-represented minority groups address the poor cultural environments that currently affect them, then long-term sustainable change is not going to occur. The gap will remain. Affirmative action and the top 10% rule are band-aids on a massive head wound.
TJ raises a good point that outside influences need to be addressed but I think the fact that the students from poorer minority students do as well as those from more well off backgrounds show that given the opportunity even students from disadvantaged backgrounds can do as well. I was thinking about this situation and it occured to me that the ten percent rule is in some ways the reverse of the situation prior to affirmative action. Then minorities from poorer backgrounds had to be exceptional to be able to get into colleges like UT. Just being as good as whites wasn't good enough since whites had advantages for legacy and tradition. Where as now those students primarily from white and better off schools have to be much better than those from poorer minority students to make the top ten percent of their schools.
I think the schools are worse than the cultural problems at this point. There is no way "cultural" problems cause kids to not be able to pass the TAAs test. It's a joke how bad public schools are these days.
The problem is that the so called upper class people that get left out are at scohols that are notorious for grade inflation. They had an investigation of that report when it first aired (if I'm thinking of the same program). The two hispanic girls that got into UT under top 10% were the only girls from their school to goto UT. The two that they interviewed that were denied were from schools that had a combined 100+ kids go to UT. Plus there have been tons of studies that prove Top 10%-ers do better than non 10%-ers. The reason you see lower SAT scores on Top-10%-ers is because they know they're getting in anyways so why waste your time studying for an SAT that won't matter when you apply? If you want any information on the validity of Top 10% Rule in predicting college performance here's a website to check out: http://www.utexas.edu/student/admissions/research/ --Edit-- I should mention that those of you who say people stay away from advanced courses to get into top 10%: you have no idea what you're talking about. At most high schools the top 10% all have GPA's above 4.0. 99% of schools will give an extra grade point for AP classes (i.e. a 5.0 for an A instead of a 4.0). So the theory that kids will stay away from AP classes isn't really based in too much fact.
The 10% rule only applies to UT (or maybe public schools)? What is the big deal? There are plenty of other schools, such as Rice, that don't use the 10% rule. These private schools are the ones the "upper class" folks are aspiring for anyway. In my personal experience, I've rarely encountered anybody who comes from money that says UT was their first choice. 10% rule may not be perfect. So just modify it to weight AP classes heavier and include SAT/ACT scores. Problem solved. Minorities don't need handouts. Just make it an even playing field and that is what the 10% rule intends to do. If it isn't perfect on the 1st try, fix it. Don't throw it out. Save the intent of the rule and fix the details. The intentions are good.
