No problem simply let the test me made by educators from all walks of life IMO Why should everyone NOT have input on it That way no one can BAM about it BTW - What do you propose for poor school with inadequate funding? Is it just TOUGH NOOKIES for them. When I was in high school . . it was a big deal that Stephen F Austin did not have books for something like half a semester or a school year. A standardized test would not account for that These students are being penalized for sh*tty school management Some of them could not go else where. I know the solution is to get rid of the managers BUT for THOSE STUDENTS to just TAKE THE LOSS because of something beyond their control is unfair. Rocket River
Standardized tests are a joke. At my high school, despite the relative quality of the educational program we were in, most students weren't prepared for the SAT. The skills on that exam weren't skills we learned in class. Unlike some highschools, mine didn't offer SAT preparation courses. Like their private school counterparts the wealthy kids simply took the expensive Princeton Review/Kaplan test preparation classes for two years and yielded extermemely high scores. I, and many other poor kids like me, didn't score nearly as well as them. We weren't less talented than them. Just not as prepared. Of course, now after having attended a good college, I am prepared to take these tests. Having recently applied to graduate school, my GRE score is reflective of that added preparation. The only things different about my life is 1) I went to college and 2) I know longer live in poverty. What is misguided is the idea that a school whose curriculum is not rigorous (which includeds most poor and minority dominated schools) would yield students prepared to do well on these exams. The standarddized test merely reinforces what we already know about the poorer schools. In adequate funding, overcrowding, teacher (pay) motivation, and socio-econonmic stresses on students all play a role in creating a productive classroom environment. A standardized test doesn't address the issue of the problems of underpreparation.
RR, you went to Austin High? By U of H? Small world. That used to be considered a pretty good school, at least compared to schools like Milby. My sister used to be in the "Scottish Brigade". I bet they haven't had it for years. I don't know what the answer is to the problem. When I graduated from high school, you could get into UT based on SAT scores or class rank (or both). If your SAT scores were high enough, it really didn't matter what your class rank was. So students that were at a HS that didn't challenge them, and made poor grades out of "boredom", could still get into a school like UT. It's a b**** of a problem. Where do you draw the line? And the point about rural schools is a good one. I had an uncle who was the top student an East Texas high school. He still had to work his way through school. Went through college until he got his doctorate non-stop and had a perfect 4.0 the entire time. Is now a Dean at a major university. In Houston. So that shows it can be done. He didn't have any "rich family" to help him out. (he had my Dad, but that's another story)
I agree, and while we're at it, let's phase out lessened standards for athletes (dramatically lessened, far more than affirmative action). Do you honestly believe the various members of the Rice baseball team had comparable academic ability to the rest of the student body? Right, sure they do. Colleges and Universities exist for the vast majority of students who are there to learn, not for those who see it as something to do in between practice. If they can make the cut and they play ball, fine, but as long as we're on the way to true meritocracy, let's completely divorce athletic ability from the equation.
Read through the Rice baseball media guide. You will encounter some very impressive academic profiles of the players. Jeff Blackinton, a catcher for Rice who hit the ball that Tim Moss booted in the 9th inning of the Rice-UT game in Omaha, scored a 1570 on his SAT. Even the guys that came in from Juco's had impressive high school GPA's and achievements. I caution you, Sam, on using this argument. Many schools inflate their minority representation through these lowered academic standards for athletes. For instance, Rice's football team is far and away the biggest reason why Rice's black enrollment isn't abysmal. Careful what you wish for.
But don't you think a school the size of UT is going to have a formula of some kind to determine admissions anyway? Or are they going to take each and every application and judge it subjectively? They get something in the neighborhood of 20,000 freshman applications per year. Can they really subjectively evaluate all of them? As it is, they have subjectivity on 30% (they say, I've seen other stats that say 47%) of their applications. And I still maintain that UT wants to admit fewer students from high performing schools, that's one of the reasons they want to increase the number of students from underperforming schools. So it would seem that their desire in getting rid of the Top 10% rule would be to so they don't have to admit so many high achieving students from higher achieving schools.
The Catcher? I believe it takes at least nine guys to form a baseball team. Junior college? Please, I'm sure your rejected high school colleagues have resumes that put these lesser lights to shame. You and I both know that an associates degree is nothing to write home about when dealing with selective colleges like Rice. Oh, at certain D-1 schools it may have a disparate impact; as the high profile examples, like football and basketball players are chock full of miniorities. However the vast majority of college athletes are ones that you don't see on TV on saturdays and sundays (swimmers, divers, soccer players, hockey players, volleyball, lacrosse, gymnastics, field hockey, golf etc.) where minority representation is nowhere near as great as it is on the University of Miami football team. Look, if you want to have a true meritocracy for academic institutions based on academic merit, you have to leave athletics out of the equation. It has no more bearing on classroom performance than does race.
As much as I enjoy college football, I would support requiring student athletes adhere to the same standards of admission as any other student. If that kills college sports, than so be it.
Agree. I don't think it would kill it either, but you're going off on a tangent here. Many would disagree, I think. Well, maybe... maybe no.
Ah, It doesn't matter anyway. What UT wants, UT will get. They want an end to Top 10%, the Legislature will bend over backwards to give it to them. UT wants to operate as if they were a private school. The Legislature will allow them to do so as much as they can.
I think most schools take care of this by giving more Grade Points for hight level classes. When I went to Klein, a high A in an Honors class got me 6, whereas a high A in a regular's or phys ed class got me 4. There were tons of people in my school with GPA's around 5.
UT wants to operate as if they were a private school. The Legislature will allow them to do so as much as they can. Don't most public schools around the country control their own admissions policies? How exactly is not wanting Top-10% connected with private schools?
That's how they did it at my school, too, though we were on a 100 pt. scale. There is also the fact that schools do require so many classes that there isn't all that much opportunity to load up on easy electives and skew the GPA or class rank. My older son, who started high school this year, has to take English each year, has to have three years of Math, three years of Science, two years of foreign language, two years of physical education or athletics, three years of social studies. He has relatively few opportunities to take electives.
It's the rule of public schools in this state. It's not just Top 10%, it's wanting to set their own tuition, their stated lack of respect for other UT system schools, their lack of respect for their own regents, etc. that leads me to believe they wish to be more like a private school. And I would bet that UT wouldn't care if Texas Tech and A&M had to still live under Top 10%. They just don't want it to apply to them. They just can't make the arguments to allow them to be special. And I don't know that most public schools set their admissions criteria without interference from their Legislatures.
Why would UT care what Texas Tech and Texas A&M's policies are/were? Moreover, why should they? Their job is to ensure that they do what's best for UT, not all public universities in the state. You think Texas Tech or Texas A&M or Houston or Sul Ross or UTEP or would care if they got the rule lifted for them and not for Texas? They're all differnt universities, with different roles and functions. Hell, Texas Tech WISHES its admissions were constrained by the top 10% rule.
Since UT is the one fighting for all these issues, though, it just shows to me that they wish to operate without interference from the Legislature. They may couch it in what's best for students in the state, but it's all about them wanting to be able to flex their muscles and show their power. The Legislature limits their power, and they don't like that. Yeah, they probably shouldn't care about Tech, etc. to any great degree (though I kind of think they should start caring more about UTEP and UTA and UTSA and UTPA, etc), but their actions are nothing more than a power grab. They don't like that the State, some outside group, is exerting a significant level of control over them. So they're doing whatever they can to end that influence. Part of being a public school is having to deal with the public and public officials. UT would rather the public and public officials didn't deal with them at all.
I go to UT, and here are my beefs with the University: First off, the whole deregulation of the tuition has got me scared beyond belief because my father is not only paying for my tuition and for my sister's tuition and housing, but right now he is paying for my rent and bills because it has taken me 3 years to find a job here in Austin. I dont make enough money to fully support myself, and my job isnt good enough to make me the money to support myself even if I went full time and took night classes. Second is this whole top 10 rule. I think they should get rid of it quite honestly. UT's admission system works on some sort of grid where they weigh GPA and SAT/ACT scores versus a job, extra-curricular activites, community service, awards and achievements, sports, and now even race is becoming a factor. Based on my experiences and the people I have met at UT, those who were in the top 10 had all the other extras to go along with the grades... and even those who werent the greatest at school had the extras to compensate. But then there are those who have the status of top 10% and don't do anything with it because they know they're in anyway. Which makes it almost impossible for someone in the top 12% WITH better qualifications to get in because someone has already taken that place. And honestly, high school was a joke for me. I slept through classes, doodled, talked with friends, etc. I did EVERYTHING but apply myself and I got A's and B's easily. I got my admissions through the rule, and I would have made it in without the rule too. Now at UT, I am finally after three years learning HOW to study and apply myself, and my GPA shows that struggle. So what did the top 10% do for me? not a lot - maybe made me a cocky little freshman who thought she was too good to study and is now paying the price for it. But ultimately, I do agree that UT is becoming some ugly monster, and I dont really want to be around to see the effects.
They don't like that the State, some outside group, is exerting a significant level of control over them. So they're doing whatever they can to end that influence. The same can be said about virtually every public government entity in the country. Every organization wants to have more flexibility to function as it wants, whether its a city, state, university, the defense department, or whatever.
