Texas School System

I went to private high school, but my sister is in public high school in Houston. She told me in her French class, the only thing they do is watch movies....in Spanish. Her teacher says its close enough, but if anyone walks in, tell them its a Spanish class.

 

Complain all you want about the Top 10 Percent Rule. The studies have shown that students admitted under this rule do FAR better than students admitted who weren't in the top ten percent. The program has also led to not only increased ethnic diversity but increased geographic diversity. Prior to the rule, only a very few number of schools supplied the VAST majority of students at UT, a state college.

Everyone thinks their school is harder than it is. If you can't finish in the top ten percent of high school you're either not smart enough, you're not trying hard enough or your school has rampant grade inflation.

Reading the grammar in your post I'm not surprised you have a problem with the Top Ten Percent rule, though it does explain your frustrations with the education system.

 

Is this 10% rule that ONLY students who are in the top 10% of their high school class get in, or that all students in the top 10% automatically get in?

The former sounds like a bad idea, but the latter seems to be a good idea for the reasons of increased diversity mentioned by halfbreed.

 

I think the most telling part is that a state the size of Texas has only 2 Tier-1 universities, Texas and Texas A&M. Meanwhile, compare that with California where there's Berkeley, UCLA, UCSB, UC-Irvine, and UCSD.

Having gone to UT twice I can attest to the number of dumbasses on campus. At least the College of Engineering and Graduate School of Business both had selective admissions standards, so I didn't get to see a lot of it up close. But I remember taking Philosophy 304 (Contemp. Moral Problems) as a FA elective and couldn't believe the kind of comments I heard during our discussion sections. It seems like the College of Liberal Arts is a dumping grounds for those admitted via the top-10% rule.

 

Idiots exist on every public campus I've been too. I am embarrassed by the people that make it into my alma mater.

 

Wow, what a jerky response.

I'd love to see this data supporting the asinine 10% rule.

Of course on the average a 10 percenter would do better than a none 10 percenter, but that's just conveniently ignoring all the qualified kids who get passed over for this basically cockeyed version of affirmative action.

 

Yep, they are everywhere....

 

You forgot several actually. There's also UC - Davis, UC - Riverside, and UC-Santa Cruz. In addition UC - San Francisco is Tier 1 for med school. Comparing that to Texas and it shocking that with all the money in the school system that there are only the two Tier 1 schools.

 

When you complain about idiots on campus and then throw out a mangled post it's kind of an obvious response.

The comparison has to be Affirmative Action vs. Top Ten Percent Rule because that's why the rule came into effect. The old method had to be replaced and they were only going to consider methods that did something for diversity, right or wrong. I'm not a proponent of affirmative action as I'm sure you know so I feel that the current rule is a huge improvement over the past. It rewards success in school.

While I was an undergrad I had to do a lot of papers on the top ten percent rule and the data is out there in terms of success of top 10 percenters vs. non top ten percenters at UT. I'm in class now so I can't get it for you but when I get some time I'll find you some studies done by UT after the program's implementation. You might think there's a reason for UT to fudge the numbers but it's data, nonetheless.

Students admitted under the rule graduate more often and graduate faster than students not admitted under the rule. Now if you want to change the rule to be more of a top 5 percent rule, then that's one way to go as it frees up a lot of space for non top 10 percenters. The problem is you'll go back to having UT overrepresented by the same schools.


EDIT: I'm not sure the addition of tier 1 schools will help. A&M doesn't have the same problem with the top ten percent rule as UT has had in the past. This may have changed recently but, historically, it's seemed that it's only a problem for UT. Adding another school isn't likely to alleviate those problems.

 

demographic breakdown during affirmative action days and top 10% days please.

 

If you are in the top, let's say, 15% of a good school as you said, would you not be able to qualify thru other means, such as high SAT score? If you can't, does it not mean you shouldn't be admitted anyhow?

Of course , there are others in the top 10% of an inferior school who should not be there either but are you arguing that you are just as unqualified as they are, and you should be allowed in as well?

 

I don't have number but I would assume this is true. i'd be willing to be that kids from poor rural schools benefit from the rule as well

 

i've tried looking for it but haven't found good data pre-top 10%.

here is the info since.

 

You can get in. I was like top 12% or something from a good high school and had a relatively good SAT and I got a scholarship from UT.

 

The main concerns with the top 10% rule is that they admit you to the public university of your choice in Texas - so the vast majority of kids pick UT or A&M. So those schools, due to their enrollment limits, have much less flexibility in picking the remaining candidates. People that might have gotten in otherwise won't because an increasing number of their slots are filled by automatic 10% qualifiers.

I think the top 10% rule would work much better if you had to list up 5 schools or something that like, and you were simply guaranteed admission into at least one of them.

 

Right, forgot about those too. Texas needs to get one of the other schools like UH, Tech, or UTSA up to speed.

 

I'm looking for my old data. I got most of it through interviews with legislators in favor of and opposed to the program during a panel on the issue. I'm trying to find where I saved it but having trouble because it's been around 5 years.

I know this isn't hard data but I can tell you from memory that schools in Dallas and Austin accounted for huge portions of the enrollment pre-top ten percent rule.

 

Alright I have a 2001 study (remember I wrote this in 2003) so I'm looking for updated information regarding feeder schools. Here's a paper published online regarding the feeder schools complete with a list at the bottom of students per school for schools sending students to UT for the first time after the rule's implementation:

http://www.utexas.edu/student/admissions/research/montejanopaper.html

For information regarding the performance of students admitted as top ten percent students and those admitted as non-top ten percent students, UT does a yearly progress report. The latest report is through 2008 and is in two parts (warning: PDF links):

Part I: http://www.utexas.edu/student/admissions/research/HB588-Report11.pdf

Part II: http://www.utexas.edu/student/admissions/research/HB588-Report11-part2.pdf




As you can see from the report, despite having similar SAT scores, students admitted under the top ten percent rule have a much higher GPA on average than similarly situated students who didn't graduate in the top ten percent of their high school class.

 

And until Reagan came into office, I believe that they were all free for CA residents