CONTACT YOUR LEGISLATOR TODAY: Top 10% cap

L

LonghornGirlie

500+ Posts
SB 175, which proposes a reasonable cap on the percentage of the incoming class at State funded universities to Top 10% students is expected to be debated on the Senate floor TOMORROW, March 24th. A similar House measure, HB52 is currently in committee.
PLEASE CONTACT YOUR STATE SENATOR AND REPRESENTATIVE SUPPORTING THESE MEASURES.

Look Up My Representatives

You can then scroll down to find your STATE senator and STATE Representative.

Austin, 78703:
Email Kirk Watson
Email Elliott Naishtat

December 2008 Report: The Top 10% Law
and its impact on The University of Texas at Austin

Key Points:
Since the implementation of the Top 10% Law, there has been no significant change in the
percentage of UT students from school districts classified as “rural” or “non-metropolitan” by
the Texas Education Agency.

If current trends persist, in 2009 all Texas students enrolling in the fall will be Top 10%
graduates and some Top 10% students will be forced to enroll in the summer. By 2013, UT
will be forced to reject all graduates of Texas high schools who are not in the Top 10%.

While Top 10% students on average earn slightly higher grades at UT than non-Top 10%
students, the performance is not uniform throughout the Top 10%. Those students in the
6th through the 10th percentile of their high school graduating class earn on average a
grade point average equal to students in the 11th through the 20th percentile.

A HornFans user's story: A Texas Exes' daughter accepted at Vanderbilt, USC, Notre Dame, and Emory but rejected by UT-Austin
 
I emailed Kirk Watson and Mark Strama. Thank you for posting the links to accomplish this. Everyone should contact their state senator and state rep. Very worthy undertaking.
 
Wouldn't it be easier to get your kid to make top grades starting in the 9th grade? 4 years of high school grades should be a better indicator of how they will perform in college instead of an SAT score.

If you lower the top 10% rule down to the top 5%, you start replacing those who did well in high school with those who did better with an entrance exam. Where does it state that is more fair except to those with the better SAT scores?

the real problem is that the state of Texas needs more top level universities. UT-Austin cannot handle many more students so throw money at other schools. changing the top 10% is just addressing a symptom and not the real issue.
 
BA, the problem is that all schools are different. Read the other post. In some HS 3.8 GPA might get you in the top 10% but others you might need 4.5. This bill isn't sayig SAT will be the decider either but it gives you UT the ability to admit other students who may be just as qualified.
 
Done.

BA, I hear your point, and if top 10-percenters filled 50% of the slots I would agree with you. However this year they will 86% of the available slots and that number will increase next year. When 100% of slots are determined solely by HS GPA, you fail to take into consideration extra-curricular activities, SAT/ACT, essays, family eco-socio situation, and other factors that define who a person is. I like the idea of lowering the percentage to say 5% or guaranteeing top 10% admission to any public university, but requiring a second application that considers these other factors for UT/A&M. Anyone who gets in the top 10% of their class deserves automatic admission to a good public university, however that university shouldn't necessarily be one of the two flagships.
 
So rather than a top 10% rule, we will have the BCS computers decide who to offer?

The LHG computer may provide extra points for diversity. Another may give extra points for charitable work. Another may "adjust" GPA for the quality of the school so that more kids from good schools get in. My computer would give much less weight to class rank and lots of weight to SATs. (I would not hold bad grades against a 14 year old who is still being a kid and not serious yet.)

So if we get rid of the 10% rule, who will make the rules? Will we have a father posting on HFs that his daughter was in the top 6% and did not get in because she does not do well on standardized tests or worse yet assert that she did not get in because she is white and they let some black kid in with a lower class rank to provide diversity?

Is that better than complaining that kids who are lucky enough to go to really good schools are getting shafted because of tougher competition? If you have a choice of sending your kid to a really good HS and risk not getting into UT or sending them to an inner city school where they have a much better chance of finishing in the top 10, which would you choose?

For those against the 10% rule, do you favor an objective criteria or a subjective criteria?

If objective, what would be the formula?

If subjective, what would be your goal that would drive your choice? Kids who have the best chance to have a high GPA at UT? Kids who would be most likely to make the world a better place? Would racial, ethnic and geographic diversity be important?

How about a lottery for all those in the top 10% plus those in the top 20% with a 1350 SAT.
 
SD,

I would favor an objective percentage that would equal 50% of admittances, say top 5% this year, which would be adjusted annually so that no more than 50% of admittances were automatically admitted based on GPA. This would ensure diversity based solely on GPA so that it didn't matter if you came from a fancy neighborhood with great schools (HP, Alamo Heights, River Oaks), only that you were in that certain top percentage of your class. For the remaining 50% of admittances, I would consider an index where GPA and SAT accounted for a high percentage of the decision whether to admit that student. A number of other factors (extra curriculars, essay, socio-economic background, etc...) would provide admissions folks with some subjective criteria to ensure diversity as well as fairness to kids who did very well at schools with uber numbers of high achieving students (HP, Westlake, etc...). Diversity and meritocracy can be achieved while ensuring UT remains one of the top universities in the world. Sticking purely to a GPA based admissions process because you can't think of a better way of doing it doesn't reflect the brilliance that is UT.
 
SDHorn, capping the top 10% law would make UT admissions more like they were 15 and more years ago. It would make UT admissions more like peer universities. Right now, UT is unique in that it has no discretion on admissions. It's now a crisis because UT has no more room for the kids it is legally required to admit. UT is also not allowed to price tuition high enough to limit enrollment to a manageable level.

In short, the current system is not a sustainable system.
 
Nice, pithy remark, Bob. Got anything to back that up? Furthermore, have you go anything to show that the top 10% law has forced UT to change its evil ways evident in your little quip?I do.

The Top 10% has made no difference in racial or geographic diversity at UT. We are fast approaching a mark where UT has no discretionary admissions and the law is not generating the diversity that you seem to crave. Did you forget that the Top 10% was enacted as a response to the Hopwood decision which made it illegal for UT to consider race during the admissions process? Did you forget that Hopwood was white?

A Michigan ruling opened a crack in the door for UT to possibly start considering race again in its admissions process. It seems that UT would like to consider race, and there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that such consideration would be to the benefit of different, suburban white kids.
 
That probably was a little sharper than I intended. It is clear that UT ultimately will lose its ability to select as a result of top 10. They have been trying to reduce class size, and top 10 soon may conflict.

My point was that the composition of the class is not going to be larger if UT gains selectivity. People who think top 5 or top 3 is going to give their kid a better chance may well be disappointed.
 
Of course somebody is going to be disappointed. Another person is going to be ecstatic. That's the deal. For every person who will not get in to UT-Austin, someone else will.

Right now, 90% of high school seniors are automatically disappointed. Some percentage of them will be made happy by a change.

There isn't any way to make everyone happy. It is a question of what system best serves Texas students as a whole and the University.
 
I apologize for overstating. The Top 10% law has not impacted racial diversity as intended. Hispanic enrollment has increased from 3.7 to 4.8%. Black enrollment has increased from 14.2 to 18.1%.
The Link

The 2006 Princeton study indicates that the Top 10%
is not race-neutral and that was the primary source for my remark.

After a 6 hour marathon today with a variety of amendments which I've not had the chance to review, SB 175 passed 22-8.

In reply to:
Click to expand...
 
I think that's a great decision for the school. I know UT is struggling to find a way to limit enrollment, so it can compete better nationally.

Some may disagree, but I think the primary measurable change (and goal) will be a reduced class size. I foresee minority enrollment % staying consistent with where it is. Also, since 10% doesn’t guarantee you a spot at UT, perhaps admissions will factor in SAT scores – that helps UT national ratings too.
 
If I had more time at the moment, I'd look up the exact figures. However, since the top 10% rule was instituted, the number of students admitted into UT with SAT scores below 1000 has increased by somewhere around 500% (maybe a little more, don't remember exactly)...and they continue to increase each year. Just some food for thought...
 
I got my letter back from Mark Strama this weekend regarding my email to his office regarding the top 10 percent rule.

I think there simply needs to be some room to maneuver for The University of Texas to maintain some degree of control of their enrollment. I think racial, ethnic and religious diversity are all good things to have at a University of higher learning because of the differing viewpoints and backgrounds where diversity IMHO should be something that we embrace so we can LEARN from others who are different from ourselves. I hope that a more subjective admissions process might allow for greater diversity.

I have my own selfish concerns because of my own child. I think that class rank and SAT scores are very important. that's basically how I got in years ago. However, I think that oftentimes that the student who has performed well academically and ALSO is involved in a wide variety of non-academic interests brings perhaps ultimately more to the table.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict TEXAS-KENTUCKY *
Sat, Nov 23 • 2:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top