Oogway said:
Do you have proof that it is 100% a "diversity decision"?
I'm not trolling, but I was considering that perhaps the increase in numbers of Top 10% qualifiers who are actually enrolling upon acceptance was beginning to affect the freshman classes. Remember that A&M has stats for applied, admitted and enrolled, and typically they project a certain # of those that are accepted to actually show up on campus and enroll. The growth in Texas not just in population, but in numbers of high schools (think charter schools) begins to affect that as well. Each time there is a new high school opening, that increases the pool unless I am doing the math wrong.
In other words, what you are saying may be partially true, but I am not convinced it is the only reason for the change in admittance qualifications.
Oogway said:
Back when there was a discussion (it might have been in the Politics forum) regarding the Top 10% rule, I was and still am in favor of it. I know some folks are not. While I agree with you that GPA and class rank should be computed using a uniform metric, there were folks that were arguing about schools graduating students who were not capable of matriculating at A&M* and therefore the Top 10% rule should be abolished. I have a problem with that.
A&M already draws a significant amount of its student body from urban areas and urban high schools, which does reflect the changing nature of the state itself. Students from small rural ISDs where the curriculum is solid but lacks access to the breadth and depth that a 6A high school can offer should not be denied the same opportunity to attend as a student from St. Marks or Highland Park. Otherwise, all of the tradition that A&M was built upon would be meaningless. However, with the Top 10% rule, there are students from all over the state and almost every county who apply, are accepted, and enroll at A&M. The mission of A&M as a state school is to give the taxpayers of the state higher educational opportunities to students who have ties to the communities from which they come and to which they will return, perhaps not always to live permanently, but to further the investment which the taxpayers have made in their education.
If you graduated from this university or any other state school in the US, then you have been a beneficiary of that investment as well (as was I). Granted, the student is asked to shoulder a lot more of that expense than in the past, so in some ways students from earlier years were subsidized at a higher rate by the taxpayers than as individuals.
As far as the process being more subjective, that will be true, but it may allow for some of the outstanding applicants who we have read about in other threads (who attended schools that didn't really rank, etc) to shine and be admitted.
*As far as students attending that should not be admitted, a lot of the examples people were listing were anecdotal. To really know, one would have to delve into the data. A&M, like many universities, has worked diligently toward increasing student retention. This is important most especially if a student comes from a school where the exposure to college level classes may have been minimal. Living Learning Communities, groups for first generation students, help desks, and mentors are some of the resources that universities have that simply did not exist when I attended college many many years ago. These aids cost time and money but so does a college education, and I believe that the University, former students and current students working together can continue the trajectory of A&M as an institution of excellence.
Quote:
"It is the intent of the legislature that all institutions of higher education pursue academic excellence by considering students' academic achievements in decisions related to admissions. Because of changing demographic trends, diversity, and population increases in the state, each general academic teaching institution shall also consider all of, any of, or a combination of the following socioeconomic indicators or factors in making first-time freshman admissions decisions:
Quote:
(8) the applicant's region of residence;
(9) whether the applicant is a resident of a rural or urban area or a resident of a central city or suburban area in the state;
The Board members are appointed by the Governor.Quote:
The mission of the THECB is to provide leadership and coordination for Texas higher education and to promote access, affordability, quality, success, and cost efficiency through *60x30TX, resulting in a globally competitive workforce that positions Texas as an international leader.
Quote:
60x30TX is entirely student-centered: its overarching goal is that 60 percent of young adults (25-34) in Texas will hold some type of postsecondary credential by 2030.
It also proposes that at least 550,000 students in that year will complete a certificate, associate, bachelor's, or master's from a Texas institution of higher education; graduates will have identifiable marketable skills regardless of major; and students (statewide) will not graduate with debt exceeding 60 percent of their first-year wages.
Oogway said:
As far as the process being more subjective, that will be true, but it may allow for some of the outstanding applicants who we have read about in other threads (who attended schools that didn't really rank, etc) to shine and be admitted.
UT is now at top 6% now. And they get significantly more out-of-state applicants and admits than A&M. They went to top 6% because they would have trouble having room to fill specialized slots (athletes, fine arts, etc.) if they stayed at anything higher.Jack Cheese said:Oogway said:
Do you have proof that it is 100% a "diversity decision"?
I'm not trolling, but I was considering that perhaps the increase in numbers of Top 10% qualifiers who are actually enrolling upon acceptance was beginning to affect the freshman classes. Remember that A&M has stats for applied, admitted and enrolled, and typically they project a certain # of those that are accepted to actually show up on campus and enroll. The growth in Texas not just in population, but in numbers of high schools (think charter schools) begins to affect that as well. Each time there is a new high school opening, that increases the pool unless I am doing the math wrong.
In other words, what you are saying may be partially true, but I am not convinced it is the only reason for the change in admittance qualifications.
UT dealt with this issue by changing from Top 10% to Top 8% (maybe 7 now). I don't know if they've dropped the academic admit altogether like A&M though. Regardless of motivation, this makes the decision process for the non-10% more subjective, not more objective.
The top 10% rule is already arbitrary due not only to differences in academic rigor and competitiveness between high schools, but also due to wide variation in how GPA and class rank are computed across the state's districts. Thats why making the process more subjective for the rest of the applicants is irksome.
But exceptional SAT/ACT scores are not a very good predictor of college success at all (I don't know what you mean by long term.) Repeated studies have shown this.Esteban du Plantier said:
Exceptional SAT/ACT scores are a better predictor of long term success than class rank.
My high school was very competitive, but I had a very high ACT score. Not sure I would have gotten into TAMU based on class rank alone.
lost my dog said:But exceptional SAT/ACT scores are not a very good predictor of college success at all (I don't know what you mean by long term.) Repeated studies have shown this.Esteban du Plantier said:
Exceptional SAT/ACT scores are a better predictor of long term success than class rank.
My high school was very competitive, but I had a very high ACT score. Not sure I would have gotten into TAMU based on class rank alone.
there are exceptions to every rule. but, by and large, this is not the case for small schools around the state.histag10 said:
So i have never been for the top 10% for the exact opposite reason people in here seem to be for it. I was from a small rural school. 1 person was in our top 10%. One. Person. It was an extremely competitive school (still is), and i was not that one student. I was, however, auto admitted based on test scores, and watched many a top 10% classmates from large high schools fail out freshman year.
There's is so much wrong in this statement. If you're a review admit candidate, earliest you will hear anything is in December before the winter break.DukeMu said:
A&M has rolling admissions and a 70% acceptance rate. If you want to get into A*M, Apply EARLY. Like NOW...Especially in engineering.
Jack Cheese said:Oogway said:
As far as the process being more subjective, that will be true, but it may allow for some of the outstanding applicants who we have read about in other threads (who attended schools that didn't really rank, etc) to shine and be admitted.
And just as likely (actually much MORE likely now than before) that a well qualified student with an excellent SAT / ACT and reasonably high class rank in a competitive school will be left out.
Let's just say that someone I know quite well has a 1360 SAT, 31 ACT and is 12% in her class of 900+ students. She has literally never made a B, has taken AP classes in every subject except math (where she is K-level, so same GPA impact as AP), and her rank is below 10% solely because she is choosing 4 years of theater and 4 years of orchestra (3 of those in chamber level). Some districts don't penalize students for fine arts, ours does.
She's on the outside looking in. Do you think we feel better knowing that the admissions department may or may not like her subjective qualities more than her objective scores?
Honestly, I'm over it. She's our youngest. Her older brother went through the admissions mill with solid qualifications and ended up elsewhere after being offered PSA. I'm glad he did. I don't care one bit if she goes to A&M, and that's coming from someone whose dad, brother, and wife are all Aggies.
I'm honestly curious - what do you mean by mismatched?NewOldAg said:
The problem isn't that the top XX% rule is a completely terrible thing it's just that it's pretty obvious that 10% is too broad. It has been the case for a long time that the Business & Engineering schools fill up on those kids and a ton of them wash out to other less competitive majors or out of the university all together. Those kids are obviously mismatched to Texas A&M and we aren't doing them any favors by admitting them. There's nothing wrong with those kids going to UTD or UTA and getting a good education there. Texas seems to have figured out that you can still give everyone some opportunity by floating that number higher while also reducing the mismatch problem.
Prexys Moon said:
Wow. One more admission class gets academic admit (top 25% and 1360) and then after that it's just top 10 percent and review.
Top 25% and a good SAT score vs taking easy courses and getting top 10%...ridiculousQuote:
https://admissions.tamu.edu/freshman/admitted
TriAg2010 said:Jack Cheese said:Oogway said:
As far as the process being more subjective, that will be true, but it may allow for some of the outstanding applicants who we have read about in other threads (who attended schools that didn't really rank, etc) to shine and be admitted.
And just as likely (actually much MORE likely now than before) that a well qualified student with an excellent SAT / ACT and reasonably high class rank in a competitive school will be left out.
Let's just say that someone I know quite well has a 1360 SAT, 31 ACT and is 12% in her class of 900+ students. She has literally never made a B, has taken AP classes in every subject except math (where she is K-level, so same GPA impact as AP), and her rank is below 10% solely because she is choosing 4 years of theater and 4 years of orchestra (3 of those in chamber level). Some districts don't penalize students for fine arts, ours does.
She's on the outside looking in. Do you think we feel better knowing that the admissions department may or may not like her subjective qualities more than her objective scores?
Honestly, I'm over it. She's our youngest. Her older brother went through the admissions mill with solid qualifications and ended up elsewhere after being offered PSA. I'm glad he did. I don't care one bit if she goes to A&M, and that's coming from someone whose dad, brother, and wife are all Aggies.
I think it's a disservice to yourself and your daughter if you think that some door is forever closed just because her admission would not be *automatic*. Let's say she is rejected as a review admit. With her credentials, she should be an easy junior college transfer. Life isn't always a straight line and the rules won't always be crafted in your favor.
DukeMu said:
A&M has rolling admissions and a 70% acceptance rate. If you want to get into A*M, Apply EARLY. Like NOW...Especially in engineering.
Where are you getting your *real* stats?Jack Cheese said:DukeMu said:
A&M has rolling admissions and a 70% acceptance rate. If you want to get into A*M, Apply EARLY. Like NOW...Especially in engineering.
Where do people get this? I keep seeing the 70 percent acceptance figure thrown around. Here are the *real* stats as posted from another thread.
49,700 total apps
13,100 top 10 percent
5400 academic admit
2350 full admits, review
3000 other pathways- blinn, gateway, psa
Prexys Moon said:
Went to admissions seminar last week in Longview. Derek Nido is the East Tx representative and it was a great presentation, very informative. Thoughts- (some of this is basic stuff that some of you may know).
1. It is worth it to go to these presentations. Takes the myths out of it. They are all over the state, all summer long.
2. The class applying for Fall 2020, this is the last year for academic admit.(top 25%, 1360 SAT) Reason is to free up more spots for review admit.
Stats for 2019 admits-
49,700 total apps
13,100 top 10 percent
5400 academic admit
2350 full admits, review
3000 other pathways- blinn, gateway, psa
He anticipates it being the same for 2020.
Dark_Knight said:
Honestly dont see the issue with top 10%. I'd rather have fewer people auto admitted and more people actually looked at.
Oogway said:
Back when there was a discussion (it might have been in the Politics forum) regarding the Top 10% rule, I was and still am in favor of it. I know some folks are not. While I agree with you that GPA and class rank should be computed using a uniform metric, there were folks that were arguing about schools graduating students who were not capable of matriculating at A&M* and therefore the Top 10% rule should be abolished. I have a problem with that.
A&M already draws a significant amount of its student body from urban areas and urban high schools, which does reflect the changing nature of the state itself. Students from small rural ISDs where the curriculum is solid but lacks access to the breadth and depth that a 6A high school can offer should not be denied the same opportunity to attend as a student from St. Marks or Highland Park. Otherwise, all of the tradition that A&M was built upon would be meaningless. However, with the Top 10% rule, there are students from all over the state and almost every county who apply, are accepted, and enroll at A&M. The mission of A&M as a state school is to give the taxpayers of the state higher educational opportunities to students who have ties to the communities from which they come and to which they will return, perhaps not always to live permanently, but to further the investment which the taxpayers have made in their education.
If you graduated from this university or any other state school in the US, then you have been a beneficiary of that investment as well (as was I). Granted, the student is asked to shoulder a lot more of that expense than in the past, so in some ways students from earlier years were subsidized at a higher rate by the taxpayers than as individuals.
As far as the process being more subjective, that will be true, but it may allow for some of the outstanding applicants who we have read about in other threads (who attended schools that didn't really rank, etc) to shine and be admitted.
*As far as students attending that should not be admitted, a lot of the examples people were listing were anecdotal. To really know, one would have to delve into the data. A&M, like many universities, has worked diligently toward increasing student retention. This is important most especially if a student comes from a school where the exposure to college level classes may have been minimal. Living Learning Communities, groups for first generation students, help desks, and mentors are some of the resources that universities have that simply did not exist when I attended college many many years ago. These aids cost time and money but so does a college education, and I believe that the University, former students and current students working together can continue the trajectory of A&M as an institution of excellence.