UT Tightens Admissions To Top 8 Percent (San Antonio, Arlington: public school, university, taxes)

[yehudi]

High school grades alone are not as good a predictor of college success as a combination of GRADES and TEST SCORES.

Proven fact.

Grades are a "somewhat" stronger measure of discipline and scores are a "somewhat" stronger measure of ability. A balanced metric using both scores has the highest R-Value with high college GPA.

[gpurcell]

Originally Posted by austinite45

I think what UT urgently needs is getting rid of its affirmative action policies, and admitting students based on standardized tests such as the SAT, plus extra-curricular activities.

Some schools in Texas are so bad that being in the top 5% means little more than a passing performance at more demanding schools.

SAT scores are worse predictors of success that class ranking or GPA--by a lot...the top 5 or 10 percent in every high school aren't all that different in intellectual capacity.

[gpurcell]

Originally Posted by yehudi

High school grades alone are not as good a predictor of college success as a combination of GRADES and TEST SCORES.

Proven fact.

Grades are a "somewhat" stronger measure of discipline and scores are a "somewhat" stronger measure of ability. A balanced metric using both scores has the highest R-Value with high college GPA.

Sorry, you're wrong. Big study by Bowen et al just released showed that class ranking and GPA are good predictors. SAT/ACT add little predictive value.

[Trainwreck20]

There are studies that show all sorts of stuff, and I am not sure I trust any one 'study' that shows whether grades or tests are better predictors. I will say that I believe that the benefit from tests scores is related more to the potential for exceptional students. That is not to say that all high score SATs result in exceptional students, but that the exceptional students often have high SATs (and may not be top 10%).

[centralaustinite]

Originally Posted by Trainwreck20

There are studies that show all sorts of stuff, and I am not sure I trust any one 'study' that shows whether grades or tests are better predictors. I will say that I believe that the benefit from tests scores is related more to the potential for exceptional students. That is not to say that all high score SATs result in exceptional students, but that the exceptional students often have high SATs (and may not be top 10%).

SAT can reveal which students have exceptional potential but that is not the same as being an exceptional student!

The system (and life) tends to reward hard workers who are high achievers. There are many kids who are either very bright or creative thinkers who are not motivated by standard high school fare, those are the ones left out by the top ten percent. But there are probably fewer of them than you think and UT is hardly the only educational outlet for them.

[sweetrai]

Originally Posted by centralaustinite

The best predictor of college grades is high school grades! There is a tremendous amount of research that demonstrates this. SAT/ACT are very poor predictors of college success.
.

Agreed, I believe most studies indicate that SAT/ACT scores are more directly related to socio-economic status. It is true the best predictor of the likelihood of student to succeed in college is the high school grades. Letters of recommendations and involvement in extra-curricular activities or work is also a good way to judge a student. Taking it even one level further, when I hire a graduate student to work with me, their grades on a standardized test (GRE in my case) is one of the last things I look at. Do I look at it? Yes, but I know that students can learn to just "study for the test". The GRE score/SAT score, etc just tells me they are good at taking timed tests. What really matters to me are their reccomendation letters and personal statement, followed by grades and GRE scores.

[sweetrai]

Originally Posted by contramundum

Well **** what happened to me then? I had a 3.5 cumulative in high school. Then I went to UW-Madison and barely maintained a 2.0. And no, it wasn't partying that did me in.

Sometimes it can be previous exposure to a topic and study habits. Did you search out help from the professors, teaching assistants, tutors? Sometimes, it is the teaching style of the professor is not the best match to a particular student learning style.

[contramundum]

Originally Posted by sweetrai

Sometimes it can be previous exposure to a topic and study habits. Did you search out help from the professors, teaching assistants, tutors? Sometimes, it is the teaching style of the professor is not the best match to a particular student learning style.

For sure. My major was history and that was pretty much just wrote memorization of information. You either study a lot and get an A or you don't study much and get a C.

I barely studied during high school. I figured that would carry over to college and I would still maintain my 3.5 gpa. I guess not, haha.

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by Trainwreck20

The 'Top 10' rule was not at all the idea of the university, it was an action on the part of the legislature. To be fair, the legislature was only reflected the vocal citizens, but it is a screwball rule. Anyway, as far as I can tell, parents did not like their kids getting rejected from admission to the favorite school based on a test that cannot be predicted ahead of time. Parents wanted a concrete requirement that could be tracked over time - it is pretty easy to tell if you will be in (or not be in) the top 10% from pretty early. The SAT or ACT can 'surprise' some parents late in the game, and there is also no automatic 'in' based on the results, either.

I think the 10% rule is actually pretty good. Im glad that kids from schools on the border etc get automatic admission. The purpose of the 10% rule was to get more minority enrollment. They may not be as good academically once they get here and the dropout rate may be higher, but at least they get the shot.

I think I may be a democrat now...

[Nomadic9460678748]

Who can really say whether it's test scores or high school performance which indicate a student's potential to succeed in a university environment? Studies will say whatever you want them to say. I doubt that a purely objective outcome as to such questions has ever really been obtained. I know of students who obtained soaring SAT scores but who were nevertheless overwhelmed by the entire university experience and thus unable to complete their degrees due to a variety of non-test score related implications (i.e. stress, financial strain, or a genuine inability to find interest in the university experience).

Nevertheless, UT Austin must find a way to become a more rigorously selective institution. It appears to be making some strides. Not too long ago the acceptance rate for UT was at 51%. That's absurd! You cannot purport to call yourself a "highly selective" institution of higher education with a 51% acceptance rate. If you believe what you read on the USNWR rankings (I'm no fan of them, but let's be honest, everyone, including the universities, makes note of what they say) then UT now has a 43% acceptance rate, which is a much needed improvement, but is still not where it should be if UT ever expects to break into the top 10 public universities in the country, not to mention the top 40 national universities. Again, I am loath to make note of them, but USNWR has consistently placed UT Austin 47th nationally. Respectable, but not nearly so impressive as people like William Powers would you believe it to be. We all know that USNWR's methodology veers in favor of private institutions, but even so, some 14 other public universities rank before UT Austin, one which was not even founded until the 1960s, but has still managed to overtake UT Austin.

I truly believe that one of the best remedies for this entire problem is to concentrate on improving other universities in the UT & A&M systems so as to permit the two "flagship" (hate that term) campuses to regain a more selective position. Just as students in California who do not gain admission to UC Berkeley are usually quite pleased to accept admittance to UCLA or UC San Diego in lieu of, Texas university students should have that type of quality option with respect to their other state schools. In other words, if a student doesn't get into UT Austin or A&M College Station, there should be a willingness on their part to take admission into a UT Arlington or A&M Kingsville, with the understanding that the quality of education will be on par with anything they would have received at a flagship. The reason this doesn't happen? Those other institutions have been left to the wayside. It's shameful really. It's a bad policy move. And it's bad for the Texas economy.

I wish the legislature would invest more time in these issues. Or perhaps the University should advocate more vehemently on behalf of its students? Too much political waddling and not enough robust performance on what many would agree is a very significant issue.