Indiana Daily Student 06/03/2009

WE SAY Let college admissions do its job.

At the end of May, Texas decided to cap the number of students its state universities were required to admit under an admissions guarantee that it had created to increase diversity.

We’ve all heard that United States’ K-12 education is worsening. The educational system needs to be reconstructed; however, in the meantime, states have been motivating students to take it upon themselves to improve their learning by providing incentives for doing well in school.

Some states are incentivizing college because college costs are rising and increased demand has caused an increase in the competitiveness for slots. But states differ in how to do this.

West Virginia, for instance, awards all its high school graduates who earn a 3.0 GPA or higher and a minimum SAT score of 1020 with free tuition at any state university.

Texas, however, has taken a different approach. For the last 10 years, it has awarded all state high schoolers who are in the top 10 percent of their class with guaranteed admission to any of its public universities, including the prestigious University of Texas at Austin.

There are bound to be drawbacks with any policy a state chooses, but Texas’ policy in particular is a cause for alarm. Although ethnic diversity has increased within these schools, this system has made the admissions committee virtually obsolete.

In fall 2008, 81 percent of incoming students of the University of Texas at Austin were admitted under the 10-percent rule, according to The New York Times. Projections estimate the entire Austin campus would comprise top-10 percent students by 2013.

Students who did well but were not in the top 10 percent at larger or more competitive high schools, maybe because they were involved with extracurricular activities or maybe because they had to work, are being squeezed out by this
policy.

There’s also the chance that putting this much emphasis on grades might encourage easier class schedules, instead of AP classes, lessen the importance of the SAT and create more homogeneous students.

There are X-factors to every applicant. Some, who aren’t A+ students in every subject, might be stellar in something else that is valued. The creation of an admissions committee proved that point – that treating each applicant individually is a better predictor of success than any standardized number.

Texas state legislators have essentially replaced the admissions committee, determining admittance for students without ever reviewing them. Again, although ethnic diversity has increased, as was intended, the quality of Texas’ most prestigious state universities is deteriorating at its expense. Texas’ reaction of capping a university’s required 10-percent admittance at three quarters of all incoming students still might not be enough.

It boils down to a personal question that all of us need to ask ourselves: How much are we willing to sacrifice to increase diversity?

Go Back

Wrangling in a wild policy

June 3, 2009 Editorial WE SAY Let college admissions do its job. At the end of May, Texas decided to cap the number of students its state universities were required to admit under an admissions guarantee that it had created to increase diversity. We’ve all heard that United States’ K-12 education is worsening. The educational system needs to be reconstructed; however, in the meantime, states have been motivating students to take it upon themselves to improve their learning by providing incentives for doing well in school. Some states are incentivizing college because college costs are rising and increased demand has caused an increase in the competitiveness for slots. But states differ in how to do this. West Virginia, for instance, awards all its high school graduates who earn a 3.0 GPA or higher and a minimum SAT score of 1020 with free tuition at any state university. Texas, however, has taken a different approach. For the last 10 years, it has awarded all state high schoolers who are in the top 10 percent of their class with guaranteed admission to any of its public universities, including the prestigious University of Texas at Austin. There are bound to be drawbacks with any policy a state chooses, but Texas’ policy in particular is a cause for alarm. Although ethnic diversity has increased within these schools, this system has made the admissions committee virtually obsolete. In fall 2008, 81 percent of incoming students of the University of Texas at Austin were admitted under the 10-percent rule, according to The New York Times. Projections estimate the entire Austin campus would comprise top-10 percent students by 2013. Students who did well but were not in the top 10 percent at larger or more competitive high schools, maybe because they were involved with extracurricular activities or maybe because they had to work, are being squeezed out by this policy. There’s also the chance that putting this much emphasis on grades might encourage easier class schedules, instead of AP classes, lessen the importance of the SAT and create more homogeneous students. There are X-factors to every applicant. Some, who aren’t A+ students in every subject, might be stellar in something else that is valued. The creation of an admissions committee proved that point – that treating each applicant individually is a better predictor of success than any standardized number. Texas state legislators have essentially replaced the admissions committee, determining admittance for students without ever reviewing them. Again, although ethnic diversity has increased, as was intended, the quality of Texas’ most prestigious state universities is deteriorating at its expense. Texas’ reaction of capping a university’s required 10-percent admittance at three quarters of all incoming students still might not be enough. It boils down to a personal question that all of us need to ask ourselves: How much are we willing to sacrifice to increase diversity?

Wrangling in a wild policy