FISHER v. UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN ET AL.
 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/24/us...exas.html?_r=0

"WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a challenge to a race-conscious admissions program at the University of Texas at Austin, handing supporters of affirmative action a major victory.

The decision, Fisher v. University of Texas, No. 14-981, concerned an unusual program and contained a warning to other universities that not all affirmative action programs will pass constitutional muster. But the ruling’s basic message was that admissions officials may continue to consider race as one factor among many in ensuring a diverse student body.

The decision, by a 4-to-3 vote, was unexpected. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, the author of the majority opinion, has long been skeptical of race-sensitive programs and had never before voted to uphold an affirmative action plan. He dissented in the last major affirmative action case.

Supporters of affirmative action hailed the decision as a landmark.

“No decision since Brown v. Board of Education has been as important as Fisher will prove to be in the long history of racial inclusion and educational diversity,” said Laurence H. Tribe, a law professor at Harvard, referring to the Supreme Court’s 1954 decision striking down segregated public schools.

Roger Clegg, the president of the Center for Equal Opportunity, which supports colorblind policies, said the decision, though disappointing, was only a temporary setback.

“The court’s decision leaves plenty of room for future challenges to racial preference policies at other schools,” he said. “The struggle goes on.”

President Obama hailed the decision. “I’m pleased that the Supreme Court upheld the basic notion that diversity is an important value in our society,” he told reporters at the White House. “We are not a country that guarantees equal outcomes, but we do strive to provide an equal shot to everybody.” "

pdf http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions...4-981_4g15.pdf


"The University of Texas at Austin (University) uses an undergraduate
admissions system containing two components. First, as required by
the State’s Top Ten Percent Law, it offers admission to any students
who graduate from a Texas high school in the top 10% of their class.
It then fills the remainder of its incoming freshman class, some 25%,
by combining an applicant’s “Academic Index”—the student’s SAT
score and high school academic performance—with the applicant’s
“Personal Achievement Index,” a holistic review containing numerous
factors, including race. The University adopted its current admissions
process in 2004, after a year-long-study of its admissions process—undertaken
in the wake of Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U. S. 306,
and Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U. S. 244—led it to conclude that its prior
race-neutral system did not reach its goal of providing the educational
benefits of diversity to its undergraduate students.
Petitioner Abigail Fisher, who was not in the top 10% of her high
school class, was denied admission to the University’s 2008 freshman
class"

Thoughts?

What I hear as a concern from educators there: this policy is sending unprepared people of all races to UT.

That's because it's a K-12 problem. ALL colleges and universities in Texas pull from the same body of potential students coming out of Texas public high schools.

IMHO the issues stems from the TEA, Texas Education Agency, that sets the academic standards for K-12 public schools. And, the disconnect that TEA has with the THECB, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, that sets the academic standards for public colleges and universities.

Over the years the TEA has lowered the passing score for the state mandated tests. Over the years the state mandated tests has gone by many names - TAKS, TEAMS, TAAS, and now I think it is called STAAR.

Over my years of working in higher ed. we were told we couldn't tell K-12 what to do to best prepare those students for college and university.

And, with NCLB, it has made it harder for K-12 public schools to retain students. So now, K-12 public schools basically have to promote everyone to ensure they will graduate from high school.


As for Ms. Fisher, if she really wanted to get into UT-Austin as a top 10% student, she should have "gamed the system" by transferring to a "lower performing" school for her senior year of high school. It is not unheard of......

Well, not only that but let's say you have 30% of some high school in say, Plano, with a deserved GPA of over a 4.0. All could easily excel at Texas or A&M. Then you have some tiny high school out in the sticks somewhere whose--maybe--top 2 kids can do it but the rest will flame out spectacularly in their first semester (not that the Plano kids won't but it won't be due to academic unpreparedness, most likely). I have taught at both kinds of high schools and can picture it so easily.

Texas is shooting itself in the foot two ways. First, with the above scenario. Second, because a lot of these kids want a 4-year big U experience so Texas is losing these kids to other big Southern schools and sometimes they don't return to Texas. I have been openmouthed at the numbers of Texas women on the new member lists at Arkansas, OSU, OU, Mississippi State, Ole Miss, Auburn, and Bama. Also, a lot of those schools offer fabulous scholarships to the scorned Texans. After all--a lot of the scorned Texans only have a 3.95!

Carnation, I see that a lot with UGA. I've seen many high GPA kids (3.8 on a 4.0 scale) with volunteer hours, athletics, extracurriculars, etc get rejected. But Alabama courts these OOS kids with partial or full scholarships. A friend's son is taking advantage of that now. If you live in the Atlanta area, it's very hard to get in UGA because they don't want it to be just a bunch of ATL kids attending and that makes sense & many brainiacs are staying in state due to the HOPE grant.

This would happen anyway, without the top 10% rule. I saw this happening in my own freshman class in 1987.

The top 10% rule is a way to level the playing field since race could no longer be considered a strong admissions factor. And, just because you can get into any school for any reason, that does not mean you will graduate in four years.

I don't think Texas is shooting itself in the foot for the reason I stated above. If there is anything shooting Texas in the foot, it is the cost of living in Austin which has skyrocketed over the last 10 - 15 years.

And for the NPC orgs at Texas, that is a very small issue. Considering the thousands of students who go there, only a few are interested in joining NPC orgs at Texas. Since we all know ;) it is real hard to get into a NPC sorority at Texas, especially the coveted Big 6, then that is probably the reason so many Texas girls go to other big southern schools.

But, I get it. Go to Texas, join a Big 6 chapter, marry well, preferably a man from a well established native Texas family, and become the hottest Dallas socialite. :D

I'm not sure these girls would have necessarily gone Greek at Texas. They might have joined one of the coveted spirit organizations, for instance. And Austin has a lot to do!

The ones I've talked to have left the state for the big U experience. At a lot of these OOS schools, going Greek is a big deal because they're located in small towns waayy away from tons to do. CoughcoughStarkvilleMS, although I hear it's gotten better.

So the girls who wanted to become Dallas socialites may end up in Birmingham, Baton Rouge, or Atlanta but hey, we all make choices and pray for the best.

True
Austin has always had a lot to do. It's just now, for some reason, Austin has become *the* place to live in Texas. UT System can't control the cost of living in Austin.

This is all well and good, but it really has nothing to do with the Fisher case, unless she wanted to join a NPC or spirit org at Texas.

Some did but decided to make lemonade from their lemons.

I'm a born-and-bred Texan but moved out to the Southeast meany moons ago. Of course, I'm thrilled about the influx of Texans and so are the NPC chapters! :D The only people I've known who are upset about it: some girls and moms who've been bemoaning how high the influx of Texans with killer grades and SATs has raised the bar for not only PNMs but for girls who are trying out for coveted honor society spots and say, drill team positions.

As for Ms. Fisher, if she really wanted to get into UT-Austin as a top 10% student, she should have "gamed the system" by transferring to a "lower performing" school for her senior year of high school. It is not unheard of......[/QUOTE]

BINGO. Several students at strong high schools did just that - my kids graduated from JJ Pearce in the Richardson ISD back in the day and were not in the top 10% - but had several AP classes and scored in the 1250 range under the old SAT. High ACT scores as well and were admitted to EVERY other school they applied to. My Son graduated magna cum laude in finance and economics, has two Masters and is the CFO of a company here in Florida.

They couldn't get better than wait listed at UT which was fine since they were never interested in UT. But the State came up with the top 10% rule to solve the affirmative action predicament. What I am saying is that high schools in the Dallas ISD had kids in the top 10% who barely made 1000 on their SAT and who spent their freshman year in all remedials at UT yet just scraped by.

Kids from Plano and Richardson had high scores, grades, etc. and had to do summer school to get into UT. Many chose not to and went to places like Indiana U., a very good academic school, and were able to graduate just fine. Some kids in our neighborhood transferred to Hillcrest High School so they could get better class rankings, using their grandparents' address to get into the DISD.

UT has freshman retention problems because of the 10% admission rule. Nonetheless, Ms. Fisher has graduated from LSU law and I am sure she's doing very well.

From what I know of the top public schools in Texas, her alma mater was not one. So, it doesn't seem as if there were 10 valedictorians or that the top 10% was filled with kids who were extraordinary.

The long and short of it is that Abigail Fisher was a mediocre (at best) student who thought she was entitled to attend her flagship university. An 1180 SAT? I'm pretty sure I did better than that when we were invited to take the SAT in 7th or 8th grade. UT-Austin is simply entering the league of UVa, Michigan, UNC, UCLA, and Berkeley where just being a "good in-state student" isn't enough. I'm seeing it to some extent at Florida too, as kids who would have been shoo-ins back in the 90s are being denied, as Bright Futures (the lottery scholarship) is keeping the top kids who may have gone OOS right at home.

FWIW, Abigail Fisher did not go to LSU Law--she only got her undergrad from there and is now, interestingly enough, working in Austin.

Well, there's more to it than that; unprepared freshmen are coming to UT and flaming out spectacularly. That's why there are those programs that offer an easier transfer admission to sophomores on up.

I'm late, but I agree with all of this.

I agree - Austin is getting too expensive which will drive some of its current residents out, but everyday I see more and more out of state license plates so they will just be replaced (sadly IMO). My home value has gone up a substantial amount (well for me) which is great but the taxes are also going up and this will force me to sell my house in a couple of years.

And to the comment above about her poor SAT score-I performed very poorly on the SAT but I was a very good student. I feel the SAT has no prediction on how a student will do in college. I went to college with merit scholarship recipients that had very high SAT scores and they barely made it through undergrad. Not that they were not smart, quite the opposite, but they did not know how to study. I finished my undergrad requirements in three years and was accepted to vet. school early. I feel the same about the ACT for grad school. Again, I did not have a great GRE score but my undergrad grades were very good. During my vet school interview the poor score was mentioned and I had to explain that I was not very good with that type of testing. I did very well in vet school despite the poor GRE score.

I actually think that the Texas girls who wanted to become socialites stay in-state and attend the private schools like TCU, SMU, Baylor, etc. IME I've found the girls who go OOS to big SEC schools to be more open to broadening their horizons, though I do know of a few who pledged a sorority in big SEC school only to try and transfer back to UT-Austin.

About the Abigail Fisher thing - the CAP program exists because UT-Austin officials are well aware that many auto-admits will crash and burn their Freshman year. You spend a year at another college in the UT system (excluding UT-Dallas I believe) and as long as your GPA is above a 2.5 or 3.0, you are automatically admitted into UT-Austin.

IMO, everything sort of balances out in the end. My older brother has friends who didn't have the "grades" to get into UT-Austin and ended up going to TCU, Tulane, Austin College, OU, etc., made good grades, and are currently attending UT Law and Baylor Medical School.

UT-Austin's actually moved away from the top 10% rule and only auto-admits the top 8%, leaving more room for "qualified" applicants. A&M uses the top 10% rule as well, but it has an additional auto-admit in which if you are top 25% and have at least an SAT of 1300 or ACT of 30, it's automatic acceptance.

[QUOTE=Munchkin03;2413698]
The long and short of it is that Abigail Fisher was a mediocre (at best) student who thought she was entitled to attend her flagship university. An 1180 SAT? I'm pretty sure I did better than that when we were invited to take the SAT in 7th or 8th grade. UT-Austin is simply entering the league of UVa, Michigan, UNC, UCLA, and Berkeley where just being a "good in-state student" isn't enough. I'm seeing it to some extent at Florida too, as kids who would have been shoo-ins back in the 90s are being denied, as Bright Futures (the lottery scholarship) is keeping the top kids who may have gone OOS right at home.
QUOTE]

This is pretty much the issue. It's similar to what the Court found in a case at Michigan--which does not have a percentage plan. The plaintiff's scores just weren't good enough to get in. She wasn't a bad student, but compared to the other students who applied the year she did, she was not as qualified based on grades, strength of classes, test scores, extra curriculars, etc. She said her life was ruined and that she couldn't become a doctor because she didn't get into UM. Really? I'm pretty sure there are a lot of doctors out there who went to schools that aren't as highly ranked as Michigan.

My cousin lives in New Mexico and he got into UT with grades that probably would not have gotten him in if he lived in Texas. I think Texas's plan is probably a good idea with bad execution.

That's pretty typical of most colleges--even at my undergrad, plenty of people who had been denied as freshmen transferred in as sophomores. There were also people who couldn't hack it and didn't come back for sophomore year.

So, if that option was available to Abigail Fisher, why didn't she take it?

Exactly.

Ive wondered that myself since I know a few people that ended up transferring to Austin after completing their freshman year at one of the other UT system schools. Anyway, good luck to her...

I totally agree, but my hunch is that the 1st year experience at any of the UT satellite schools is WAY different than it is at the flagship. Doesn't mean she shouldn't have taken it (if it was offered to her), but I'm guessing that's where her 18 yo mind went. The rest of the schools in the system are more commuter-type than UT Austin.

I've been told that people want the full 4-year flagship experience and that's why they leave the state. Plus women from very Greek families know that many schools are far less likely to take sophomores so they don't want to transfer in. Hey, there's no way you can compare, say, a U of H freshman experience to one at UT.

The 10% thing doesn't say "you're guaranteed admission and placement at UT or A&M" -- it says you're guaranteed admission to a public school and placement as space allows. If they provide an in for you that's not necessarily the "traditional flagship route" (read: CAP program) and you decide not to take it, that's on you.

3 years at a flagship > no years at a flagship

This makes sense, and explains why Greek life is booming at schools where it was previously lukewarm.

I don't get the feeling that Abigail Fisher went Greek at LSU, though. From what we know of her grades and extracurriculars, an SEC-style Rush would have chewed her up and spat her out. Would she have sued if she hadn't gotten in?

Probably not, as she is homely.

Sen's Revenge! Shame on you! SEC sororities have women of all facial persuasions!

Think about it!

Her grades were mediocre at best.

I suspect she has a terrible personality as well. I mean, she sued a school because she's a racist.

...and she is NOT CUTE.

She's got to have at least two of those three to succeed at SEC rush. :p

In all my years of GreekChat....

I have NEVER seen an SEC sorority woman -- or ANY sorority woman, for that matter -- who looked like Abby.

I have seen overweight sorority women.

I have seen sorority women of all colors.

I have seen Lesbian sorority women - even masculine of center sorority women.

But I have never, ever, ever seen a sorority woman on these pages who looked like this:

http://ww2.hdnux.com/photos/31/32/62.../3/920x920.jpg

If that makes me wrong, I don't want to be right.

Did you have to post such a large image?

It's extremely petty to not only belabor the point about her physical appearance, but also to pick the most unattractive picture of her possible. She has never indicated that she wished to join a sorority, and it's obvious that she has other priorities in life. We can discuss the case without resorting to ad hominem attacks, mkay?

As to Abigail's merits, I don't think "Fisher had a grade point average of 3.59 (adjusted to a 4.0 scale) and was in the top 12% of her class at Stephen F. Austin High School. She scored 1180 on her SAT (measured on the old 1600-point scale, because UT Austin did not consider the writing section in its undergraduate admissions decision for the 2008 incoming freshman class). The 25th and 75th percentiles of the incoming class at UT-Austin were 1120 and 1370" count as "mediocre" at all! If being in the top 12% of your school makes you mediocre, then many of us here would probably be considered retarded.

I also fail to see how getting rid of race considerations in regards to admissions makes her a racist. I do not agree with them either, and I am a member of the minority myself. I think that this issue will be one that - like politics and religion - people really won't budge on their opinions no matter how well-reasoned the opposing side would be.

Background information
 

This documentary was on last month. It aired about 1-2 weeks before the US Supreme Court handed down their decision.

It gives a really nice overview / history of the admissions policies of UT Austin over the last several decades with respect to race. The program is an hour long.

http://www.klru.org/blog/2013/06/adm...al-now-online/


And no, this documentary does not address NPC recruitment and how the Top 10 rule has had an impact on NPC recruitment. Sorry, carnation.

It's the unprepared freshmen I'm most concerned about!

Yup, I sure did.

Yep, petty and spiteful. That's me! You are free to ignore/block my posts.

This is a conversation we have been having in my organizations. Maybe not "unprepared" in the sense that you may be thinking (or maybe you are) but in general I am concerned that any of our organizations will just become echo chambers of middle and upper classes, leaving low-income and first generation college students outside of the conversation.

But I know we've discussed that in some form on GC before.

I tried to double-click on this post to love it, but GC isn't IG. Who knew?

Here's the thing. In her complaint, she failed to discuss the 42 white kids who didn't get in to UT with worse scores than she did. The 5 students of color who did were a bridge too far!

"Although one African-American and four Latino applicants with lower combined academic and personal achievement scores than Ms. Fisher’s were provisionally admitted, so were 42 white applicants whose scores were identical to or lower than hers. Similarly, 168 black and Latino students with academic and personal achievement profiles that were as good as, or better than, Ms. Fisher’s were also denied, according to the university," Elise Boddie, a law professor at Rutgers, wrote in the New York Times this week."

So you NEVER ran across a triple legacy whose grandmother donated a wing of the house so her darling granddaughter would be pledged? The actives gave her a bid because after all "someone has to plan the homecoming float and she's a good worker".

Sen must NOT be from the South. LOL.

I wouldn't expect such misogyny and sexism from someone so concerned with human rights.

Just for the record, all NPC sororities have women of all looks, even those who don't fit cultural standards of attractiveness. Perhaps few if any in 'face houses' but that's the vast minority.

I think we can impugn someone's ideas without calling into question their physical attractiveness, or lack thereof. This has become a bit too childish. I'm certainly not defending her ideas as the lawsuit against UT was pretty hairbrained to begin with. I believe the controlling law was Gratz v. Bollinger, which threw out a points system based on objective criteria, awarding (for example) 20 points for being a racial minority, but only 12 points for a perfect SAT score. Since UT's system weighed a great many factors, I'm really not surprised by the outcome here.

I am curious, however, to know who on Earth funds the "Center for Equal Opportunity," which I guess is who bankrolled this lawsuit. Who would give money to an organization wanting to make our institutions of higher learning more white? I can certainly imagine some racists would be in favor of that cause, but I can't imagine anyone caring enough to give money to it.

This was a good read.

http://jezebel.com/all-the-greedy-yo...-me-1782508801

It was, indeed. Thank you for sharing it with us.

Here you go - the info is a bit old, but it seems like there are a number of entities that have provided or still provide funding: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...al_Opportunity.