View Single Post
  #5  
Old 03-29-2008, 11:57 AM
breathesgelatin breathesgelatin is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,137
Send a message via ICQ to breathesgelatin Send a message via AIM to breathesgelatin Send a message via MSN to breathesgelatin Send a message via Yahoo to breathesgelatin
Quote:
Originally Posted by em_adpi View Post
The 10% rule needs to be eliminated anyway. The population has grown so much; I'm pretty sure that's why UT had to introduce the CAP program.

To be honest, I never liked the 10% rule because the 'top 10%' of a high school class could vary from one school to another.
UT hates the 10% rule. Right now they're admitting something like 81% of freshmen based on the ten percent rule. For A&M the number is much lower, so A&M isn't as worried about it:

http://media.www.dailytexanonline.co...-3279783.shtml

Personally, I see some good and bad to the top 10% rule. As a graduate student who's really interested in having UT increase its profile among Research 1 institutions, having the rule prevents UT from keeping enrollment down, forcing them to spend more and more on undergrads and preventing them from sending money to research and to grad students. At the same time, I don't blame Texas high school grads for going to UT over other schools (including A&M, bwa hahahaha).

I just don't know what other solution they're going to come up with to remedy it. I guess the idea of the third flagship school is maybe part of it--starting from scratch and presenting an alternative to people who maybe wouldn't go to Tech or A&M over UT but would be interested in starting something new from a blank slate? I am just skeptical about whether that would really work.

One thing batted around is switching it to the fact that if you were in the top 10%, you'd be admitted to *some* Texas state school. But it seems like that would required a lot of coordination/bureaucracy between admission offices.
Reply With Quote