Fairly shocking admissions news from UT

[srmom]

Is that how much they usually admit, or is that the number they have now because of the high number of top 10%. If it's just a number they use (regardless of the top 10%) I find that extremely low, especially considering that UTEP admits over 15,000 students a year.

It has to do with the "yield statistics". UT, based on past history, feels pretty confident this year that if they accept 11,500 kids, out of those acceptances around 7,200 will decide to attend (a yield percentage of 63%). UTEP probably accepts more because their historic yield percentage is lower - say they accept 15000 and are trying to get to 7200, their yield percentage would be 48%. If their desired class size is even smaller (say 5000) then their yield would be 34%.

Texas has a higher yield percentage because, frankly, it is more popular, and more people who are admitted actually decide to go there. If you look at REALLY popular schools, say like Harvard, their acceptance percentage is REALLY LOW - 9.2%, Princeton is 9.7%, and Yale is 9.9%. Those schools yield rate is REALLY high too, Harvard's is 80% - 8 out of 10 people who are accepted to Harvard actually end up going (from an article in the Crimson). Obviously, Harvard is more popular (& prestigious) than Texas, so obviously their yield is much higher.

does this make sense?

An interesting thing about yield and history is that it is just an estimate, so sometimes they screw up. In 2005, when my oldest was accepted to UT, they "over-enrolled". In other words, they accepted too many, thinking the yield would be lower, so when more people actually came, they went "Oh Crap!" So, in 2006, they reined it in, and actually were a bit "under-enrolled", but that was better than the year before.

So, it is kind of a crap shoot - but that's why statisticians are paid the big bucks

And, yes, Texas should standardize GPA, and curriculum weighting. The Texas Education Agency is working on that right now - and even that has become controversial!! There's no pleasing everyone!!

I'm just glad I'm almost out of that phase of my life! I'll still be involved because I believe the health of the state and its future are greatly tied to our educational system, but I won't have a dog in the hunt (so to speak), so I won't be emotionally invested like I am now.

[Senusret I]

Georgetown's yield was 50% with an acceptance rate of about 10%.

28,000 applied, 2,800 were accepted, and about 1,400 actually enrolled.

We'd lose the other 50 percent to Ivies and schools like Wash U in St. Louis which were just as good as Georgetown but offered merit-based financial aid.

[srmom]

http://www.tasb.org/services/gr/docu...m_gpa_1008.pdf

Here's the information about the House Bill that is in the process of being "tweaked" in order to standardize the Texas grading system. It seems pretty straight forward, but some districts are fighting it tooth and nail!! To me, it seems like a no-brainer issue, but others feel vehemently that it somehow screws up their methods.

Senusret, it is really interesting to look at different schools acceptance rates and yields.

Historically, it can be affected by the economy (ie when times are bad, people are less likely to be able to pay "full freight" so they look to schools with better aid), by a bump in recognition (like Wash U has become much more prestigious and has gained major name recognition over the past decade), even something like success of sports teams can cause applications to rise (UF has seen a dramatic rise in the number of applications since the 4 nat'l championships).

[Senusret I]

^^^ Absolutely.

Basketball Coach John Thompson and President Bill Clinton are personally responsible for the surge in applications since the 70s. Georgetown was not considered anything more than a regional university before then.

[srmom]

I just reread that report, and something I found really funny - in the conclusion it says, "The proposed uniform GPA rules have sparked a lively debate over the content of the uniform GPA methodology."

HAHA - yeah I'll say it has sparked a "lively debate" I went to a school board meeting where people were literally screaming at the poor school board members. Nobody could hear what anybody else was saying. Lively - that's one way to put it.

Those poor school board members, they don't get paid enough to put up with the abuse. Oh wait, they don't get paid at all, it's a volunteer position - That sux!

[srmom]

Just a quick update, regarding the 10% law:

http://www.statesman.com/news/conten...526topten.html

Interesting compromise.

It won't effect my son in any way, besides the fact that he graduates next year in 2010 (wow, scary number, am I that freaking old??? ), and the new law goes into effect in 2011, he also will graduate in the top 6%. So, no dog in the fight for me. I'm just glad for the state that there is some movement on this issue.