Re: high school kids protest
[ QUOTE ]
But this standardizes GPA etc across different groups where the quality of education received varies greatly. The 10% rule is a little fragile in that other qualifications are ignored, but it allows a lot of kids with limited opportunities a chance to maximize their potential. Sure, two kids with equal class ranks at very different schools are not dead even, but you can't say that one is more deserving of a certain college education just because they were provided more mobility through their upbringing.
[/ QUOTE ]
In fact, its doing the opposite, its providing someone with more mobility for going to a WORSE school. How does it standardize GPAs at all? It does far from it. This school has a valedictorian with a 3.5 GPA that can't even pass a basic test. You go to some high achieving school where someone has a 4.2 and still isn't in the top 10% with a 1400 SAT score, and you are saying somehow these are standardized? Give me a break.
The top 10% rule is awful. Its purpose is somewhat understandable. However, the consequences of the current implementation is disaster. It handcuffs top schools like UT into accepting people who have no business there. If you are a top achiever at a crap school, there is a chance you have a lot of untapped potential. Make it a top 5% rule, or less, so that its impact on otherwise deserving candidates is minimized. Make it so that the top 10% have to still complete some other basic requirements to get entry to their top choice, or otherwise get delegated to another state school. It will prevent the best state schools from getting watered down and allow unprepared candidates to suceed more often at a lesser school that is more on par with their abilities. If you can't pass the TAKS test after 5 tries, you have no business at ANY top tier university.
|