|
|
#41
05-29-2007, 04:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: high school kids protest
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] 50-60% is passing on an already dumbed down test. These people shouldn't be banned from walking at graduation, they should be sterilized to prevent contamination with the rest of the population. [/ QUOTE ] Agreed. [/ QUOTE ] The only flaw in this idea is that probably >50% of these geniuses already have kids. 
|
|
#42
05-29-2007, 05:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: high school kids protest
[ QUOTE ]
[ 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. [/ QUOTE ] The problem is that it's a rule and not a suggestion, or part of a larger system with some more depth. Without the 10% rule, the standardization of GPA/SATs etc exists because it assumes the same amount of effort is required to get those scores in different places. This is why SAT scores and the like are relevant in this discussion - when an inner city kid with a crappy education gets a 1200, that kid is probably smarter than a suburban white bred type with a 1350. The 10% rule balances out some of these inequities, if not in the ideal way - I think there should definitely be more qualifiers and exceptions in place. I know little about UT specifically - why exactly would someone in the top 10% of a good school be dead set on going there? Just the price, or do they excel in any particular field?
|
|
#44
05-29-2007, 08:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: high school kids protest
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ 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. [/ QUOTE ] The problem is that it's a rule and not a suggestion, or part of a larger system with some more depth. Without the 10% rule, the standardization of GPA/SATs etc exists because it assumes the same amount of effort is required to get those scores in different places. This is why SAT scores and the like are relevant in this discussion - when an inner city kid with a crappy education gets a 1200, that kid is probably smarter than a suburban white bred type with a 1350. The 10% rule balances out some of these inequities, if not in the ideal way - I think there should definitely be more qualifiers and exceptions in place. I know little about UT specifically - why exactly would someone in the top 10% of a good school be dead set on going there? Just the price, or do they excel in any particular field? [/ QUOTE ] It's the best public school in Texas. Definitely one of the top publics in the country. It's also the one I've heard the most about. I have no idea how A&M is affected by the top 10% rule (what % of its admissions are based on it), but its still not as elite as a university. Case in point, this girl who is at the TOP of her class (I would hate to see what kind of morons in that school are at the 90th percentile), who gets a free admission pass to Texas, probably enough grants and aid to pay for it, and she can't even get 50% of the questions on a basic skills test right after 5 tries. Something is not right. Your arguments about the SAT scores being about knowledge, its incorrect. It is a reasoning and aptitude test, not a knowledge based test. It was designed to find talent in unsuspecting places, from either students in poor schools or slackers that didn't get good grades in high school. You can milk a few points out of the SAT with preparation, but I doubt it would be anywhere near 150 points. No (good) college admits people assuming that GPAs are equal. Colleges have data, especially in-state, about how high schools stack up and how grades compare. Especially since some schools have completely different grading systems. Some places might use different scales, or weight advanced classes differently.
|
|
#45
05-29-2007, 08:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: high school kids protest
Maybe the sign holder was trying to level everyone?
|
|
#46
05-29-2007, 08:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: high school kids protest
the biggest fault i find with the top ten school is the small schools.
My wife graduated from a small school, she was ranked #3 with like a 3.8 or 3.9, the were 43 people in her class. If #5 or #6 has like a 3.5gpa, and is disqualified it seems kinda bs to me. but i didnt goto school in texas so i have no idea how it exactly works
|
|
#48
05-29-2007, 10:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: high school kids protest
...sigh... After watching "Letters from Iwo Jima" the other day with my wife, we were discussing some of the history behind it. I know that she's not interested in history, so her questions about Iwo Jima were legit. However, I was shocked when she asked me if the US was in World War II and then if we won.
Oh... and I guess it's important to mention that my wife is a grade school teacher with a Master's Degree in Education. Thankfully, she doesn't teach history. /end thread derail
|
|
#49
05-29-2007, 11:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: high school kids protest
[ QUOTE ]
...sigh... After watching "Letters from Iwo Jima" the other day with my wife, we were discussing some of the history behind it. I know that she's not interested in history, so her questions about Iwo Jima were legit. However, I was shocked when she asked me if the US was in World War II and then if we won. Oh... and I guess it's important to mention that my wife is a grade school teacher with a Master's Degree in Education. Thankfully, she doesn't teach history. /end thread derail [/ QUOTE ] ........................................ .. .................. .......................... ........ I hope this is a joke, this is seriously disgusting.
|
|
#50
05-29-2007, 11:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: high school kids protest
[ QUOTE ]
Oh... and I guess it's important to mention that my wife is a grade school teacher with a Master's Degree in Education. Thankfully, she doesn't teach history. [/ QUOTE ] Unfortunately, she teaches. Period. I don't care what degree you have. If you don't know that we were in WW II, then you shouldn't be teaching.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
