<p>Cromette – Thanks for the OR vs AND clarification. The SAT version parallels the ACT version (as it should). I should have either copied & pasted or posted a link instead of attempting to quickly summarize.</p>
<p>From what you describe and my experiences in the Big Ten, PAC 10 (this dates me a bit), and the Ivy League, I see A&M and UT as quite similar when it comes to admission.<br>
Both are subject to HB 588. (I prefer the A&M version that allows a high test score to offset a lower rank. The expected GPA formulas UT uses for holistic admission do precisely this, but UT’s auto admit decision is 100% class rank driven and I find that very silly.). Both impose higher standards on high demand majors like engineering. Both admit ‘auto admits’ to overall university if they don’t get their desired major (e.g., engineering). Both use section scores in the admissions process. Neither require SAT Subject test scores. Both get thousands and thousands of applications each year and must ‘systematically’ evaluate them (leading to the use of various ‘formulas’). Both have a rolling admission process. (The Ivy League, for example, does not). Both schools also have limited university housing and don’t require freshmen to live on campus. …</p>
<p>Due to excess demand, UT gets to impose a 75% cap. Should A&M run into the same issue someday, I have no doubt that the legislature will give them a similar exemption (or the law will get refined to make it mute for both schools.) With the constantly improving applicant pool at both UT & A&M, I have no doubt that A&M is on a path to having HB 588 problems at some point.</p>