That I what I thought, though it looks like now even for Calc BC you have to get a 5 and still pass the placement exam. So all math credits will require a placement test.
True. That said I think most of these kids took MV calc, Linear Algebra and some stuff at Pitt/CMU. They just took Calc BC this year so they might get out of it in college or they ran out of interesting classes. Not sure I’ve seen my son open the book this year.
They want to make sure students are truly prepared for the rigor of higher-level MIT courses. A big selling point in our book.
GT also allows you to test out of classes, but will accept transfer credit if you have true college credit for the classes and they have evaluated it to be equivalent. S19 could have tried to test out of DiffEQ but since it looked like the class covered some topics he hadn’t he decided to retake it.
@chmcnm “Ok. Let’s say you’re a high stat student from Georgia. Your parents pay taxes to Georgia. Your family roots are in Georgia. You apply to GT and get denied. How would you feel?”
I would feel GT made a mistake and move on. There is no end to your logic. Until, that is, 100% of all Tech admittees are “from Georgia [whose] parents pay taxes to Georgia [and who have] family roots in Georgia.”
FWIW: Tech’s admit rate was about 67% in the not too distant past. Was overwhelmingly comprised of Georgia residents.
Things (application and admission #s) changed dramatically when GT joined the Common App.
@Publisher And it was not considered a public Ivy back then and was predominantly white male. The real question is what is its mission.
Also, regarding “in-state kids with high stats that were rejected”. Not sure how the “high stats” are defined here. It’s a fact that GT already admitted lower stats in-state students today (on average) compared OOS ones.
Would you move on? Do you have a spare $100-200k on you? Not everyone does. UGA as second choice is nice but not the same as GT. Might have to go out of state which is expensive.
Reread my post. There is an end to my logic. HIGH STATS. If I’m in-state AND my stats are equal or better than the average OOS stats why should I be rejected? Especially if my taxes are supporting the school. Nowhere in the bill does it say we let kids with a 900 SAT score into CS at GT.
This is most likely true of many state flagships.
Agree here, my kid is on high end of stats accepted EA and yet he was deferred. He is in state. If he does not get in on regular decision, expensive decisions may have to be made about where to get an engineering education. I’m not sure the argument that low stat kids would be the ones getting in with this proposal is accurate. He did not get in and he has a 4.5gpa, 12 AP, 34 ACT,top 5% of class, 2 sport varsity athlete, along with leadership, and community service involvement.
Is there any proof that this is actually happening? That in-state kids with stats that are higher than the average OOS stats are being rejected? I doubt it. It will depend on what your definition of “higher stats” is. As we know GT puts less emphasis test scores and more on gpa/rigor. So on the surface there might be some rejected in-state kids that stats may look higher but when you dig down it might not be the case.
My understanding of the process is that at top schools perfect or near-perfect “stats” (test scores and grades) for an unhooked candidate are just the first hurdle to be cleared before your app is looked at seriously.
A necessary but not sufficient condition.
Exactly what happened with my (in-state) DS20 with being rejected EA this from UIUC. I’ve seen OOS kids accepted with somewhat lower stats in the same program (CS). I’m thinking they’re seeing the extra $$$. Frustrating! Granted, CS is one of the most competitive programs, but I had always heard UIUC was trying to keep the high-stats kids instate since many were going OOS.
I don’t know. Maybe, maybe not. Can you prove it’s not? All I can go with are what I see here but read post #511 above. Look at some other posts like 326 or 371. I’m sure there’s others. Some rejected. Some deferred. Deferred isn’t rejected but odds still aren’t in favor.
The proposed bill was written for a reason with at least a little thought. Whether you agree or not someone or some people drafted this for a reason. They don’t just happen.
Ultimately this comes back to what is the purpose of Georgia Tech? Educate state residents first or become a top, global university (not sure the 2 goals are at odds). If it’s a state school supported by state tax money then I would hope it’s #1. At least be truthful and transparent.
https://irp.gatech.edu/gt-visionmission-statements
"Vision
Georgia Tech will define the technological research university of the twenty-first century. As a result, we will be leaders in influencing major technological, social, and policy decisions that address critical global challenges. “What does Georgia Tech think?” will be a common question in research, business, the media, and government.
Mission
Technological change is fundamental to the advancement of the human condition. The Georgia Tech community - students, staff, faculty, and alumni - will realize our motto of “Progress and Service” through effectiveness and innovation in teaching and learning, our research advances, and entrepreneurship in all sectors of society. We will be leaders in improving the human condition in Georgia, the United States, and around the globe."
@collegehunt2017 I hope your son eventually gets admitted. It looks like he will do well no matter where he lands. Best of luck.
@chmcnm Thank you so much for the kind wishes. GT is his #1, but have to believe he will land exactly where he is supposed to be. This process is tough!
@chmcnm I found the article I was looking for, so we can end the speculation on the stats, assuming the article is accurate. Last year, 41% of EA admits were OOS. So you would go from 59/41 to 90/10. I think the point is that even if this was restricted to the EA round, there would still be “high stat” Georgia applicants getting rejected, and then there would be pressure to do the same for the RD round.