March
Not to beat a dead horse, or, to beat a dead horse, in 2019 GT accepted 40%
of Georgia applicants and 16% on Non-Georgia applicants. Unless Georgia students are superior to the rest of the country, they’re enjoying significant favoritism already.
And while I don’t think the data is available, I would presume OOS applicants self-select to a higher average academic level group.
Here is an article on UT Austin Chancellor’s take on top 10% rule (2016): https://publicuniversityhonors.com/2016/01/25/university-of-texas-chancellor-opposes-top-10-percent-admission-rule/
No doubt.
I always wondered why UT was not ranked higher. Now I know. The State of Texas mandates that it accept students that it objectively would not accept - the top 10% (now 6%) of each Texas high school, regardless of test scores and grades. That’s pretty much what the Georgia Senator is proposing.
“DEMYSTIFYING ADMISSIONS
Georgia Tech’s leader on applications, enrollment and building a stellar first-year class separates fact from fiction—and the past from the present—to explain how it all works.
Winter 2018 Vol. 94 No. 4 | BY RICK CLARK, DIRECTOR OF ADMISSION”
https://www.gtalumni.org/s/1481/alumni/17/magazine-pages.aspx?pgid=15663&gid=21&cid=34951
“In addition, as a public university, we are committed to serving our state, so we intentionally select around 60 percent of our undergraduate students from the state of Georgia, 30 percent from out of state and 10 percent from outside the country. Last year, to achieve that desired geographic makeup, our admit rate for students from Georgia was 37 percent—significantly higher than our non-Georgia admit rate (19 percent).”
Lots of other interesting observations, good read.
Also from the link above:
"A common misconception is that we want each student to be “well-rounded.” The truth is that we do not expect them to have “done it all.” Instead, we are asking. “Will this student be missed when they leave?” “Have they left an indelibly positive mark?”
Ultimately, we want students who will challenge and stretch their peers on campus and beyond once they graduate. We are not concerned with whether they had a specific title, but rather if we see evidence that they are making people around them better. In order to find this, we also closely read their essay and short answer responses, as well as their recommendation letters from teachers and counselors."
FWIW: I found SAT test data for Georgia for 2019. ~76,000 students took the test. Only 5% scored 1400+, which is about 3800 students. Only 14% of the students who took the SAT expressed the intent to major in engineering or computer science, which probably tracks with the fact that only 11% sent their scores to GT. The mean SAT scores of those groups were ~1130. Mean score for all students was 1058, so the future engineers were a little bit higher, but not much. The highest average score was for the self-described 512 mathy types, whose average score was 1200. So, while it is impressive that Georgia had a couple hundred perfect (36/36/36/36) ACT scorers (which is equivalent to SAT 1590+), it doesn’t seem to apply at scale against a deluge of high stat OOS applicants. Has anyone found similar data for the ACT?
https://reports.collegeboard.org/pdf/2019-georgia-sat-suite-assessments-annual-report.pdf
Ga Tech is pretty clear, with their admissions “motto” (for lack of a better word) “Creating the Next”, of what they are looking for:
They are looking for more than grades and test scores. They want the people who will make a difference in the world, who have a vision of where they are going and what they want to accomplish. In fact, last year (or maybe it was 2 years ago) when they began the 2 team application review (that’s not the exact term but the formal name escapes me), they first selected students without looking at SAT/ACT scores and then looked again to see if it would have made a decision in their acceptance/deferral/denial decision. It didn’t.
Lots more about what GT looks for can be found in Rick Clark’s blog here http://pwp.gatech.edu/admission-blog/
And as an aside, this fall’s freshman enrollment was 55% instate and 45% OOS.
I understand what you are saying, but currently what is being proposed would not do that, as it is only putting rules on EA and not total admissions or enrollment. If the rule as written went into effect there are multiple ways GT could still end up with the exact same class profile.
Ex. This year’s EA accepted ~2000 in-state and ~2700 OOS. So if the 90/10 EA rule was in effect, then accept the same ~2000 in-state and then accept 200 OOS (they would be the Stamps Scholarships finalists). The left over 2500 OOS would be deferred in a new group call “priority deferred” (or whatever) they would be told they are guaranteed RD admissions as long as they did x,y,z (maybe send in 1st semester grades(no Ds or Fs) and complete a continued interest form). Then the regular deferred would get put in with the RD applicants like normal. Exact same class as you would have without the 90/10 EA rule. 
You would have plenty of OOS applicants sending in EA to compete for scholarships. This is not the only way but you get my point.
At this point I think this 90/10 rule is only a politician thinking or making it look like he is doing something. Now if it changes to be an enrollment or entire admissions limit then I agree with you.
@racereer “I understand what you are saying, but currently what is being proposed would not do that, as it is only putting rules on EA and not total admissions or enrollment. If the rule as written went into effect there are multiple ways GT could still end up with the exact same class profile.”
What makes you think the politicians will stop at 90%? Or stop at EA? There will always be “high scoring” Georgia students unhappy with their rejection by Tech, and there will always be politicians looking for votes willing to increase the percentage requirement AND extend it into RD.
@PuppyM If you read to the bottom of my post, I already agreed with you if that happens. I think (or hope) the politicians will also look at how much business, money, and recognition GT brings to the state and realize what could happen if they limit GT too much.
GA Tech is already much more accessible for in state students than out of state students. UGA, KSU and Georgia Southern all have engineering programs and all accept the Hope/Zell. That being said, the kids from my son’s high school who are at Tech are all very high stat (1500+ SAT/4.0) kids.
GA Tech does offer multiple pathways for transfer admission which are not included in the freshmen admission stats. Several kids who didn’t meet the high stat admission standards were offered this path as well and plan on transferring in.
I think the balance of in state and out of state students at Tech is a good thing for the school and for the students who are accepted.
One more thing to consider - Ga Tech is very very challenging. Even many of the high stats kids who are there struggle. The admission standards are very high to ensure they can do well in the very rigorous coursework - and it is rigorous academically and also time consuming. I forget the exact statistic at FASET but it was something like for every 3 hours in class a week it is not unusual to have to commit to an additional 10 or more hours outside of class.
Any changes to the admissions percentages appear to happen at the legislative level, and its probably unlikely they will address this, if at all, more than once.
It’s a fact that GT enrolls more in-state applicants than OOS. Note that I didn’t say admit because the yield of the OOS applicants is only half of the in-state, so they actually need to accept more to hit their target (which makes the proposed 90/10 rule even more ridiculous). Using the LITE data for admits and yields, I come up with 4 enrolled OOS for every 5 enrolled in-state. This seems to match the 45/55 number mentioned in post#569. The SAT data strongly suggests that they accept in-state applicants with significantly lower stats (average) when compared to elite engineering programs. GT does not publish public stats on the OOS applicants., but they can’t hide the Georgia SAT results. The very best of Georgia can compete with anyone. But there are not nearly enough of them.
Just to put this into perspective, last year MIT alone had 5,858 applications with ACT 34+ (SAT 1510+). They only admitted 569. There is an enormous pool of uber stats applicants that are not getting into their schools of choice. GT’s now very public reputation will draw them like moths to the flame.
That sounds a little low. At least 75% of their freshman class has ACT 34+.
Edit: I guess that means the rest submitted SAT
@TheVulcan The stats were from the applicants, not the admitted. And yes, the rest were SAT. I didn’t want to add them together because I don’t know how MIT counts applicants who submit both. The stats of the enrolled class are actually irrelevant because I was more interested in the stats of those who didn’t get in. Those are the “moths”.
Last year I found an interesting statistics posted on GT web site. It is about GT undergraduate student body:
Freshmen 3000
Sophomore 2400
Junior 3600
Senior 6000
Why? I asked my friend in Atlanta who has kid in GT. The drop from freshmen to sophomore, most of them are in-state. Can’t handle the rigor. The increase from sophomore to junior, is Georgia’s rule to allow transfer from CC for in-state student only. While most of the OOS students graduate in 4 years, lots of these transfer student can’t. So senior numbers ballooned to 6000.
It is obvious that GT reject high stats in-state students to get OOS students for money is not true.