<p>
Worse than useless. I checked and only 76,542 students took the ACT in Texas in the last state report. That’s barely enough to be statistically significant. A blipette on the screen. Thanks again.</p>
<p>Edit: I checked again and there are @100,000 kids total who took the SAT in Mass + RI + Maine + N.H. + Vermont in the last state reports. That just shows how insignificant those Texas ACT numbers are. Gosh. Why even bother?</p>
<p>For those who care about such things, Texas has more ACT takers than there are SAT takers in all but 5 states. In addition, nationally the ACT is in a statistical dead heat with the SAT if you remove “institutionally required” California. The ACT is actually more popular in the rest of the country (the other 49 states and the District of Columbia) by the margin of 1,474 students. A trouncing reminiscent of David and the Philistines, but hopefully slightly less painful to the Philistines themselves. ;););)</p>
<p>Before a sharp-eyed numbers cruncher catches my error, I failed to subtract the California ACT takers. My bad. I was having too much fun with my David/Philistines reference. I’ll correct my numbers. ;)</p>
<p>O.K. Less Cali and Md. the other 48 states and the District = ACT 1260545, SAT 1252567.</p>
<p>I agree. My daughters go to one of the better Texas public schools and I can attest to the fact that the competition is fierce and the atmosphere is stressful for the kids. </p>
<p>The classes are overcrowded (35+ in all classes including Math and Science);
the teachers are overworked (at the HS level they average 225 students) and can not grade all of the papers,
students who do not have the ability or prerequisite courses are encouraged to take AP and Dual enrollment classes leading to failure of an average of 80% on the AP exams;
the students that do have the wherewithall to handle the more difficult classes are not givrn the opportunity to further discuss the subject or ability to concentrate and extrapolate.</p>
<p>I followed this thread for awhile, and now I have totally lost track of the points being made. I would like to offer my summary and what I have read</p>
<p>Texas Education could be and should be much better. However any numerical comparision has got to realize the demographic challenges the state faces. These shouldnt be an excuse, just an observation</p>
<p>There are some great private schools, with awesome caring parents, there may be some that are not as good or not as polite.</p>
<p>There are some great public schools and far too many that are not as good. </p>
<p>As Texans, or people who care about Texas, we should celebrate the schools such as SMS and other great ones, that provide outstanding opportunites for people with the location, financial resources or assistance to attend. However this will always be just a few Texans taking advantage of these schools, no matter how well meaning.</p>
<p>An educated Texas is important, and while we all ( I do) work to see that my kids are educated (in my instance at very good public schools with magnet programs) we should give a little thought to what we can do for all Texas students</p>
<p>…and then there is the higher education system (ducking to miss the flying posts)</p>
<p>RTY456 - There are good schools and great teachers. However, the state government is anti-intellectual and in reality anti-education. They pay lip service to higher education and in reality cut pay by increasing employee benefit contributions. </p>
<p>Teachers are required to spend so much time doing paperwork and preparation for TAKs that they lose their creativity and have little time to prepare lessons. If they would just stop teaching to the tests and the state and federal government would cut back the paperwork, teachers could go back to teaching. My generation used the ITBS as a benchmark. Texas should look to a national standard instead of having the nation adopt its standard.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, not all school districts are large enough to have a strong Magnet program. The GT programs in even some of the better school districts are a farce. One hour a week pull outs in elementary school. Maybe one class in middle and high school. I won’t whine here. The GT kids may slow down for a while (I believe they call this normalization), but most do have an insatiable desire to learn and will teach themselves if they have to, or will they?</p>
<p>Our state legislature last session spent less time discussing funding of schools and education than they did talking about ‘freedom of religious expression in public schools’ and the promotion of a bible class. </p>
<p>I have stopped several instances of Title V funds being used to pay for religious character based education in a ‘weathy’ school district. Those funds should be used to augment programs in Title I schools, that is the reason those funds exist under No Child Left Behind.</p>
<p>I am not a public school teacher, I am an education advocate.</p>
<p>Wow, curmudgeon. Ouch? I’d first like to point out that while I believe myself to be intelligent and therefore able to hold my own, I am 17 years old and may have a bit of immaturity to overcome due to age. What’s your excuse? </p>
<p>The point I was trying to make was MERELY that the statistical data was not an accurate reflection of the educational quality of all Texas schools (public and private), but more a reflection of standardized test preference and poor legislation, i.e. the Top Ten Percent rule. </p>
<p>It may be true that Texas had only ~30,000 less ACT test takers than MA, ME, RI, NH, and VT combined, but you should also take into account the fact that TX has over twice the population of those states combined. If you look at it that way, TX has far less ACT test takers by percentage. But I am aware that I should find the population of highschool-aged only by state, but I’m too lazy. Perhaps I’ll be proved wrong. Also, as someone already mentioned, I personally have only ever heard the ACT being offered by counselors to people who made terrible SAT scores; this adds to the possibility for skewed data.</p>
<p>I’d also like to add that I do not look down upon anyone based upon their upbringing or other circumstances beyond their control, and I feel very thankful to have been brought up in a suburban area. I know many people from all walks of life, and I myself have not had it so easy. You do not know me, how dare you patronize me? I was only stating the FACT that many inner city and rural areas often have a lower quality of education as opposed to suburban and/or wealthy areas, and that this too is a possible reason for the atrocious statistics that started this thread. The CURRENT education system and Top 10% rule are not working out so well together, but I agree that everyone should be given the opportunity to go to college, despite their highschool circumstances.</p>
<p>Like I said before, I do believe the state needs work, lots of work. But those statistics are a bit radical in my opinion.</p>
<p>I am not going to post again on this thread. I hope everyone had a lovely Thanksgiving.</p>
<p>
<br>
Post if you’d like. You didn’t hurt my feelings. Don’t be upset that I called you out for your irrational feeling of superiority. We all are guilty of it -gee. I think I already said that on this thread. Learn to laugh at yourself, or else you’ll end up a stuffed shirted prig. Remember, say what you mean and mean what you say. Language is precise. Somebody is always listening 
And if you can’t do that - at least have a sense of humor. Loosen up. I was just busting your chops. If I was mad, you’d know.
Well, good for you. At least you are consistent. But I feel sorry for folks who don’t live in the country. But that’s just me. It’s not a choice everybody would make.
My points have nothing to do with population of states or %'s of test-takers. Only the statistical significance of the ACT taking population in Texas. My point is simple. It’s a big number. It is statistically signifcant.<br>
I did. Thank you.</p>
<p>There are excellent students and they come from everywhere and nowhere. IMO the top students could live in a hollowed out tree trunk with the Keebler elves and still surpass the students of the finest schools, from the finest families, with the finest… Don’t underestimate those elven kids. They compete quite well. And have the added benefit of being magically delicious.</p>
<p>
Now I’m confused. (Which, in and of itself, is not that unusual. Is it?)</p>
<p>Haven’t you taken the ACT more than once yourself? Once 9/7 and once before when your high grade was a 35 in “Writing”? </p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/act-preparation/393504-september-07-act-15.html#post4684224[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/act-preparation/393504-september-07-act-15.html#post4684224</a></p>
<p>(BTW, p.m. if you want standardized test tips.) </p>
<p>In my D’s school district the ACT is more popular than the SAT with their counselor. (And A+M is far more popular than Texas. Maybe 10 to 1. It’s tough to make assumptions about a state as diverse as Texas. ) I believe counselors outside the city/suburban areas are quite split on which test they recommend. At D’s school all 10th graders take the PLAN Test. That is quite common in our area, even at the suburban schools.</p>
<p>Remember, Texas is the outlier. Look at our neighbors La., Ar., Ok… and their stats on “which test”.</p>
<p>reid. I have taken the time now to read more of your posts (because of a “hint” of your’s in a previous post). Specifically those on your FA situation. You are an excellent student with a fantastic attitude (and record to match). You will be a great success. I can see it in the way you present yourself. “No excuses, just the way it is.” I appreciate that in you. I appreciate that in anybody . Others will appreciate that in you, too. </p>
<p>You have good instincts on most things from what I can tell (except as to me:)). But …I have some specific suggestions for you on your FA situation that I think will help you in your quest. P.M. me.</p>
<p>BTW, I now put you in my Elven child category. That’s a good place to be in Admissions if you present it right. Some colleges eat it up.</p>
<p>I was at a Thanksgiving dinner last night and since we all were either the parents of college students or those going through the application process right now, the after dinner conversation turned to the college admission process in Texas.</p>
<p>Our group included an editor at the Dallas Morning News, and a tenured Professor at SMU, among others.</p>
<p>Invariably the discussion turned to the UT top ten percent issue. For those unaware, UT-Austin admits those in the top ten percent of their HS class first. This highly criticized plan has led to much debate because students with higher test scores and GPAs from more competitive schools are often denied admission because they are not in the top ten percent, while those at less competitive schools with lower GPAs and scores are admitted.</p>
<p>Several years back when we were touring schools in the SE we were told at UGA that Texans were now their number two source of applicants and enrolled students…their comment was “thank you ten percent rule!”</p>
<p>Getting back on topic, one of the people in the discussion last night raised an interesting point that I had not previously considered. He said that he was really concerned about the future of Texas (the state) because it was in essence forcing so many top students to go away to, many of whom may not return. Sure there are other good schools but when a student can attend a flagship school elsewhere (like UGA) with a scholarship that evens the financial playing field, versus a Texas State or Texas Tech (please not deriding either school here) the likelihood is high that they are Athens bound. Couple that with meeting the boy or girl of their dreams while there who is instate and then finding that suburban Atlanta might be a nicer place to live than say Midland or Lubbock or even Plano (oh my gosh are those hills and trees?) and the chances are high that the expatriate student becomes a Georgia taxpayer.</p>
<p>Obviously this is a bit of an exaggeration but how long can we as a state afford to keep many of our best and brightest at a disadvantage when applying to our flagship school before it really does begin to impact things? Rust belt cities have seen the brain drain for the last thirty years leaving them with aging populations and kids who can’t wait to leave. This was UT’s attempt to avoid criticism for racial/ethnic discrimination and to that end it has worked; however many great kids who are far more qualified for admission are being denied and are packing their bags and heading elsewhere, often out of state. </p>
<p>As a state, we need to be careful to not wear the same blinders that the Midwestern cities/states wore for so long and are now reeling with consequences that they can’t reverse.</p>
<p>Not to derail the thread, but can’t we work to make an equitable school funding system where each Texas child has access to the same level of education and instruction whether they live in Plano or Plainview? Can’t we work to make the Texas Tech System as wealthy as the scared cows of A+M and Texas? What about SFA? Where does the screwball idea of “flagship” come from anyway? Shouldn’t all state schools be flying the flag? Or at least more? Can any rational explanation be made for the Permanent University Fund? Why doesn’t Texas have an equitable college funding system? For the colleges themselves or the students? Why doesn’t Texas have a public LAC? Why doesn’t Texas have a Florida Bright Horizons, or a Georgia scholarship system in place? Heck, even Arkansas has better aid for its best students (and it can be used at Arkansas private colleges, too.). We have bigger problems than the top 10% rule IMO. But those problems don’t have the same pull in Highland Park and Memorial.</p>
<p>BTW, I do see problems with the top 10% system. But it is at least one thing in Texas that serves to level the field for the have-nots. Fix the other inequities in the system. Then fix the 10% rule. Or fix them both at the same time. But don’t mess with the 10% and leave the have-nots in the cold again. (And the Texas legislature is holding the richies hostage, aren’t they? Power politics by the rural legislators, the Valley legislators, and the inner-city legislators. Imagine that.)</p>
<p>Or can it be that the Highland Park/Memorial bunch believes their kids are innately smarter, more capable, and more deserving of a quality college education?</p>
<p>'mudge</p>
<p>Great extension of the issue I raised…as I said…it goes way beyond the 10 percent rule…the implications are enormous.</p>
<p>
And that is a sad state of affairs, but isn’t it sadder still that an equally intelligent child be denied the opportunity to attend the school of his choice because his school has no AP courses or SAT prep classes or qualified Calculus BC teachers or well-equipped labs or libraries or well funded debate and Math Club opportunities…</p>
<p>If tears are a limited resource then I’m going to save my tears for the second kid. And if we are going to change tears to $, my opinion will be the same. The kids who do the best in the situation they are given get rewarded under the existing 10% system. That’s not all bad, but I do agree. It’s not all good , either.</p>
<p>It’s just that some in Texas think the best prepared kids should be additionally rewarded by going to our best financed institutions. Why does that naturally flow? Shouldn’t we aspire to even that out just a little? Isn’t the job of a public institution to serve the public? If a kid does all he can do in his school system, graduates number 1 in the toughest curriculum they have - why shouldn’t he get to go wherever he wants to go? Is it somehow his fault that his school offers zero AP’s and no Debate Club? Is it his fault that parental involvement is low? That the parents don’t finance ec’s out of their own pocket? Where did he cause any of that? Why punish him for not having something he couldn’t have received and reward someone who just took a common AP courseload at their school?</p>
<p>What’s best for the whole can’t be defined by comparing a student from a poor district and a rich district and always picking the kid with the best stats and ignoring class rank. Gee. Wonder which kid comes out on top more often? LOL . (But of course there are glorious exceptions. None of the advantages and they still rise to the tippy top. The Keebler Kids. ) Why not just have a caste system? ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is why we love you, Curmudgeon! :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I have heard similar comments very often, and based on a careful analysis of the admission trends at the two flagship schools in Texas, I simply reject the implication that BETTER students are OFTEN denied admission. Frankly, this story falls flat on its face when Texas A&M offers direct admission to high scoring students. Well, the definition of high scoring used to be based on a 1300 on the old SAT. So, inasmuch as most Texas schools struggle to crack an average of 1000, and most competitive public schools are in the 1000-1100 range, this hardly equates to … VERY competitive students, if they are NOT in the top 10% nor score of 1300 SAT scores. </p>
<p>Now, as far as UT-Austin, where is the evidence that very competitive students are often DENIED admission because of failing to crack the top 10% at their school? </p>
<p>From my perspective, this entire debate of the negative impact of the top 10% rule is fueled by mythical tales and outright fabrication. The issue is that there is a difference between failing to be accepted automatically and ultimately REJECTED from the school altogether. In addition, the top 10% rule only offers automatic admission in the general Liberal Arts program and does not apply to the most competitive programs in business, engineering, or communication.</p>
<p>In my opinion, the students who did not secure an automatic admission for failing to earn a rank in the top 10% at a participating school, or score high enough on the SAT would not have fared much better in an open admission system. This issue might be slightly different at the ultra competitive schools that do NOT rank, but that is a choice that parents made when enrolling at such schools … and I doubt that gaining admission to UT-Austin was their first objective! </p>
<p>What people really want is the automatic admission just to be able to claim how fast they … reject it!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>While the concern is understandable, the real issue is that there is hardly any way to change the fact that the best and brightest DO have options that take them … out of state. This said, this does not mean they all leave. In May, I spoke at length with a student who turned down Stanford and MIT to attend UT-Austin, and this by choice and design. </p>
<p>In the meantime, isn’t the top 10% rule supposed to … retain the best of what our public education system delivers? In a nutshell, aren’t those students supposed to be the best and brightest? Well, that is what many “education advocates” want us to accept! </p>
<p>The reality is that the students who go away are doing it because they have better options, not because they are chased away by the lack of options in Texas. The ones that have to leave the state because the “lack of options” are not necessarily the “best and brightest” as the bar for automatic admission is hardly the tough challenge people made it out to be.</p>
<p>As an example, should we ask Curmudgeon about the options open to the students who graduated ranked in the top 10% of his daughter’s class and compared it to the next 2-3%? Fwiw, I can tell you that the students who graduated in the 8-10% rank at the BEST public HS in my town were darn lucky to have UT and TAMU as automatic options. For all the noise they make, I do not see the story to be much different at the Plano or Judson High of the world, not to mention all the Bubba High schools that shine so brightly on our friday nights in Texas.</p>
<p>PS I hope that many who decided to leave the state WILL return to Texas. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Today, you also need to be in the top 25% of the class. It used to be the top 50%. Historically, TAMU accepted 50% of its class via the yop 10% rule, 25% via the high SAT scorers, and 25% from the remaining pool. All-in-all, hardly the major “exclusion” of top students some want us to believe.</p>
<p>xiggi, I’ll see what I can do. </p>
<p>D’s school is an O.K. public with limited course choices. The system does very well with what they have but our community is moderately poor , with no industry or lignite plant or other tax base booster. A large percentage of the land is valued at ag rates (usually a tenth of market around here). There are usually 140 kids that graduate. We have AP BIO, AP Calc AB, and AP Art (I think).</p>
<p>In my D’s year I can do most of the results by memory
<p>I don’t recall anyone going to Texas her year (no one applied) , and I know of 2 or 3 more kids who went to A+M and got in, two with the Corps. </p>
<p>1) Was a pre-med who received a full ride and perks.
2) Received a full-ride and was able to continue serious physics research he had started as a high-schooler.
3.) Received a full-ride.</p>
<p>IMHO, people are making this waaaaay too difficult. If you want the top 10% kids from the poorer districts to leave the A+M and Texas slots to the “better qualified” suburbanites, try bribery. Mordida. Let’s get all Haliburton with it. Every public school other than Texas and A+M for free if you are top 10%? The problem is solved. Maybe a new problem is created but that one is deader than dirt.</p>
<p>Caveat: My kid didn’t want to go college in her home-state. Wanted something new. Hated A+M and Texas. She did apply to and was accepted to Texas Tech with a piddling scholarship (the highest they offer to non-NMF’s).</p>