Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Auto admit for top 6% of class with a minimum ACT of 32 or SAT of 1400.

What does this mean? The point is that the SAT and ACT are inherently discriminatory. There are studies that show that those who perform lower are still able to handle the work when they are admitted. Their graduation rate is a little lower but that is often due to lack of family support or other issues.

Expensive test prep is not the source of advantage on these tests. Studies show that expensive classes make about a 10 point difference and private tutoring makes no difference? That suggests these tests measure something real.

Research also shows that high school grades are the single best predictor of college outcomes, but that GPA and test scores together are the best two-variable predictor of academic outcomes. Again, test scores appear to measure something real and unique.

The argument over these tests is not about whether they measure something, but what do they measure. These tests are essentially IQ tests. IQ is not raw brain power OR accumulated knowledge; it’s both. Essentially, IQ measures how well one can operate in a cultural environment. So, back to the bias of college entrance tests. The notion is that underprivileged students are just as capable - i.e raw brain power - as privileged students, but they lack good environmental opportunities. For example, they don’t attend quality schools. Thus, the idea is that if underprivileged kids were exposed to great opportunities, they too could score and perform well. Ok, that’s all well and good. But here’s the rub: how is a selective college supposed to makeup for years of poor academic preparation while maintaining standards for kids who already achieve at the college’s standards?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dean J has suggested that UVA is not the state’s flagship university. I don’t think VA, per se, claims to have one. VA has a variety of institutions. Everyone can find a place. No need to centralize everything at one school. In California, the UC system is considered the flagship.

I don't think there is anything that designates UVA as the flagship in the state legislation or constitution.

It's an interesting point. What is a flagship? I just googled it and wikipedia has five paragraphs of definitions.

The College Board, for example, defines flagship universities as the best-known institutions in the state, noting that they were generally the first to be established and are frequently the largest and most selective, as well as the most research-intensive public universities. These schools are often land-grant, sea-grant, or space-grant research universities.

Virginia Tech and Virginia State are land grant. I had never heard of "sea grant" or "space grant." UVA, W&M, Tech, and ODU are both sea grant and space grant. VCU and GMU are sea grant only. Hampton is space grant only.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You want UVA to take more instate students? Make it larger!

UVA is pathetic, it's one of the smallest flagstate schools in the nation compared to the number of HS students.

I don't know why VA residents tolerate it.

incoming... UVA booster claiming VA tEch and UVA are basically 1 university.

Dean J has suggested that UVA is not the state’s flagship university. I don’t think VA, per se, claims to have one. VA has a variety of institutions. Everyone can find a place. No need to centralize everything at one school. In California, the UC system is considered the flagship.

Historically, UVA and William and Mary have been considered the most selective options in Virginia. Combined, they have about 23,500 undergraduates, with about 2/3rds of that total, or about 15,500 in state. UNC Chapel Hill would be comparable for the State of North Carolina. It has 19,117 undergraduates, with 82%, or 15,675, coming from in-state. Since NC has about 23% more people than Virginia, you can't say Virginia has a very different model or comparatively few slots. UT Austin has 40,000 undergraduates but a state population 3.4X as large as Virginia. It actually has fewer spots there on a per capita basis than Virginia.

This is correct. There are plenty of seats for Virginia students of all stripes at Virginia colleges.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You want UVA to take more instate students? Make it larger!

UVA is pathetic, it's one of the smallest flagstate schools in the nation compared to the number of HS students.

I don't know why VA residents tolerate it.

incoming... UVA booster claiming VA tEch and UVA are basically 1 university.

Dean J has suggested that UVA is not the state’s flagship university. I don’t think VA, per se, claims to have one. VA has a variety of institutions. Everyone can find a place. No need to centralize everything at one school. In California, the UC system is considered the flagship.

Historically, UVA and William and Mary have been considered the most selective options in Virginia. Combined, they have about 23,500 undergraduates, with about 2/3rds of that total, or about 15,500 in state. UNC Chapel Hill would be comparable for the State of North Carolina. It has 19,117 undergraduates, with 82%, or 15,675, coming from in-state. Since NC has about 23% more people than Virginia, you can't say Virginia has a very different model or comparatively few slots. UT Austin has 40,000 undergraduates but a state population 3.4X as large as Virginia. It actually has fewer spots there on a per capita basis than Virginia.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You want UVA to take more instate students? Make it larger!

UVA is pathetic, it's one of the smallest flagstate schools in the nation compared to the number of HS students.

I don't know why VA residents tolerate it.

incoming... UVA booster claiming VA tEch and UVA are basically 1 university.

Dean J has suggested that UVA is not the state’s flagship university. I don’t think VA, per se, claims to have one. VA has a variety of institutions. Everyone can find a place. No need to centralize everything at one school. In California, the UC system is considered the flagship.

I don't think there is anything that designates UVA as the flagship in the state legislation or constitution.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You want UVA to take more instate students? Make it larger!

UVA is pathetic, it's one of the smallest flagstate schools in the nation compared to the number of HS students.

I don't know why VA residents tolerate it.

incoming... UVA booster claiming VA tEch and UVA are basically 1 university.

Dean J has suggested that UVA is not the state’s flagship university. I don’t think VA, per se, claims to have one. VA has a variety of institutions. Everyone can find a place. No need to centralize everything at one school. In California, the UC system is considered the flagship.

Anonymous wrote:You want UVA to take more instate students? Make it larger!

Perhaps UVA could be larger, but at some point you can't just keep stuffing more students into a campus (grounds). UT Austin has grown only slightly since about 1970 since it had already reached nearly 50,000 by that time and it is located in the middle of a large city. The states have to develop alternative campuses. In the case of Texas, Texas A&M, which has a huge amount of land, has grown to be the second largest school in the country with 68,000. Texas has also developed campuses like UT Dallas.

Anonymous wrote:You want UVA to take more instate students? Make it larger!

UVA is pathetic, it's one of the smallest flagstate schools in the nation compared to the number of HS students.

I don't know why VA residents tolerate it.

incoming... UVA booster claiming VA tEch and UVA are basically 1 university.

Anonymous wrote:Auto admit for top 6% of class with a minimum ACT of 32 or SAT of 1400.

What does this mean? The point is that the SAT and ACT are inherently discriminatory. There are studies that show that those who perform lower are still able to handle the work when they are admitted. Their graduation rate is a little lower but that is often due to lack of family support or other issues.

Auto admit for top 6% of class with a minimum ACT of 32 or SAT of 1400.

You want UVA to take more instate students? Make it larger!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was really shocked coming from the DMV to the Midwest and finding out all kids who had at least a 3.0 in high school got auto admitted to all the universities in the state. Not only that, but they had massive tuition scholarships for kids with a 3.5 and up. It seemed so much more civilized than the crazy competitive atmosphere of Maryland and Virginia public universities.

Yes buts lots of those schools aren’t great.

What states are we talking about here?

Minnesota, Wisconsin, UIUC are all top schools. I don't think they have guaranteed admissions for 3.0+ GPA though, that would be ridiculous. They do tend to have lower GPA and SAT requirements than UMD for freshman despite being peer schools.

Think North Dakota, but not North Dakota.

It's not about the quality of the schools, but our rights as taxpayers. We subsidize public education with our tax dollars. Why shouldn't our kids have #1 priority to go to places like UVa? why do we accept admissions offices turning a right into a privilege?

Why in the world won’t you just name the states you are talking about? It is hard to have a discussion without all the facts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was really shocked coming from the DMV to the Midwest and finding out all kids who had at least a 3.0 in high school got auto admitted to all the universities in the state. Not only that, but they had massive tuition scholarships for kids with a 3.5 and up. It seemed so much more civilized than the crazy competitive atmosphere of Maryland and Virginia public universities.

Yes buts lots of those schools aren’t great.

What states are we talking about here?

Minnesota, Wisconsin, UIUC are all top schools. I don't think they have guaranteed admissions for 3.0+ GPA though, that would be ridiculous. They do tend to have lower GPA and SAT requirements than UMD for freshman despite being peer schools.

Think North Dakota, but not North Dakota.

It's not about the quality of the schools, but our rights as taxpayers. We subsidize public education with our tax dollars. Why shouldn't our kids have #1 priority to go to places like UVa? why do we accept admissions offices turning a right into a privilege?

+ 1. We subsidize "non-profit" Private schools (e.g. the Ivies) as well, yet put up with their secretive selection processes. Why not tax them all? For the benefit of the poster that shows up asking "what about other non-profits like churches and hospitals (imagine a whiny Karen voice here) - yes, tax everyone.

Thanks for saving me the work! Can you provide me to your other posts in other forums that insist we tax churches and country clubs? Oh, you can't? Because there are none? Because you are full of shit?

NP - golf clubs are taxed. https://www.thegolfbusiness.co.uk/2017/11/taxation-in-golf-your-questions-answered/

You posted a lovely article about golf club taxation in the United Kingdom. Not sure how it is relevant. Most Country Clubs are tax exempt in the US: https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/other-non-profits/social-clubs. https://www.thebalancesmb.com/what-is-a-501c7-tax-exempt-social-club-4172019 https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/nonprofit/2013/02/private-country-club-earning-12-million-in-profits-is-tax-exempt.html

You are not good at this.

The point was that they ARE taxed but in a special category. And country clubs are completely separted from churches which fall under the first amendment. Sorry I'm so busy with my law practice that I couldn't precisely point to the IRS Reg that you were seeking but as you said "I'm not good at this" so I'll ask Yale for my law degree back tomorrow. Hey, a thought for you: instead of being insulting, why don't you research it and announce to the world the difference between golf club and church tax treatment instead of just insulting strangers here? What an idea! Being productive instead of trying to scold and be a karen.

I think you didn't mean to say "I'll ask Yale for my law degree back tomorrow" but you meant to say "I'll give back my Yale law degree tomorrow" which, if you truly can and do, would be a boost for Yale's reputation.

As for the country clubs being taxed in a special category: they are not in the US. The 3 links I provided proved that.

The original point, which you are trying desperately to gish-gallop past, is that you have a bee-sting on your butt about colleges and you think that their tax exempt status gives you some right to determine their admissions policy. This is crazy and demonstrates your lack of a basic grasp of civics.

Oh, and you clearly are NOT good at this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a state school hopes to be a great academic institution, it cannot take state residents only or set arbitrary cutoffs without attention to actual ability. Doing either greatly limits the pool of high-achieving applicants and saddles the university with expensive mandates to bring poorly performing kids up to speed or boot them out. The much better approach is what Virginia does: offer a variety of public schools focused on different studies and for students of different abilities and let them compete for which school fits them. By definition, not everyone will go to UVA, or W&M, or VATech, and that is Ok.

This year, everyone wants to complain about UVA and VATech admissions because this was a very unpredictable admissions cycle, and now, many yearn for a quality education at a good price. But, if students and parents really valued these institutions, they would have committed to them upfront. I have little sympathy for the folks who played the field and now rant that UVA and VATech didn’t hold a position for them. Truly the epitome of privileged thinking.

UT Austin seems to be doing just fine

It is, but if it was released from the top 6% rule, it would likely have significantly higher average standardized test scores, probably at around the level of Michigan, etc. Having lived in Texas for a while, they don't seem to be as obsessed with USNWR ranking as DCUM is. They are cognizant that UT Austin is a great deal with in state tuition, and particularly so in areas like business, engineering, and computer science.

I’m confused. Are you saying that high hs junior level SAT scores make a college a great academic institution? Did you even listen to the podcast?

Top 6%/10% provides opportunities to some people, but it takes them away from others. If you go to an easy high school, you may be top 10% working less than someone who goes to a tougher school with tougher competition.

Those at the high schools with tougher competition usually have other advantages in life that those in the “easier” high schools do not. Please don’t assume that people in the easier high schools aren’t working hard. They often have other obstacles to success. And if you understand equity would understand this is what is needed.

This policy was put in place as an alternative to affirmative action because UT lost a court case - Hopwood.

If you listen to the podcast, the girl who was admitted under the 10% plan to be a math major clearly said she didn't work very much at her high school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a state school hopes to be a great academic institution, it cannot take state residents only or set arbitrary cutoffs without attention to actual ability. Doing either greatly limits the pool of high-achieving applicants and saddles the university with expensive mandates to bring poorly performing kids up to speed or boot them out. The much better approach is what Virginia does: offer a variety of public schools focused on different studies and for students of different abilities and let them compete for which school fits them. By definition, not everyone will go to UVA, or W&M, or VATech, and that is Ok.

This year, everyone wants to complain about UVA and VATech admissions because this was a very unpredictable admissions cycle, and now, many yearn for a quality education at a good price. But, if students and parents really valued these institutions, they would have committed to them upfront. I have little sympathy for the folks who played the field and now rant that UVA and VATech didn’t hold a position for them. Truly the epitome of privileged thinking.

UT Austin seems to be doing just fine

It is, but if it was released from the top 6% rule, it would likely have significantly higher average standardized test scores, probably at around the level of Michigan, etc. Having lived in Texas for a while, they don't seem to be as obsessed with USNWR ranking as DCUM is. They are cognizant that UT Austin is a great deal with in state tuition, and particularly so in areas like business, engineering, and computer science.

I’m confused. Are you saying that high hs junior level SAT scores make a college a great academic institution? Did you even listen to the podcast?

Top 6%/10% provides opportunities to some people, but it takes them away from others. If you go to an easy high school, you may be top 10% working less than someone who goes to a tougher school with tougher competition.

Those at the high schools with tougher competition usually have other advantages in life that those in the “easier” high schools do not. Please don’t assume that people in the easier high schools aren’t working hard. They often have other obstacles to success. And if you understand equity would understand this is what is needed.

This policy was put in place as an alternative to affirmative action because UT lost a court case - Hopwood.

+1, the whole point of this is affirmative action. I am a 2007 UT Grad who got In automatically based on class rank. Back then it was too 10% of the class for UT too. I went to a huge competitive public school in Plano, TX where the academics and competition where pretty high, but most of the people in my class weren’t aiming for UT but for the same Ivies the kids from here are aiming for. I actually was thinking of UT as the safety school, but when it came down to it, the tuition was just so low it didn’t make sense not to go there. As for the other Texas universities, outside of Texas A&M, most of them were not particularly competitive, at least back in the stone ages when I was applying. Also, the UT system schools (UTEP, UTSA, etc) used to have an automatic transfer program to UT if you met certain requirements.