Mass College Admission Cheating Scandal

[crash_davis 23113]

1 minute ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

I think I'm misinterpreting what you're saying, but it sounds like you're cool with a rich California kid whose dad is a Silicon Valley guy getting a sweetheart deal to be the basketball manager because UT lets in disadvantaged kids too?

yep, totally fine. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, crash_davis said:

yep, totally fine. 

Interesting. I disagree.

[crash_davis 23113]

1 minute ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

Interesting. I disagree.

are you equally upset at the well qualified kids who didn't get into to UT because they let someone lesser qualified in based on race?

i know 3 kids who went to LASA scored over 1400 on the SAT, had mostly AP course work, scored 5 on AP tests who didn't get into UT engineering and computer science. i know of one minority kid in CS at UT who had way lesser class load and score less than 1400 on the SAT. i'd venture to say THAT kid took the the spot of the better qualified kid. 

so if we are not using merit as the main criteria and using race and socioeconomic status as major factors, then every year inherently there hundreds and probably thousands of students getting screwed over. so what's the big drama if a kid skirts the system, and what exactly is that system?

again i'm for affirmative action as the intent and end goal is a good thing. but i know it's at the expense of better qualified kids. 

[High Plains Drifter 11050]

7 minutes ago, crash_davis said:

are you equally upset at the well qualified kids who didn't get into to UT because they let someone lesser qualified in based on race?

i know 3 kids who went to LASA scored over 1400 on the SAT, had mostly AP course work, scored 5 on AP tests who didn't get into UT engineering and computer science. i know of one minority kid in CS at UT who had way lesser class load and score less than 1400 on the SAT. i'd venture to say THAT kid took the the spot of the better qualified kid. 

so if we are not using merit as the main criteria and using race and socioeconomic status as major factors, then every year inherently there hundreds and probably thousands of students getting screwed over. so what's the big drama if a kid skirts the system, and what exactly is that system?

again i'm for affirmative action as the intent and end goal is a good thing. but i know it's at the expense of better qualified kids. 

 

 

I'm not upset at all if/when this happens. You (the royal you, not you personally) want students at college to be in a racially, and socio-economically diverse environment.

Which is why I have no sympathy for the white girl who sues the university because they let in an African American with slightly lower grades/scores instead. Its not about the white girl or the African American, its about everybody else at the college not sitting in a class that is 100% white and wealthy.

 

Edited January 20, 2022 by High Plains Drifter

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, crash_davis said:

are you equally upset at the well qualified kids who didn't get into to UT because they let someone lesser qualified in based on race?

i know 3 kids who went to LASA scored over 1400 on the SAT, had mostly AP course work, scored 5 on AP tests who didn't get into UT engineering and computer science. i know of one minority kid in CS at UT who had way lesser class load and score less than 1400 on the SAT. i'd venture to say THAT kid took the the spot of the better qualified kid. 

so if we are not using merit as the main criteria and using race and socioeconomic status as major factors, then every year inherently there hundreds and probably thousands of students getting screwed over. so what's the big drama if a kid skirts the system, and what exactly is that system?

again i'm for affirmative action as the intent and end goal is a good thing. but i know it's at the expense of better qualified kids. 

I have more of an issue that universities haven't kept up with a growing state or demand for college education. So many people are rejected that could easily handle the academic rigor of UT. If you're a bright kid, you essentially have UT and Rice as your options in Texas. Maybe UT-Dallas? It's criminal there are not more academic options here and it's going to lead to our best and brightest going elsewhere.

That said, I am reasonably confident the three LASA kids still went to solid schools and will land on their feet. I do wish they could be admitted to the school of their choice. No doubt they could handle the academics. As for the minority kid? I think that spot means a whole lot more to them and their future. I don't have an issue with a portion of spots going to under-represented (and in-state) students.

So no, I am not as equally upset as when a California resident with every advantage in the world gets a plum deal because of their parent's connections and pocketbook. 

 

[NeverMarryAStripper 21907]

It won't be too long before having rich parents won't have any benefit at all, except of course for the shit load of money you inherit

[OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys 2078]

17 minutes ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

It won't be too long before having rich parents won't have any benefit at all, except of course for the shit load of money you inherit

yeah, except for that benefit

[crash_davis 23113]

11 minutes ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

It won't be too long before having rich parents won't have any benefit at all, except of course for the shit load of money you inherit

yep the rich kids will be fine. and i don't blame the rich kids. they have no say into what race or socioeconomic status they were born any more than the african american or latino kid in how they were born. most rich kids are not assholes. they are trying to do what all kids are trying to do, better themselves and their opportunity for success. the main difference is that middle class and rich kids' parents will have a better social and work network to afford their kids the better opportunity. poor kids don't have the luxury of their parent's life experiences, social or job networks. they need a "better" college much more than the richer kids.

we are using mine and my wife's network to get our kids internships and opportunities that i know the poorer kids don't have access to. like i said earlier, life has a way of working out, good and bad.

[Jambon 176]

2 hours ago, crash_davis said:

are you equally upset at the well qualified kids who didn't get into to UT because they let someone lesser qualified in based on race?

i know 3 kids who went to LASA scored over 1400 on the SAT, had mostly AP course work, scored 5 on AP tests who didn't get into UT engineering and computer science. i know of one minority kid in CS at UT who had way lesser class load and score less than 1400 on the SAT. i'd venture to say THAT kid took the the spot of the better qualified kid. 

so if we are not using merit as the main criteria and using race and socioeconomic status as major factors, then every year inherently there hundreds and probably thousands of students getting screwed over. so what's the big drama if a kid skirts the system, and what exactly is that system?

again i'm for affirmative action as the intent and end goal is a good thing. but i know it's at the expense of better qualified kids. 

Scoring above 1400 on the SAT and taking AP courses in itself is not enough to get into UT engineering or CS.  You just described a mediocre Asian kid.  I should know, I'm Asian.   These two programs are top 10 in the nation.  UT is big on the concept of 'fit to major'.  They want to see that your high school coursework align with your major.  My son got into UT CS last fall.  Knowing how difficult it was to get into CS at UT, we loaded his high school coursework with advanced CS classes, robotics, and engineering.  He was also top 6% in his class (#4 overall).  I do believe this was why he got accepted. I was still not sure if this was going to be enough.   He has a friend just got into UT engineering (electrical).  She is Asian and scored above 1500 on her SAT and is a 4-year All-State violinist and is the salutatorian of her high school.   Moral of the story is that there are a lot of different criteria that UT uses for admissions.  The talent of the applicants applying for these programs are off the charts.  It's not only what you are doing but how do you stack up against other kids. 

I'm also for affirmative action.  I will take the poor kid that did well in school that did not have endless resources to take SAT prep classes, private schools, etc.  This shows a ton of character and will.  These are just as important criteria for admission as standardized test scores. 

[TwiceHorn 31489]

2 hours ago, crash_davis said:

are you equally upset at the well qualified kids who didn't get into to UT because they let someone lesser qualified in based on race?

i know 3 kids who went to LASA scored over 1400 on the SAT, had mostly AP course work, scored 5 on AP tests who didn't get into UT engineering and computer science. i know of one minority kid in CS at UT who had way lesser class load and score less than 1400 on the SAT. i'd venture to say THAT kid took the the spot of the better qualified kid. 

so if we are not using merit as the main criteria and using race and socioeconomic status as major factors, then every year inherently there hundreds and probably thousands of students getting screwed over. so what's the big drama if a kid skirts the system, and what exactly is that system?

again i'm for affirmative action as the intent and end goal is a good thing. but i know it's at the expense of better qualified kids. 

Well, I suppose one factor there is what are "qualifications"?  The minority kid may be qualified at overcoming adversity, including economic, cultural, and language disadvantages, while the white kids are not.

[Jiggy-Z 3432]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, I suppose one factor there is what are "qualifications"?  The minority kid may be qualified at overcoming adversity, including economic, cultural, and language disadvantages, while the white kids are not.

Is there a box for moxie?

[Sbbruin 21858]

18 minutes ago, Jiggy-Z said:

Is there a box for moxie?

Yes, right below "sticktoitiveness"

[Js1 85353]

32 minutes ago, Jiggy-Z said:

Is there a box for moxie?

Isn’t that why Case McCoy got a scholarship? 

[Deej 76806]

I thought it was his promise as a filmmaker that got him a scholarship?

[LCHorn 2620]

1 hour ago, Jambon said:

She is Asian and scored above 1500 on her SAT and is a 4-year All-State violinist and is the salutatorian of her high school.

Somewhat off topic but for our Asian posters, is there something of a stereotype that you all have to learn to play the violin?  I know probably five Asians that play the violin, another one that plays the cello and zero whiteys that play either.  

[Jambon 176]

Just now, LCHorn said:

Somewhat off topic but for our Asian posters, is there something of a stereotype that you all have to learn to play the violin?  I know probably five Asians that play the violin, another one that plays the cello and zero whiteys that play either.  

LOL.  My Asian son plays the cello and piano.  Picking up an instrument as a youngster is pretty big in the Asian community.  Asian tends to like the classical instruments.  It's probably easier to play the piano or violin as a 5 year old as opposed to the oboe or trumpet.  I steered him towards orchestra instead of band because of the Texas heat.  Marching band in Texas seemed like a beating. 

[JesusSweatDuck 17781]

I'm not for affirmative action as it is currently implemented. It currently only considers race and does not consider the real factor of socioeconomic status. A poor white kid will get passed over and a rich black kid will get the benefit of the doubt.

 

That's wrong

[LCHorn 2620]

1 minute ago, JesusSweatDuck said:

I'm not for affirmative action as it is currently implemented. It currently only considers race and does not consider the real factor of socioeconomic status. A poor white kid will get passed over and a rich black kid will get the benefit of the doubt.

 

That's wrong

What makes you think economic status is ignored?  Fox News?

[JesusSweatDuck 17781]

1 minute ago, LCHorn said:

What makes you think economic status is ignored?  Fox News?

When did you put your parents income on a college application.  Federal grants? Sure, but income is not part of the application process

[LCHorn 2620]

3 minutes ago, JesusSweatDuck said:

When did you put your parents income on a college application.  Federal grants? Sure, but income is not part of the application process

If you say so-I’d imagine if that was untrue there’d be quite a fall in private school demand.  
 

Socioeconomic status is ALL over the application process.

[Jambon 176]

3 minutes ago, JesusSweatDuck said:

When did you put your parents income on a college application.  Federal grants? Sure, but income is not part of the application process

Income is part of the financial aid process that doles out aid, loans, and grants.  It is also required if you are applying for scholarship.  It is very much a part of the application process.

[JerrysJheriCurl 977]

Is anyone entitled to a “spot” (as it’s being called on here) at UT? 
Going to LASA (or anywhere else) and doing well there should entitle you to spot at UT? 
Entitlement is a helluva of drug.
Also a helluva mindset.

And definitely a helluva way to go through life. 

Edited January 21, 2022 by JerrysJheriCurl

[topochico 1049]

2 minutes ago, JesusSweatDuck said:

When did you put your parents income on a college application.  Federal grants? Sure, but income is not part of the application process

We just went through the application process this year. The applications have family marital status, number of siblings, educational level of both parents and if they are currently employed/what is their occupation. Most of the essays have an option to discuss how you dealt with or overcame adversity. There is ample information for schools to take an educated guess about a kids socioeconomic advantages or disadvantages. 

I am perfectly fine with schools factoring in data like this. The rich kids will do just fine. If they didn't get into UT, I am sure they got accepted to about 5-10 other schools that will provide a quality education that their parents will pay for and they will come out debt free on the other side. 

[Sbbruin 21858]

5 minutes ago, topochico said:

We just went through the application process this year. The applications have family marital status, number of siblings, educational level of both parents and if they are currently employed/what is their occupation. Most of the essays have an option to discuss how you dealt with or overcame adversity. There is ample information for schools to take an educated guess about a kids socioeconomic advantages or disadvantages. 

I am perfectly fine with schools factoring in data like this. The rich kids will do just fine. If they didn't get into UT, I am sure they got accepted to about 5-10 other schools that will provide a quality education that their parents will pay for and they will come out debt free on the other side. 

We're in the same boat, and yes, with the UC application, I am certain that info will be used against him.  

[JesusSweatDuck 17781]

13 minutes ago, Jambon said:

Income is part of the financial aid process that doles out aid, loans, and grants.  It is also required if you are applying for scholarship.  It is very much a part of the application process.

Not part of the admission process if I'm remembering correctly. Yes part of getting scholarships but not admission

[Jambon 176]

4 minutes ago, JesusSweatDuck said:

Not part of the admission process if I'm remembering correctly. Yes part of getting scholarships but not admission

If you are asking for aid, loans, or grants, you need to fill out FAFSA.  The schools looks at this and can use it to definitely determine admissions, scholarship, etc. 

[Pato del Muerto 52507]

1 hour ago, Jambon said:

class (#4 overall)

[topochico 1049]

3 minutes ago, JesusSweatDuck said:

Not part of the admission process if I'm remembering correctly. Yes part of getting scholarships but not admission

It is easy to tease out income from the data points in the actual application. Married, 2 kids, father-investment banker, mother-pharmacist vs Single mom, 3 kids, mother-housekeeper at Embassy Suites hotel. 

We didn't fill out FASFA until after the applications were submitted, but I know for a fact that the schools could pinpoint a solid range for our family income/socioeconomic status beforehand.  I have no clue how much that truly factored into any acceptance decisions, but it's fine if it did. 
 

[Harrison Bergeron 1798]

I'll state the obvious up-front ... I do not envy anyone responsible for college admissions in an increasingly complicated world. With our population outpacing our top colleges' capacity, it is increasingly difficult to make the optimal admissions.

That being said, I think from the university's perspective, the goal should be from an elite university's perspective:

• Admitting the absolute best possible caliber of students that can succeed, i.e. graduate and transition to a successful career that will bring prestige and future donations to the university
• To a lesser degree, the universities do have an interest in admitting some students of wealthy alumni purely for the financial benefits - while it would suck I would not fault anyone for admitting Red McCombs' grandkids ahead of mine ... I'm never going to be able to endow a school; at least there is some tangible value to this preference as opposed to other artificial criteria

With all the advanced analytics available, there should be a reasonably reliable way to predict success and use those information to support admission decisions. It is complicated as you have to prevent admitting a bunch of kids who do nothing but study and have superior book smarts but lack the basic IQ / EQ to be successful in the real world. That leads to graduating a bunch of helpless robots who will never make mid-level management.

Similarly, you have to avoid admitting a bunch of poor kids that tried hard that have no reasonable chance of succeeding in a rigorous, competitive environment. That leads to a bunch of first- and second-year dropouts as well as wasted resources on the university's part ( or more lowering of standards) and life-derailing discouragement for the students. Said another way, a lot of these poor kids would ultimately be exponentially better off at a "non-elite" university where they can thrive and likely will be much better off long-term than being artificially admitted to an elite university, and the university would be better off for not having to spend extra resources helping these students cut it or artificially passing them only to set them up for career disappointment. 

All that bloviating beside, not sure there is a better system than the one we had been using:

• Grades to judge against local peers
• Standardized tests to judge against national peers
• Consideration for other factors such as leadership, extra-curriculars, socio-economic, environmental, etc.

Probably not perfect but not sure there is a better, specific alternative.

 

[Updawg 2266]

Pretty good post. Tough decisions

[ABSR 5315]

4 hours ago, Jambon said:

If you are asking for aid, loans, or grants, you need to fill out FAFSA.  The schools looks at this and can use it to definitely determine admissions, scholarship, etc. 

scholarships and aid yes.  They do not look at this for admissions.

[TexasEd 8067]

19 hours ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

I have more of an issue that universities haven't kept up with a growing state or demand for college education. So many people are rejected that could easily handle the academic rigor of UT. If you're a bright kid, you essentially have UT and Rice as your options in Texas. Maybe UT-Dallas? It's criminal there are not more academic options here and it's going to lead to our best and brightest going elsewhere.

 

This is my position and why I think that the lack of other viable top tier options outside of Texas, Rice and UT-Dallas is a travesty.  We need another top tier public sector school and not for A&M to get closer to TCEH than UT Austin.

[Guest]

34 minutes ago, TexasEd said:

 

This is my position and why I think that the lack of other viable top tier options outside of Texas, Rice and UT-Dallas is a travesty.  We need another top tier public sector school and not for A&M to get closer to TCEH than UT Austin.

It's a bit of a Catch-22. A&M is actually opening up more spaces to students. Given the growth of Texas population, that's a good thing. The issue is that everyone else is getting more exclusive. So schools get more exclusive, their average student gets better and rankings rise. Meanwhile, the school that's keeping up with the growth of the state sees lower admission standards and rankings fall.

Not sure what the answer is. I honestly don't think the University of Texas at Austin can handle 100,000 students. Think it has to be similar to the Cal system, which also has issues with exclusivity at its name-brand schools that wasn't there decades ago.

 

[High Plains Drifter 11050]

3 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

It's a bit of a Catch-22. A&M is actually opening up more spaces to students. Given the growth of Texas population, that's a good thing. The issue is that everyone else is getting more exclusive. So schools get more exclusive, their average student gets better and rankings rise. Meanwhile, the school that's keeping up with the growth of the state sees lower admission standards and rankings fall.

Not sure what the answer is. I honestly don't think the University of Texas at Austin can handle 100,000 students. Think it has to be similar to the Cal system, which also has issues with exclusivity at its name-brand schools that wasn't there decades ago.

 

 

The answer is simple:

More good, rigorous, research focused state schools that aren't diploma mills. Which cost a lot of money. Which means it won't happen.

More tech (electrical, plumbing, automotive repair, legal secretary, nursing, etc) schools. Which cost a lot of money. Which means it won't happen.

 

 

 

 

[irishtexan 11519]

It's so hard being a rich white man in America today....

[Samson's Wig 3192]

Graduation rate is a data point that interests me in these discussions. UT, like every other school, massages these numbers to the point it's hard to really know the reality.

I'm all for letting in kids who had a tougher road to get to the door over kids who perhaps had an easier go.  I think you have to be very careful with this type of system, however, as where to draw the line is not something you can really plug into analytics and get a concrete answer.   Ultimately, a flat meritocracy is the only truly clean way of handling admissions, but as other have noted it doesn't necessarily lead to the best overall result.  Figuring out how to balance more nebulous criteria will always be difficult and controversial.

Back to graduation rates - if you let in kids who are weaker students based on their background, whether it's because of race/socioeconomics/disability or because daddy is buying a new library, you have to also supply resources that will help them take that step or you're just setting them up for failure. There's no glory in admitting a shitload of kids to your school when half of them never make it out, no matter what criteria you use to screen them.

I also think that there is a lot of generalizing about "rich" kids in this thread, which I suspect also pervades admissions offices.  In our current climate, there are plenty of professionals with kids heading to college in the next decade who won't have their own student loans paid off by then.  Millennials had to borrow out the ass for school, especially for professional degrees, and then entered a world where they're having to pay double or more for a family home than what was happening just a few years ago.  Just because mom's a lawyer and dad's a pharmacist doesn't mean they can just pay for junior to go to school out of pocket.  The landscape is changing and tuition continues to skyrocket, and there won't be many people left at all who can afford to just pay their kids' way through school.  The notion that a successful mom and dad also means Junior will have an easy time finding work is also convoluted.  In some cases it will help, sure, but not all.

In the end, American higher education is fucked up and needs serious fixing.  Other developed nations tend to have more specialized public universities, which are smaller than giant American public unis, and provide a solid landing spot for kids from all backgrounds and interests. In America, we tend to let expensive private college fill this niche, which makes it inaccessible to almost everyone.  Texas might be the most egregious example in the world of a government putting too many eggs into one basket instead of spreading public funding of higher education out.  The other, perhaps more important, part of the equation is that we don't spend near enough on higher education in general, leaving tuition too high and opportunities limited.

[Murfdogg21 4412]

Maybe aggy Rick Perry’s buddy was correct. We should just admit an unlimited number of students so nobody gets left out, with mostly online coursework which seems like the direction it’s going anyway. Then weed half of them out based on academic performance after a year or two, when they can transfer to a smaller school to finish, while those with good grades move on to upper level degree coursework. 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13515]

Public schools should serve as a vehicle for less fortunate young adults to get ahead. I’m not saying it should be exclusive less fortunate but they need to ensure it’s not just fortunate young adults who are assisted when they started on first base if not second or third.

of course the real failure is that we relatively have so few top notch school in Texas. Texas leadership has failed Texas children over the last 25-30 years. This will eventually be the downfall of Texas unless we can continue to attract outside educated adults while pushing native Texans down.

Edited January 22, 2022 by Nice Guy Eddie

[Nice Guy Eddie 13515]

1 hour ago, Murfdogg21 said:

Maybe aggy Rick Perry’s buddy was correct. We should just admit an unlimited number of students so nobody gets left out, with mostly online coursework which seems like the direction it’s going anyway. Then weed half of them out based on academic performance after a year or two, when they can transfer to a smaller school to finish, while those with good grades move on to upper level degree coursework. 

Fyi, the top level schools would rail against this plan. They’re partially judged in rankings by how many students they reject. We’re all proud when we see UT is #XX in national rankings. How would you feel when you see us drop to #200 or 250?

The ranking system of course is sad. Shouldn’t it be a goal of a school to provide an education to as many as possible as opposed to as few?

[Pato del Muerto 52507]

13 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Public schools should serve as a vehicle for less fortunate young adults to get ahead. I’m not saying it should be exclusive less fortunate but they need to ensure it’s not just fortunate young adults who are assisted when they started on first base if not second or third.

of course the real failure is that we relatively have so few top notch school in Texas. Texas leadership has failed Texas children over the last 25-30 years. This will eventually be the downfall of Texas unless we can continue to attract outside educated adults while pushing native Texans down.

The Utexas system is actively trying to bring the satellite schools up in order to meet demand. 
 

the aggy system continues to bleed its satellite schools dry to funnel money to the CS campus- and even then the main campus isn’t able to handle what they’ve done.  My wife’s nephew is a freshman there, hates it, has 4/5 classes this semester online and not by choice. He is leaving after the spring semester, and is thinking about dropping the one in-person class and doing the rest from home. 
 

 

[Js1 85353]

19 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

The Utexas system is actively trying to bring the satellite schools up in order to meet demand. 
 

the aggy system continues to bleed its satellite schools dry to funnel money to the CS campus- and even then the main campus isn’t able to handle what they’ve done.  My wife’s nephew is a freshman there, hates it, has 4/5 classes this semester online and not by choice. He is leaving after the spring semester, and is thinking about dropping the one in-person class and doing the rest from home. 
 

 

There is hope for this generation after all! 

[Brisketexan 105152]

Public schools should serve as a vehicle for less fortunate young adults to get ahead. I’m not saying it should be exclusive less fortunate but they need to ensure it’s not just fortunate young adults who are assisted when they started on first base if not second or third.
of course the real failure is that we relatively have so few top notch school in Texas. Texas leadership has failed Texas children over the last 25-30 years. This will eventually be the downfall of Texas unless we can continue to attract outside educated adults while pushing native Texans down.

It’s important to realize that the primary job of public universities is to serve the people of the state. Their job is to perform a public good: cultivate the most important capital asset anyplace has (its people).

The State of Texas invested a lot in me (I had a full ride all the way through college and law school). That helped keep me here in-state. In return, I’ve become successful, been a strong net positive to the economy, and raised a successful family. The investment paid off.

The state did the same by offering accessible, low-cost education to my dad at A&M decades ago, with a similar result. State universities are economic force multipliers for their state, if used correctly.

The Utexas system is actively trying to bring the satellite schools up in order to meet demand. 
 
the aggy system continues to bleed its satellite schools dry to funnel money to the CS campus- and even then the main campus isn’t able to handle what they’ve done.  My wife’s nephew is a freshman there, hates it, has 4/5 classes this semester online and not by choice. He is leaving after the spring semester, and is thinking about dropping the one in-person class and doing the rest from home. 
 
 

And I love what UT has done with its satellite campuses. I have nieces who started at Arlington and finished at Austin (a good path that addresses the issue of promising students who may not yet be ready for the rigors of UT Austin). I know other kids who are getting good degrees and jobs from Arlington and Dallas, which are turning into strong universities in their own right. We need more of them.

[Pato del Muerto 52507]

26 minutes ago, Js1 said:

There is hope for this generation after all! 

Basically, he and his mom are saying that what aggy sold them on visits and literature is not the actual experience.  But I think we already knew that. 
 

I told my wife that even if you are one of the smart kids that heads there for a value-priced good degree plan like engineering, with the way they accept marginal students those are the people you will be surrounded by for the first couple of years in dorms and basic freshman classes. So that’s the culture. 
you either need to have been raised redass, be malleable enough to conform, or hate it. and if you hate it, what are your actual options?  Big decision for a 19 year old to have to make, on the heels of making the big decision of where to attend out of high school and having to/being able to admit that decision was a mistake. 
 

especially when you tell people you are going to aggy and half of your friends’ parents drone on about how it was the best thing they ever did, between whoops. 

Edited January 22, 2022 by Pato del Muerto

[TwiceHorn 31489]

On 1/20/2022 at 9:21 PM, Harrison Bergeron said:

To a lesser degree, the universities do have an interest in admitting some students of wealthy alumni purely for the financial benefits - while it would suck I would not fault anyone for admitting Red McCombs' grandkids ahead of mine ... I'm never going to be able to endow a school; at least there is some tangible value to this preference as opposed to other artificial criteria

While I grant the practicality of this line of thought on the part of the University, it is problematic that a wealthy alum requires a quid pro quo to make the donation.

And that reflects the entitlement attitude that permeates this whole situation.  Wealthy donors should be ashamed about putting their alma mater in this position.

[TwiceHorn 31489]

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Fyi, the top level schools would rail against this plan. They’re partially judged in rankings by how many students they reject. We’re all proud when we see UT is #XX in national rankings. How would you feel when you see us drop to #200 or 250?

The ranking system of course is sad. Shouldn’t it be a goal of a school to provide an education to as many as possible as opposed to as few?

One of the major reasons for Texas' lower standing compared to other top publics is that very thing:  selectivity.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Wealthy donors should be ashamed about putting their alma mater in this position.

LOLz.

by the same token, a shit ton of folks need to wake the fuck up to the fact that the world isn't fair.  I have enjoyed the ying and yang to a certain degree on this aspect of the discussion in this thread overall..

and before someone asks, No, I am way the fuck far off from being one of those kind of (donor) alums.

[Samson's Wig 3192]

6 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

I told my wife that even if you are one of the smart kids that heads there for a value-priced good degree plan like engineering, with the way they accept marginal students those are the people you will be surrounded by for the first couple of years in dorms and basic freshman classes. So that’s the culture. 
you either need to have been raised redass, be malleable enough to conform, or hate it. and if you hate it, what are your actual options?  Big decision for a 19 year old to have to make, on the heels of making the big decision of where to attend out of high school and having to/being able to admit that decision was a mistake.

especially when you tell people you are going to aggy and half of your friends’ parents drone on about how it was the best thing they ever did, between whoops. 

What do you mean by, "those . . .people"?

I don't know why anyone goes to aggy.  Weird decision that many make though.  In spite of recognizing the difference in rankings,  I'm not sure the gap between an engineering degree at UT and A&M, or even TTU for that matter, is that significant in terms of earning potential and career prospects.  The ceiling may be marginally higher for UT grads, but the floor for a graduate from any of them is about the same.  The specific discipline certainly comes into play, with each having their respective weaker and stronger departments.  Culturally, of course, there is a world of difference between the three, and this is what matters most for those selecting where to study.  Someone who isn't comfortable with authoritarian circle jerking would have a hard time in college station, I would think.  But UT has gotten so difficult to get into, due to population growth more than anything else if we're being honest, that these kids have to go somewhere.  If you're a socially functional eighteen year old, I can't imagine staring down the barrel of attending aggy.

[Harrison Bergeron 1798]

6 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

While I grant the practicality of this line of thought on the part of the University, it is problematic that a wealthy alum requires a quid pro quo to make the donation.

And that reflects the entitlement attitude that permeates this whole situation.  Wealthy donors should be ashamed about putting their alma mater in this position.

I don't think it's an unreasonable request. It's not entitlement it's human nature. Every person on this board would do the same, and its rationale and not reasonable for the universities to accommodate. "Morally" if you will it's no different than other non-academic factors employed in admissions.

Edited January 22, 2022 by Harrison Bergeron

[Harrison Bergeron 1798]

There's really two separate issues that are not mutually exclusive: we should both preserve our "elite" institutions as "elite" while improving higher education for all. Texas offers a lot of diverse options for lots of different types is students, which is a good thing. 

[TwiceHorn 31489]

55 minutes ago, slorch said:

LOLz.

by the same token, a shit ton of folks need to wake the fuck up to the fact that the world isn't fair.  I have enjoyed the ying and yang to a certain degree on this aspect of the discussion in this thread overall..

and before someone asks, No, I am way the fuck far off from being one of those kind of (donor) alums.

Has nothing to do with fairness.

It has everything to do with wealthy people, not all, but many, being entitled cunts.