• Facebook StumbleUpon
• Email

1. uthookem said:

   March 5th, 2009 at 8:40 am

   “In 1998, 41% of the entering freshmen qualified under the Top 10% rule. In 2009, 86% of the entering class will fall under that rule.”

   I started UT in the class of 1998, and was in the top 10%. It was nice knowing that I would be admitted by being in the top 10%, but I couldn’t pay for it even if I was admitted. Fortunately, I secured a full ride academically, so I wasn’t that worried (I had smarts, and grew up in Houston…lots of folks handing out money for college).

   As I understand, the top 10% rule was put in place to ensure that small towns with small high schools could get their smartest kids into the state schools. However, it is quite possible that Buford the Valedictorian from McCamey, who must be admitted to UT, is not near as smart or well rounded as Cindi from Lamar who graduated ranked 73rd in her class, just outside the top 10%.

   Starting with the top 1% and then heading down the list still allows the rural kids to get in, so I support this.

   I also called my representatives yesterday and urged them to support the amendment of the law. To look up your state rep, go here: State Reps

   Hook ‘em!

2. EggNog said:

   March 5th, 2009 at 8:42 am

   Interesting that they are looking at modifying the 10% rule instead of dropping it completely. It was introduced to legally get minorities into UT, but did not work towards that aim. Turns out that the top 10% at “minority” schools are mostly white.

   Moving to a top 1%, 2%, etc; tiered admission will only continue to bring in more white students. Since this is supposedly opposite of what they are aiming to do, they should drop that requirement completely.

   I was part of that first entrant class in ‘98, its amazing to think that it has taken a decade for them to seriously try to do something to correct their mistake. Sadly, its just a band-aid.

3. Bob in Houston said:

   March 5th, 2009 at 8:52 am

   UT has data that shows that top-10 percent students get better grades than non-top-10s with similar test scores.

4. Bob in Houston said:

   March 5th, 2009 at 8:56 am

   EggNog, it’s not an issue at any other school in the state.

5. HenryJames said:

   March 5th, 2009 at 8:58 am

   “It was introduced to legally get minorities into UT, but did not work towards that aim.”

   That was the initial aim, but it’s been kept in place by supporters in the legislature mostly from small towns.

6. Parlin Hall said:

   March 5th, 2009 at 9:08 am

   I’m just to the right of this picture.

7. uthookem said:

   March 5th, 2009 at 9:10 am

   Okay, so first for minority enrollment, and then for rural schools. The amendment should still help rural schools; it doesn’t look like it has ever helped minorities.

   Hook ‘em!

8. Mysterious Package said:

   March 5th, 2009 at 9:20 am

   Trash the top 10% rule. No one cares if you are black or asian or from Van Horn, get in on your own merrits and quit riding coatails. Go back the way it was before. I was top 30% at a prestigious High School, barely got in and made a 3.5 GPA with deans list my last 4 semesters. I would not have gotten in now and that is a shame. Scrap it, 10% has run its course and has done nothing but bring in lesser kids.

9. bigdukesix said:

   March 5th, 2009 at 9:25 am

   UT has data that shows that top-10 percent students get better grades than non-top-10s with similar test scores.

   Would anyone expect anything different?

10. HistoryHorn said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 9:26 am

    Where are you guys getting your information?

    1998 incoming freshman: 65% White, 3% Black, 17% Asian American, 13% Hispanic

    2008 incoming freshman: 52% White, 6% Black, 19% Asian American, 20% Hispanic

    The Top 10% rule is a hell of a lot better than a comprehensive file review system, some jackass sitting in the Tower weighing a kid with 1230 SATs (it will always be on a scale of 1600 in my heart) who played orchestra and worked part time versus a 1270 SAT who played JV basketball and volunteered is the most asinine thing in history. Every single high school freshman in the state knows exactly what they have to do to get into UT.

    Did I get screwed by going to Cinco Ranch High School where a 4.1 was required for the top 10 (which I was nowhere near)? In the most narrow view possible, yes. However, having a high SES and a ton of cultural capital more than sets off the ‘disadvantage’ of going to CRHS. People in the suburbs whining make me sick.

11. 10isgod said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 9:31 am

    I’m personally of the opinion as well that the rule should just be abolished. I feel that good grades a good student do not necessarily make. Other things such as their extra-curricula’s and other factors need to be taken into account. I know that at many of the most competitive schools around the state that many of the kids who are in the top ten percent often times do not participate in outside activities in order to keep their GPA’s up. I also went to a very prestigious high school and was only in the thirtieth percentile, yet i was admitted due to my SAT and all of the outside sports and awards that I had acquired.

12. HistoryHorn said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 9:42 am

    Extracurriculars are bull. That whole system was set up after Jews started doing a little too well on entrance exams/SATs at Harvard, Yale and Princeton (’The Chosen’ is an excellent book on the subject). Asian Americans now face the brunt of discrimination since they do well in school but tend to have fewer extra curriculars.

    Honestly, who gives a shit if someone played cello or was on the JV football team in HS? What relevance does that have to your academic career in higher ed? None. Secondly, how is that quantifiable/comparable to someone who worked for the school newspaper or played sports? It’s not. Instead a bunch of admissions officers are empowered as gatekeepers at the university to keep out people they don’t like. Maybe it’s because I just read “Blink” but everyone has so many hidden biases it’s basically a crapshoot. The order you read an essay, how you feel that particular day, it’s a crap system shrouded in mystery.

13. bgood2texas said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 10:00 am

    Extra curriculars should have alot to do with admissions. If I’m looking at a kid who played sports and was involved in the community versus a kid who just stayed at home and studied, i’m taking the first kid every time. I would do this even if there was a 50-75 point difference in his SAT.

    You do this because you aren’t just recruiting students, you’re recruiting the people that will live in, run, and shape your university. The more vibrant and diverse the kids you bring in, the better.

14. Charlie said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 10:02 am

    Not knowing the game is costing me $180 grand.

    We moved here a few years back with two boys still in high school. We thought it wise to move to a district with what many claim is the most academically competitive high school in the state.

    Being in the top quintile from a top school didn’t cut it with UT (where I went in the late 60s). Both got snapped up by even more prestigious OOS programs but at 4 – 5 times the annual cost. Ouch! Wish I’da knowed better.

15. HenryJames said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 10:02 am

    Harvard had pieces of flair that they made the Jews wear.

16. srr50 said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 10:13 am

    I like Flair
    

17. The General said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 10:20 am

    I am glad I came in the class of ‘97.

18. Austin Powers said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 10:25 am

    “I am glad I came in the class of ‘97.”

    Good thing you didn’t pull out..

19. CloseToJumping said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 10:34 am

    I think that what qualifies as extra curricular is generally an utter joke. I did stupid before and after school shit like FCA, French Group, Student Council, blah, blah, blah. Who gives a shit? Apparently academia. I joined those things because I knew I had to, went to the minimum amount of meetings, and then I did what I needed to do, work and play sports.

    The working was the extra curricular activity in which I learned the most besides sports. Hard work, earning spending money and more, giving a shit about local business and politics as a result, and helping the family pay bills. Those things mattered more than being on student council, yet working meant virtually nothing for getting into the UT biz school. I found that and the entire academic college experience to be an utter mockery of reality once I was there. I still do, more than a decade later, even though I got in and did the whole BBA thing.

    What actually matters is how well you get things done (not just getting them done, but getting them done well), how well you solve problems, and how well you can work with others to achieve a common goal. Not one of those things does college address. If you reply that class projects or study/party time management skills address the prior point, you are exactly the special kind of dipshit I have always assumed you were, Barking Carnival poster.

    I’d prefer they measure off of scores/HS rank and a lottery for people who qualify, score-wise, when there are too many qualifying before the scoring bar is raised. It would produce as much value as the stupid ass mix they include of extra curricular activities such as drama or fucking band. It takes the pretense of fairness out of it and it is what it is. The rest is charlatanism.

20. EggNog said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 10:55 am

    Interesting look at the actual numbers on enrollment, I hadn’t seen them but had “heard” about them. Those numbers seem awfully low for Middle Eastern students, unless they are rolled into the Asian American group.

    How does the Hispanic population growth in Texas compare to the UT enrollment over that time?

    Since the rule was passed to skirt legal decision about race based admissions, but has since formed into something that promotes rural admissions, what is the point? Is there any law on the books that prevents UT from choosing to draw from various locations? It would seem simpler and more effective than this tiered % rule they are looking at.

21. BatesHorn said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 11:10 am

    Well, you pretty much have the classic Westlake vs. The Valley argument here: you get westlake kids that can get into Duke or UVa but can’t get into UT vs. a kid from the valley that would be Texas St. bound if it weren’t for the 10% rule.

    I don’t know the answer, but man has the 10% changed things: in 92, UT was our safety school when we applied out east. Not anymore.

22. HenryJames said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 11:20 am

    Anyone know what the percentage of out of state or foreign enrollees is?

23. HistoryHorn said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 11:38 am

    International students make up 3% of the incoming class (n=208) Out of state appears to be 5.8% (n=393)

    http://www.utexas.edu/student/admissions/research/HB588-Report11.pdf

24. dedfischer said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 11:40 am

    I rejected UT’s overtures coming out of high school. I finished 1 out of 22, but 4 were exchange students, so only 18 eligible natives……in Claude. I might have had to go to Tech anywhere else. I think that rich Venezuelan chick, who grew up with servants in her house, was in for a large culture shock. Imagine that? You sign up for an exciting new exchange program to soak up American culture after being sheltered in the Finnish country side your whole life, and you draw one of the four families from Claude that annually host foreigners.

25. uthookem said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 11:49 am

    Nice, lively discussion we’ve got going. I see the point of kids in Westlake/Plano/Bellaire getting into the fancy schools in the east and not getting into UT, as well as Rico from Alice getting into UT and not being able to get into Rice/UVA/Duke.

    This can be volleyed back and forth ad nauseum.

    It all comes down to one thing once you get out of school: getting shit done.

    CTJ summed it up very well:

    “What actually matters is how well you get things done (not just getting them done, but getting them done well), how well you solve problems, and how well you can work with others to achieve a common goal. Not one of those things does college address.”

    I’m an engineer for the space program. Just about everyone here can get shit done. A few can get shit done well. Very few can get shit done well while working well with others.

    Hook ‘em!

26. BrickHorn said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 11:58 am

    What actually matters is how well you get things done (not just getting them done, but getting them done well), how well you solve problems, and how well you can work with others to achieve a common goal. Not one of those things does college address.

    Your perspective on the value of a college education is a direct result of your chosen major.

27. Ricky said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 12:05 pm

    Not to piss anyone off to much but I think business and engineering schools should just be cut from academia and be a part of trade schools. In flailing around for 5 years at UT I generally called my time in both programs ‘drone school’. It was pretty evident I was in training to be a cog. Once I dropped all pretense of ‘training’ for a career and got down to just ‘learning things’ by taking a lot of random liberal arts classes I found I learned a lot about thinking that has made my working career much more interesting and worthwhile.

28. BrickHorn said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 12:09 pm

    Ricky,

    In other words, the State should invest its resources in training the best and brightest to be qualified for exactly nothing useful?

29. CloseToJumping said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 12:22 pm

    That is a projection of your thoughts onto how other people think and behave, BrickHorn. Generalize all you want, I do it regularly with enjoyment, but on a personal level, had I chosen Finance, History, or Child Development, it wouldn’t have changed much. College was a tertiary concern at the time, at best. Not unlike the extracurricular BS that preceded it.

30. Facebook User said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 12:28 pm

    Brick – Hard core science/math stuff needs to be done for sure but the ability to develop critical thinking about things and properly communicate those thoughts is well served in Lit, History, etc.

31. BrickHorn said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 12:29 pm

    College was a tertiary concern at the time, at best.

    It sounds like the student, not the coursework, was the problem.

32. BrickHorn said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 12:39 pm

    Brick – Hard core science/math stuff needs to be done for sure but the ability to develop critical thinking about things and properly communicate those thoughts is well served in Lit, History, etc.

    I’m in favor of a required core curriculum that emphasizes critical thinking and communication. But I don’t think expelling the engineering and business colleges from the state’s flagship university is sound policy, nor do I believe that an emphasis on liberal arts education would be useful.

    Personally, I would advise any student even remotely interested in math and science to major in engineering. Armed with an engineering degree, you can write your own ticket into pretty much any industry or field you want. Law, medicine, business, science, engineering, academia, journalism, government, etc. are all filled with former engineers and engineering grads.

    It’s easy for engineers to teach themselves literature, writing, philosophy, civics, and so on. But it’s damned near impossible for liberal arts grads to go out and teach themselves how to design useful technology.

33. Ricky said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 12:47 pm

    Brick, I was joking. If the engineering students and business students aren’t exposed to liberal arts courses they will be poorly served. In fact, I would have ended up a trade school drop out and never would have gotten all the rich critical thinking, reading, and writing skills that I pooh-poohed when I came to UT thinking I would become an engineer rather than an editor.

34. Justaguy said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 12:50 pm

    I realize I am not very bright, but can any give an insight into how the Top 10 percent is imperiling summer school and the athletic program?

35. Scipio Tex said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 12:55 pm

    Justaguy:

    It’s honestly not. Powers is using that as a clever bogeyman to threaten our idiot legislature and draw media attention to the sheer idiocy of the Top 10% rule.

36. dedfischer said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 1:00 pm

    All I know is I had a shit-ton of offers coming out of high school, money in my pocket, and a jet ski. I didn’t have any of that when I got done with college. I was Kenny Fucking Powers, and after 3 episodes, shit-ton is my new favorite curse word.

37. huge said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 1:45 pm

    i had a full ride to USC, maybe i should have gone.

38. intellectual type said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 1:49 pm

    I guess concerning all of this, the best comment I can think to contribute is, “don’t hate the player, hate the game.” Anyone who wants to go to UT knows what must be done. If they are unable or unwilling to get it done, then that’s life. A good life lesson to learn at an early age.

39. The General said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 2:12 pm

    “I guess concerning all of this, the best comment I can think to contribute is, “don’t hate the player, hate the game.” Anyone who wants to go to UT knows what must be done. If they are unable or unwilling to get it done, then that’s life. A good life lesson to learn at an early age.”

    I don’t think the point of the argument is that poor disillusioned Westlake must mope over to Duke with Daddy’s Jag, and the public cries. I think the point is that the top 10% rule does not, by itself, identify the best students to represent the University.

    There is an old law school joke that goes something like this, “A students are law proffessors, B students are judges, and C students are millionaires.”

    The current law shuts us out of the millionaire market and is not performing as it was intended.

40. Scipio Tex said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 2:15 pm

    intellectual type:

    On a user-end pragmatic level, sure.

    In every other way, what you just wrote is utter horseshit.

    We’re trying to build an elite university that serves this state as an economic and intellectual engine of progress, not engage in a little league soccer participation trophy award ceremony.

    The notion that because a certain structure exists means that everyone should just say OKAY and then dumbly modify their behaviors appropriately by driving their kids to a horrendous high school isn’t the answer and speaks to precisely the mentality required to find our country in the shitty mess it is because people shrug and say “Oh, that’s the system. What can you do?”

    We allowed idiots to craft the top 10% system under some false notion of valuing diversity over achievement and merit and now we’re suffering the consequences.

41. Spider said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 2:33 pm

    The 10% rule was a way to pretend we’d gotten rid of race-based admissions (without the embarrassment of a sudden whitening of the school), while simultaneously placating the pseudo-populism of those who see UT as just a state school, and have forgotten the “first class” mandate that is still in the Texas constitution. It was a way of keeping the wrong people happy, people who aren’t interested in our mission at UT.

    The result has been a shocking dumbing-down of the UT student body that I have witnessed first-hand.

    There’s a reason that the “new” UGS curriculum is just a bunch of rebadged classes that used to be PART OF A RETENTION PROGRAM. I taught one of those courses once. Once.

    Not all schools are created equal. An admissions policy that pretends they are is a failed admissions policy. And a politician who keeps education from enforcing standards is a waste of skin. You’d never do this to the graduate school.

42. Scipio Tex said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 2:37 pm

    Nicely written, Spider.

43. Spider said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 2:41 pm

    “In other words, the State should invest its resources in training the best and brightest to be qualified for exactly nothing useful?”

    If the name of your major is the name of your job, you’re in a trade school. Education is not “training.” That comes later.

44. Spider said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 2:42 pm

    Whoa, Scip likes my writing?

    Think I can die happy, now.

45. intellectual type said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 2:43 pm

    I agree the system should be changed, but by the same token I did what I had to do to get in. I graduated in the top 10% of my class to get in because I knew that was what it was going to take to get in. Granted, I also had a shit-ton of extracurricular activities and STILL had the grades to get in from a high school that was far more difficult than most. All I’m saying is this day and age there’s too many people working for the same spot and you better damn well distinguish yourself in order to achieve your goal.

46. beowulf said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 2:43 pm

    Nicely written Spider and Scipio.

    I’ve called my senator and Rep. Have the rest of you?

    Of course, I look for any little excuse to call my Rep. I would wager she is the best looking State Rep in Texas. Maybe the country. And a UT grad and big fan.

    Tara Rios Ybarra. She’s a dentist and her husband is an ER doc in Harlingen.

    http://www.votetara.com/

47. BrickHorn said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 2:46 pm

    The result has been a shocking dumbing-down of the UT student body that I have witnessed first-hand.

    I’d love to see some objective statistics to either confirm or disconfirm that suspicion. For example, what has happened to average graduate entry exam (GRE, GMAT, LSAT, MCAT) scores for UT graduates since the 10% rule went into effect?

48. HenryJames said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 2:48 pm

    “while simultaneously placating the pseudo-populism of those who see UT as just a state school”

    That’s accurate. Just listen to any of the speeches of the rural reps during debates over attempted changes.

49. BrickHorn said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 2:48 pm

    If the name of your major is the name of your job, you’re in a trade school. Education is not “training.” That comes later.

    If the name of your major is not also the name of a potential job, your “education” is worthless.

50. Spider said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 2:55 pm

    I’d love to see some objective statistics to either confirm or disconfirm that suspicion.

    That’s why you’re an engineer. Students’ analytical abilities and communications skills have declined, according to faculty who’ve been here a lot longer than I. For the skill sets we teach, objective tests are wholly inadequate.

    If the name of your major is not also the name of a potential job, your “education” is worthless.

    If you’re this ignorant, your education was worthless. Our students will have, on average, three careers before they retire. My father was a chemical engineer. He worked in modems for his last decade of useful life. My EE buddy works in marketing. A general education prepares you to learn. That’s why medical school and law school and grad school are willing to wait for you. The MCAT rep at NACADA last year stood up and announced that a BBA was worthless. Send your kids to get BAs and they can take an MBA later. They’ll be more successful. Our students who take B-school classes agree: not a challenge. The B-school maintains higher admissions standards to create a marketable air of exclusivity.

    Half of American CEO have Liberal Arts BA’s, and unlike the B-school, we aren’t even trying. We know what we’re doing.

51. intellectual type said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 3:07 pm

    I sense that this is going to degenerate into a contest of “whose major is better.” Before that happens, i’d like to throw out one other idea concerning the Top 10% law. UT is the only school where this seems to be a major issue right now. Basically, everybody wants to go to UT Austin and has the perception that all of the satellite campuses are inferior. Perhaps some of this could be placated by increasing the quality of education of these other campuses. If you can increase the attractiveness of these other schools, then you can reduce the demand of UT Austin. Granted, I believe this is necessary regardless of the Top 10% law. Just my two cents.

    Responses?

52. ChicagoTTU said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 3:15 pm

    My younger bother graduated in the top 12% of his High School and eventually went to West Point, where he graduated in the top Quarter (’06).

    When applying, in addition to West Point, he was accepted to Notre Dame and Stanford, but because of his 12% H.S. ranking, Texas would only accept him on a probationary level… (I can’t remember the in’s and out’s of this “probationary” tab exactly, and I’m too lazy to put in the research, so just take my word, please).

    I know this is just one of many case studies, but it’s just an example how the Top 10% criteria, or any one academic criteria, shouldn’t play such a deciding role in the make-up of any student body.

53. BrickHorn said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 3:18 pm

    For the skill sets we teach, objective tests are wholly inadequate.

    That’s because the “skills” aren’t useful in an objective sense.

    A general education prepares you to learn. That’s why medical school and law school and grad school are willing to wait for you.

    Engineering school teaches students useful skills and, in the process, teaches students to think and solve problems in a way that is universally applicable. Any intelligent engineering student can go out and learn the equivalent of a liberal arts education without much effort.

    How many liberal artists do you know who aren’t terrified of mathematics and science? The eyes of the most brilliant Ivy League liberal arts grads I knew in law school glazed over when elementary mathematical concepts (like simple interest) were discussed.

    A liberal arts education prepares students to learn things that any college student can learn. An engineering (or math or science) education provides knowledge in areas inaccessible without either guidance by professionals or a unique combination of genius and motivation.

    Half of American CEO have Liberal Arts BA’s, and unlike the B-school, we aren’t even trying. We know what we’re doing.

    Training the inept leaders of America’s economic disaster?

54. Fuzzy said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 3:20 pm

    Bob – I am sure UT has data that show that top 10% students get better grades than non top 10% students with similar scores. For the 10% rule to be valid, it would have to show that top 10% students get better grades than students with top 10% test scores. That’s not likely, since test scores are equated, whereas class status is clustered.

55. BatesHorn said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 3:20 pm

    FWIW, it’s not whites that get in when affirmative action is dropped, it’s Asians, as the UC system found out.

    Having gone to a four year Liberal Arts school, the quality of a humanities education is in the writing and critical thinking. And that’s gold here in DC, where both are in jaw droppingly short supply. Plus the rejection of grade inflation, which means good work earns you a C. Period.

    Of course, none of that is apparant from my imbecilic rantings on this site.

56. BrickHorn said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 3:25 pm

    Spider,

    Send your kids to get BAs and they can take an MBA later. They’ll be more successful.

    I do agree with that. However, I would add that a kid with a BS degree in science, mathematics, or engineering will be even more successful (on average).

57. Dejuan Blair said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 3:38 pm

    There is no college major for “sales” that I know of.

    Many major Enterprises and small businesses depend on their sales teams to achieve their revenue target.

    Lots of people who are in sales make a shit-ton of money. (There are also a lot of schlocks).

    Anyway, it doesn’t matter what your major was, you might be a tremendous success or failure at sales. It has little to do with the classes you had in college.

    College helps prepare you for real life – inside the classroom, interacting with the world and having your head in a toilet.

58. Mysterious Package said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 4:36 pm

    Well, the cool kids played football or golf or basketball or whatever. The dorks played cello and flute. Its pretty simple really take 50% of both.

59. Spider said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 4:44 pm

    Engineering school teaches students useful skills and, in the process, teaches students to think and solve problems in a way that is universally applicable.

    Lots of things do. If you didn’t keep confusing subject matter with process, you’d see that.

    Any intelligent engineering student can go out and learn the equivalent of a liberal arts education without much effort.

    Speaking as someone who actually works with engineering students in a liberal arts setting, you’re full of shit.

    How many liberal artists do you know who aren’t terrified of mathematics and science?

    Lots, especially in economics, which is in liberal arts. And psychology. And linguistics. Ever seen syntactic theory?

    The eyes of the most brilliant Ivy League liberal arts grads I knew in law school glazed over when elementary mathematical concepts (like simple interest) were discussed.

    The plural of anecdote is not data. Since you haven’t got anything right about the liberal arts yet, we can identify at least one engineering student who isn’t good at liberal arts.

    A liberal arts education prepares students to learn things that any college student can learn.

    Since many of the don’t, and fail, this statement is transparently false.

    An engineering (or math or science) education provides knowledge in areas inaccessible without either guidance by professionals or a unique combination of genius and motivation.

    … just like the humanities, yes.

    Training the inept leaders of America’s economic disaster?

    At last you have said something that has a chance of being correct.

60. Spider said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 4:54 pm

    However, I would add that a kid with a BS degree in science, mathematics, or engineering will be even more successful (on average).

    That’s because you have assumed, without justification, that BA’s do not require technical skills or that they are intellectually undemanding. Making that kind of observation would require the kind of unobjectively-measurable skill that you have repeatedly demonstrated you lack. There’s a reason UT has no pre-med curriculum, for instance, and why they send so many students to get BA’s: it’s the only way to get skills that they never will in nat. sci or engineering.

    We’re training people for jobs that don’t exist yet, involving skills that can’t be dumbed-down to a scantron. Since you not only fail to grasp this but also adamantly reject it, it’s a damned good thing that you don’t work in education, because your students would be screwed.

61. Saggy Aggie said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 4:55 pm

    Power’s probably desperately wishes to ditch the top 10% rule because of the drastic effect it has had on the attractiveness of our co-eds. Now this is a subject worthy of discussion. An automatic 10% rules allows the ugly girls to take potential space from the hot ones because the hot girls tend to be busy doing things other than studying in high school, as we all know. You do not have to be an EE grad to understand the mathematical implications of this phenomenon. If a Liberal Art’s BA has eyes that can see past his up-turned, scientific ignorant nose, then even those flakey flunkies can comprehend this bit of mathematical data.

    Powers does have a intimate personal interest relating to this hottie co-ed numbers issue. He is known to scavenge his future mates from this very selection of hottie co-eds/gold diggers who happen to be attracted to older, successful men with mucho dinero to give away for their favors. I believe he has already been married to three of such said hottie co-eds. Only heavens and his therapist knows how many other hottie co-eds he has had, let us say, less formal relations with. Old, successful, dirty, old men like to be surrounded by hottie co-eds desperate to do favors in order to secure those valuable higher grades. This should be an equation that even a B.A. can comprehend, whether he be a CEO or not. Maybe all of this talk is just his weiner telling him that it is time to find another hottie co-ed to get hitch to and has very little to do with the any other business of the university. As if he really gives a damn about education or educating the children of Texas, given his age and the stage of his life. When you only have about ten more years to live and you have the means, old, perverted geezers are thinking about only one thing, the only thing that probably matters to them at that point. It’s just fortunate for him that he happens to be the president of a major state university. More power to Powers, that perverted, old, over-educated, geezer. And the worse of all this is, I believe, he has a liberal arts B.A.

62. Spider said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 4:57 pm

    I sense that this is going to degenerate into a contest of “whose major is better.”

    Not really. We just have one poster who insists on demonstrating how much he doesn’t know about education.

63. DBH said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 5:15 pm

    “If the name of your major is the name of your job, you’re in a trade school. Education is not “training.” That comes later”

    The first guy who told me that was a Plan II student with a love of English literature. He was the cousin of my potluck roommate my freshman year. After hearing I was majoring in business, he asked, “Man, what in the fuck are you doing?” That was followed by the trade school line. Dude was busy building a giant bong at the time. Last I knew, he was mounting tires in Houston.

    Not being one to paint with a broad brush, I didn’t conclude that all liberal arts grads were losers. But then, while I was finding my way at UT, I accumulated enough hours for minors in Spanish and Economics. So I guess I’m not *just* a trade-school guy.

64. Spider said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 5:27 pm

    But then, while I was finding my way at UT, I accumulated enough hours for minors in Spanish and Economics. So I guess I’m not *just* a trade-school guy.

    A great example. This is why Liberal Arts Career Services tells students to not mind wandering a bit (and why, as I mentioned above, liberal arts students do so well in business). But business schools worked like hell to gain acceptance at four year institutions. It’s a very recent addition.

    Brick’s point (at 12:39) was that “It’s easy for engineers to teach themselves literature, writing, philosophy, civics, and so on,” because Brick doesn’t know the first thing about those fields, and that “it’s damned near impossible for liberal arts grads to go out and teach themselves how to design useful technology,” because he doesn’t know about liberal arts grads who do exactly that kind of work. Anthropology grads design user interfaces, clinical psych is saturated with technology (has to be), German grads work in cog-sci, etc. The people I encounter in IT have a bizarre variety of backgrounds. Hell, a UT liberal arts student has to take a bare minimum of 18 hours of math and science, and those in the more technical majors do a hell of a lot more.

    Brick has assumed that there’s a division between the disciplines that doesn’t exist in the business world, and he’s assumed his field is superior because he’s ignorant of every other field. I would never make that mistake about engineering, no matter how much the guys in nat. sci make fun of engineers.

65. CrazyJoeDavola said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 5:57 pm

    “If the name of your major is not also the name of a potential job, your “education” is worthless.”

    Journalism students past and present will likely take issue with this claim. Of course, I never ran into any other majors who spent so much time and so much aggressiveness in avoiding math and science courses.

    By the same token, I’ve known some engineering/statistical/computer types who couldn’t compose a proper sentence – let alone paragraph, let alone entire communications packages – to save their lives.

    And despite that, I’ve known lots of people with enormous holes like these in their education nonetheless going on to be very successful. Mostly because those people got very good at getting other people to take care of stuff like crunching some numbers or writing some press releases for them.

    As to the larger point, I’d be much more comfortable with UT’s 10% rule if I had any faith that the legislature showed any interest in fulling funding not just UT, but also improving the conditions of the entire state education system.

    There’s absolutely no reason we shouldn’t have a state school system as robust as that of California.

66. DBH said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 6:15 pm

    I took a lot of liberal arts courses, some great (e.g. Anthropology) and some I considered a complete waste of time because an occasional prof was an idiot. I guess my point is, both sides should guard against over-generalization. I like to think all UT’s departments contribute to its stature as a world-class institution.

    As for the 10% rule, it sucks more as time passes. But it was instituted with a worthwhile purpose in mind in the wake of a court case. Surely reasonable minds can find ways to persuade the legislature to give the admissions office more flexibility in attracting qualified candidates while balancing diversity and fairness to serious students from around the state.

67. Nero said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 6:31 pm

    I graduated with a 3.92 GPA in Finance at UT and feel like I didn’t learn all that much in business school. I’m pretty sure the longest paper I ever wrote in college was 5 pages, and that was in Spanish – the language. Everything else was scantron.

    I had an Italian professor for an investments class and we did everything by hand, short answer style. That was worth while.

    The classes (and school) I got the most out of in college:

    Economics (liberal arts)
    Astronomy (natural science)
    History of Texas Government (liberal arts)
    Art History (liberal arts)
    Greek Mythology (liberal arts)

    The problem I felt with business school is that a lot of it is wrote, and how worthwhile it is is based on one’s ability to retain it. You don’t have to retain critical thinking, it just grows inside of you and stays there.

    And, with an undergraduate BBA, I can only get into the following graduate programs – Law, MBA, or City Planning. I didn’t take enough science or real math (b-school calc doesn’t count) to have the prerequisites for medical school or any other program. A finance professor of mine that I respect a lot told me that the curriculum for the MBA was the same as what the BBAs were taught, and that the MBA program was created for graduates of liberal arts schools. The crossover that an MBA gives to scientists, engineers and liberal arts undergrads is excellent. However, it is a waste of money for business undergrads and is just a very very expensive way to buy your way into the party that should let you in anyway, except that your ticket says “BBA” on it instead of “MBA”.

68. Nero said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 6:33 pm

    *rote

69. Newy25 said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 6:37 pm

    “The first guy who told me that was a Plan II student with a love of English literature. He was the cousin of my potluck roommate my freshman year. After hearing I was majoring in business, he asked, “Man, what in the fuck are you doing?” That was followed by the trade school line. Dude was busy building a giant bong at the time. Last I knew, he was mounting tires in Houston.”

    Ah, Plan II. As a BBA graduate myself I heard all of their cliche cat calls as well. Before I retired and left New York I had the luxury of meeting a recently graduated Plan II major in my office – sorting the mail. She was just waiting until she could make it big writing screen plays off Broadway or some gay shit. I may have sold out yes but I did so in style with single malt scotch, overpriced cigars and the ability to train high school football and track recruits for free as my passion back in Texas.

    She can only hope to bang her way up to executive assistant. Karma is a real MF’er.

70. CrazyJoeDavola said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 6:55 pm

    Don’t gloat too much. A lot of those liberal arts/plan II folks eventually find their way to government jobs.

    And they generally don’t give up on their resentments.

71. 98 said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 6:57 pm

    architecture with speck. the most productive class. im one of those stats guys who regrets not taking architecture as a major.

72. Nero said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 6:59 pm

    I think the single most important trait that successful people have that has nothing to do with college is drive. What you want, why you want it, and what you are willing to give up (free time, relationships, health, etc.) are things that are more likely to be born out of religious, socionomic, and family conditions experienced during the formative years.

    I’m not aware of a class at UT that taught motivation.

73. Newy25 said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 7:05 pm

    “Don’t gloat too much. A lot of those liberal arts/plan II folks eventually find their way to government jobs.

    And they generally don’t give up on their resentments”

    Can you compile a list of prominent government officials who graduated with a degree in Plan II honors? It has been my experience with politicians that they are C students with enlarged egos.

74. Saggy Aggie said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 7:23 pm

    Come on Spider and the rest of you Liberal blow hards, put your money your mouth is. Considering how much better your education and critical thinking is, I am sure you will have no trouble at all in providing for us this definition of objective truth that would be applicable for the Liberal Arts. As I said above, if you cannot then just shut the hell up about you and your critical thinking.

75. DBH said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 7:27 pm

    “She can only hope to bang her way up to executive assistant.”

    Well, at least she’ll never suffer the indiginity of having squandered her education at a trade school!

76. Saggy Aggie said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 7:32 pm

    For some reason, after all this bragging about how great your field is, I suspect that I will not get a response at all and certainly not one from Spider. I am not denying that Liberal Arts grads go on to success, but considering that none of them are able to provide a definition of objective truth for their field, we can all see and sense that most of their success is probably undeserved and probably has little if any relation to the truth.

77. Saggy Aggie said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 7:38 pm

    If learning a so called trade or vocation in college is akin to being an overeducated plumber, then learning how to write and speak well and flamboyantly is akin to being just an overeducated car salesman and a con. Maybe this explains much of that material success you cannot stop speaking of. That certainly must be the case if you cannot provide a standard of objective truth for your field.

78. Newy25 said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 7:41 pm

    “Well, at least she’ll never suffer the indiginity of having squandered her education at a trade school!”

    So true.

    The person who listed Greek Mythology as one of the most useful and educational classes they took in college is either unemployed or a degenerate pot smoker. I watched a 2 hour special on the history channel and I am probably just as informed on the ritual of fucking children and drinking wine off dead people as he is. A day does not go by that I do not summon that knowledge into my everyday life.

    Let me tell you.

79. Saggy Aggie said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 8:04 pm

    By the way, Spider, being a gentleman and a nice guy, I will help you out. The correct approach would be to say that the hard sciences also cannot provide a legitimate standard of objective truth, given its general outlook and because it is premised on induction. But, hey, at least they are able to accomplish some tangible tasks.

    In a sense you are correct to be proud of a liberal education. If any field will come to define a legitimate standard of objective truth, it will most certainly come from the liberal arts, notwithstanding its present pitiful state. The only problem is that the so called critical thinking you are so proud of has fallen to such depths (you being a prime example of this) that people are just too stupid these days to be capable of grasping and expressing a standard of objective truth. It certainly does not say much for our era and the quality and the nature of the people who populate it.

80. Nero said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 8:18 pm

    I didn’t say it was “useful”, I said I got a lot out of it. I think that classes that make you think about things outside of your comfort zone are part of a well rounded educational experience. Many allusions that are made every day by people you speak with or in articles that you read are to events long in the past or of different cultures. To not have an understanding of these things can limit your interaction with the world around you.

    Making references to girls fucking their way to the top is only one way to be provocative and interesting.

81. CrazyJoeDavola said:

    March 5th, 2009 at 8:35 pm

    “It has been my experience with politicians that they are C students with enlarged egos”

    I didn’t say politicians.

    I said government jobs. For example: The soon-to-come army of environmental auditors.

    Resentful bureaucrats can exercise a hell of a lot more power over everyday folk than mere politicians can.

82. intellectual type said:

    March 6th, 2009 at 6:30 am

    For all of the worthless trade school guys like me,

    We all took our required 18 hours of non-engineering courses and by god, the women were far more attractive in those classes. Now, I did happen to find the hottest girl in my major and am still dating her but that’s not the point. She was the exception, not the norm.

83. HenryJames said:

    March 6th, 2009 at 6:37 am

    Sound of tires screeching.

    Honking of horn.

    Circus music playing in the background.

    That clown is wearing a lot of maroon paint.

84. jc25 said:

    March 6th, 2009 at 7:30 am

    Nero: You and I are cut from the same cloth. My three favorite classes at UT were Calc 408D, Art History, and BA 324 (if taught well, it’s an excellent class).

    Finance was a waste of time–take FIN357 and you’ve taken them all. On the plus side, it left a lot of time for partying. This was especially helpful since I used my first two years taking all the pre-reqs for Medical School, until I realized how much I hate chemistry.

    Now that I’m in the business world, this really presents a problem for me. Pretty much the only thing I can do is pursue an MBA. I wish I had majored in math or something.

85. BrickHorn said:

    March 6th, 2009 at 7:55 am

    Spider,

    There is no market for the “skills” taught in the liberal arts colleges. The examples you cite (such as economics) are exceptions that prove the rule.

    That is not to say there aren’t brilliant people majoring in the liberal arts. Rather, my claim is that a liberal arts education is nothing more than a stepping stone to something useful. On this point, I actually believe we agree.

    Brick’s point (at 12:39) was that “It’s easy for engineers to teach themselves literature, writing, philosophy, civics, and so on,” because Brick doesn’t know the first thing about those fields

    In accusing me of ignorance, you betray your own. What do you liberal arts types call that phenomenon? Is it “irony?”

    Just to wrap up this complete hijacking of the thread (80% my fault), I would like to say that despite my anti-liberal arts bias I would never argue to eliminate that pedagogical domain from the university curriculum. I do agree that the liberal arts fill an important function and that all students should be exposed to them in a classroom setting. However, an education that focuses solely on liberal arts with insufficient exposure to systematic application of science and mathematics does not prepare the student to contribute immediately in as broad a range of fields. Engineering and hard sciences open the broadest and most diverse set of career doors for a young college graduate.

86. TaylorTRoom said:

    March 6th, 2009 at 8:00 am

    OK, this will be controversial. Let’s talk about the uncomfortable truth of why guys that flunk out of engineering school switch majors to business, and why guys that flunk out of business school switch majors to government. Raw quantitative analysis ability. Innate capacity for math.

    My observation is that math represents a series of ever higher hurdles in difficulty. Pretty much any human should be able to learn basic math- addition, subtraction, multipication, division, basic fractions. Any college student, with the right focus and motivation, should be able to learn algebra and trigonometry.

    There are some people who just can’t understand (as opposed to passing the class) calculus. These people may be able to do just find in a liberal arts curriculum. They may be very intelligent, and able to understand many difficult concepts in logic. They just lack the capacity for higher math.

    Higher calculus (the kind business majors don’t have to take) can only be mastered by an even smaller segment of the population. Then you get differential equations, and my personal limit- transform functions (this is why I could be a very good mechanical engineer, and a much lesser electrical engineer). Even though the modern world is based on the application of the square root of -1, only a small segment of the population is capable of understanding it. It’s not a matter of ambition or effort- many people just lack the ability to understand it. A diploma holder in engineering from Texas is not just somebody trained in a trade (my Art History class has been much more useful in life than my Fortran class), but somebody who has made it through a quantitative analysis obstacle course. They have demonstrated that their brain has the ability to do some things that most of the population can’t.

87. BrickHorn said:

    March 6th, 2009 at 8:46 am

    Any college student, with the right focus and motivation, should be able to learn algebra and trigonometry.

    There are some people who just can’t understand (as opposed to passing the class) calculus.

    Conceptually, calculus is more intuitive than trigonometry. The bitch with calculus is its application.

    A diploma holder in engineering from Texas is not just somebody trained in a trade (my Art History class has been much more useful in life than my Fortran class), but somebody who has made it through a quantitative analysis obstacle course. They have demonstrated that their brain has the ability to do some things that most of the population can’t.

    True. And understanding political science theory, geography, art history or philosophy aren’t in that category of “things that most of the population can’t [do].” Those are pastimes, the kinds of topics discussed in books I keep handy for light reading on the shitter. Math and science, and their application to real world problems, are serious endeavors.

88. Charlie said:

    March 6th, 2009 at 9:58 am

    There’s a lot of talk here about learning math if you put your mind to it. Takes me back…

    There’s a Robert E. Lee Moore Hall at UT. There wasn’t when I went there in ‘67. R. E. L. Moore was still teaching. I couldn’t wait to take his Theory of Calculus class. The man had produced more famous mathematicians during his loooong career (especially along with his UT colleague Dr Wall) than Harvard’s and Yale’s entire math departments COMBINED.

    Over the summer I took Trig/Analytic Geometry from none other than Dan Mauldin, a captain of the ‘63 national champion team and on the verge of his PhD.

    Come September I was in Moore’s class. There he stood, all 5-feet-even of him and 92/93 years. I had just turned 18. As I surveyed the room, I appeared to be the second oldest in the class and the only one of two not in an unironed, oversized, long-sleeved white dress shirt. Moore turned his back to us and started talking to the chalkboard as he furiously threw up equations.

    Didn’t see his face again until the end of class except during the second class meeting, the guy behind me, the one who looked to be maybe a sophomore, slipped a cigarette out of its pack.

    No sooner did the lighter click than Moore whirled and stormed at the poor SOB. Moore was famed for his love of boxing; he could be seen devouring boxing mags regularly at his favorite barber shop on the Drag.

    He got right in the guy’s face demanding to know what right he had to foul the air we all breathe (smoking in class was commonplace in those days). He kept it up until finally the guy burst into tears, gathered his books and fled from the room. Moore watched him depart with evident disgust then strode triumphantly back to the chalkboard.

    At the end of the next week, not having understood a word, I decided I was no longer a math major and dropped the class. Later, despite having never taken another math class, I would score a 760 on the GRE quantitative. Seven years later, I took Theory of Calculus, just to see, at UCSD and made the highest grade in the class.

    Just goes to show ya. Turns out I wasn’t the math dummy I thought I was.

89. Saggy Aggie said:

    March 6th, 2009 at 1:09 pm

    “That clown is wearing a lot of maroon paint.”

    In response, I do admit that I do not sound as professional as the other commentors on this board, but then what is professionalism, for the most part, other than another term for “double think”, which is another term for hypocrisy? So I do not necessary consider this characteristic of mine to be such a bad thing. I am sorry but I am unable and unwilling to play that game. Professionalism is a term that was invented to keep people unaware of and more comfortable with being hypocrites and social automatons.

    With the increasing competitiveness of society and the insistence that children at younger and younger ages conform to this attitude of professionalism, one can foresee a bifurcated society, because there will always be those who are unable or unwilling to tolerate this yoke placed upon them. One can also foresee that the social automaton group will, by and large, discriminate heavily against the more rebellious and the less skilled group. You could say that the society of man in the future will begin to take human evolution into its own hands, which is an irony. The irony and the fallacy of the theory of human evolution is that man only learns to become human by detaching himself from his desires, and not, as is typically thought, by being cut throat and overly competitive. But, of course, a professional social automaton, being a social automaton, will overlook this basic fact of human nature (since he has so little of it left), and one can foresee, as a result, a human society which becomes increasing inhuman, even though it may excel in professionalism.

    Yes, yes, I am aware that a person like myself must appear to come across as a clown in the modern era, but then, in a ridiculous age, perhaps the only people who truly are not clowns are the ones everyone else believes to be clown. Such a state of affairs is not so implausible if one thinks about it. Anyway, I am cogently aware that the era for people like myself passed long ago, many, many generations ago. Folks like me just do not belong among this generation, and I, for one, am glad that my time in this era will soon pass into history.

90. LonghornScott said:

    March 6th, 2009 at 1:22 pm

    ha. That was like reading bad sci-fi.

91. Austintacious 'Horn said:

    March 6th, 2009 at 4:53 pm

    A college degree really shows that a person is “trainable” and will finish what they started.

    The majority of all college grads never work in the field of their chosen study.

    HOOKEM

92. Newy25 said:

    March 6th, 2009 at 4:57 pm

    “Let’s talk about the uncomfortable truth of why guys that flunk out of engineering school switch majors to business”

    You have just demonstrated how uninformed you are about The University of Texas. The Business School at Texas is the single hardest college to be admitted to. You can argue about how difficult technically some Engineering classes are but it is far, far easier to get into that program than it is to get into the B-School. If you flunked out of anything you are not welcome in the McCombs School of Business. People with SAT scores under 1450 need not apply.

    And I took Diff-E-Q while a Sophomore Finance major. It was part of a Risk Management track the school offered while I was there.

93. Double Major said:

    March 7th, 2009 at 6:21 pm

    FYI Business students do have to complete both differential and integral calculus (either through M408C-D or M408K-L)

    I am currently a sophomore finance and government major and I think I’ve found the middle ground that works for me. The b-school can be too cut and dry sometimes, but I see the value in knowing the fundamentals of business and how to behave in a professional environment (watching my senior math major friend giving a presentation proved this to me). At the same time I enjoy the balanced approach of LA and the government degree allows me to explore interesting topics I couldn’t otherwise.

Leave a Reply