Through the Lens of my fellow bloggers...

The topic that has came up most recently that I am quite fascinated about is the Top Ten Percent Law. Through the lens of one of our fellow bloggers, he stated a couple of situations where his friends either were accepted or accepted towards the CAP Program as substitution before getting admission into UT. Man.. I was one of those students in the year 2003 that did not make it to UT, but into the CAP Program... I believe I was 12 percent of my class... unbelieveable! Although I do agree with the author that the Top Ten Percent Rule isn't fair, and I may have a little hatred over it, but there are many pros for this issue.

As an Asian-American as well, I do believe that th effects of direct affirmative action as institutionalized racism against two minority demographics that show a higher percentage enrollment in college than their population would otherwise reflect: South Asians, and East Asians. Asians constitute 2.7% of the Texas population, yet constitute 14.4% of UT students. Foreign students entirely constitute 8.9%, and they don't graduate from a US high schools at all, stated in The University of Texas at Austin Office of Institutional Research website.

On the other hand, I see many pros on this topic. For instance, the Top 10 Percent Rule gives high school students an incentive to do well and strive for excellence. Some students need this rule because they may be very intelligent and a hard worker, but never perform well on standardized tests, such as the SAT. Some students can’t perform well under the timed pressure of tests and they get too distracted by the idea that this one test could determine their future, causing them to possibly do poorly, in which I feel as if I am an example of this. I also think four years of hard work, which is shown by being in the top 10%, is more indicative of hard work than a four hour test, and this rule is a great way for colleges to reward students for their persistence and effort. If the Top 10% Rule wasn’t in effect, a student could go in and score a 1300 on the SAT and get admitted because they are good at test taking but not enough effort throughout their years in high school, while someone in the top 7% of their class with good work ethic could be rejected. Only so many people can be in the top 10%, but there have been instances where a student who doesn’t really care about school will do exceptionally well on standardized tests, and could be admitted, without the achievement of the Top Ten Percent Rule, over those who try hard all four years in high school.

I do agree that we should alter the rule. The law passed to give equal opportunities to those that are not able to qualify for these schools who are taking the opportunities away from people who have worked just as hard. If the law is done away with, students who traditionally wouldn’t be considered for admission would lose the chance to attend these schools. To be considered in the top ten percent rule for any student, they should be involved in school organizations and have taken classes that are challenging to be prepared for college. The government may feel that a CAP Proram is the best way to standardlize the number of students admitted by this law, but I think that having strict guidelines for the rule would give those who applied themselves at poor schools the same opportunities of those who did the same at wealthier schools.