nil
gotten
ofltt
i hisij
play i
Opinion
TtfE Battalion
Page 5B • Tuesday, January 27, 2004
Unruly behavior
'he top 10 percent law treats some future Aggies unfairly before they arrive
MR
i
n
>honkI
►efortj
ose I
ing itj
.irnarJ
cordi
the i
tut
ei
liddkl
I
iensi
don'll
jwtB
ii
to i
MATT
MADDOX
M ore than 100 years
ago, British Prime
Minister Benjamin
Disraeli coined the saying,
|“There are three kinds of lies:
lies, damned lies and statis
tics.” Last week, a study
released by Princeton sociolo
gist and Texas native Marta
Tienda confirms Disraeli was
right. Tienda’s report concludes that competi
tive students in Texas are not being harmed by
House Bill 58K, which guarantees high school
seniors ranking in the top 10 percent of their
class a spot at the Texas public university of
their choice. Numbers are important in evaluat
ing students for admissions to college, but the
single factor of a high school grade point aver
age cannot tell the whole story. The Princeton
study does not address the most important fail
ure of the top 10 percent law: the fact that it
does not treat all high schools equally. This is
a law which is an obstacle to accomplished
students and a law that should be dismantled.
Tienda’s ambitious study surveyed 5,2(H)
Texas high school seniors, focusing on those
ranking in the second 10 percent of their class.
She discovered that approximately one out of
every tour students from this group of students
who wished to attend were denied admission
to Texas A&M or the University of Texas.
From this she concluded. “It is difficult to
argue that second decile students' access to the
public flagships has been undermined by
H.B.588." Even if the numbers did tell the
whole story, a more than one in four chance of
being rejected still offers little
comfort to undergraduate
applicants.
What the survey suffers from is the
same problem that the top 10 percent
law does: It treats all high schools the
same. The automatic admissions pro
gram means that a student with a
4.0 grade point average who
does not place in the top 20
percent of his class at a com
petitive school must fight for
admissions while the vale
dictorian at a mediocre
high school with a 3.5
grade point average is auto
matically admitted to the
school of his choice.
Tienda acknowledges that not
all high schools are equal, but the
study fails to take into account the
varying degree of rigor of each school
represented in the survey.
Fundamentally, the auto
matic admissions pro
gram is flawed
because it bases
admittance to col
lege not on a com
petition among all
applicants, but only
among the local
peers of an appli
cant. While there
is no easy way to
compare the diffi
culty of every individual school, it is
clear that qualified Texas stu-
dents are being turned
down at A&M and
UT because they
not fall in the
top 10 percent.
Tienda devotes much of her
study jo tearing down the stories
of qualified students being
rejected from the college of
their choice because of the
top 10 percent law, calling
those stories "anecdotal evi
dence.” However, when it
comes time for her to
defend her assertion that
qualified students are not being
replaced by less qualified students,
her only evidence is the stories about
how some of those less qualified students
are offered admissions by prestigious
out-of-state universi
ties. Despite this
shortcoming,
media outlets
have been tout
ing Tienda’s
conclusions as
hard fact.
Interestingly, Tienda may have an agenda
for raising support for the automatic admis
sions program. Her study ends with the con
clusion that the "optimal solution for Texas”
would be for universities to use race as an
admissions factor. Considering that the original
support for the top 10 percent law came from
affirmative action proponents in the Texas
Legislature, Tienda’s assertion that race should
count in admissions reveals a potential bias for
her support of the program.
The solution to the problem of the top 10
percent law is an overhaul or complete end to
the program. Following what California has
done, Texas could guarantee automatic admis
sions to a Texas public university rather than to
the school of an applicant’s choice. This would
maintain the educational benefits of the pro
gram while reducing the number of spots at
flagship public schools locked up by under
qualified students.
More importantly — and despite the wishes
of those such as University of Texas President
Larry Faulkner — the students of Texas
deserve to be judged based on merit. Set asides
in the form of House Bill 588 don’t have a
place in the real-world competitive environ
ment of college. This is one time when the
numbers do lie.
Rylie Deyoe • THE BATTALION
Matt Maddox is a senior
political science major.
;n
Wrongful accusations
led Kennedy's presumptions that Bush
rchestrated the war hurts the country
G.«
R!
rsity
;e |
ncel
leto
ML
to
CHRIS
LIVELY
in-
lead in dis-
ust for the
lajority of
'resident
eorge W.
ush’s State
T the Union
iddress, Sen.
’ed Kennedy, D-Mass., once
Igain demonstrated his dis-
liste for conservative policy
a his typical immature man-
er. The recent recipient of
k George Bush Public
ervice Award has done great
eeds as a senator and public
[ervant, but a recent comment
nade regarding the Bush
dministration’s involvement
n Iraq tops off and summa-
izes Kennedy’s longstanding
nd mindless Bush-bashing
treak of comments.
In a speech on Jan. 14,
ennedy said the war in Iraq
as a political product invent-
d by the Bush
administration to win elec-
ions, according to The
ioston Herald. In the past,
Kennedy has made other
laims regarding the war,
eeming it nothing short of
njust and fraudulent.
A man of such prestigious
nd significant responsibility
as more important jobs to
o, but he remains intent on
xploiting the Iraq war to
ring down the GOP, often
lasing his claims on invalid
I r ridiculous arguments.
I One can reasonably argue
liat the war was miscalculat-
Id. It can even be charged
liat the decision was made
loth disregard for certain
Itst-war criteria. But claiming
pat the war was a political
move is outlandish. It would
e illogical for Bush to risk
n 80 percent approval rating
y going to war to make his
arty look good.
In contrast, Bush foresight-
dly set aside his political
opularity to make one of the
ost important decisions in
American history.
The president repeatedly
mentioned that post-9-11
America is a different sce
nario — one that many liberal
politicians have failed to rec
ognize. Bush was sincere and
passionate about envisioning
a more secure world. It can
not be said that the world is a
worse place with the libera
tion of millions of Iraqis and
the capture of one of the most
infamous and brutal dictators
in history.
u
But asAmencan
troops continue to
, risk their lives every
day in the face of
ongoing violent
attacks, even the
most fanatical of
liberal politicians
must refrain from
declaring their efforts
as products of some
fictional and
politically ambitious
leader.
There was no guarantee of
capturing Saddam Hussein or
finding weapons of mass
destruction, but Bush disre
garded his approval ratings to
do what he thought necessary
to improve the well-being of
a nation and a world. Why
would a president confronted
with the inevitability of civil
ian casualties and the possi
bility of chemical and biolog
ical attack on his own troops
take that path to boost his
political ratings?
Kennedy is renowned for
his candor when critiquing
Bush. And, in most circum
stances, a politician should be
credited for speaking his or
her mind when it comes to
political matters. After all,
one significant virtue of a
democracy is allowing multi
ple ideologies to compete
against each other 1o win over
public opinion.
In addition, this continuing
competition allows for the
evolution of a necessary sys
tem of checks and balances
between the parties. But there
is a difference between a
political mind keeping anoth
er in check and one set out to
annihilate the other. Sen.
Kennedy represents the latter.
Aside from Kennedy’s
inadequately supported argu
ments, what should be con
sidered most important is that
Kennedy’s contribution to
America in a time of conflict
here and abroad is nonexist
ent. The country needs skep
tics to monitor and critique
the government, but only in a
decent and mature manner.
Kennedy and other politicians
who claim that going to war
was a mistake must avoid
using the situation as only a
political weapon.
As the presidential election
day nears, both parties will
inevitably continue to pum
mel the other. But as
American troops continue to
risk their lives everyday in the
face on ongoing violent
attacks, even the most fanati
cal of liberal politicians must
refrain from declaring their
efforts as products of some
fictional and politically ambi
tious leader. The number of
coalition lives that are lost
grows every day, and, as
America has its hands full
and tries to make progress in
the Middle East, it needs
politicians who are more
interested in the unity of a
country than partisanship.
Legacy policy
had little effect
Dr. Gates plainly states in
his letter that no one admitted
into this University over anoth
er candidate solely because
of his legacy.
Having a legacy wasn’t
worth a whole lot in the first
place. Only four points on a
scale of 100. Persons of
impoverished families were
given six. So, as for the peo
ple who think the legacy pro
gram is some sort of neo-
Nazism, the numbers prove
just the opposite.
Lets compromise.
Remove all mention of race
off applications, remove affir
mative action and then, when
everyone is really admitted
based on merit, not on race,
not on income, then and only
then, should we remove the
legacy program.
Noah Johnson
Class of 2007
Alumni loyalty is
most important
Duke University has affirma
tive action and legacy admis
sions. What prevents Texas
A&M from having the same?
Perhaps the public nature of
the university is a considera
tion, but if Aggie alumni want
ed to follow the Duke plan by
restoring legacy and affirma
tive action, who can doubt
their political abilities in
Texas? State Sen. Jeff
Wentworth tells an El Paso
reporter that the 10 percent
law is raising enough com
plaints to attract the legisla-
MAIL CALL
ture's attention.
But here's the question: is
Aggie hostility to affirmative
action greater than their
political desire to continue a
legacy program? And if hos
tility to affirmative action
exceeds alumni loyalty at
Texas A&M, what does that
say about the temperament
of Aggie culture when it
comes to racial diversity?
Greg Moses
Class of 1981
Parking plan
forgets students
In response to Natalie
Younts’Jan. 22 article:
Who does the University
serve? Well if we ask Phil
Brand, it sounds like it should
be him. Ask some faculty
members, it sounds like it
should be them. What about
the thousands of undergradu
ates here that work more
than one job, and are still in
debt up to their necks?
Without these students, Mr.
Brand's, along with the facul
ty's, reserved spaces would
still be pasture. Why does a
staff member think he is so
worthy of a parking space
when the ones who pay his
salary need to fight for park
ing and then walk the dis
tance to their classes? Does
this make sense? Why are
the undergraduates here at
A&M treated so poorly?
Of the faculty members that
complained about not reach
ing classes on time from far
away parking spaces, how
many will not allow students
into the classroom once class
has begun, telling students
they should be earlier so they
can get a parking spot? My
guess is probably more than
a few. Let's level the playing
field. What's wrong with a
student asking their professor
why can they not get here
early enough to get parking
and make it to class on time?
George J. Hager
Graduate Student
Students cannot
accept hate crime
I missed something on the
campus tour I took a few
years back and have been liv
ing with this realization since
my freshman year at Texas
A&M. I missed that part on
the tour where Aggies commit
hate crimes against fellow
Aggies, and it is acceptable
for everyone to turn their
head. My friend was beaten
up this weekend by a fellow
Aggie because he is gay. He
is part of the “Aggie family.”
Since when has hate become
part of the Aggie family? Sure
we can say, “not all Aggies are
like that.” But we are only as
strong as our weakest link.
Erin Collins
Class of 2003
The Battalion encourages letters to
the editor. Letters must be 200 words
or less and include the author’s name,
class and phone number. The opinion
editor reserves the right to edit letters
for length, style and accuracy. Letters
may be submitted in person at 014 Reed
McDonald with a valid student ID.
Letters also may be mailed to: 014 Reed
McDonald, MS 1111, Texas A&M
University, College Station, TX 77843-
1111. Fax: (979) 843-2647 Email: mail-
call@thebattalion.net
Chris Lively is a senior
sociology major.