The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 71, No. 18, Ed. 1 Friday, February 3, 1984 Page: 24 of 48
forty eight pages : ill. ; page 20 x 14 in.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
full reports
(The following reports were presented to the Self-Study Steering Committee and
will serve as the basis for discussion at the forthcoming open meetings.)
ADMISSIONS
Alan Grob, Chair
ext. 4846
Joseph Buccheri
ext. 4918
Sarah Burnett
ext. 4856
Robert Haymes
ext. 4045
J. R. Jump
ext. 3576
Pat Moore
623-1500
Anne Schnoebelen
ext. 3732
Ellen Spraul
660-9217
Martha Strawn
850-0222
Carlos Tonche
630-8858
Gordon Wittenberg
ext. 3386
The Panel on Admissions reviewed undergraduate admissions, paying special attention
to the procedures and operations of the Admissions Office and Admissions Committee, spe-
cial admissions policies for athletes and music students, geographic and divisional quotas,
transfers and "five-percenters," and admissions to the graduate programs and to the Jones
School. The Admissions Office has recently begun to computerize its records, but some of
the information the Panel needed was not easily available, and with the limited staff and
busy schedule of the Admissions Office, it could not be procured.
From its earliest years an outstanding undergraduate student body has been one of
the most prized assets of Rice University, and maintaining the high quality of that student
body is plainly indispensable to any program for excellence at Rice. By almost all of the cri-
teria used for measuring success in undergraduate admissions, the academic profile of the
class that entered Rice in 1983 would have to rank among the best in the nation. Approxi-
mately 80% of our incoming students graduated in the top 10% of their high sshool class,-
the average combined SAT of the 574 students who enrolled was 1299; and over 30%
(174/6) were either National Merit or National Achievement Scholars (the profile presented
by the Admissions Office does not include scholarship athletes). Moreover, the disturbing
trends in admissions identified in The Self-Study Report of 1974 for the most part have been
corrected and reversed. For these accomplishments the Admissions Office deserves high
praise.
The Self-Study Report of 1974 found evidence of a serious decline in selectivity in ad-
missions accompanied by a significant drop in College Entrance scores, tendencies that if
allowed to continue would certainly have eroded academic excellence at Rice. Commenting
on a decline that had been evident since the introduction of tuition in 1965, the report
states that in the "crisis year" of 1973 offers were extended to 1188 (63%) of our 1988
applicants and of those offered admission only 44% chose to attend Rice. By 1983 these
trends had clearly been reversed. Applications have increased by approximately 50%. Of
those applying, only 38% are accepted. Of those accepted about 56% actually entered
Rice. Apparently the steady decline in test scores noted in the earlier report continued until
1980, but-this trend reversed and scores are now stable at approximately 1300. During a
decade when private universities were widely perceived to b^ in difficulty and recruiting
wars for academically superior students had begun to heat up, the admissions statistics for
Rice are undeniably impressive.
A second concern voiced ten years ago was over the apparent decline in the quality of
our incoming engineering students. In 1973 the applicant pool in engineering had dimin-
ished; 75% of those who applied were admitted; and test scores had declined perceptibly.
A decade later this trend too had obviously been reversed. In 1983 engineers made up the
largest group of applicants; of those applying less than a third were admitted; and of our
incoming students those in engineering had the highest test scores. No doubt, intensified re-
cruiting assisted by generous support from the Brown Foundation is responsible for much of
our improvement. But the major reason for that improvement must finally be attributed to
circumstances over which the University had essentially no control/ the end of a period of
malaise in engineering due largely to cutbacks in the aerospace industry followed by enor-
mously expanded employment opportunities for engineers first in the oil industry and then in
high technology areas.
One other problem foreseen in The Self-Study Report of 1974 was the loss of out-
standing applicants because Rice was not competitive in its need-based financial aid. Here
again, by 1983 this problem seems to have been solved through a combination of low tui-
tion and a financial aid policy more generous than most selective private universities in
meeting demonstrated need. The new challenge in 1983 is the emergence of large numbers
of merit-based scholarships at American universities designed to entice academically tal-
ented students. In coming years Rice will face increasing competition for its best applicants,
especially from the University of Texas and Texas A&M.
Although Rice can take justifiable pride in undergraduate admissions, some problems
raised a decade ago remain unresolved, and vexing new problems have emerged in recent
years. Among the problems old and new to be taken up in this report are the appropriate-
ness and consequences of geographic and divisional quotas, the validity of the new admis-
sions standards and requirements drawn up for athletes and students in music, and the
effectiveness of efforts by the Admissions Committee to achieve greater diversity in the stu-
dent body.
Admissions Office Procedures
In its assessment of present admissions procedures, the Panel found that the Admis-
sions staff does an excellent job with its present limited resources. The present applicant
pool numbers about 2800 students (in comparison to Dartmouth with 11,000 applicants
applying for 1,054 places and Stanford with 14,000 applying for 1,549 places), a rela-
tively low figure. Of these applicants, currently 36% are accepted; of those students ac-
cepted, 53% come to Rice. The Panel finds that the size of the applicant pool does not
institute a major problem, but the growth of the numbers of applicants we would consider
The Rice Thresher, February 6, 1984, page 4
admissible would be welcome.
The Admissions Office, in the opinion of the Panel, is understaffed and underfunded
compared to schools that are our strongest competitors. Currently the office is not able to
send out large mailings, even to Texas schools where we need to compete with other schools
such as the University of Texas Austin and Texas A&M. The Panel felt it would be useful to
buy selected lists of students from scholarship services—at least, a list of Texas National
Merit Scholars.
In general, Rice needs to have more and better publicity for better recruiting, both
within the state and nationwide. One way to do this in Texas would be to initiate special
programs for high school counselors, bringing them to the campus. The Panel also recom-
mends the bringing of more Texas students to the campus for special weekends and other
programs.
With greater financial resources available, the quality of the literature sent out should
be improved, made both more informative and more attractive. Present literature contains
little academic information in comparison to that sent out by many other schools.
The Panel also considered whether Rice should offer scholarships based solely on merit
without regard to need. Merit scholarship programs have been expanded rapidly in recent
years, even at universities as academically strong as Duke, Emory, Tulane, and Vanderbilt.
However, most of the most highly selective schools, including those in the Ivy League, do not
offer merit scholarships. The consensus of the panel is that as long as Rice does not reduce
financial assistance based on need, the offering of merit scholarships is appropriate. The
Admissions Office has receivedf four new full scholarships (tuition, room and board, fees)
based on merit. In addition, Rice offers 100 National Merit scholarships each year, 40
Board of Governors scholarships, 40 Cohen scholarships, 40 Brown Engineering scholar-
ships, and 25 William Marsh Rice scholarship, as well as other smaller awards. Separate
merit scholarships funded by the Shepherd Society are awarded to music students in the
Shepherd School.
The procedures of the Admissions Committee, though somewhat cumbersome and
time-consuming for its faculty members, give a special character to admissions at Rice Uni-
versity. Each applicant's folder is read by five committee members, most of them faculty
members, thus ensuring that each applicant receives the individual treatment and personal
attention on which Rice prides itself.
Computer facilities have only recently been provided by the Admissions Office. How-
ever, this system and the information generated by it are not yet adequate. More technical
information on the selection process should be provided to the Admissions Committee.
In summary, the panel strongly urges that significantly more money be allocated to the
Admissions Office in order to increase the staff, to provide more and better literature, to
process inquiries more efficiently, and to fund special recruiting programs for both coun-
selors and prospective students.
Admissions Quotas
The Panel on Admissions examined the use of geographic and divisional quotas in the
admission of freshmen to the University. Evidence exists that indicates that the practice of
the Admissions Committee is to give preferential treatment to students from Texas over out-
of-state students. Also, an attempt is made to balance the entering freshmen class each
year so that the number of majors entering Rice are, as much as possible, evenly distributed
among the natural sciences, engineering, and academics (the humanities and social sci-
ences). Those applying for admission to the architecture and music degree programs are
not subject to geographic quotas.
In regard to the geographic quota, the Panel found that there is some ambiguity re-
garding this policy. The Panel sought information from the President's Office to determine
why and how this policy of geographic quotas was developed and to determine whether or
not the University was legally bound to give preferential treatment to applicants who reside
in the state of Texas. Professor Alan Grob, Chairman of the Panel, asked President Hack-
erman to address this question. Chairman Grob received a letter stating:
"I am responding to your request of September 28. The Admissions Committee does
not have specific geographic quotas for admission.
"While we think of the University as a world-class institution, it is important to remem-
ber that we are an institution chartered in Texas. As such, we need to pay continuing
attention—all other things being equal—to admitting Texas applicants to Rice Univer-
sity.
<j
The President's statement contradicts what in fact has been the practice of the Admis-
sions Committee.
In academic, engineering, and science admissions all things are never equal. Appli-
cants in those categories are broken down into further sub-categories of in-state and out-
of-state students and firm quotas are then assigned each sub-category so that in-state and
out-of-state applicants never compete against one another. This practice is not in keeping
with the policies of the University as stated by President Hackerman and should be elimi-
nated as soon as possible. The percentage of out-of-state applicants has grown since the
last Self-Study in 1973 (in 1982, 1781 of the total applicant pool of 3029 were from out of
state). It is clear that in some instances better-qualified applicants from out of state are de-
nied admission and lesser-qualified in-state applicants are offered admission. SAT scores
for out-of-state applicants have averaged approximately 30 points higher than those of in-
state students during the five years statistics were available to the Panel since the last Self-
Study.
The Panel recommends that no preference for admission be given to in-state students
over out-of-state students.
The Panel also examined the use of divisional quotas implemented to ensure a balance.,
among the major divisions of the University when the members of the entering class select
their majors.
Some departments of the University, due to uncontrollable external factors (e.g.,
changing economic cycles or new social or technological developments), are more suscepti-
ble than others to shifts in student interest. Currently the Electrical Engineering Department
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Mitchell, Mark M. The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 71, No. 18, Ed. 1 Friday, February 3, 1984, newspaper, February 3, 1984; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth245550/m1/24/: accessed July 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting Rice University Woodson Research Center.