Return to front page.

Report of the

Undergraduate Admissions Requirement

Committee

June 21, 1999

Members:

Dr. Doyle Alexander College of Sciences andMathematics
Mr. Roger Bilow Office of Admissions
Dr. Florence Elliott-Howard College of Business
Mr. Piero Fenci College of Fine Arts
Dr. Michael Legg Arthur Temple College of Forestry
Dr. DawnElla Rust College of Education
Dr. Lauren Scharff College of Liberal Arts
Ms. Pat Spence College of Applied Arts and Sciences
Dr. Robert Szafran, Chair College of Liberal Arts
Ms. Marthea Turnage Ralph W. Steen Library

ExecutiveSummary

The committee recommends:

Normal Admission Requirements forBeginning College Students

• That successful applicants must earn at least a second-level high school degree or its equivalent before beginning at SFA.
• That successful applicants must meet one of the following conditions:
  • in the 1^st (top) quartile of their high school graduating class;
  • in the 2^nd quartile and have an SAT score of at least 850 or an ACT score of at least 18;
  • in the 3^rd quartile and have an SAT score of at least 1050 or an ACT score of at least 23;
  • in the 4^th quartile and have an SAT score of at least 1250 or an ACT score of at least 28.
• That unsuccessful applications be reviewed by a committee within the Office of Admissions. Those applicants showing very strong college potential on dimensions other than high school degree earned, graduating class quartile, and SAT/ACT scores will be accepted for admission.
  • While the weight given to characteristics other than high school quartile and SAT/ACT scores will undoubtedly change over time as the university gains experience and assessment data on the review process, the committee recommends the following characteristics at least initially be given strong consideration: grades in high school classes, type of high school courses taken, type of high school degree earned, extracurricular activities, and past academic success at SFA of students from the applicant's high school.
  • For any academic year, the committee recommends that the number of applications approved for admission through the review process not exceed 10 percent of the number of applications approved for admission based on high school quartile and SAT/ACT scores.

Transfer Admissions Programs

• That no changes in transfer admissions requirements be made at this time. Insufficient information currently exists on the academic success of these students at SFA. Therefore, the committee recommends that systematic information on the academic success of transfer students at SFA be gathered. If that information reveals that certain large categories of transfer students are more likely to fail than to succeed academically at SFA, appropriate changes in transfer admissions policies should then be made.

Special Admissions Programs

• That no changes in special admissions programs be made at this time.

Other Recommendations andSuggestions

• That the entire university community (students, faculty, staff, administrators, and friends of the university) seriously commit greater effort and resources to the recruiting of students meeting these new admissions requirements -- particularly students graduating in the top quartile of their high school class. Among other things, greater effort and resources should be committed to target marketing of potential students, personal contact with potential students, and merit-based scholarships.
• That the Vice-President for Academic Affairs annually inform the Faculty Senate on the academic success of students initially admitted to SFA under the normal admission requirements for beginning college students, under the review process for beginning college students, under the requirements for transfer students, and under the university's special admissions procedures.
• That these proposed changes in undergraduate admissions take effect in the Fall 2001 semester.

The committee suggests:

• That the university review its probation/suspension policy and its GPA policy for repeated courses.

REPORT OF THE

UNDERGRADUATE ADMISSIONS REQUIREMENT

COMMITTEE

In organizing this report, we begin with a brief statement of theguiding principles with which the committee worked. We then presentand explain our recommendations regarding undergraduate admissionsrequirements. That is followed by answers to what we believe will besome frequently asked questions about our recommendations. The reportconcludes with brief appendices including supporting information.

Guiding Principles

First, the committee remains committed to the present mission andgoals of Stephen F. Austin State University. We do not seek totransform SFA into an elite undergraduate institution. The universityshould continue to admit a broad range of undergraduates able andwilling to do college work. It is in providing a quality education tothis larger group of students that our nation's future successresides. We welcome the challenge that comes with being acomprehensive university, and we are committed to making SFA standout among such schools for the high quality of the education itprovides.

Second, a university's admissions standards should correspond towhat it takes to succeed at the school. Students and parentsreasonably perceive a positive admission decision as an indication ofexpected success and not just as an opportunity to try. If admissionsstandards do not so correspond, then an institution has a moralobligation to present itself as an open-enrollment institution or, atleast, to warn prospective students that broad categories of studentswho will probably fail are, nevertheless, given clear admission intothe institution. In this regard, we believe a minimum definition ofacademic success is that a student should have a cumulative gradepoint average of 2.00 or higher after two semesters.

Admissions RequirementRecommendations

Undergraduates are initially admitted to SFA in three ways: underthe normal admission requirements for beginning college students,under the requirements for transfer students, and under one of theuniversity's special admissions procedures (for example, the SummerProvisional Program, the Academic Opportunity Program, and the HighSchool Concurrent Program). Normal beginning college admissionsaccount for almost two-thirds of SFA's undergraduate population.Transfer admissions account for almost one-third of the undergraduatepopulation. Special admissions programs account for about 4 percentof the undergraduate population.

Normal Admission Requirements for Beginning CollegeStudents

SFA's current policy is as follows:

• It is recommended that applicants have earned in high school 4 credits of English, 3 credits of math, 2 credits of science, 3 credits of social science, 2 credits of foreign language, 1 credit of fine arts, and 1 credit of computer science.
• Applicants are required to graduate in the top half of their high school class or have an SAT score of at least 1010 or an ACT score of at least 21.

The committee recommends:

• That successful applicants must earn at least a second-level high school degree or its equivalent before beginning at SFA.

Starting in 2000, all Texas high schools will offer three highschool degree programs: the Basic High School Program, theRecommended High School Program, and the Distinguished AchievementHigh School Program. Both the recommended and the distinguishedachievement high school programs require at least 4 credits ofEnglish, 3 credits of math, 3 credits of science, 4 credits of socialstudies, 2 credits of other languages, 0.5 credit of speech, 1.5credits of physical education, 1 credit of fine arts, 0.5 credit ofhealth, and 1 credit of technology applications. The committee isrecommending that SFA require that students have completed at leastthe Recommended High School Program.

We are making this recommendation for the following reasons:

• Only students earning at least the second-level degree will have the necessary academic background to immediately begin and be successful at college-level courses.
• The high schools are recommending to students that they complete at least the second-level degree if the student intends to go on to college. Should SFA's admissions standards be less than those recommended by the high schools? We believe not.
• Currently, 21 of the state's 30 public four-year universities require certain high school credits. SFA is one of the nine schools that currently only make recommendations about high school credits (see Appendix A). The committee believes this sends the wrong message to students about how seriously academic preparation is valued at SFA.
• A review of a sample of high school transcripts from current applicants to SFA revealed that almost all students who are being admitted under the normal admission requirements for beginning college students are already earning at least a second-level high school degree. Thus, our current policy which just recommends certain high school credits not only sends the wrong message but gains us few additional students.
• This proposal is workable. The fact that over two-thirds of the state's public four-year universities currently enforce high school credit requirements proves that it is workable. Furthermore, the state-adopted format for high school transcripts clearly indicates what type of high school degree was earned. Thus, in only a small number of cases will it be necessary to go into an applicant's transcript to tally the number of credits in particular areas.

The committee recommends:

• That successful applicants must meet one of the following conditions:
  • in the 1st (top) quartile of their high school graduating class;
  • in the 2nd quartile and have an SAT score of at least 850 or an ACT score of at least 18;
  • in the 3rd quartile and have an SAT score of at least 1050 or an ACT score of at least 23;
  • in the 4th quartile and have an SAT score of at least 1250 or an ACT score of at least 28.

We are making this recommendation for thefollowing reasons:

• The State of Texas requires all public universities to automatically admit students graduating in the top 10 percent of their high school class. The committee believes automatic admission to students graduating in the top 25 percent of their high school class is reasonable given the goals and mission of SFA.
• Students who meet these conditions have at least a 50 percent chance of succeeding at SFA (that is, having a GPA of at least 2.00 after two semesters); students who don't meet these conditions have less than a 50 percent chance of succeeding. We selected these SAT/ACT minimum scores based on an examination of the success rates of four consecutive cohorts of entering first-year students (see Appendix B). The committee believes that students whose high school rank and SAT/ACT scores indicate they will probably fail at SFA should not be routinely given normal admission to the university.
• It is true that required SAT/ACT scores go up sharply as we move through high school quartiles. This is because every study of SFA students located by the committee found that high school rank is a better predictor of success at SFA than are SAT/ACT scores. Students in lower quartiles must possess strong academic abilities if they are to succeed at SFA. Again, we point out that our SAT/ACT scores are based on student performance at SFA. These are the scores students in lower quartiles have historically had to have in order to have at least a 50 percent chance of success at SFA.
• Low admission standards exact an academic cost. Many students and lower-division course instructors reported to us that the presence of significant numbers of academically weak students in classes almost inevitably weakens the learning environment. Instructors reduce the amount and complexity of material taught because it is difficult to ignore the fact that several students in the class are clearly struggling. As a result, all students, including the stronger students, are exposed to less material and that material is less rigorously taught. Furthermore, the better students recognize that less work from them will be required in order to insure good grades.
• Low admission standards exact a financial cost. Based on a review of records, students not meeting one of these recommended admission conditions are high consumers of developmental services on campus and, yet, still have very high attrition rates. The university is expending disproportionate resources on these students without great success.
• This plan is workable. Currently, 11 Texas public four-year universities are using a sliding scale admission standard in which minimum SAT/ACT scores change depending on the applicant's high school quartile (see Appendix A). If those institutions can successfully use such a scale, we believe SFA can.
• The committee is sympathetic to the arguments that weak students deserve another chance, that a poor high school record may be due to circumstances outside a student's control, and that some very talented students are unable to do well on standardized tests. Our response to these points is that, first, to set lower standards would be to admit categories of students we know are more likely to fail than to succeed and, second, there remain other avenues by which such students can be admitted to SFA -- avenues such as the review process (to be described next), transfer admission, and the special admissions programs.

The committee recommends:

• That unsuccessful applications will be reviewed by a committee within the Office of Admissions. Those applicants showing very strong college potential on dimensions other than high school degree earned, graduating class quartile, and SAT/ACT scores will be accepted for admission.
  • While the weight given to characteristics other than high school quartile and SAT/ACT scores will undoubtedly change over time as the university gains experience and assessment data on the review process, the committee recommends the following characteristics at least initially be given strong consideration: grades in high school classes, type of high school courses taken, type of high school degree earned, extracurricular activities, and past academic success at SFA of students from the applicant's high school.
  • For any academic year, the committee recommends that the number of applications approved for admission through the review process not exceed 10 percent of the number of applications approved for admission based on high school quartile and SAT/ACT scores.

We are not proposing an intensive review involving essays andpersonal interviews. Rather, we are suggesting a more limited reviewusing items already on the state's "Common Application for FreshmanAdmission" and which can be easily recorded. Applications notreceiving initial approval based on type of high school degree,graduating quartile, and SAT/ACT scores would be searched for strongevidence of potential for success at SFA. The evidence must indeed bestrong since it must counter type of high school degree, graduatingquartile, and SAT/ACT scores which predict failure.

The committee is not recommending specific other criteria to beconsidered in this review process because SFA has limited experiencewith a review process such as this. For that very reason, it will bea learning process, and the weight given to specific other criteriawill undoubtedly change over time. In order for this review to bedone in as fair and equitable a fashion as possible, it is essentialthat the success of students admitted through this review process becarefully assessed and those results be used to improve the reviewprocess over time.

It is not necessary that this review process be delayed till justbefore the start of an academic semester. To do that would risk theloss of the more talented applicants in the review pool as theyaccept admission offers from other schools. Rather, offers ofadmission based on review can be made at the same time offers ofadmission are being made based on type of high school degree,graduating quartile, and SAT/ACT scores. For every ten offers ofadmission based on these usual criteria, one offer of admission canbe made based on review.

We are making this recommendation for the following reasons:

• Although as a group, students without our recommended SAT/ACT scores are more likely to fail at SFA than to succeed, some individuals without those test scores may have a strong potential for success at SFA. We want those students at SFA. This review process allows them to be routinely identified and admitted.
• This review process is consistent with recent state and federal guidelines encouraging universities to consider a range of applicant characteristics and to avoid a too rigid dependence on SAT/ACT scores.
• This plan is workable. Five Texas public four-year universities already use a review process for all applicants not meeting posted admission criteria (see Appendix A). The director of SFA's admissions office believes his staff can handle the kind of review process described here.

Normal Admission Requirements for Transfer Students

SFA currently requires transfer students to have completed 15 ormore semester hours and to have earned a GPA of at least 2.00 on alltransferable work.

The committee recommends:

• That no changes in transfer admissions requirements be made at this time. Insufficient information currently exists on the academic success of these students at SFA. Therefore, the committee recommends that systematic information on the academic success of transfer students at SFA be gathered. If that information reveals that certain large categories of transfer students are more likely to fail than to succeed academically at SFA, appropriate changes in transfer admissions policies should then be made.

Special Admissions Programs

SFA currently offers a number of special admissions programs. Allof them involve relatively small numbers of students. Examples ofthese programs are the summer transient student program, the programfor non-degree seeking students, the international student admissionprogram, the mature student admission program, the high schoolconcurrent student program, and the summer provisional program.

The committee recommends:

• That no changes in special admissions programs be made at this time.

Other Recommendations and Suggestions

The committee recommends:

• That the entire university community (students, faculty, staff, administrators, and friends of the university) seriously commit greater effort and resources to the recruiting of students meeting these new admissions requirements -- particularly students graduating in the top quartile of their high school class. Among other things, greater effort and resources should be committed to target marketing of potential students, personal contact with potential students, and merit-based scholarships.

Admissions is not just the responsibility of the AdmissionsOffice. When admissions is done well, the entire university communitydeserves credit; when admissions is done poorly, the entireuniversity community deserves blame. At any time, but particularlywhen admissions procedures are changing, the entire universitycommunity must actively participate in the recruitment process.

This recommendation calls for more than just lip-service andhead-nodding. We are calling on everyone to devote both time andenergy to the recruitment of qualified students to SFA. For many ofus, this means talking to high school students who are making collegechoices. Personal communication tends to be much more effective thanmass mailings. It also means making the opportunities andaccomplishments of SFA more visible within our major studentmarketing areas. This means more community involvement.

This recommendation calls for increased resources. In particular,the committee believes funding for merit-based scholarships should beincreased. Previous increases in merit-based scholarships haveimproved our ability to recruit well-qualified students; additionalincreases should result in further improvements. In order to increasefunding for merit-based scholarships, other university programs mayneed to see decreased funding, or at least no growth in funding. Sobe it. The committee feels increased funding of merit-basedscholarships is that important.

The committee recommends:

• That the Vice-President for Academic Affairs annually inform the Faculty Senate on the academic success of students initially admitted to SFA under the normal admission requirements for beginning college students, under the review process for beginning college students, under the requirements for transfer students, and under the university's special admissions procedures.

As an academic institution, the faculty mustbe centrally involved in the determination of the university'sadmissions requirements. Regular assessment of university policiesand procedures results in their improvement over time. Therefore, werecommend that the chief academic officer of the university annuallyreport to the elected faculty representative body on theeffectiveness of the university's admissions requirements inselecting students who are more likely to succeed than fail at theinstitution.

The committee recommends:

• That these proposed changes in undergraduate admissions take effect in the Fall 2001 semester.

The success of any change in university admission requirementsrequires that the public, in general, and high school counselors andprospective students, in particular, be informed of the changes wellin advance of their implementation. Not only must these groups beinformed but they must be shown that these changes are easy tounderstand and that they will make SFA an even better place toreceive a college education than it has been in the past. If thecommittee's proposals are acted on this calendar year, we believethey can be successfully implemented for the fall semester of 2001.

The committee suggests:

• That the university review its probation/suspension policy and its GPA policy for repeated courses.

These policies are not admissions policies; therefore, they do notdirectly fall within the charge given to the committee to reviewundergraduate admission policies. Both policies do, however, affectthe size and characteristics of the student population, the learningenvironment within the classroom, and the academic reputation of theinstitution. In the course of eliciting input from faculty to assistthe committee in its decision making, frequent and critical commentsabout the university's probation and suspension procedures and itsGPA policy for repeated courses were received. The committee,therefore, does suggest that the university review thesepolicies.

Questions and Answers about OurRecommendations

How did the committee go about its work?

The committee consisted of the Director of Admissions, one memberfrom each of the university's seven colleges, one member from RalphW. Steen Library, and a chairperson. The committee met on a weeklybasis from February 16 through May 13.

The committee gathered information from a variety of sources. Ofprimary importance was SFA's Office of Admissions which providedinformation about admissions requirements and experiences at both SFAand at other Texas universities. The 1999 NCHEMS report "Increasingthe Entering Student Admissions Profile at Stephen F. AustinUniversity: A Feasibility Study" was also a valuable source ofinformation.

The committee disseminated information about its activities andencouraged input through an Internet website, a listserv in which allSFA faculty were initially enrolled, presentations to the FacultySenate and the Student Government Association, two public forums,surveys of both faculty and students, and two articles in ThePine Log.

What impact would these recommendations have?

The committee believes the following things are likely to happenif its recommendations are adopted:

• The quantity and quality of learning in classes, particularly lower-division courses, will increase (because students with the greatest difficulty comprehending classroom material will no longer be admitted to the university);
• Student retention rates will increase (because students meeting these new requirements have had higher retention rates at SFA than students who do not meet these new requirements);
• Average grade point averages will increase (because students meeting these new requirements have had higher GPA's at SFA than students who do not meet these new requirements);
• Expenditures on developmental services will decrease (because students meeting these new requirements have made less use of developmental services at SFA than students who do not meet these new requirements);
• The number of students admitted to SFA as transfer students will increase (because some students blocked from admission to SFA as beginning college students will go to community colleges and then seek admission to SFA as transfer students);
• The academic reputation of the university in the general public will increase (because our published admission requirements are seen to be higher, because the quality of classroom instruction will improve, and because the perceived quality of SFA students and graduates will be higher);
• SAT/ACT scores of applicants in the second quartile of their high school graduating classes will increase (because at present high school students intending to come to SFA who are safely ensconced in the second quartile of their class are required to take the SAT or ACT exam have no incentive to do well but they would under the new requirements); and
• The number of applicants in the first quartile of their high school class will increase (eventually because of the improved academic reputation of the university but more immediately because of increased target marketing, personal contact, and merit-based scholarships).

What impact would these recommendations have on enrollment?

Obviously, some current SFA undergraduates who were admitted underthe normal requirements for beginning college students do not meetour recommended requirements. (Since we propose no changes intransfer and special admission programs, students admitted to SFAunder those programs would not be affected by our recommendationsregardless of their SAT/ACT scores.)

Of the 12,132 students enrolled at SFA in the fall of 1998, 1,022of them would have been blocked from admission because they wereundergraduates who were admitted through the normal procedures forbeginning college students but did not meet our proposed SAT/ACTrequirements for their high school quartile. Those students represent8.4 percent of the university's total enrollment.

The effect of our proposed changes would, of course, differ byclass level. Of the 2,353 beginning college students admitted in thefall of 1998, 426 students or 18.1 percent would have been blockedfrom admission because they were admitted through the normalprocedures for beginning college students and did not meet ourproposed SAT/ACT requirements. However, only 69 seniors would havebeen blocked from admission by these new requirements. Thatrepresents just 3.2 percent of the senior class. The impact differsso dramatically from entering first-year students to seniors for atleast two reasons. First, students who do not meet our proposedrequirements typically do not succeed and, therefore, leave SFA inlarge numbers usually within the first year. Second, the percentageof a class admitted as transfer students increases as class levelincreases. Transfer students make up none of our beginning collegestudents but about half of the senior class; and, of course, transferstudents are unaffected by our recommendations.

So, should the university brace for a drop of 18.1 percent inbeginning college students and a drop of 8.4 percent in totaluniversity enrollment if these recommendations are adopted?Absolutely not, for the following reasons:

• The numbers in the previous paragraphs do not take into account the review process we are proposing. The number of beginning college students admitted in any given semester could increase by as much as 10 percent because of the review process.
• The number of first quartile students recruited as a result of increased target marketing, personal contacts, and merit-based scholarships will increase.
• The number of second quartile students who raise their SAT/ACT scores above our minimum requirement will increase because they now have an incentive to score well.
• The number of students admitted as transfer students will increase as some students unable to gain admission as beginning college students will turn to other routes to reach SFA.
• The student population at any point in time reflects admission standards for several years into the past. New admissions requirements take many years to transform the student population profile. This transition period will allow time for some of the long-term positive effects of the new requirements such as an improved academic image within our market areas to take place.

What impact would these recommendations have on minorityenrollment?

These recommendations could reduce the minority percentage of theundergraduate population but only slightly. In the fall of 1998, 17.5percent of all of our undergraduates were minority. If students whowere admitted as beginning college students but who do not meet ourproposed high school quartile and SAT/ACT admission requirements wereexcluded, the remaining undergraduate population would be 15.6percent minority -- a drop of less than two percentage points.

Of course, we are also proposing a review process for unsuccessfulapplications and, as noted above, we expect transfer admissions toincrease and SAT/ACT scores of 2^nd quartile students toimprove. The effect of these things on the race and ethniccomposition of the undergraduate population is unknown.

Why are your recommendations different from the NCHEMSreport?

We agree with some conclusions in the NCHEMS report. We believeSFA is looking in the right places for high-ability students and thatcompetition among universities for high-ability students as definedin the NCHEMS report is intense and dominated by well-fundedinstitutions and that many of these high-ability students use SFA asa back-up institution. We are less certain that higher admissionstandards would result in a short-term enrollment decline although werecognize that as a possibility. (Regrettably, the NCHEMS reportnever actually offers for consideration specific higher admissionstandards even for statistical modeling purposes.) We certainly sharethe reports endorsement of increased support for the SFA101,Connections, and Honors Programs and we call for more than just agradual increase in the Academic Excellence Scholarship Program. Bypostponing consideration of transfer admission changes, it could besaid that we support the report's recommendation for gradual change;however, we do not see the need to incrementally change therequirements for beginning college student admissions because we donot believe we are recommending a radical change in admissionstandards and because we feel to introduce incrementally thesechanges would unnecessarily create confusion and uncertainty aboutprospective students, their parents, and high school counselors aboutwhat are admission standards are "right now".

In a larger sense, however, there is a fundamental differencebetween our recommendations and those in the NCHEMS report. We do notshare NCHEMS' sense of pessimism about SFA's opportunities. Here aresome of the reasons for our greater optimism:

• We are more knowledgeable about SFA because we have worked here. (We even know that the name of the institution is Stephen F. Austin State University and not Stephen F. Austin University.)
• We disagree with the report's definition of high-quality students. The report defines a high-quality student as one with an SAT score of at least 1110 or an ACT score of at least 24. This is too restrictive a definition and certainly places us squarely in competition with the elite academic institutions in the state. It is a definition that is not in keeping with the mission of this institution. Furthermore, as every in-house study has shown, high-school rank and not SAT/ACT score is the better predictor of student success at SFA. A better criterion of high-quality student for this institution and one that might have lead to different conclusions would have been graduation in the top quartile of her or his high school class.
• When faculty and students are asked to describe the problem with our current admission standards, they rarely mention a shortage of high-quality students but they frequently mention the presence of large numbers of ill-prepared students. These are not simply two sides of the same coin. Yet, the report says nothing about the latter problem.
• The report seems to assume the exclusive goal of the institution is enrollment maintenance. We believe enrollment maintenance is desirable but high-quality education is more important.

How are the recommendations different from the changes adoptedand then dropped in 1994?

For the 1994-95 academic year, SFA adopted a "sliding scale"admission policy for beginning college students in which studentswere placed in one of five categories based on their high school rank(top 25 percent, 26 to 50 percent, 51 to 60 percent, 61 to 75percent, and 76 to 100 percent). Students applying for admissioncould receive one of four initial decisions (eligible for honorsadmission, eligible for regular admission, deferred admissiondecision, or not eligible for admission) depending on their highschool rank category and their SAT/ACT scores. In less than a year,SFA abandoned the new admission requirements and returned to theprevious requirements. (See Appendix C for a history of SFA'sadmission policies.)

We believe our recommendations would be more successful than thoseimplemented in 1994 for the following reasons:

• Our proposal is simpler. The 1994-95 requirements used five categories of high school rank; we use four. (Creating a break point at the top 60 percent of a class was particularly troublesome in 1994 since students, parents, high school counselors, and other universities traditionally think in terms of quarters.) The 1994-95 requirements had four initial decisions; we use two (admit or review). A new special admissions program, the Prep Program, was also introduced at the same time as these changes in beginning college admission requirements; by comparison, we propose no changes in the transfer or special admissions programs at this time.
• Our proposal comes from a faculty committee which operated in an open and accessible manner. As a result, faculty will have a greater sense of ownership of the proposal and commitment to it. This is important since we are calling for more personal contact in the recruiting process.
• Our proposal has a longer lead-time before it is implemented. This will allow for greater communication and education to occur with prospective students, parents, and high school counselors.
• In 1994 the Office of Admissions was undergoing reorganization with substantial turnover in key personnel. By comparison, the Office of Admissions is currently under able leadership with an effective organization and a secure, quality staff. It has good channels of communication with the entire campus and enjoys widespread support. As a result, it is better able to implement changes in our admission requirements.

  Conclusion

The university's mission states that "our focus is on excellencein undergraduate education." If that is true, then theserecommendations should be adopted. They are reasonable, moderate,effective steps to improve undergraduate education. In the short-termthey will raise both the quality and quantity of learning that takesplace in our classrooms. In the long-term they will improve theprestige and reputation of our graduates and our institution.

Things are happening on this campus, in the state, and in thenation to make this the right time to act. The university's 1998Student Retention Report recommended a serious examination ofadmission standards because of their clear and obvious link tostudent retention. The university's planning document also completedin 1998, "SFA 03: A Rededication to Student Success," called for astrengthening of the university's admission standards. Theuniversity's first-ever capital campaign, "Share the Legacy," iscurrently underway with a $30 million dollar goal and scholarshipsupport as a funding priority. The Texas Higher EducationCoordinating Board projects increasing enrollment at SFA during thenext 10 years because of increasing numbers of high school agestudents in our market areas. Finally, universities across the nationare in the process of raising admission standards in a drive toencourage academic excellence (see Appendix D).

Now is the time to act!

Appendix A: Admission Requirements at OtherTexas Public Universities

Texas Public Four-Year Universities	Required (and Recommended) High School Credits
	English	Math	Science	Social Science	Foreign Language	Additional Required (and Recommended) Credits
Angelo State University	4	3	3	3	(2)	(1 computer science)
Lamar University-Beaumont	4	3	2	2.5	2	2.5 academic electives
Midwestern State University	4	3	2			6 from math, science, U.S. or world history, U.S. government, world geography, economics, social sciences, foreign language, fine arts, computer science, business, speech, journalism
Prairie View A&M University	4	(3)	(3)	2		4 electives
Sam Houston State University	4	2	2	2.5		(1 computer science, 2 academic electives)
Southwest Texas State University	4	3	3	3	2	(1 social studies, 1 foreign language, .5 fine arts, .5 speech, .5 heath, 1 computer science, 1.5 p.e.)
Stephen F. Austin State University	(4)	(3)	(2)	(3)	(2)	(1 fine arts, 1 computer science)
Sul Ross State University	4	3	2	3	(3)	(1 fine arts, 1 computer science, 1 world history, 1 world geography)
Tarleton State University	(4)	(3)	(2)	(2.5)		(College preparatory high school curriculum)
Texas A&M International University	4	3	2	3	2	1 fine arts, 1 computer science
Texas A&M University	4	3.5	2	3	2	(1 computer science)
Texas A&M University-Commerce	4	3	2	2.5	2
Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi	4	3	2	3	(2)	( 1 computer science)
Texas A&M University-Kingsville	(4)	(3)	(3)	(4)	(3)	(1 computer science, 1 art, .5 health, 1.5 p.e., 3 electives)
Texas Southern University	(4)	(3)	(2)	(2)		(6 from foreign language, computer science, speech, journalism, fine arts)
Texas Tech University	4	3	2	2.5	(2)	3.5 academic electives
Texas Woman's University	4	3, (4)	2, (3)	3, (4)		3 academic electives (foreign language, health, computer science, fine arts, speech, p.e.)
University of Houston	4	3	2	3	(2)
University of Houston-Downtown	(4)	(2)	(2)	(4)	(3)	(College preparatory high school curriculum)
University of North Texas	4	3	2	3	(3)	(1 world geography, 1 math, 1 science, .5 health, 1 fine arts, 1 computer science, 1.5 p.e., 2.5 electives)
University of Texas at Arlington	4	3, (4)	3, (4)	3	2	(1 computing proficiency, 1 fine arts, 1.5 p.e.)
University of Texas at Austin	4	3, (4)	2, (3)	3	2 (3)	(.5 fine arts)
University of Texas at Brownsville	4	2	2	4	3
University of Texas at Dallas	4	3.5	3	3	2	(1 computer science, .5 fine arts, .5 health, 1.5 p.e.)
University of Texas at El Paso	(4)	(3-4)	(3)	(4)	(3)	(1 computer science, 1 fine arts, .5 health, 1.5 p.e.)
University of Texas -- Pan American	(4)	(3)	(3)	(3.5)	(2)	(1 computer science, 1 fine arts, .5 economics, .5 health, .5 speech, 1.5 p.e., 3.5 electives)
University of Texas -- Permian Basin	4	3	2	3	(2)	Additional science or math can replace foreign language
University of Texas at San Antonio	(4)	(3)	(2)	(2)	(2)	(1 fine arts)
University of Texas at Tyler	4	3	3	3	(2)	fine arts, computer science
West Texas A&M University	(4)	(3)	(3)	(3)	(2)

Texas Public Four-Year Universities	Minimum SAT/ACT Scores by High School Rank1
	1st Quarter	2nd Quarter	3rd Quarter	4th Quarter
Angelo State University	*	*	1030/23	1270/30
Lamar University-Beaumont	*	*	1000/21	1100/24
Midwestern State University	*	950/20	950/20	950/20
Prairie View A&M University	*	880/18	880/18	880/18
Sam Houston State University	*	*	1010/21	1010/21
Southwest Texas State University	920/20	1010/22	1180/26	1270/29
Stephen F. Austin State University	*	*	1010/21	1010/21
Sul Ross State university	*	*	920/20	920/20
Tarleton State University	*	930/20	930/20	930/20
Texas A&M International University	919/18	919/18	919/18	919/18
Texas A&M University	920/19 Review **	1050/23 Review**	1180/26 Review**	1180/26 Review**
Texas A&M University-Commerce	*	920/20	920/20	920/20
Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi	900/19	1000/21	1100/23	1200/27
Texas A&M University-Kingsville	*	970/21	970/21	970/21
Texas Southern University	*	*	*	*
Texas Tech University	1140/25 Review**	1230/28 Review**	1270/29 Review**	1270/29 Review**
Texas Woman's University	800/17	800/17	800/17	800/17
University of Houston	*	1100/24	1100/24	1100/24
University of Houston-Downtown
University of North Texas	*	1010/21 Review**	1100/24 Review**	1180/27 Review**
University of Texas at Arlington	900/19	950/20	1000/21	1150/25
University of Texas at Austin	Review**	Review**	Review**	Review**
University of Texas at Brownsville
University of Texas at Dallas	1140/25	Review**	Review**	Review**
University of Texas at El Paso	*	*	920/20	920/20
University of Texas -- Pan American	*	*	930/20	930/20
University of Texas -- Permian Basin	*	830/18	920/19	1100/24
University of Texas at San Antonio	830/17	870/18	920/19	970/20
University of Texas at Tyler	950/20	1000/21	1050/22	1100/23
West Texas A&M University	*	*	950/20	950/20

1 Many universities allow lower scores for students who rankhigher in their high school classes.

* No minimum test scores set, but students must submit scores.

** Applications reviewed to help determine admission.

Source: Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board's brochure"Planning for College Admission" published Summer, 1998

Appendix B: Past Success Rates for EnteringCollege Students at SFA

SAT category	top quartile	2nd quartile	3rd quartile	4th quartile
1200-1600	95% GPA > 2.00 based on 312 cases	62% GPA > 2.00 based on 68 cases	46% GPA > 2.00 based on 37 cases	25% GPA > 2.00 based on 8 cases
1100-1190	91% GPA > 2.00 based on 446 cases	67% GPA > 2.00 based on 241 cases	56% GPA > 2.00 based on 143 cases	33% GPA > 2.00 based on 46 cases
1000-1090	85% GPA > 2.00 based on 689 cases	61% GPA > 2.00 based on 543 cases	48% GPA > 2.00 based on 365 cases	32% GPA > 2.00 based on 117 cases
900-990	71% GPA > 2.00 based on 526 cases	58% GPA > 2.00 based on 782 cases	47% GPA > 2.00 based on 261 cases	30% GPA > 2.00 based on 67 cases
800-890	63% GPA > 2.00 based on 241 cases	49% GPA > 2.00 based on 546 cases	46% GPA > 2.00 based on 159 cases	21% GPA > 2.00 based on 29 cases
400-790	40% GPA > 2.00 based on 76 cases	39% GPA > 2.00 based on 290 cases	33% GPA > 2.00 based on 55 cases	0% GPA > 2.00 based on 15 cases

Source: Committee analysis of 12-month success rates of 6,062 fall1994 through fall 1997 beginning first-year students

Appendix C: History of SFA AdmissionPolicies

University General Bulletins	Requirements	Notes
1923-24 to 1968-69	required high school credits in specified areas
1969-70 to 1979-80	18 on ACT or adequate predictive score*
1980-81 to 1983-84	top ½ of high school class or 18 on ACT / 800 on SAT
1984-85 to 1989-90	top ½ of high school class or 20 on ACT / 900 on SAT
1990-91 to 1993-94	top ½ of high school class or 21 on ACT / 900 on SAT	ACT changed scoring scale
1994-95	1st quartile and 19 ACT / 800 SAT 2nd quartile and 19 ACT / 800 SAT 6th decile and 21 ACT / 900 SAT otherwise review or reject
1995-96 to present	top ½ of high school class or 21 on ACT / 1010 on SAT	SAT changed scoring scale

* predictive score based on grades during 2^nd semesterof high school junior year, ACT sub-test scores, and gradingpractices at SFA

Source: Committee review of SFA General Bulletins

Appendix D: Admission Activities at OtherUniversities

16A *** Houston Chronicle Sunday, May 2, 1999 Universities get tough on freshman admissions
By Valerie Strauss Washington Post It was one of the few things a high school senior could depend on: Maintain a B-plus average and waltz into a major public university. Not any more. These days, even a perfect 4.0 grade-point average doesn't guarantee admission. Across the country major public universities and some smaller state schools have been deluged with applications and forced to be choosier with freshman admissions. The surge is being attributed to a potent combination of relatively low costs, improved honors programs and a population boom among high school graduates in many states. At the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, hundreds of students with Scholastic Assessment Test scores of 1,400 out of a perfect 1,600 were turned down, including some who graduated second in their class. The situation is tougher out west. At the university of	California's Los Angeles and Berkeley campuses, thousands of students with 4.0 GPA's were told in so many words, "Thanks, but no thanks." "I've heard from lots of unhappy people who thought their child was solid because they had a B average," said Linda Clement, admissions director at Maryland's College Park campus. "It's so competitive now." At Maryland, the mean grade point average of the 8,000 students admitted this fall out of 17,000 applicants was 3.7. In 1993, the average GPA of enrolled freshman was 3.17. Last year, it was 3.54. The number of four-year public institutions practicing selective admissions - meaning a majority of accepted freshman were in the top 25 percent of their graduating class - has jumped by 49 percent during the past dozen years, according to a study by policy analyst Thomas G. Mortenson. Private four-year colleges and universities also increasingly are relying on selective admissions.	Elite private schools are inherently choosy, but public schools - which enroll 80 percent of all undergraduates - have long been viewed as having a place for everyone. Students who don't get into their state's flagship schools often wind up in other public colleges and universities - though even some of the smaller schools are becoming harder to get into. Some public universities in New York, Louisiana and other states that historically have had open admissions are setting tougher admittance standards. That leaves fewer college opportunities for students in the bottom half of their class, who tend to come from low-income families and increasingly are turned to public two-year colleges, according to education analysts. "It's always the little guys that get squeezed in this," said Mortenson, of the Washington-based Center for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education.