UH Hilo Congress Admissions Committee 2007-2008: our goal is student success
DRAFT--DRAFT--DRAFT--DRAFT--DRAFT--DRAFT-The primary mission of UH Hilo is to offer high quality undergraduate liberal arts and
professional programs. (UH Hilo Mission Statement, as stated in AY 2007-2008 catalog
and Strategic Plan 2002-2010).
Introduction
This is the report of the Admissions Committee to the Faculty Congress for AY 20072008. According to the Congress charter,
The Congress will appoint a standing admissions committee composed of at least one
faculty representative from each college that awards undergraduate degrees and one
faculty representative from Student Affairs. The Congress will also appoint a faculty
member to serve as chair of this committee. The committee will be charged with
* reviewing and recommending general admission standards for UH Hilo
undergraduates. These standards will address first-time new students, transfer students,
home schooled students, dismissed students, and students who would otherwise be denied
admission but have exceptional skills and talents of interest to the university. While the
committee makes recommendations for general admission standards, it will not infringe
on the prerogative of individual colleges to 1) establish higher admission standards for
students enrolling in its courses or programs, and 2) establish admission opportunity
programs for students that would not otherwise meet the university’s general admission
standards
* making periodic assessments of admission standards in light of the mission of the
university, the strategic plan, financial considerations, University of Hawai’i system
policies, and Board of Regents policies
* making periodic, evidence-based assessments of admission opportunity programs
established for students that do not meet the general admission standards. These
assessments must also address whether the admission opportunity programs have
admission standards, a faculty review process, an on-going academic support structure
to assist students, and an evaluation component to monitor effectiveness of the program.
We have identified three interrelated issues pertaining to admissions: Our statewide
reputation is poor, our retention and graduation rates are low, and our faculty are
frustrated with the preparation level of our students.
1) The reputation of UH Hilo is poor outside of East Hawaii. “I believe, and we've
always believed, that we're five steps behind," said nationally acclaimed author Lois-Ann
Yamanaka. "It's the 'You're only good [enough] to be on this rock' mentality. It's
ingrained. And when your neighbor's kid goes to Stanford and you had to stay in Hilo
College -- I mean, heaven forbid! To me it's sad because I felt that way."(Leong, 1999).
UH Hilo should be an attractive option for top Hawaii high school graduates. We have
outstanding, unique programs in Hawaiian Studies, Volcanology, and Marine Science.
Our Nursing program has national accreditation, and our College of Business and
Economics is one of only two AACSB-accredited colleges of business in the state. Our
Computer Science graduates’ field exam scores are on par with the top schools in the
nation.
However, NSSE results indicate that students themselves feel underchallenged [ref], and
a 2007 survey of faculty members reveal that in the view of teaching faculty, many
students lack basic skills such as writing.
A study of Oahu high school counselors [ref] indicated that in many areas UH Hilo has a
good reputation that is consistent with our primary mission of providing excellent
undergraduate programs. UHH is seen as a small liberal arts type campus with a strong
undergraduate program. UHH is also seen as a good fit for Oahu students who want an
away from home experience that is not too far away or for students who are interested in
such programs as Hawaiian language, tropical ag, or astronomy. These are distinctive
competencies that we should emphasize.
Unfortunately, the same survey shows that UHH is seen as having a “reputation not as
strong as UH Manoa.” Counselors indicated that they would recommend UH Hilo for
students who are “the ones who cannot get into UH Manoa,” “2.5 to 3.0 students ” and
“Those that may not meet UH Manoa standards but yet have good enough grades to
attend UH Hilo.”
UH Hilo’s reputation is better in East Hawaii than it is statewide. In the Hilo-WaiakeaLaupahoehoe complex, the survey of high school seniors indicates that more students
intend to enroll at UHH than at any other four year institution (20%, or 80 total).
Statewide, however, only 3% of students (236) intend to enroll at UHH, the same
percentage that intends to enroll at HPU. Twelve percent of graduating seniors statewide
intend to enroll at Manoa. This means that outside of East Hawaii, only 156 seniors
surveyed in the entire state intend to go to UH Hilo. This is clearly an area for potential
growth.
(http://arch.k12.hi.us/PDFs/seps/2006/SEPS06_Staterpt070627.pdf)
Not only is UHH viewed as having a “reputation not as strong as UH Manoa,” per our
posted strategic plan (http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/uhh/strategic/analysis.php) public
perception of Hawaii tertiary education overall is poor overall compared with national
figures.
Hawaii U.S.
% of state residents who say: A typical college graduate from the state
28%
38%
has high levels of skills and knowledge
% of employers satisfied with how colleges and universities in the state
23%
46%
are preparing students for work
2) Retention is an issue. The most recent Washington Monthly college rankings rated
UH Hilo 176 out of 200 liberal arts colleges. The WM rankings are meant to be a
socially conscious alternative to US News & World Report rankings, which tend to be
correlated to a school’s wealth. Washington Monthly measures how good a school is at
providing social mobility to low income and underrepresented students. UHH’s biggest
negative was the actual versus expected graduation rate; 31% versus 51%. As the system
implements incentives related to numbers of graduates, this will become an issue of
increasing importance.
3) Many students are unprepared for college level work. This is not unique to Hawaii;
nationwide, about half of high school graduates are unprepared for college work (Greene,
2005). In a campuswide survey of UHH faculty, a plurality indicated that basic grammar,
writing and critical thinking skills were all major issues with our students. Students who
are not ready for college work should be directed to HCC for remediation per our posted
strategic plan. This is not happening currently because we do not have a robust and
mandatory suite of placement tests. Some institutions use standardized test scores for
remedial placement. The Florida State system places into remediation students scoring
below 440 on SAT verbal or math, or 17 ACT English, 19 ACT Math, or 18 ACT
reading. (http://enrollment.fgcu.edu/advising/fashandbook/remediation.html;
http://www.cas.usf.edu/freshmen/coursenonsciences.html). According to these standards
[how many of our students would be considered remedial? Brendan’s data]
Tradeoffs involved in admissions standards
At this time, the Admissions Committee is not making specific recommendations with
regard to admissions standards. Rather, in this section we provide an evidence-based
overview of the likely tradeoffs involved in increasing standards to approximate those of
UH-Manoa, and keeping the standards that are currently in place.
While we provide no specific directives with regard to academic hurdles, in Section 3 we
do make recommendations for lowering non-academic barriers for students.
Currently, for incoming freshmen we require a 3.0 academic high school GPA. If the
GPA is 3.0 or higher, SAT/ACT scores are not used. For students with a GPA lower than
3.0, SAT / ACT is used on a sliding scale.
Manoa’s admissions policy according to their website is stated as a 3.0 academic high
school GPA in addition to SAT scores of 510 (critical reading), 510 (writing), and 510
(math) or ACT score of 22.
Evidence in favor of keeping the current standards:
There is concern that raising standards could cause a dip in enrollment. If Manoa’s
standard were applied to our current entering freshman class, [Brendan’s data here.] On
the other hand, UH Manoa did not see a predicted dip in enrollment after raising its
standards in 2002.
30000
25000
20000
UH AT MĀNOA
UH AT HILO
UH-WEST O‘AHU
CCs
15000
10000
5000
0
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Fewer than half of UHH students are subject to admissions standards. Transfer
students are required only to have maintained a C average in 24 units of academic classes
in any community college. Raising admissions standards would not affect transfer
students. Transfer student policy is decided at the BOR level.
Fewer than half of UHH students are subject to admissions standards. Transfer
students are required only to have maintained a C average in 24 units of academic classes
Evidence in favor of raising standards:
Increasing standards can increase enrollment. CUNY increased admissions standards
and ended nearly all remediation programs and experienced a 24 percent enrollment
increase in five years. (http://www.highereducation.org/crosstalk/ct0205/news0205cuny.shtml). The University of Nebraska at Lincoln saw increased applications and
enrollments following their raising admissions standards, largely from students in the top
20% of their high school class (http://www.unl.edu/scarlet/v6n8/v6n8features.html,
http://www.unl.edu/scarlet/v9n23/v9n23features.html;
http://ucommxsrv1.unl.edu/scarlet/public/FMPro?-db=scarletstory&format=storydetail.htm&-lay=public&-op=eq&storyid=732211S34975X&-max=1&find=). The changes were implemented in the mid 1990s, and UNL continued to see
growth at least through 2005. On the other hand, UH Manoa increased its admissions
standards in 2002 and saw neither a dramatic increase nor a dramatic decrease in
enrollment.
Standardized test scores predict retention (Brooks and DuBois, 1995, Pritchard and
Wilson, 2003). A study of 513 accredited public institutions using IPEDS data indicated
that institutional selectivity was associated with higher graduation rates: “admitting one
percentage point more of those who apply for undergraduate admission results, on
average, in a decline of .295 percentage point in graduation rates.” (Hamrick, 2004). At
UH Hilo, [waiting for Brendan’s data]
Standardized test scores predict GPA (Zimmerman, 2003, Betts and Morell, 1999); a
recent study at the University of California indicated that the SAT II subject test is the
best single predictor of first year GPA, although adding other measures increases
predictive value (http://www.ucop.edu/news/sat/research.html)
Higher admissions standards improve an institution’s reputation. The caliber of
students is a determinant of institutional reputation, and institutional reputation in turn
affects both recruitment (Goenner and Snaith, 2004) and retention (Nguyen and LeBlanc,
2001, Belanger et al., 2002).
Higher admissions standards can help us recruit Native Hawaiian students by
making UHH more attractive to Kamehameha graduates who are currently going to
the Continental United States for college. “Graduates who plan to attend a four-year
college or university on the U.S. continent have a mean grade point average of 3.3 and
relatively high SAT-I Verbal and SAT-I Math scores, averaging around 548 and 610,
respectively.” (Imua, September 2004). Admissions standards close to these levels would
position UH Hilo as a match for these students’ potential rather than a step down.
(www.ksbe.edu/pase/pdf/Reports/Post-graduation/03_04_9.pdf).
Raising admissions standards will accelerate student performance upwards through
peer effects. Peers influence academic performance (Sacerdote, 2001). Students have
their GPA pulled up by having a roommate with a high verbal SAT, or pulled down by
having a roommate with a low verbal SAT, and students at the very low and very high
ends of the distribution are far less prone to peer effects than those in the middle.
(Zimmerman, 2003). If we are admitting more low-end students than high-end, these
results would lead us to predict that overall student performance will be pulled down.
3) Non academic hurdles: The recommendations that
our committee has agreed
on, pertaining to lowering *non* academic barriers.
These are what we
agreed on back in January and include:
* Implement a mandatory first year / first semester
program for incoming
freshmen and transfer students
* Examine and clean up the "hygeine factors" that cause
dissatisfaction such
as parking permits, web access to catalog and other
services, limited times
and slots for placement testing, and insufficient
numbers of seats in
required intro classes
* Implement on site childcare for students (having this
open to faculty
would probably be helpful as well)
* Start a dialogue with the Athletics Department to see
what they did in
2000/2001 to increase their graduation rate, and
determine if there is
anything we can learn from them
Is there anything else that should be included? Nina
and Reni, we haven't
heard from you, what do you think?
Em
Introduction
UH Hilo has the opportunity to occupy a unique niche. No other institution in Hawaii
offers a high quality, affordable undergraduate liberal arts education.
Currently, UH Hilo enrolls fewer than 3% of Hawaii first time freshmen. As the only
public (and therefore affordable) small liberal arts college in the state of Hawaii, UHH
should be seen as an excellent option for college bound Hawaii high school graduates.
Issues
Recommendations: Building our culture, knocking down
nonacademic hurdles
Organizational culture is important because it:






Defines the boundary between one organization and others
Conveys a sense of identity for its members
Facilitates the generation of commitment to something larger than self-interest
Enhances the stability of the social system
Serves as a sense-making and control mechanism organization members
Allows the organization to accomplish things!
(Robbins, 2003)
In order to build student, faculty and staff commitment to the organization, we need to
clear away unnecessary annoyances and obstacles. Currently we admit more students
than we can house. We admit students who are responsible for young children, but we do
not make childcare available. We admit students who require remediation in math,
writing, and possibly reading, but we do not have a remediation program.
Our website and marketing materials, our library hours, parking policies, and the way we
allocate resources to classrooms and labs all send a message about how highly we value
our students and their success.
The outcomes of appropriate organizational socialization are high productivity and
commitment, and low turnover.
Student “productivity” is being measured via assessment programs, which are still in
their infancy.
As far as commitment and turnover, UH Hilo’s attrition rate is high. We do not know
how much of this attrition is pre-planned, however.
The most recent Washington Monthly college rankings rated UH Hilo 176 out of 200
liberal arts colleges. The WM rankings are meant to be a socially conscious alternative to
US News & World Report rankings, which tend to be correlated to a school’s wealth.
Washington Monthly measures how good a school is at providing social mobility to low
income and underrepresented students. UHH’s biggest negative was the actual versus
expected graduation rate; 31% versus 51%. The fact that our actual rate is twenty points
lower than predicted may indicate that we are admitting students who require more
support than we are providing.
Recommendation 1: Mandatory, universal First Year program. This includes enforcing
ENG 100 being taken the first semester. This will require offering sufficient numbers of
sections. A well coordinated first year program will calibrate student expectations, let
students know what is expected of them, and foster organizational commitment
Recommendation 2: On-site childcare.
A survey of first and second year students indicated that over 10% were considering
leaving UHH because of childcare and family responsibilities. Among Native Hawaiian
students the number was closer to 12%. Although faculty attrition is outside the purview
of the Admissions Committee, we suspect that available on site childcare would be a
boon to faculty with young children as well.
Recommendation 3: Resource allocation to improve quality of student life
On site study/meeting/food service areas
Coordinated online catalog/registration
Bookstore improvements
Parking permit improvements
Tradeoffs: Issues pertaining to admissions standards
At this point the Admissions Committee is not recommending specific admissions
standards. Any recommendation would be premature in light of the proposed system
resource allocation changes. Instead, we present potential tradeoffs associated with three
courses of action that are frequently brought up: Raising admissions standards for first
year entering students, keeping admissions standards the same for first year entering
students, and relaxing standards for first year students so that first year students and
transfer students are subject to consistent standards.
Currently we are admiting underprepared students, and providing them uneven support,
little or no mandatory remediation, and no accommodation for work or family. While
there are many different counseling options and special programs, there is no systematic
or mandatory remediation, no evening program, and no on-site child care. This
combination of high-need students with low levels of academic and work-life support is
likely to ensure continued high attrition rate among students and negative feedback from
employers.
If we wish to increase the level of academic challenge and quality at UH Hilo, we, the
faculty, must commit to doing our part. If we are gifted with well-prepared students and
capped class sizes, we must provide a consistently deep level of challenge in order to
keep those students engaged and help them to realize their potential.
What predicts performance?
If test scores can predict GPA and retention, why do we not see a significant relationship
between SAT and first year GPA among UHH students? We believe that one likely
explanation is to be found in the research on peer effects.
If we raise standards, will we lose students?
Some have expressed concern that raising standards might decrease head count. Even
though Chancellor Englert had predicted that raising admissions standards would shift
6,000-9,000 students to other UH campuses, Manoa’s fall enrollment did not decrease,
nor did that of other campuses increase. In the end, Manoa increased student quality
without sacrificing quantity. (http://www.iro.hawaii.edu/maps/mlcatego.asp)
The (surprising) case against remediation.
Our investigations indicate that the source of our poor local reputation is our well-known
lack of selectivity. Many of our current admitted freshmen are unprepared for college.
According to our current strategic plan, these students should be directed to HCC for
remediation, but are not. One natural first reaction to this information is to recommend
instituting a robust remediation program. This was certainly the initial assumption of
many on the Admissions Committee. Further research into this issue, however, revealed
that in addition to usurping the mission of the Community Colleges, efforts at instituting
remediation would do little to help anyone.
One option we have is to embrace the fact that we are functioning as a remedial school,
and structure our offerings accordingly. This would be in direct violation of our mission
and BOR directives indicating that remediation is the responsibility of the CCs. It is
unlikely that the system would grant sufficient resources for instituting the extensive
remediation required by our current student population. Institutions with similar student
profiles to ours have mandatory placement tests at entry and offer up to three years of
not-for-credit developmental courses in reading, writing, and math; that is, the
equivalent of tenth, eleventh, and twelfth grade in each of those topics.
The more profound the need for remediation, the less effective remediation is, so that
resources spent on the least prepared students result in extremely small gains, while the
same resources spent on average students result in much larger gains, and/or gains for
greater numbers of students. The strongest evidence against remediation, however, is a
recent study out of RAND and UT Dallas indicating that the estimated billion-plus
dollars per year spent on first-year college remediation, when analyzed in the aggregate,
provides little benefit either for individual students or for society in general
(Martorell and McFarlin, 2007). If we were to embrace our current role as a largely
remedial institution, we would be forfeiting our opportunity to be an engine of social
mobility for Hawaii.
Recommendations
What are we doing right?
We still have small class sizes for most courses. This is probably our main competitive
advantage, and it is one we should guard passionately.
Most classes are taught by full time tenure track faculty; we make appropriate use of
adjuncts, except in the English department, where many lower division courses are taught
by nontenured professors. Composition courses must be taught by tenured faculty who
know that they are not risking their continued employment by enforcing academic rigor
(Guinn, 2006, Falkenberg and Greenwald, 2007).
We are publicizing our unique Hawaiian Language, Marine Science and Volcanology
programs. This is important in developing and promoting our unique identity, rather than
striving to be a poor man’s Manoa.
What could we change in order to do better?
We recommend following our mission to offer high quality undergraduate liberal arts
and professional programs. Although graduation rates are not explicitly mentioned in
our mission statement, we believe that the following measures will improve our quality,
our culture, our reputation, and consequently our graduation and retention rates.
Recommendation
Ongoing program to
work with high
schools on aligning
Where it fits
RECRUITMENT
Comments
UHH is the most
popular 4 year college
for East Hawaii HS
Cost
Personnel and
travel money need
to be dedicated to
standards, and HS
counselors on
clarifying our market
position
Adopt higher
standards; at least
Manoa’s minimum
510 SAT or 22 ACT
in each subject for
admission to the
University
Mandatory FYE:
academically rigorous
semester course as
pre-or co-requisite for
all other courses.
Recruit returning
local students with a
coherent evening
program and
affordable on-site
child care available
during all class times.
Charge tuition per
course, not per
semester.
Standardized code of
professionalism
REPUTATION
RETENTION
MISSION
EARLY
SOCIALIZATION
seniors, but reputation this program
lags on other islands.
Working with HS fits
with statewide P20
initiative; Brain
development is
complete by early
20s, earlier
interventions might
be more effective.
.
.None foreseen;
Manoa had no dip
in enrollment
when they raised
their standards in
2003.
Taught by academic
faculty. Includes 1)
History and norms of
academia 2) Local
Hawaii history and
culture 3) Basic
health biology and
poli sci (see U of O).
ONGOING
Those who are
SOCIALIZATION, education-resistant at
ACADEMIC
18 can become some
SUCCESS
of our best students
MISSION
decades later,
strengthening the
culture by providing
positive role models.
ACADEMIC
We have too many
SUCCESS
students loading up
on courses and
underperforming in
all of them. The persemester all-you-caneat model also
discourages students
from enrolling in
HCC where
necessary.
ONGOING
Master Syllabus type
SOCIALIZATION code of
Faculty time and
commitment
Childcare center
operating 7:30am9pm weekdays,
commitment to
running
underenrolled
evening classes
Limit class size to 20
RECRUITMENT
ACADEMIC
SUCCESS
MISSION
Writing across the
curriculum
RECRUITMENT
ACADEMIC
SUCCESS
ONGOING
SOCIALIZATION
RECRUITMENT
Raise the cap on out
of state to 50-60%.
(A local parent
suggested this,
expressing interest in
UHH but saying, “I
don’t want [my kids]
hanging out with the
same people they’ve
been with since
elementary school.”)
Adopt a realistic
student head count
goal
Decouple student
professionalism
optional but available
to faculty. May
include items such as
no hats in class, no
laptops, no cell
phones, upper
division courses
expected to take 3
hours for every class
hour, etc.
Takes advantage of
one of our biggest
strengths. Enables
writing across the
disciplines.
Lose economies
of scale, gain
recruitment
advantage.
Requires capping
class size (see
above)
Local parents would
like their kids to be
exposed to other
cultures without
moving too far away,
getting swallowed up
in a giant R1 like
Manoa, or spending a
fortune like Oahu
private colleges.
Would increase
revenues, as out of
state tuition is
higher.
Economically,
higher education
can be a clean
export industry for
Hawaii.
ACADEMIC
SUCCESS
ONGOING
SOCIALIZATION
MISSION
Growing to 7000
students is practically
and environmentally
unsustainable.
Pressure to increase
enrollment leads to
our current housing
crisis, and to such
violations of mission
as taking students
more appropriately
directed to HCC.
Depends on
system reaction
and incentive
system—UHH
would lose money
if resources
allocated on head
count, but would
benefit if
resources were
allocated on
academic quality
outcomes.
ACADEMIC
Teaching a rigorous
satisfaction from
faculty evaluation
SUCCESS
class takes a great
deal of time and
effort, and one’s
efforts are rewarded
by student learning,
but not student
satisfaction.
Other programs to try include
Leadership honors
RECRUITMENT Develop a cohort
program
curriculum for current
presidential scholars
Pilot for future
learning
community
programs
UH Manoa has taken a different tack. UHM very publicly moved to raise standards in
2003, stating that they hoped to shift the burden of underprepared students elsewhere in
the system:
“The debate on whether to raise admission standards at Manoa -- and move those who are
unable to meet them to other four- or two-year UH campuses -- began to gain momentum
among administrators last year
…
Some also said that too much remedial teaching is being done at Manoa. "We can cater to
someone shopping around trying to find the lowest standards, or we can cater to someone
shopping around trying to find the highest," said UH-Manoa philosophy professor James
Tiles
…
"If we have an opportunity for 6,000 to 9,000 to go to another part of the system, we
would not have to carry the burden we are now," [former chancellor Peter] Englert said.”
(http://starbulletin.com/2003/10/25/news/story2.html)
Signaling low selectivity tells high achievers that they should go elsewhere. The
selectivity of a university is self-reinforcing, with higher standards attracting higherachieving students and increasing both recruitment and retention (Goenner and Snaith,
2004, Nguyen and LeBlanc, 2001, Belanger et al., 2002) .
References
BELANGER, C., MOUNT, J. & WILSON, M. (2002) Institutional Image and Retention.
Tertiary Education and Management, 8, 217-230.
BETTS, J. & MORELL, D. (1999) The Determinants of Undergraduate Grade Point
Average: The Relative Importance of Family Background, High School
Resources, and Peer Group Effects. Journal of Human Resources, 34, 268–293.
BROOKS, J. H. & DUBOIS, D. L. (1995) Individual and environmental predictors of
adjustment during the first
year of college. . Journal of College Student Development, 36, 347-360.
FALKENBERG, S. & GREENWALD, A. G. (2007) The Influence of Grades on
Teaching Effectiveness Ratings. Association for Psychological Science 19th
Annual Convention. Washington, D.C.
GOENNER, C. F. & SNAITH, S. M. (2004) Assessing the Effects of Increased
Admission Standards. College and University, 80, 29-34.
GREENE, J., & WINTERS, M. (2005). (2005) Public high school graduation and
college-readiness rates: 1991-2002. New York, Manhattan Institute.
GUINN, B. V., VERN (2006) The Influence of Grades on Teaching Effectiveness
Ratings at a Hispanic-Serving Institution. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education,
5, 313-321.
HAMRICK, F. A., SCHUH, J. H., & SHELLEY, M. C. (2004, MAY 4). , 12, 19. (2004)
Predicting higher education graduation rates from institutional characteristics and
resource allocation. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12.
LEONG, L. (1999) Isles lose many of ‘the best and brightest’. Star-Bulletin. Honolulu.
MARTORELL, P. & MCFARLIN, I. (2007) Help or Hindrance? The Effects of College
Remediation on Academic and Labor Market Outcomes. RAND and University
of Texas at Dallas.
NGUYEN, N. & LEBLANC, G. (2001) Image and reputation of higher education
institutions in students’ retention decisions. International Journal of Educational
Management, 15, 303-311.
PRITCHARD, M. E. & WILSON, G. S. (2003) Using Emotional and Social Factors to
Predict
Student Success. Journal of College Student Development, 44, 18-28.
ROBBINS, S. P. (2003) Organizational Behavior, Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice Hall.
SACERDOTE, B. (2001) Peer Effects with Random Assignment: Results for Dartmouth
Roommates. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116, 681-704.
ZIMMERMAN, D. J. (2003) Peer Effects in Academic Outcomes: Evidence from a
Natural Experiment. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 85, 9-23.
Remediation: cutoffs:
SAT
Verbal 440
Math 440
ACT
English 17
Math 19
Reading 18
http://enrollment.fgcu.edu/advising/fashandbook/remediation.html
These are the Florida state cutoffs
http://www.cas.usf.edu/freshmen/coursenonsciences.html
CUNY (which is nominally open admissions):
Under the new standards, freshmen will have to earn at least 510 on the math SAT to win
entry to the five top colleges, and 500 for the bachelor's degree programs at the
other senior colleges -- John Jay, Lehman, Medgar Evers, New York City College
of Technology, Staten Island and York. The university minimum is now 480,
although some colleges have set higher cutoffs.
Manoa:
Profile of Admitted Students. All applications are evaluated on an individual basis.
Generally, successful applicants attain a B (not B-) average for all collegepreparatory high school course work, achieve SAT scores of 510 (critical
reading), 510 (writing), and 510 (math) or ACT score of 22 in each section, and
rank in the upper 40 percent of their graduating class.