- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Vote to change TOPS to need based or ACT at least 30 FAILS
Posted on 5/10/17 at 4:35 pm to Scruffy
Posted on 5/10/17 at 4:35 pm to Scruffy
quote:
He earned it and accepted it with a contractual agreement that he would maintain certain agreed upon scores. He broke the contract. He should have to repay what he took.
This is really stupid.
0
Posted on 5/10/17 at 4:35 pm to redbullwings
quote:
Well that is the plan for anyone going to college. Become more educated as your progress. A probationary period could be allowed to regain the assistance, but if someone does not re-enroll or re-gain the proper criteria, they absolutely should have to pay back the money they received.
The issue for present purposes is that does nothing to save the program. The money is too small. Also, good luck recuperating money from people who can't finish a college program.
Posted on 5/10/17 at 4:36 pm to therick711
quote:
Maybe they could look at changing TOPS to a STEM program and make it a public-private partnership with Exxon and its partners who are already active in this area. If legislators see it as a lemon, at least make lemonade with it.
If not this, then they could cap the number of awards given out each year by discipline. Ex: this year they'll award TOPS to x number of incoming ChemE, y number of poli sci, and z number of journalism students. These numbers could fluctuate based on the workforce's demand for those majors as estimated by the Louisiana Workforce Commission.
That way, students majoring in a discipline that is more in demand will have a better chance at getting TOPS than one majoring in something which has basically zero marketability. They may only award TOPS to 80 Women and Gender Studies incoming freshmen statewide, but might have 300 slots for Accountants. It takes minimum TOPS requirements to apply, but the slots are filled in order of merit. If there are 400 applicants for 450 slots, everyone who meets the minimum gets a TOPS scholarship, but if 400 apply for 350 slots, and 50 of the 400 made below a 21 on their ACT, then those 50 don't get to major in that and get a TOPS award. They either qualify based on need or they major in something else.
Posted on 5/10/17 at 4:37 pm to DupontsCircle
People with a 30+ ACT most certainly do go to LSU.
That was what made the thing fail. GPA should be the focus, not ACT scores. I'm a lazy frick with a low HS GPA and >30 ACT that failed out of LSU three times before graduating. I didn't even need TOPS money, but got a full ride for that one semester
That was what made the thing fail. GPA should be the focus, not ACT scores. I'm a lazy frick with a low HS GPA and >30 ACT that failed out of LSU three times before graduating. I didn't even need TOPS money, but got a full ride for that one semester
Posted on 5/10/17 at 4:37 pm to kingbob
The issue is if you don't know if you are going to get TOPS, you're going to go to a better school that is giving you a noncontingent assistance of some type.
Also, administrating that program would be incredibly costly. We're tying to lower the cost of the program.
Also, administrating that program would be incredibly costly. We're tying to lower the cost of the program.
This post was edited on 5/10/17 at 4:42 pm
Posted on 5/10/17 at 4:38 pm to therick711
quote:
The program already allows for usage at trade schools and community colleges. It is criminally underused. Mostly because the folks that utilize those programs, generally speaking, don't qualify for that tier of TOPS program (which has different and lower standards if I remember correctly).
That's why I am saying to change it. Incentivize it so that it is more alluring versus the lower tier for attending a typical four year college. Instead of 25-50% or lower they could have most if not all costs covered to pursue an education that could help them in their career and limit student debt that they may have incurred pursuing a similar degree because a four year school is the expectation.
Posted on 5/10/17 at 4:42 pm to DupontsCircle
(no message)
This post was edited on 5/24/17 at 7:02 am
Posted on 5/10/17 at 4:43 pm to therick711
I agree that it would be tough. But not impossible. I read an article stating that some 53,000 students in a ten year time frame lost TOPS. i believe it was 2005-2015. not exactly sure on the date. That ends up being a lot of money wasted on students who never graduate.
Posted on 5/10/17 at 4:43 pm to AwesomeSauce
The political reality will never allow that. Can you imagine? In a country where "going to college" has become the dream, you are moving people away from that dream to a trade school. The politics of that just can't happen from where I'm sitting.
Posted on 5/10/17 at 4:45 pm to redbullwings
quote:
I agree that it would be tough. But not impossible. I read an article stating that some 53,000 students in a ten year time frame lost TOPS. i believe it was 2005-2015. not exactly sure on the date. That ends up being a lot of money wasted on students who never graduate.
Only if you agree that incentivizing students to take a more demanding high school curriculum and finishing with decent metrics was a "waste." You could always look at it as a plus even though they didn't graduate.
Posted on 5/10/17 at 4:46 pm to DupontsCircle
LSU is falling behind in retaining and attracting talented students. The tiered system is working for our football rival. My son graduated high school last year and we have so many friends with very academically accomplished kids (30+ on the ACT) getting nothing but TOPS from LSU (to those of you who say that 30+ will get you lots of scholarship offers), and in the case of last year, they are having to pay a percentage of tuition. My son and several of his classmates from NOLA chose Alabama because of their scholarship offering.
UA offers:
If you have a 3.5 high school GPA plus
ACT of 32+ (OOS), 30+(IS) = full tuition
ACT of 30-31 (OOS) 66.67%
ACT of 29 (OOS) is just under 50%, 29 (IS) is 50%
27-28 in both get you some money
Does it work and are they attracting talented students? YES. Per UA - The freshman class includes 6,856 students, a 5.8 percent increase over last fall. The class comes to UA with an average ACT score of 26.1, the highest in UA history, and an average high school GPA of 3.65. More than 2,100 freshmen scored 30 or higher on the ACT, placing them in the top 5 percent of students taking the ACT. The class includes 135 National Merit Scholars and 20 National Achievement Scholars.
UA offers:
If you have a 3.5 high school GPA plus
ACT of 32+ (OOS), 30+(IS) = full tuition
ACT of 30-31 (OOS) 66.67%
ACT of 29 (OOS) is just under 50%, 29 (IS) is 50%
27-28 in both get you some money
Does it work and are they attracting talented students? YES. Per UA - The freshman class includes 6,856 students, a 5.8 percent increase over last fall. The class comes to UA with an average ACT score of 26.1, the highest in UA history, and an average high school GPA of 3.65. More than 2,100 freshmen scored 30 or higher on the ACT, placing them in the top 5 percent of students taking the ACT. The class includes 135 National Merit Scholars and 20 National Achievement Scholars.
Posted on 5/10/17 at 4:49 pm to therick711
quote:
The political reality will never allow that. Can you imagine? In a country where "going to college" has become the dream, you are moving people away from that dream to a trade school. The politics of that just can't happen from where I'm sitting
Reality is a stone-cold bitch sometimes. There is nothing wrong with a community college or trade school and for a lot of people that has improved their lot in life. For others that option versus dropping out of college could have completely reshaped theirs. You don't overhaul a failing state by sticking with the conventional wisdom that got you in this mess to begin with.
Posted on 5/10/17 at 4:54 pm to AwesomeSauce
I completely agree. I just don't see it being politically viable to incentivize those programs over college--to say nothing of the fact that it probably doesn't get us out of the budgetary problem we're currently in.
Posted on 5/10/17 at 4:58 pm to therick711
quote:
doesn't get us out of the budgetary problem we're currently in.
The only thing that will correct this is a constitutional convention and legislatures in place that are more concerned with their duties than their career advancement or advancement in society.
Posted on 5/10/17 at 5:16 pm to redbullwings
quote:
Well that is the plan for anyone going to college. Become more educated as your progress. A probationary period could be allowed to regain the assistance, but if someone does not re-enroll or re-gain the proper criteria, they absolutely should have to pay back the money they received.
You get a job with a 90'day probationary period, at which time a decision on continued employment will be made based on merit. You got the job because you have the relevant skills/education/whatever. Therefore, you earned the opportunity. Lets say for whatever reason you suck at the job, and the employer decides not to retain you. You'd be cool with paying them your wages back?
Posted on 5/10/17 at 5:35 pm to Hammertime
quote:
Hammertime
quote:No fricking chance anyone is buying that.
and >30 ACT
Posted on 5/10/17 at 5:37 pm to GEAUXT
quote:
There are other needs based scholarships. TOPS should be 100% merit based imo
TOPS was never supposed to be need based. It was all about kids that worked hard in high school and was strictly merit based.
The poor and the stupid have complained since the beginning because they wanted all government money spent on them.
Posted on 5/10/17 at 5:37 pm to Lethrill
Those scholarships fall in line with what I've been seeing from most decent state colleges. A 32 seems to be the benchmark for a full ride or at least fill tuition, and a 30ish gets you around half tuition.
A 30 most definitely isn't getting you a full ride at LSU. Last I checked, a 33 is the minimum for a full ride, and I think there are two types of these scholarships and they go to only 10 students each.
If you don't get one of those, that 33 only gets you $2,500/yr
30 gets you $2,000/yr
28 I think gets you $1,500/yr
If TOPS isn't paying most of tuition, LSU would have to drastically increase merit scholarships to retain high-ACT students.
A 30 most definitely isn't getting you a full ride at LSU. Last I checked, a 33 is the minimum for a full ride, and I think there are two types of these scholarships and they go to only 10 students each.
If you don't get one of those, that 33 only gets you $2,500/yr
30 gets you $2,000/yr
28 I think gets you $1,500/yr
If TOPS isn't paying most of tuition, LSU would have to drastically increase merit scholarships to retain high-ACT students.
Posted on 5/10/17 at 5:38 pm to tigerskin
I disagree with the need based exception. If the idea is to keep in state talent at state schools, the using money to award lower standards makes no sense
Posted on 5/10/17 at 5:38 pm to DupontsCircle
quote:
People who get a 30 ACT ain't going to LSU
This is stupid
Page 6 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News