• Home
• Mission Statement
• Value Added
• Reports to the Board
• Chancellor's Speeches
• Chancellor's Biography
• Budget Presentations
• Strategic Planning
• Partnership with TCSG
• Contact Us

Home » Strategic Planning

Policy Direction on Admissions

Adopted by the Board of Regents, June 14, 1995

The University System of Georgia

Shall stimulate Georgians' aspirations for higher education, have high academic standards for its students and programs, challenge and assist students to meet or exceed those standards, provide sound academic and career advice, help students prepare for employment and lifelong education in a changing world, and increase the number of well educated Georgians.

Shall seek a high-quality, diverse pool of students to admit, insuring that the majority has the preparation considered necessary for college success and providing focused support for those students whom it selectively admits without the standard preparation.

Shall place the welfare of its students, within the context of academic quality, as its first priority in decision-making at all levels.

Shall insure that Georgians comprise the large majority of its students, with special emphasis on the representation of minorities among its successful graduates. . . .

Shall reasonably accommodate the needs of non-traditional learners in providing access, services, and instruction.

Shall create deep, rich partnerships with elementary and secondary schools by initiating and supporting . . . dynamic and sustained pre-college programs, and other projects throughout its institutions to assist in insuring that Georgia's children and young people receive strong preparation and advisement for college study. . . .

BACKGROUND:

1. Undergraduate Admissions
   • Currently, undergraduate admissions requirements in the University System of Georgia are set separately by each institution, at or above minima established by the Board of Regents. The established System minima--the same for all sectors from research universities to two-year colleges--are very low: a high school diploma (or GED) PLUS either 250 verbal SAT or 280 math SAT OR 1.8 GPA (a C- average) in high school academics. (SAT scores range from 200 to 800 each on verbal and math tests.) Six of the senior colleges and all but one of the two-year colleges require no more than the System minima in their admissions requirements. These minima are little different from totally open admissions.
   • System minima for admissions without screening for Developmental Studies placement are also permissive: 350 verbal and 350 math SAT scores, and (for post-1988 high school graduating classes) completion of the College Preparatory Curriculum (CPC) in English and mathematics. In 1993-94, the national composite SAT average was 902, while the System average was 850, equivalent to a 44th percentile ranking. The System's SAT minima for Developmental Studies placement equate to a composite score of 700 (equivalent to a 20th percentile ranking), which is what the NCAA sets as its qualifying score for student athletes with a 2.5 GPA. The NCAA has just raised the standard to a 900 composite SAT for students with a 2.00 GPA. (Future SAT minima, standards, and requirements will, of course, all need to be adjusted to the new national scale.) All but one senior college and two two-year colleges set placement screening requirements higher than these System minima. Even within the same sector, institutional requirements vary greatly for admissions without Developmental Studies screening. For Freshman admission without screening at one senior college, a recent high school graduate would need only the System minima of 350 verbal and 350 math SAT scores and all CPC English and math, but at another senior college, the student would need 430 verbal and 430 math SAT scores plus a straight C average for high school academics and a separately computed prediction of a 1.7 GPA as a college freshman, as well as all CPC English and math.
   • Beyond requiring CPC English and math for admission without Developmental Studies screening, current Board policy allows institutions to accept any number of CPC "deficiencies," even though it defines the College Preparatory Curriculum as "essential" preparation for college-level work. Georgia's current CPC College Preparatory Curriculum requirements (specified in "Carnegie units" or standard year-long high school courses) are: 4 years in English, 3 in math, 3 in science, 3 in social sciences, and 2 in the same foreign language. More academic Carnegie units may be required for graduation from a particular high school, but University System requirements total only 15 Carnegie units. This is higher than only half of the SREB states, and lower than many other states with excellent systems of higher education, such as California, Indiana, and Wisconsin. CUNY has just reversed its open admissions policy by beginning to phase in a 16-unit requirement. An April New York Times article applauded CUNY for "forc[ing] high schools to require more of their students, because the university's entrance requirements become the exit standards for high school." Post-1988 high school graduates who are admitted with "deficiencies" in English or math (involving any number of units) must "make-up" their deficiencies by taking additional coursework in that area, unless they pass the appropriate section of the Collegiate Placement Exam (CPE). Nearly all the two-year colleges and five of the senior colleges require only the System CPE minimum of 75 for this purpose, and beginning in winter 1996, institutional screening may use COMPASS as an alternative to the CPE. "Deficiencies" in subject areas other than English and math do not trigger Developmental Studies screening, but must be "made up" by completing a 100-level course with a C or better; a student taking a course to "make-up" a CPC deficiency does not receive the degree credit for the course that other students in the same class--even those earning the same grade--do. This year 25.3% of entering students had to "make-up" CPC deficiencies in English, math, science, social science, and/or foreign language.
   • Developmental Studies: Students with CPC deficiencies in English or mathematics, or with SAT Verbal or Math score under 350, are placed in Developmental Studies unless they achieve adequate scores on relevant sections of the CPE. This fall 30% of entering Freshmen placed in Developmental Studies because they could not meet these System minima; an additional 13% could not meet higher requirements set by their specific institutions and were therefore placed in Learning Support (an umbrella program that both includes and extends beyond Developmental Studies). A total of 43% required such remediation. Students placed in Developmental Studies have a maximum of four quarters to complete the institution's requirements in each area before being suspended for a quarter, and they may earn no more than 30 quarter degree-credits before exiting Developmental Studies. The System requires that English or math deficiencies be "made up" by completing (with a C or better) a non-degree- credit bearing course numbered below 100, and passing the CPE.
   • Several System institutions have experimented, on a pilot basis, with variations in these placement procedures and CPC admissions requirements. As of fall 1995, Southern College of Technology has raised its admissions standards to 350 SAT Verbal and Math and a 2.0 high school GPA, while requiring all students to take the MAT Placement Test to determine where to start the college's basic mathematics sequence. Southern Tech has increased that sequence from three to four courses by the addition of "College Algebra" before "Pre-Calculus I." It also requires all students who earn less than a C on any English 110 paper to participate in its Learning Resource Center programs. The college's preliminary studies suggest that this configuration of placement testing, required courses, and learning assistance may yield improved achievement for students both with and without CPC deficiencies when they enter. North Georgia College already allows no CPC deficiencies, and Georgia College has recently undertaken to phase in similar CPC requirements--from 3 CPC deficiencies allowed in Fall 1992, to no deficiencies allowed as of Fall 1995--although requiring students to complete CPC courses without specifying any particular grade level. (The college refers students with CPC deficiencies to nearby two-year colleges.) Under these rising admissions standards, Georgia College's enrollments have continued to grow, although at a slightly slower rate than previously, and the percentage of African Americans admitted there has also increased. The college's Developmental Studies placements have been cut in half. In addition, Georgia College has found that students with stronger CPC completion rates also have higher SAT scores and higher high school GPA's; this is in line with University System studies, which have found that students with stronger CPC completion rates also have higher grades as college freshmen. (It remains unclear, of course, whether high school CPC courses attract better students or make better students.)
   • The Board's policies offer little guidance on transfer standards, although a large number of students do indeed transfer within the University System. Georgia State, for instance, receives twice as many transfer students as new freshmen each year. Board policies require only that students complete 20 quarter credits to be admitted as transfer students (45 to bypass CPC requirements). Individual institutions may require the completion of a higher number of credits or students to enter by transfer rather than under Freshman admissions requirements. All students, including all transfer students, must also pass both the reading comprehension and essay parts of the Regents' Test in order to receive either an associate or baccalaureate degree, and must enroll in non-Developmental Studies remedial courses if they do not pass the test before earning 75 quarter credits.
   These undergraduate admission requirements involve several problems:
   1. The current requirements are a high school counsellor's nightmare. The double layers of varying institutional requirements for admissions with and without Developmental Studies placement send no clear message to prospective students, high school counselors and teachers, and parents about the kind of preparation needed for successful college-level work. The messages that are sent--about many "deficient" admissions and a large Developmental Studies cushion--do not encourage high pre-collegiate achievement. Clearer messages to high school students need to be sent, apart from whatever appropriate measures are developed to admit college-ready non-traditional students and various exceptional students.
   2. Although the low Developmental Studies minima and generous CPC allowances offer access "opportunity" to under-prepared students, they do not concentrate support services for such students in any coordinated way. Instead they disperse the System's Developmental Studies resources and involve most University System institutions in substantial remediation work, regardless of their varied strengths and missions. Students admitted under Developmental Studies requirements persist to graduation at a significantly lower rate than those admitted under regular requirements. After two years, the attrition rate of those with CPC deficiencies was nearly twice that of those who had completed the CPC curriculum. University System students who entered as "regular Freshman" in 1986 have a five-year graduation rate of 39%, compared to 11% for students who entered as Developmental Studies students. The same cohorts' seven-year graduation rates are only slightly less discrepant: 45% graduating among "regular" admissions versus 20% among those placed into Developmental Studies. This evidence that--as Chancellor Stephen Portch puts it --"access without success is a fraud" means disappointed hopes for the students involved and a lower return-on-investment for University System and state resources.
   3. Students admitted with CPC "deficiencies" and those placed in Developmental Studies include many more white than black students. However, of all the black students admitted to University System institutions, a notably high percentage (currently 56%) is placed in Developmental Studies, many because they attend high schools lacking in CPC offerings, in counseling that encourages black achievement, and in student cultures supportive of academic aspirations. At the historically black colleges, the percentage has usually ranged from 65 to 75% over the past five years (with a low of 53% in 1990 rocketing to a high of 90% after the 1994 flood at Albany). This large "cushion" lessens the incentives for the state public schools to help improve African American students' preparation for college, and thus perpetuates a costly and dangerous cycle of academic failure for many of those students. Other System studies show that 53% of black males and 39% of black females are currently entering University System institutions with CPC deficiencies, as compared to 29% of white males and 23% of white females.
   4. Currently there is no systemic, targeted pre-college program to help youth in at-risk situations prepare to enter college ready to succeed, although many University System institutions have themselves developed excellent examples of such programs (for prospective graduate students as well)--as documented by a 1993 survey by the Office of Planning and Research, for which 18 institutions prepared lists of intervention programs. The Board's recent P-16 policy direction commits the System to undertake a statewide effort, in collaboration with the public schools, to improve students' preparation for college success. That effort could be undermined by a continued admissions policy of "winking" at differences in the high school course work available to and/or achieved by Georgia's students. Conversely, higher admissions standards can be most effectively supported by a vigorous, priority commitment to improve the college preparation of youth who find themselves in at-risk situations.
   5. The current System minima rely too often on a single quantitative measure beyond high school graduation. Starting this summer, students accepted with Developmental Studies placement based on a 1.8 high school GPA alone will not even have to submit SAT (or ACT) scores. For all other students, the System minima rely almost entirely on SAT scores--with ACT equivalents accepted, and CPE scores used for Developmental Studies checks. Most experts consider such standardized tests, when used alone, limited predictors of college success, perhaps particularly so at low extremes and for African Americans. The System's more selective institutions establish their admissions criteria based on a specific combination of SAT scores and high school GPA that research has determined to predict a 2.0 achievement in each institution's Freshman courses. Such combined criteria are considered good predictors. Recent national trends are also toward including portfolios and other qualitative materials in admissions procedures oriented to predicting college success.
   6. There is no systemwide process to assist students denied admission at one institution to find a place at another. Such customer orientation needs to be part of the overall admissions culture of the University System.
   7. Conversely, given the many differences in institutional admissions and placement requirements, students can now use transfer as a loophole to jump from institutions with low to those with higher requirements after completing only 20 quarter credits (except when individual receiving institutions have raised that 20-credit limit.) (Note that the Administrative Committee on Undergraduate Education, established by the Board's Early-Semester Calendar Policy Directive, will be working on issues related to the acceptance of intra-System transfer course credits, including the need for more consistency among System institutions in their transfer policies. The Georgia Post-Secondary Education Collaborative Council, established pursuant to the University System's 1994 agreement with the DTAE, will be working on issues related to the acceptance of transfer credits between the University System and DTAE systems, including the development of inter-institutional transfer agreements, along with the understanding of no presumption that any University System institution will accept other credits, particularly in general education, from any technical institute, in or out of state, with or without COC accreditation.)
2. Graduate and Professional School Admissions Except for teacher education programs, the Board has not established minima for graduate and professional school admissions. Program-specific requirements are set by the various graduate and professional schools and colleges. Apart from catalogue copy, there is no systemwide summary of the institutions' various operative criteria for graduate school admissions, and therefore no way to assess their appropriateness. Board policy specifically controls the proportion of out-of-state graduate students admitted only at the Medical College. Nonetheless in-state students are generally well represented in professional programs throughout the state, particularly in one-of-a-kind programs, most of which enroll 85-99% in-state students. Such figures are around or above the middle third of SREB states. In the case of graduate business programs, Georgia State's large MBA program (enrolling five times as many students as the second largest in the SREB region) stands well above SREB norms in admitting 86-90% in-state students over the past five years. Although below the SREB norms, the current 33% in-state MBA enrollments at the University of Georgia are well above the in-state enrollments at several other of the most prestigious MBA programs at state universities; UNC-Chapel Hill and the University of Virginia's Darden School have 25% and 28% in-state admissions respectively, and the University of Michigan and Indiana University have only 17% and 18%. In-state students are admitted to the MBA program at UGA with lower GMAT scores than out-of-state students. SREB reciprocity agreements also provide Georgians' good access to less common, higher-cost professional graduate programs in other states. Apart from questions about the total capacity of the University System's graduate programs (a needs assessment for Pharmacy has just been undertaken, for instance), no obvious problems call for correction in the responsiveness of our graduate and professional school programs to in-state student applicants. The lack of System-level auditing of admissions standards is, however, itself a problem; and only when it is corrected can any other potential problems with graduate and professional school admissions standards be identified.

GOALS:

To use a track-and-field metaphor for the goals of this admissions policy direction, we need gradually to raise the bar while also effectively coaching students to reach new heights.

We must therefore phase in new admissions requirements so as to allow both students and institutions to adjust to the changed expectations. And we must actively undertake to help improve students' academic preparation, exceed previous expectations, meet these new challenges, and fully succeed in college. Such efforts should involve extensive and persistent collaboration with the schools, especially through University System colleges and universities, and the state Department of Education, especially through the Chancellor's Office and regular board-level meetings.

The Board of Regents' admissions policy direction should be understood as a companion piece to the P-16 policy direction. Its activities and recommendations and data-collection should be coordinated with the work of the Georgia P-16 Community Council and the special task force on pre-college programming established by the P-16 initiative approved in March, and it should extend the precedent set by the Board of Regents' meeting with the Board of Education in May 1995.

This is in line, as well, with the recent recommendation of the Southern Education Foundation's Panel on Educational Opportunity and Postsecondary Desegregation that redeeming "the promise of equal opportunity for a high-quality education" requires "treat[ing] public schools and higher education as one system."

Generally higher undergraduate admissions requirements are called for by the strategic planning principles. Admissions requirements that are also clearer, designed in consultation with the public and independent schools, and publicized widely to pre-collegiate students, as well as their parents, will maximize the likelihood that higher admissions requirements will indeed encourage higher pre-collegiate achievement. Within the context of P-16 collaboration, a fast-track effort to mount vigorous pre-collegiate programming, especially to help youth in at-risk situations meet the new admissions standards, must have a dramatic impact; it must break the cycle of low expectations and academic failure that has entrapped many rural, impoverished, and/or minority students in Georgia. It will be important that the historically black colleges play a leading role in this effort, in order to fulfill the guiding principle that they be "models of access to academic excellence" and to insure that this initiative increases, rather than decreases, the number of African American students who are fully prepared for college work and therefore have access to a full range of educational options. University System standards established by the Board should, however, indeed be sector-by-sector standards rather than lowest-common-denominator minima; with limited (if any) institutional variations either up or down from those standards, justified by individual missions and approved by the Board.

The System standards should involve multiple measures as appropriate for various student cohorts, should be based on their effectiveness in predicting college success for diverse students, and should be differentially articulated for the various sectors of the University System. Some combination of SAT/ACT scores, high school GPA, high school class percentile rank, and CPC coursework should be considered, and supplemented--particularly for non-traditional students and those with exceptional areas of talent--by qualitative measures that might involve interviews, portfolios, and/or records of experiential achievements. Given the access mission of the two-year colleges, the most open standards should apply there, along with the most extensive provision of Developmental Studies support. While the goal should be clear standards with limited variations, any individual college or university should have the opportunity to make a case for a special variation from the standards for its sector, based on its particular mission, with the understanding that such exceptions, if any, would be limited. All colleges and universities should have discretion to admit a specified percentage of their students outside even their own Board-approved standard measures, based on individual students' special potential for success and contribution. And all colleges and universities will need to continue providing some Developmental Studies for special admissions, non-traditional students, and any exempted from the CPC requirements, as well as non-remedial Learning Support for all students.

Researchers' conclusions about what leads to students' success in high school undoubtedly applies to their success in college as well. It is a combination of high expectations, the involvement of parents (as currently in new student orientation programs), support programs that often include extra time-on-task, and professional faculty development focused on getting beyond stereotyping poor and minority students.

Therefore, the specific goals of this policy directive are:

• To insure, by collaborative work through the P-16 councils established under the Regents' P-16 initiative, that college preparatory courses target appropriate competencies; and to provide all students with opportunities to meet higher expectations. Fast-track priority will be given to developing and securing external funding for a statewide, collaborative pre-college program targeted to youth in at-risk situations, by summer 1996.
• To have new systemwide, multi-measured admission standards--and a percentage allowed for non-standard admissions--for each institutional sector, adopted by the Board by spring 1996; and limited, mission-related institutional variations, established within four months thereafter. These admissions standards should accommodate (and clearly define) non-traditional students.
• To have standards for Developmental Studies placement and completion that insure adequate screening and support for students with special needs, and a plan for strengthening Developmental Studies programming as part of the two-year colleges' transfer mission and insuring adequate provision of Developmental Studies and Learning Support throughout the University System, for Board approval by spring 1996.
• To achieve public understanding and school support for the new admissions standards by clear presentations of the new standards and institutional requirements--to all middle and high schools in the state, and to their students and their students' parents, by summer 1996. Non-traditional methods of getting the message out (from music videos to community center presentations, from computer networks to churches) should be explored.
• To establish a systemwide process to assist students denied admission at one institution to find a place at another, by fall 1996.
• To survey graduate-level and professional school admissions requirements systemwide and assess their appropriateness, by fall 1996.
• To have in place, by fall 1996, a strong data base and methodology for tracking over time the students' academic participation and performance.
• To phase in the new requirements over a period up to 10 years starting no earlier than fall 1997, so that current seventh-graders have adequate time to anticipate the new requirements, and University System institutions undergoing the greatest changes have adequate time to reconfigure their curricula, personnel assignments, and support services.
• To raise the average composite SAT of the System's entering Freshmen overall to at least the national average, by fall 2001.
• To reduce Developmental Studies placements at every senior college and university, and CPC deficiencies among recent high school graduates admitted at every institution, by at least 5 percentage points per year, to the percentages allowed for non-standard admissions, by fall 2005.
• To have, in fall 2005, no higher a percentage of students in Developmental Studies at two-year colleges than the current level for that sector, and an improved persistence-to-graduation rate for Developmental Studies students transferring from two-year colleges.
• To have at least as many African American students in the System's senior colleges and universities, and in general to increase the systemwide participation of minority students--including U.S. Hispanics, Southeast Asians, African Americans and Native Americans--to a percentage that matches each group's representation among the state's high school graduates, by 2006.
• To increase continuously the percentage of University System attenders among Georgians recently graduated from high school and the persistence-to-graduation rates for all student cohorts, by Spring 2006, thereby having a higher percentage of Georgians with degrees.

IMPLEMENTATION:

The Board of Regents therefore directs that:

• The Chancellor's Office shall charge the special fast-track task force established by the P-16 policy direction, to work in collaboration with both the general admissions task force and the Georgia P-16 Community Council, with a special focus on youth in at-risk situations:
  • to insure that current pre-collegiate programs by University System institutions are inventoried, with special attention to models of excellence; and
  • to recommend the framework and approach to developing, by summer 1996, a massive, vigorous and concerted statewide pre-college plan for up to 200,000 youth in at-risk situations, to assist them in exceeding previous academic expectations and meeting new admissions standards. Such a plan should involve an extended sequence of (perhaps eight) summers on different University System campuses staffed by the best P-16 faculty, supplemented by year-round weekend activities at a "home" campus, to be funded from external sources.
• The Chancellor's Office shall establish a general task force on admissions--with significant faculty representation from the several types of System institutions, as well as administrative, admissions, and public and independent school personnel--to recommend, by winter quarter 1996, after thorough consultation with the System's diverse stakeholders and especially with those likely to be most affected by the changes, new systemwide policies and practices for admissions, developmental studies, and transfer, including the following:
  • Generally higher standards for admissions and developmental studies placement, differentiated by sector (research university, regional university, senior college, and two-year college), for approval by the Board of Regents by spring 1996. These shall include strong CPC requirements throughout the System developed in consultation with the Department of Education. The new standards shall also include multiple other measures such as SAT (ACT) scores, high school GPA, high school rank in class, a state high school quality index based on the college performance of previous graduates, COMPASS/ College Placement Exam scores, and--particularly for non-traditional students, borderline students, and those with special areas of talent--consideration of qualitative evidence (such as applicant essays, structured student interviews, and student portfolios and/or chronicles of experiential learning). Different combinations of factors might be considered for different student cohorts, but all should be selected for their combined effectiveness as predictors of college success.
  • Stronger CPC requirements for admissions, developed in consultation with the Department of Education. These should be specified by Carnegie units (perhaps raised to 16-17 throughout the System; or stepped from 15 units at the senior and two-year colleges, to 16-17 at the regional universities, to 17-18 at the research universities, and possibly including a fourth unit of math specified for the senior year), for approval by the Board of Regents by spring 1996. Only Developmental Studies placements should be allowed admission with fewer than the required CPC units. While all students should still be required to "make-up" (with courses taken without degree credit) any math and/or English they lack from the optimum distribution list, the possibilities for also "making up" other missing CPC courses under a specified number or in specified areas (such as foreign languages previous to achievement of junior standing or a degree) should be considered.
  • A new definition of non-traditional students (now differently and inadequately treated under the pre-1988 CPC exemption and a general category of students who haven't attended school for five years), along with recommendations for any special policies to govern their consideration for admissions and placement, for approval by the Board of Regents by spring 1996.
  • Specified percentages of new students that each sector's institutions can admit outside of its approved standard admissions and placement requirements, for approval by the Board of Regents by spring 1996. Illustratively, such percentages might be stepped from 1/2% at research universities, to 2% at regional universities, to 5% at senior colleges, to 7% at two-year colleges.
  • A policy recommendation for applying the receiving institution's freshman admissions requirements to transfer students who have completed fewer than a specified number of core curriculum credits with a C-average, for Regent approval by spring 1996. Students placed in Developmental Studies might be required to complete an even higher total number of course credits, perhaps 75% in the core curriculum.
  • A plan for strengthening Developmental Studies programming and resources as part of the two-year colleges' transfer mission, and to insure adequate provision of Developmental Studies for non-traditional students and special admissions students, and Learning Support for all students throughout the University System, for consideration by the Board in spring 1996. Guidelines should be developed by summer 1996 for establishing either Developmental Studies transfer divisions at institutions serving student populations without access to a nearby two-year campus (e.g., in Columbus, Augusta, Savannah), or some form of innovative collaborative programming with two-year colleges; and for selecting some institution with research capabilities to study the student outcomes of various Developmental Studies methods.
  • Consideration of possible changes in the content and use of the Regents' Test, to provide an additional way to certify that students have gained needed proficiencies, for approval by the Board of Regents by spring 1996. While it should be considerate of any additional administrative burden on the institutions, the task force might, for instance, recommend that the Regents' Test include a math component along with current reading and writing components, and/or that passing the Regents' Test be required for all transfers students before enrolling beyond 75 cumulative quarter hours.
  • A process (after the completion of the systemwide mission review, after Board approval of new admissions standards for each sector, and in keeping with the admissions goal of having limited variations from those standards) for considering for approval in limited instances the requests of individual institutions to establish admissions, developmental studies placement, and/or transfer requirements that vary--either up or down--from System standards, based on mission-related justifications and data demonstrating that requested alternatives are consistent with academic success at that institution, for implementation in spring or summer 1996.
  • A schedule for phasing in the new standards and requirements, to maximize the preparation of current seventh-grade students under the new standards, and to allow University System institutions to reduce Developmental Studies placements of new freshman at the rate of 5 percentage points per year at every senior college and university, to the sector percentage allowed for non-standard admissions, by fall 2005, for approval by the Board of Regents by spring 1996.
  • Reexamination of programs aimed at encouraging talented students to stay in state, including current joint-enrollment and early admissions requirements, with particular consideration for any needed revisions in the conditions under which students should be encouraged to enter University System institutions even before completing CPC requirements.
  • Advice on the kinds of data needed to track the possible effects of these new policies and programs.
  • Any other initiatives at the System or institutional level needed to advance toward the goals of this policy directive.
• The Chancellor's Office shall insure appropriate liaisons among these two admissions task forces, the Georgia Post-Secondary Education Collaborative Council, and the Georgia P-16 Community Council (established under the Board's P-16 Education Policy Direction), as well as adequate specificity in the charge to the latter to assist it in spearheading collaboration between University System and high school personnel to accomplish the following:
  • Establishment of competency standards for College Preparatory Curriculum courses, and revision of the list of courses acceptable for CPC requirements, based on an updating of the Board-adopted summary of What Students Need to Know and Be Able to Do in light of currently developing national standards for college preparatory courses.
  • Collection and examination of data for high schools throughout the state on the availability of CPC courses and on their graduates' collegiate performance, and for those schools where CPC provision is found to be weak, development of programs by which the University System and its institutions and faculty might provide and/or alternative means for course instruction (e.g., distance learning and/or Post-Secondary Options).
  • Design for a pilot program using non-traditional methods of assessing the preparation for admission of a special student cohort or an otherwise limited student population, perhaps modeled on the "standardized" portfolio assessment system currently under development by ACT.
  • A plan to enhance and publicize pre-collegiate programs to improve student preparation, and to maximize publicity for the new University System admissions standards and institutional requirements to Georgia's middle and high schools, their students, and those students' parents, starting in fall 1996. This plan should be consistent with other efforts to coordinate University System and DTAE recruitment, pre-collegiate education, and support for school-to-work. It should also include workshops for counselors statewide, to inform them of the coming changes and to provide training on equity in advising for all students.
• The Chancellor's Office, upon receiving the advice of these various task forces, shall:
  • secure funding, then proceed to implement a concerted statewide pre-college plan to assist youth in at-risk situations in meeting the challenge of the new admissions standards, by summer 1996.
  • recommend to the Board, for its approval, new standards for admissions and Developmental Studies placement, and a schedule for phasing them in, as well as any new policies for transfer, by spring 1996.
  • consider institutional requests for variations from those standards in their admissions and/or transfer requirements, and institutional proposals for supporting the systemwide reform of Developmental Studies, for approval during spring or summer 1996.
  • establish a systemwide process to assist students denied admission at one institution to find a place at another, by fall 1996.
  • develop and disseminate effective presentations, targeted to middle and high school students and their parents, of University System admissions requirements and college-level expectations, by summer 1996.
  • recommend to the Board any needed changes in the Regents' Exam and/or other means of assessing and/or certifying student achievement, by spring 1996.
  • have in place, by fall 1996, a strong data base and methodology for tracking over time the academic participation and performance of various student cohorts--including minority, non-traditional, and transfer students--and the Developmental Studies and Learning Support placements, resource allocations, and student results at all institutions.
  • provide to the Board annually adequate data, research, and reporting to monitor progress toward the goals of this policy directive, and make recommendations for any adjustments, especially if particular groups of students or individual institutions are suffering unanticipated consequences.
  • survey graduate-level and professional school admissions requirements and procedures systemwide (including all published material, procedures for appointing selection committees, and guidelines for interviews), assess their appropriateness, and recommend any needed policies, for the Medical College programs by summer 1996 and for all others by winter 1997.
• Institutions implement their approved new admissions requirements, beginning in fall 1997, work collaboratively to reform Developmental Studies systemwide, work with the Chancellor's Office to improve data reporting for purposes of systemwide assessments, and support partnerships with the public schools to maximize student readiness for college.

The Board further directs that all work on admissions standards be aimed toward helping the System to achieve its vision of "Access to Academic Excellence," and be guided by its Guiding Principles for Strategic Action, including, in particular, #1-5 on student access for success, and #29 on effective external partnerships. The commitment of the University System and its institutions shall be to do, above all else, what is best for Georgian students.

return to top