Question about MU admissions

[warriorchick]

In the academic environment I am open to programs offering opportunity to under-represented groups who would otherwise not be selected for admission. I said this above. The probationary oversight should be differentiated in academic matters only, however. FFP enrollees should have a higher minimum GPA in order to eliminate the probationary tag. After all, the whole point of probation is to prove they belong academically. A mainstream enrollee who doesn't perform to some established standard falls into a probationary status. Like his FFP counterpart, he is given some time to cure that situation and should be expelled if he cannot meet that minimum standard.

I have no objection to FFPs beginning in an academic probationary status. Mainstreamers can end up there too for failing to meet minimum classroom requirements. What I do object to is having separate standards for personal behavior. A Code of Conduct must be universal in its scope and application. Anyone caught cheating or stealing should be booted. Fr Davitt taught us that Situational Ethics are absurd. That is my only objection to what was written above.

Keefe, FFP has nothing to do with "under-represented" groups. You may be confusing it with EOP (Educational Opportunity Program).  FFP kids as a general rule are middle-to-upper class kids, just like most of the rest of the student body.  I am not sure exactly how they choose kids for that program, but for the most part, they are kids that have the potential to be successful Marquette students, but their high school grades or test scores don't meet the normal entrance requirements.  I am sure a number of these kids were goofs in HS who now claim they have grown up and are ready to be serious about school.

Marquette is, in effect, bending the rules for these kids so they can attend.  I think it would be reasonable to hold them to the letter of the law when it comes to conduct, especially during the summer session.

[reinko]

Keefe, FFP has nothing to do with "under-represented" groups. You may be confusing it with EOP (Educational Opportunity Program).  FFP kids as a general rule are middle-to-upper class kids, just like most of the rest of the student body.  I am not sure exactly how they choose kids for that program, but for the most part, they are kids that have the potential to be successful Marquette students, but their high school grades or test scores don't meet the normal entrance requirements.  I am sure a number of these kids were goofs in HS who now claim they have grown up and are ready to be serious about school.

Marquette is, in effect, bending the rules for these kids so they can attend.  I think it would be reasonable to hold them to the letter of the law when it comes to conduct, especially during the summer session.

Don't think FFP is like this, but colleges have developed programs similar to this, for wealthy families of dumb kids.  I imagine you can guess the reason why.  A well-known university here in Boston created a semester long program for around 30-40 students of wealthy families, where they didn't matriculate as freshman, but went abroad, worked on study skills, took some non-credit bearing courses, and then "accepted" them for Spring semester, thus not having to report tests scores and grades to US News and the like.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Semantics.  FFP v1.0 allowed students that very likely would not have gotten in otherwise the opportunity a chance to prove themselves to gain admission to the school.  FFP v2.0 no longer provides that opportunity.  Program maintained its name but fundamentally changed. 

I'm not totally sure how FFP v1.0 was "unfair".  Were all students who were waitlisted/not going to get in not provided this opportunity?

When someone says a program was canceled and it wasn't, I don't call that semantics.  So the requirements are more stringent, so what. 

I remember growing up in So. Cal and USC had a pretty bad reputation.  It was a school where if you had the money, you got in.  People were buying degrees.  Now, it is one of the toughest schools in the state to get into it.  They clamped down, made it a place of higher academics, improved their academic image tremendously. 

One can argue at MU that its mission should be to educate anyone and everyone.  I don't believe that is the case.  MU also has a fiduciary obligation to be around and that means it needs to continue to educate quality students that are also going to make donations down the road.  The percentages on that ROI are going to mean taking kids with fewer risks.  That may sound cold as there are some great people that came out of the "old" FFP, but it is also a numbers game and I can see why MU would go in that direction.  If the change the standards back, fine....but it will make it more challenging on the $$$ side longer term and academically they will take a hit because admission rates will go up and the pool of people getting in will dilute somewhat as a result of lower scores, etc.  That's the tradeoff. 

[WI inferiority Complexes]

When someone says a program was canceled and it wasn't, I don't call that semantics.  So the requirements are more stringent, so what. 

Current FFP is as similar to the old FFP as the current Big East is to the old Big East.

[jsglow]

Separate and apart from the FFP discussion, there is absolutely no doubt that it is much more difficult to get admitted to MU today compared to even 15-20 years ago much less the nearly 35 since I penned my application.  Today's average MU student is head and shoulders above the average kid back in my day.  I'm fully supportive of that initiative as it demonstrates MU's progression toward becoming a national destination institution.

Still, sometimes I worry about adherence to part of MU's initial mission to educate the uneducated.  As such, I remain fully committed to maintaining and tracking a 'First in family to college' initiative.  Marquette forever changed the trajectory of our family when my dad set foot on campus in 1949.  Those who were once laborers were now corporate leaders, something I remind my kids often lest they forget their roots.

[warriorchick]

Current FFP is as similar to the old FFP as the current Big East is to the old Big East.

Care to elaborate?  Sounds like you know the details.

[keefe]

Keefe, FFP has nothing to do with "under-represented" groups. You may be confusing it with EOP (Educational Opportunity Program).  FFP kids as a general rule are middle-to-upper class kids, just like most of the rest of the student body.  I am not sure exactly how they choose kids for that program, but for the most part, they are kids that have the potential to be successful Marquette students, but their high school grades or test scores don't meet the normal entrance requirements.  I am sure a number of these kids were goofs in HS who now claim they have grown up and are ready to be serious about school.

Marquette is, in effect, bending the rules for these kids so they can attend.  I think it would be reasonable to hold them to the letter of the law when it comes to conduct, especially during the summer session.

Chick

I am not confusing it with anything as I don't know what FFP is/was. My original post simply asked if was similar to a program at Michigan designed to bring in under-represented groups for the objective of providing demographic balance.

With regard to having a Code of Conduct I will always say it must be universal in scope and application. You cannot say there is zero tolerance for the FFP student while the mainstream student gets 2 strikes. Tiered systems reek of Situational Ethics.

Academic performance requirements are different because that is the issue for probationary admission. But the metrics must be clear up front. I am assuming admission for FFPs centers on academic performance in high school and not moral, ethical, or legal issues.

[g0lden3agle]

When someone says a program was canceled and it wasn't, I don't call that semantics.  So the requirements are more stringent, so what. 

I remember growing up in So. Cal and USC had a pretty bad reputation.  It was a school where if you had the money, you got in.  People were buying degrees.  Now, it is one of the toughest schools in the state to get into it.  They clamped down, made it a place of higher academics, improved their academic image tremendously. 

One can argue at MU that its mission should be to educate anyone and everyone.  I don't believe that is the case.  MU also has a fiduciary obligation to be around and that means it needs to continue to educate quality students that are also going to make donations down the road.  The percentages on that ROI are going to mean taking kids with fewer risks.  That may sound cold as there are some great people that came out of the "old" FFP, but it is also a numbers game and I can see why MU would go in that direction.  If the change the standards back, fine....but it will make it more challenging on the $$$ side longer term and academically they will take a hit because admission rates will go up and the pool of people getting in will dilute somewhat as a result of lower scores, etc.  That's the tradeoff. 

It would be really interesting to see some numbers regarding ROI on FFP vs. non-FFP students.  I would hope that those that were admitted through the FFP program had an extra sense of gratitude towards the school for giving them a chance, but that is probably just more my pie-in-the-sky thinking.

I guess it really does all come down to the statement I bolded from you post above.  In my opinion a Jesuit institution such as MU should try as much as feasibly possible to view their students as people rather than investments.  But I can totally see it your way too.

[LloydMooresLegs]

I can only report based on my personal experience with FFP's in the early 80's.  It was a mixed bag at the time, most succeeding (meaning graduating, though a few took longer than 4 years), but a few burning out quickly (one kid who lived on my floor was out after one semester, stoned the whole time and having failed every class).  So, not too unlike the student population as a whole.

My two FFP roommates loved their time at Marquette, and remember it fondly.  One tried engineering, didn't have the horse power for it, but figured out a major he could handle and made it work; the other earned a degree in finance.  Based on their respective families, careers and service to their church and communities, you all would be proud to associate them with MU. 

For them, the FFP was a combination of a wake up call and opportunity.



 

[jsglow]

 

For them, the FFP was a combination of a wake up call and opportunity.
 

+1

[muhoosier260]

Keefe, FFP has nothing to do with "under-represented" groups. You may be confusing it with EOP (Educational Opportunity Program).  FFP kids as a general rule are middle-to-upper class kids, just like most of the rest of the student body.  I am not sure exactly how they choose kids for that program, but for the most part, they are kids that have the potential to be successful Marquette students, but their high school grades or test scores don't meet the normal entrance requirements.  I am sure a number of these kids were goofs in HS who now claim they have grown up and are ready to be serious about school.

Marquette is, in effect, bending the rules for these kids so they can attend.  I think it would be reasonable to hold them to the letter of the law when it comes to conduct, especially during the summer session.

This is all anyone needs to know about FFP. I knew several FFP people at Marquette, all of whom excelled at, and graduated from MU. Getting to know these classmates, they all had minor behavioral or academic issues in high school, but certainly did not have a problematic track record. I did not know anyone from EOP, but encountered several candidates via working the Schroeder Hall desk in the summer. Two completely different entities.