Free Byu?

[Scott Lloyd]

BYU's approach makes no sense to me. I find the behavior here by the University objectionable. Please let kids finish school, untouched. They are our future. To try and hurt them for doing what they feel is best, when it is not unlawful, is ridiculous. They go in liking the religion...they leave not liking it. Sheesh, show some integrity, please.

Integrity means living up to one's commitment made before enrolling in the first place. Saying BYU lacks integrity for insisting on this is a bad rap.

Edited May 5, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[ALarson]

 

 

Exactly my thoughts. When we look at the covenants we make at baptism, we can see that they are covenants regarding our acceptance of Christ and treatment of our brothers and sisters. Those covenants can all be kept in different Christian denominations. Now covenants which Scott thinks are implied, yet not stated, may be a bigger problem for a BYU student, primarily because it's Scott's gospel which is neither authoritative or well published. Sorry Scott.

I agree.

 

Scott can add as many qualifiers as he'd like to his own baptismal covenants that make them have more personal meaning for him, but those aren't stated by the church leaders (from what I've seen).

Edited May 5, 2015 by ALarson

[stemelbow]

Integrity means living up to one's commitment made before enrolling in the first place. Saying BYU lacks integrity for insisting on this is a bad rap.

Integrity means providing the best academic environment for kids, which would include allowing kids to learn, grow and make their own choices. To punish kids for learning, growing, and making their own choices, when those choices are lawful, is a violation of integrity for a university, in my mind. The school should be all about letting kids learn, grow, and feel free to make their own decisions. In fact, I'd say the university is really hurting the Church on this.

Also, Scott, I'd say it is integrity that causes these kids to come out as non-believers--being true to what they really feel and think. that is a good thing.

But it seems we'll disagree on this till the cows come home.

Edited May 5, 2015 by stemelbow

[Buckeye]

I don't know how the concept of covenants applies in other faiths.

 

But my main beef is what I have expressed earlier. BYU ought to privilege Church members who, once they have embraced the faith, remain faithful to it. And, in my mind, that means refusing to allow apostates to matriculate and thereby use up scarce enrollment slots that could be occupied by students who are faithful Church members. I repeat, as a parent of students desiring enrollment at BYU, I would be incensed if the policy were to change.

 

 

Scott, we're talking about youth who applied and matriculated at time when they were full believing "faithful" members, but who have subsequently decided that they do not believe some or all of the church's truth claims. Regardless of whether we allow these students to finish their studies, their "faithfulness" is out of our hands. However, we can still nourish the parts of our faith that these students choose to continue to embrace - in particular, their desire to be honest with their fellow man. Forcing students to conceal their true beliefs does not free up any additional spaces for other kids. And it does not foster any good will. It merely perpetuates the illusion that all is well in zion - white washing on a sepulchre.

[Buckeye]

One other point. Scott and other posters seem to think that 8 year olds should be held to the same standard for their covenants as adults. That is contrary to the teachings and practices of the church in all areas where I have lived. As one example, several years ago we had a mom and kids join the church. A year later they left and joined a baptist church. Now one of the kids has started showing back up in our ward. While the child technically "apostatized" at age 10 or 11, I know that the bishopric is approaching that action with much more understanding that were the mother to return. The central principle is that agency/accountabiliy begin to develop at age 8. While the outward covenants may be the same, the agency/accountability differ greatly between an 8 year old and a 38 year old.

[sethpayne]

 

But my main beef is what I have expressed earlier. BYU ought to privilege Church members who, once they have embraced the faith, remain faithful to it. And, in my mind, that means refusing to allow apostates to matriculate and thereby use up scarce enrollment slots that could be occupied by students who are faithful Church members. I repeat, as a parent of students desiring enrollment at BYU, I would be incensed if the policy were to change.

 

I just bought an app for tracking predictions on my iPhone.  Normally I like to use the app to track all of the failed predictions of social and family collapse some people always want to talk about.  But today I've decided to track one of my own predictions.

 

I predict, that within 20 years when BYU has changed its current policy regarding so-called "apostates", that gay marriage will not be solemnized in the temple and Scott Loyd will be an incensed but loyal Latter-day Saint.  

 

7,305 days -- start the countdown.

Edited May 7, 2015 by sethpayne

[Scott Lloyd]

I just bought an app for tracking predictions on my iPhone.  Normally I like to use the app to track all of the failed predictions of social and family collapse some people always want to talk about.  But today I've decided to track one of my own predictions.

 

I predict, that within 20 years when BYU has changed its current policy regarding so-called "apostates", that gay marriage will not be solemnized in the temple and Scott Loyd will be an incensed but loyal Latter-day Saint.  

 

7,305 days -- start the countdown.

Well, to do my little bit to help ensure such a university policy change does not happen, I will be sending the following in a letter to BYU President Kevin J Worthen:

 

Dear President Worthen:

 

It has come to my attention that a group has been formed that is agitating for BYU to remove its enrollment condition that students who enter the university as baptized members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints remain members in good standing so long as they continue to matriculate.

 

As a BYU alumnus (1980) and a Church member in good standing, I want you to know that I heartily support said requirement. Moreover, I would be displeased in the extreme to see it rescinded or relaxed in any way.

 

I shall explain my reasoning:

 

It has long been my understanding that the Church substantially subsidizes the enrollment of each BYU student, that tuition pays only a fraction of the costs.

 

Furthermore, it is my impression that the Church does what it can to offer a higher education experience to as many young Church members as it can – realizing that it can’t be done for all who would desire it – hoping to prepare some of the best and the brightest to help build the Kingdom of God on earth; that through their continued activity in the Church as well as achieving excellence in their chosen professions, these young people will bring credit to the Church and the university as well as themselves.

 

Thus, when an enrollee at BYU forsakes his or her faith, it amounts not just to a sad circumstance, but a loss of investment of sacred tithing funds that it costs for that student to attend the university. For that reason, one who effectively apostatizes from the Church cannot – must not – be allowed to continue to occupy a scarce enrollment slot that could go to a worthy and deserving young member of the Church who dearly desires to attend BYU but who might not be able to due to the ceiling on enrollment.

 

Thank you, President Worthen, for your attention to my comments. And thanks to you and your colleagues on the faculty and staff of the university for the vital work you are doing.

 

With kindest regards,

 

R. Scott Lloyd

 

[HappyJackWagon]

My letter to Pres. Worthen,

Dear President Worthen: as the son and grandson of BYU alums and as my wife and I are also alums (1998) we are writing to encourage you to ignore Scott Lloyd's letter of support for the unfair practice of withholding credit, degrees, or transfer of credits should a student transition in their faith while at BYU or otherwise not qualify for an ecclesiastical endorsement. Here are my reasons...

1- It's unfair and punitive. The Lord's church should be better than that.

2- It requires ecclesiastical leaders to break confidences by snitching on those who confided in them

3- There are easy solutions available, such as increased tuition for non-members or transfer of credits.

Free BYU! Until then I will be discouraging each of my 4 children from attending despite their current plans.

Sincerely,

Happy Jackwagon

[Scott Lloyd]

My letter to Pres. Worthen,

Dear President Worthen: as the son and grandson of BYU alums and as my wife and I are also alums (1998) we are writing to encourage you to ignore Scott Lloyd's letter of support for the unfair practice of withholding credit, degrees, or transfer of credits should a student transition in their faith while at BYU or otherwise not qualify for an ecclesiastical endorsement. Here are my reasons...

1- It's unfair and punitive. The Lord's church should be better than that.

2- It requires ecclesiastical leaders to break confidences by snitching on those who confided in them

3- There are easy solutions available, such as increased tuition for non-members or transfer of credits.

Free BYU! Until then I will be discouraging each of my 4 children from attending despite their current plans.

Sincerely,

Happy Jackwagon

Will you be signing your real name or hiding behind a pseudonym as you do here? I don't know about President Worthen, but I keep the round file within easy reach at my desk for dealing with letters that either are unsigned or are obviously written anonymously. I'll leave it to you to decide, between your letter and mine, whose is the most apt to be ignored.

 

By the way, your "easy solution" suggestion, even it it did fund the full cost of enrollment, would not solve the problem of allowing an apostate to occupy an enrollment slot that could go to a faithful member of the Church eager to attend the university.

Edited May 7, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[SeekingUnderstanding]

the unfair practice of withholding credit, degrees, or transfer of credits should a student transition in their faith 

 

 

Was a source ever provided for the claim of withholding transfer of credits? I understand that some credits are difficult to transfer past a certain point in your education, but does BYU not release the transcript of those kicked out when they resign membership or loose their endorsement?

[Buckeye]

Well, at least no one can say that Scott isn't seriously committed to the BYU policy. A few questions for you:

1. Do you believe that the church's investment in the education of non-members who have never been members is also a waste? I can (sort of) understand your "apostacy" distinction between an always-catholic vs. a former-LDS-catholic. But I'm not sure that the investment argument can support that distinction. What exactly is the investment benefit to educating non-members? And why would do you believe that benefit could not also exist for former-members?
2. Would you agree that there could be some investment benefit to allowing students to continue at BYU even after a loss of faith? Perhaps they recovert. Or perhaps they're more friendly to the church because of the experience and so they allow their still-believing spouse to pay tithing throughout their marriage. I can envision many potential benefits from allowing students to be authentic to their real beliefs. Granted, these could be outweighed by possible costs (such as these students "infecting" other students), but can you at least acknowledge that some benefit can come from allowing them to stay?
3. From a purely investment perspective, would you agree that the current policy may prove detrimental if signficant numbers of alumni voice disfavor with the policy and/or choose to limit/stop their donations to BYU until the policy is changed? I can tell you that, as an alumnus, an active member, and someone who greatly values religious freedom, I am seriously considering stopping my donations because of the policy.
4. Do you really believe that the current policy allows for additional student slots to be allocated to believing members? If so, how many slots would you estimate? It seems to me that we're talking about a fairly small portion of the student body. More importantly, these are students who entered BYU believing and changed their minds at some point. After losing their belief, most decide to conceal their true beliefs and fake their way through the end of school rather than be honest and risk being expelled. So I don't understand how the current policy is providing any significant number of slots to believing members. It seems like it's mostly just leading to dishonesty.
5. On a similar note to #4, I've read that BYU-I's acceptance rate is over 99%. If that's correct, then at least for your children and others in the states, it seems like allowing BYU students to remain even after a change of belief would not significantly affect believing students' ability to attend a church school. Maybe it affects BYU-Provo, but if pretty much everyone gets into BYU-Idaho, what is the real loss?
6. This may sound odd, but I get the impression that the real purpose behind the policy is not the students who change belief, but the teachers. If BYU were to change the policy for students, they would likely need to do the same for faculty. Considering that faculty stick around a lot longer and have great influence on the student body, that would be more troubling. Do you have this same feeling? Do you think that faculty-belief is the real issue behind all of this (at least at BYU-Provo)?
7. Since you're somewhat more plugged into the church scene through your employment, I have to wonder whether your zealousness on this issue reflects a belief that BYU may be seriously considering a change of policy? Do you have any such information? And regardless, do you personally believe that a change is being seriously considered?

 

Sorry for all the lengthly questions. I got going and couldn't stop. I really do value your thoughts on this policy as we have pretty much 180-degree different views.

Edited May 7, 2015 by Buckeye

[ALarson]

Was a source ever provided for the claim of withholding transfer of credits? I understand that some credits are difficult to transfer past a certain point in your education, but does BYU not release the transcript of those kicked out when they resign membership or loose their endorsement?

This is what I'd like to know as well.  

 

I think Scott Lloyd's term of "apostate" is not accurate when describing a student who is going to their Bishop in confidence to discuss some issues, doubts, or questions regarding any church topic. If they start speaking out against the church as a student at the University, forming a group, etc., I can see it being a problem that would need to be dealt with by the university.  

 

But even in that instance, I am completely against them taking away the credits that this student had earned prior to this happening.

Edited May 7, 2015 by ALarson

[HappyJackWagon]

 

Will you be signing your real name or hiding behind a pseudonym as you do here? I don't know about President Worthen, but I keep the round file within easy reach at my desk for dealing with letters that either are unsigned or are obviously written anonymously.

 

I would use my real name because they don't really have records for a Happy Jackwagon. I made that name up.

I "hide" behind a pseudonym here because I don't trust the strangers on this, or other sites. On other forums in the past I've had participants and moderators reach out to my priesthood leaders to try to "out" me for my positions. Though it didn't impact me in a negative way with my local leaders (I maintained TR and leadership callings) I'm not willing to give others any power to try to impact me negatively. So sadly, hiding is necessary as long as self-righteous helpers are trying to a. rescue me from my thoughts or b. silence me by getting me in trouble with my local leaders.

It's unfortunate it has to be this way, but it is necessary.

Edited May 7, 2015 by HappyJackWagon

[Buckeye]

 

 

I would use my real name because they don't really have records for a Happy Jackwagon. I made that name up.

 

 

I assumed you would use your real name - Fletch.

[ALarson]

I assumed you would use your real name - Fletch.

Very funny

 

(I love that movie!!)

[Buckeye]

Very funny

 

(I love that movie!!)

 

I love the movies too. And I hate the Lakers. Ok, "hate" is strong word. My favorite brother-in-law is a diehard Lakers fan so I can't truly hate them. But I am really enjoying this year's playoffs.

[Scott Lloyd]

Well, at least no one can say that Scott isn't seriously committed to the BYU policy. A few questions for you:

• Do you believe that the church's investment in the education of non-members who have never been members is also a waste? I can (sort of) understand your "apostacy" distinction between an always-catholic vs. a former-LDS-catholic. But I'm not sure that the investment argument can support that distinction. What exactly is the investment benefit to educating non-members? And why would do you believe that benefit could not also exist for former-members?
• Would you agree that there could be some investment benefit to allowing students to continue at BYU even after a loss of faith? Perhaps they recovert. Or perhaps they're more friendly to the church because of the experience and so they allow their still-believing spouse to pay tithing throughout their marriage. I can envision many potential benefits from allowing students to be authentic to their real beliefs. Granted, these could be outweighed by possible costs (such as these students "infecting" other students), but can you at least acknowledge that some benefit can come from allowing them to stay?
• From a purely investment perspective, would you agree that the current policy may prove detrimental if signficant numbers of alumni voice disfavor with the policy and/or choose to limit/stop their donations to BYU until the policy is changed? I can tell you that, as an alumnus, an active member, and someone who greatly values religious freedom, I am seriously considering stopping my donations because of the policy.
• Do you really believe that the current policy allows for additional student slots to be allocated to believing members? If so, how many slots would you estimate? It seems to me that we're talking about a fairly small portion of the student body. More importantly, these are students who entered BYU believing and changed their minds at some point. After losing their belief, most decide to conceal their true beliefs and fake their way through the end of school rather than be honest and risk being expelled. So I don't understand how the current policy is providing any significant number of slots to believing members. It seems like it's mostly just leading to dishonesty.
• On a similar note to #3, I've read that BYU-I's acceptance rate is over 99%. If that's correct, then at least for your children and others in the states, it seems like allowing BYU students to remain even after a change of belief would not significantly affect believing students' ability to attend a church school. Maybe it affects BYU-Provo, but if pretty much everyone gets into BYU-Idaho, what is the real loss?
• This may sound odd, but I get the impression that the real purpose behind the policy is not the students who change belief, but the teachers. If BYU were to change the policy for students, they would likely need to do the same for faculty. Considering that faculty stick around a lot longer and have great influence on the student body, that would be more troubling. Do you have this same feeling? Do you think that faculty-belief is the real issue behind all of this (at least at BYU-Provo)?
• Since you're somewhat more plugged into the church scene through your employment, I have to wonder whether your zealousness on this issue reflects a belief that BYU may be seriously considering a change of policy? Do you have any such information? And regardless, do you personally believe that a change is being seriously considered?

Sorry for all the lengthly questions. I got going and couldn't stop. I really do value your thoughts on this policy as we have pretty much 180-degree different views.

Well, given the number and length, I may have to answer them piecemeal as I find time and opportunity.

 

1. I'm not well-acquainted with the reasoning for admitting non-members. But I have heard that the percentage is so low that it's practically a negligible consideration. Understandably, there simply aren't a whole lot of non-members interested in paying a substantially higher tuition to attend a Mormon school.

 

2. We always hope that those who have strayed return to the fold. But just as the Church doesn't knowingly call people on missions to reform them, allowing those who fall away to remain at BYU is not a good means to accomplish that either, for reasons I have already explained.

 

3. That's a big "if." I really don't see that happening. And with enrollment at BYU being in such high demand, I'm guessing there is enough support to keep it functioning for the foreseeable future.

 

4. If even one deserving student who is a faithful Latter-day Saint is denied entrance to BYU because someone who has apostatized remains enrolled, that is too many. As far as it "leading to dishonesty," fear of being defrauded is not a good reason to ditch a worthwhile policy. There are surely other ways to deal with prospective dishonesty. The yearly ecclesiastical endorsement is one.

 

5. There are, I'm sure, theoretical, hypothetical or practical reasons why attendance at BYU-Idaho might not be a viable option for one who desires to attend the Provo campus. One that quickly comes to mind is prohibitive housing costs for one who otherwise could live at home with his or her parents while attending BYU in Provo.

 

Furthermore, a 99.6 percent acceptance rate at BYU-Idaho does not necessarily mean that everyone who wants to attend a Church school can. According to this website, the "applicant selectivity" level at BYU-Idaho is medium, meaning there is a medium level of difficulty in being accepted there. In other words, a lot of people desire to attend but can't for whatever reason, presumably including reasons apart from their ecclesiastical eligibility.

 

6. No, I've never entertained the speculation you give here, and I think the reason for the policy is closer to the reasons I've expressed here. (But, I hasten to add, I haven't consulted anyone "in the know" about it.)

 

7. I've not heard that a change is being considered and, in fact, I would be greatly surprised if there were. (But whatever might be your supposition about how "plugged in" I am, I assure you that no one is apt to consult me about it.)

Edited May 10, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Buckeye]

Well, given the number and length, I may have to answer them piecemeal as I find time and opportunity.

 

1. I'm not well-acquainted with the reasoning for admitting non-members. But I have heard that the percentage is so low that it's practically a negligible consideration. Understandably, there simply aren't a whole lot of non-members interested in paying a substantially higher tuition to attend a Mormon school.

 

2. We always hope that those who have strayed return to the fold. But just as the Church doesn't knowingly call people on missions to reform them, allowing those who fall away to remain at BYU is not a good means to accomplish that either, for reasons I have already explained.

 

3. That's a big "if." I really don't see that happening. And with enrollment at BYU being in such high demand, I'm guessing there is enough support to keep it functioning for the foreseeable future.

 

4. If even one deserving student who is a faithful Latter-day Saint is denied entrance to BYU because someone who has apostatized remains enrolled, that is too many. As far as it "leading to dishonesty," fear of being defrauded is not a good reason to ditch a worthwhile policy. There are surely other ways to deal with prospective dishonesty. The yearly ecclesiastical endorsement is one.

 

5. There are, I'm sure, theoretical or hypothetical reasons why attendance at BYU-Idaho might not be a viable option for one who desires to attend the Provo campus. One that quickly comes to mind is prohibitive housing costs for one who otherwise could live at home with his or her parents while attending BYU in Provo.

 

Furthermore, a 99.6 percent acceptance rate at BYU-Idaho does not necessarily mean that everyone who wants to attend a Church school can. According to this website, the "applicant selectivity" level at BYU-Idaho is medium, meaning there is a medium level of difficulty in being accepted there. In other words, a lot of people desire to attend but can't for whatever reason, presumably including reasons apart from their ecclesiastical eligibility.

 

6. No, I've never entertained the speculation you give here, and I think the reason for the policy is closer to the reasons I've expressed here. (But, I hasten to add, I haven't consulted anyone "in the know" about it.)

 

7. I've not heard that a change is being considered and, in fact, I would be greatly surprised if there were. (But whatever might be your supposition about how "plugged in" I am, I assure you that no one is apt to consult me about it.)

 

Thanks for your thoughts. I won't barage you with follow-up, except to ask how you can believe both your answer #1 and #4. If no LDS student should be denied a slot because of a former-member, why shouldn't the same principle apply for never-members, regardless of how low the numbers? I have to believe that the number of slots currently allocated to non-members at BYU exceeds the number of slots that are "opened" because of expusion of members who change their beliefs. So if the numbers of non-members are too low to care about, why do you care so passionately about "even the one" non-believing member?

 

Edit to add: I also looked at the website. I can't understand where they get the medium difficulty for selectivity, unless it's just the results of the online poll on the site. In my mind, if a school accepts 99.6% of applicants, that could only be a "medium" difficulty if the range of acceptances at other schools was between 99% (lowest) and 100% (highest). Obviously, that is not the case. Stanford and Ivys have acceptances in the single digits.

Edited May 7, 2015 by Buckeye

[Scott Lloyd]

Thanks for your thoughts. I won't barage you with follow-up, except to ask how you can believe both your answer #1 and #4.

Because faithfulness and loyalty to the Church of Jesus Christ once one has received and committed to following the covenants is not a negligible consideration. The Church has every reason to want to encourage it. In short, one who has never joined the Church in the first place is a more fit candidate for admission than one who has joined and then apostatized from it, all other things being equal.

 

 

Edit to add: I also looked at the website. I can't understand where they get the medium difficulty for selectivity, unless it's just the results of the online poll on the site. In my mind, if a school accepts 99.6% of applicants, that could only be a "medium" difficulty if the range of acceptances at other schools was between 99% (lowest) and 100% (highest). Obviously, that is not the case. Stanford and Ivys have acceptances in the single digits.

 

I can only surmise that the "applicant selectivity" range has to do with how difficult it is to meet admission standards, that a number of potential applicants are dissuaded from applying in the first place due to lack of eligibility as it pertains to ACT/SAT scores, GPA, or whatever.

Edited May 7, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Buckeye]

Because faithfulness and loyalty to the Church of Jesus Christ once one has received and committed to following the covenants is not a negligible consideration. The Church has every reason to want to encourage it. In short, one who has never joined the Church in the first place is a more fit candidate for admission than one who has joined and then apostatized from it, all other things being equal.

 

Okay. I understand this point (though disagree). But this point is not what you're making in your letter to the dean. In the letter, you are arguing on an investment rationale. You never mention a "fitness" rationale. I still don't see how you can accept non-members, but exclude former-members, on an investment rationale.

[HappyJackWagon]

"1. I'm not well-acquainted with the reasoning for admitting non-members. But I have heard that the percentage is so low that it's practically a negligible consideration. Understandably, there simply aren't a whole lot of non-members interested in paying a substantially higher tuition to attend a Mormon school."

Except for the scholarship heathens...I mean...students. Not only does the church allow non-members to attend, but some even attend for FREE. I wonder how many Mormon students would have liked to been able to attend BYU for FREE.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

Thanks for your thoughts. I won't barage you with follow-up, except to ask how you can believe both your answer #1 and #4. If no LDS student should be denied a slot because of a former-member, why shouldn't the same principle apply for never-members, regardless of how low the numbers? I have to believe that the number of slots currently allocated to non-members at BYU exceeds the number of slots that are "opened" because of expusion of members who change their beliefs. So if the numbers of non-members are too low to care about, why do you care so passionately about "even the one" non-believing member?

 

Edit to add: I also looked at the website. I can't understand where they get the medium difficulty for selectivity, unless it's just the results of the online poll on the site. In my mind, if a school accepts 99.6% of applicants, that could only be a "medium" difficulty if the range of acceptances at other schools was between 99% (lowest) and 100% (highest). Obviously, that is not the case. Stanford and Ivys have acceptances in the single digits.

It looks like the medium difficulty comes from the average test scores and GPA. That is the schools as ACT scores in the middle of all colleges, so it has a medium selectivity.

[Buckeye]

It looks like the medium difficulty comes from the average test scores and GPA. That is the schools as ACT scores in the middle of all colleges, so it has a medium selectivity.

 

Helpful, thanks. So I guess the 99.6% acceptance rate reflects the fact that applicants to BYU-I are unusually good at choosing not to apply if they're not going to make it.

[Scott Lloyd]

Okay. I understand this point (though disagree). But this point is not what you're making in your letter to the dean. In the letter, you are arguing on an investment rationale. You never mention a "fitness" rationale. I still don't see how you can accept non-members, but exclude former-members, on an investment rationale.

Well, I never said it was my only rationale. And I do believe fitness for enrollment is implied in the reasoning I have expressed.

 

But perhaps, after your observation, I will revise/amend my letter accordingly. I haven't sent it yet.

[Scott Lloyd]

Helpful, thanks. So I guess the 99.6% acceptance rate reflects the fact that applicants to BYU-I are unusually good at choosing not to apply if they're not going to make it.

I don't know off hand what the admissions standards are. But if they include a minimum GPA and college entrance test score, people who couldn't meet those would be apt to look elsewhere.

 

Edited to add:

 

FYI. Here is a website that gives admission requirements for BYU-Idaho.

Edited May 7, 2015 by Scott Lloyd