<p>I've always wondered why overall GPA's are cited by everyone on CC (and elsewhere) rather than core subject GPA's (math, science, English, foreign language, history). My daughter's A's in electives like Chamber Singers and Advanced Drama Workshop boost her GPA, but don't mean much otherwise--nobody ever gets less than a B in those classes, and no one is required to do a lick of work outside the classroom. Surely those A's shouldn't be given the same weight as A's in core subjects. But while her high school weights honors and AP grades in calculating GPA's, there's no discounting of grades for electives. Do colleges recalculate the GPA from an applicant's transcripts by disregarding the fluffier stuff? And if they do, isn't that the GPA we should consider when evaluating whether a particular college is a reach, match or safety?</p>
<p>The UCs calculate the GPA themselves giving weighting to certain (but not all) AP/honors classes and not including certain others - like PE. They call it a 'UC GPA'. I imagine a number of other colleges do something similar.</p>
<p>MommaJ, yes to your last question. S's high school calculates GPA only on core subjects, and I imagine that's the same at many schools, although obviously not all.</p>
<p>Every college my son applied to recalculated applicants' GPA based on core subjects. I think you'll find that true with most colleges. However, I believe that his HS included all courses in the GPA.</p>
<p>geezermom, how do you know they all recalculated? By reading it on their websites and/or talking to adcoms? I have noticed it on a few sites but haven't done that much research yet to know how publicized this type of info is. Good interview question?</p>
<p>I always cite the unweighted, core GPA because I was told by adcoms at two of the schools my daughter is interested in that that's the best way to be sure of where your student falls in the applicant pool. (I never asked other schools -- just assuming that the small sample was probably representative.)</p>
<p>If the college cares, they will take the time to recalculate GPA. </p>
<p>The GPA problem is far broader than core/non-core. What about weighted/non-weighted? (D went to a HS that did not weight, just for an example). What about different grading standards? (Washington Post this AM had an article about a battle in Fairfax County VA regarding grading standards and average GPA for grads within the county compared to others.) What about competitiveness of the school? (Surely a high GPA means more from a competitive HS? But maybe not - see above.)</p>
<p>It is for reasons like this that it is so hard to generalize about what goes on. Ultimately, admission decisions are not "scientific" unless the college uses a formula, which some do. But what can you do about that, other than hedge your bets with applications to other kinds of colleges?</p>
<p>What difference does it make? GPAs are not entirely comparable from one school to another, even if they agree on how to calculate it. Same with class rank. And, for many colleges, GPA and class rank are fuzzy targets, not hard inputs for a formula. At my kids' school, where GPA was pretty much "core GPA" because there was no credit for extracurriculars, college admissions success was certainly correlated with GPA, but didn't follow it precisely at all. Other factors clearly swamped small GPA differences.</p>
<p>At colleges where GPA IS essentially a hard input for a formula, they are usually pretty transparent about how that works.</p>
<p>How do you know what GPA people are quoting? (I've never specified.) FWIW, I quote the GPA that is on our kids' report cards. It includes only "academic" courses, but they don't actually define whether that includes the arts courses. I know it doesn't include PE or health.</p>
<p>Our school has 6 GPAs on the bottom of the transcript - Academic GPA (just academic classes), Overall GPA, and 10-12 GPA. Each of these are calculated in a weighted and unweighted manner. Talk about overkill!!!!</p>
<p>jackief: I am fuzzy on the details since my S is a freshman (how quickly we forget). I know we heard this in an information session at at least one school, so, yes, it's a good question to ask. The application forms also made it clear because they asked for a list of core courses--not every single course taken in HS. In a couple of cases scholarship/honors decisions were made by formula using class rank and/or SAT scores; actual GPA did not matter.</p>
<p>I agree with JHS: GPA isn't comparable from one HS to the next. You'll find a lot of commentary and disagreement over the meaning and value of GPA on CC.</p>
<p>Most schools do a quick recalcu of the GPA and then give it a numerical score of sorts. THey do not sit there and try to discern a 3.6 vs a 3.7. Also C's and D's in the academic subjects can hurt a high gpa. It isn't just the number itself. Also many colleges address the issue of weighting by assessing the courses taken, the difficulty of the school/courses and whether the student has stretched to take other courses elsewhere if such courses are not available at the high school.</p>
<p>The comments by</a> newmassdad and by</a> JHS get to the heart of the problem: there isn't enough standardization of grade averages for grade average alone to be a decisive factor in admission. It's interesting to me that the two most recent college</a> information sessions I have attended have both mentioned this issue. A Harvard admission officer said last May, "When I see a grade average like 6.85, the first thing I ask myself is, 'What does this really mean?'" A Vanderbilt admission officer said in August, "The G.P.A. has become the least useful number in college admission." </p>
<p>Yes, it is always expedient to get good grades, and especially to get good grades in challenging "core" courses, but the prudent student will always have activities outside of class and personal habits that can document genuine intellectual interest and academic ability. There is just too much uncertainty in grading standards to be sure what grades mean.</p>
<p>I understand as many have said that a number in a vacuum is not very useful. Where I have a problem is looking at info on college websites and common data sets where they do list GPAs or ranges for admitted students. Unless there is additional info to tell how the colleges arrive at a number themselves, or what they take from the school, it is hard to know how to compare ones own GPA to what is publicized. </p>
<p>The UC GPA is very specific and would be great if others would standardize on a system or at least give more info on what the numbers colleges report really mean.</p>
<p>It would be, but it does not work that way. Most adcoms at the more selective schools like a class rank if they do not know the school. That along with a weighted and unweighted gpa tells them a bit more about the student.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Do colleges recalculate the GPA from an applicant's transcripts by disregarding the fluffier stuff? And if they do, isn't that the GPA we should consider when evaluating whether a particular college is a reach, match or safety?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes - many do. In some instances, the post how they re-calculate the GPA on the admissions website or in admissions information. Last year my daughter applied to Elon University and University of South Carolina - both schools made clear how they re-calculated the GPA.</p>
<p>I agree with all of the above about GPA being a meaningless number - a concept I have attempted to preach ad nauseum.</p>
<p>
[quote]
but the prudent student will always have activities outside of class and personal habits that can document genuine intellectual interest and academic ability.
[/quote]
Not sure of what tokenadult is meaning here.</p>
<p>It's not that GPA is a meaningless number -- after all, however it's calculated it's someone's assessment of how a student is doing in school, and that's always going to be important. It's just that small differences in GPAs based on calculation methodologies are meaningless. You are not going to know any more about a kid's chances at X University if you know her "core" GPA is 3.82 than if you know her "GPA" is 3.93 or 4.56. Unless, of course, X University itself makes clear what it looks at, as many do. (That's why, on the University of Michigan or UCLA boards, people talk about their "Michigan GPAs" or "UC GPAs".) </p>
<p>Even if X University specifies a "core" GPA, it may well value that journalism course a kid got an A+ in, so that the strengths (or lack thereof) reflected in the non-core GPA may well remain strengths (or lack thereof) in the admission process, if it's not entirely automatic. And when it comes to comparing students at different high schools, all bets are off. In every admissions office, I'm sure there are high schools whose 3.5 students (however calculated) are considered competitive with other high schools' 4.0+ students. Same with class rank.</p>
<p>All this stuff matters, but none of it matters in a precise enough way to warrant the trouble of standardizing how we talk about it.</p>
<p>JHS is on target. </p>
<p>But let me re-emphasize: Each school uses the data you provide differently. Worse, we just don't know how they use it - and what they say they do does not tell us what they really do, so don't rely on info sessions and such to guide you. </p>
<p>The admissions process is not pretty. It is not rational. It is not comprehensible by mere mortals. :)</p>
<p>I wonder if the Vanderbilt ADCOM actually meant: "since everyone has a 4.0 of one kind or another, it's not helpful."</p>
<p>As the parent of a HS kid who practices many hours for her orchestra concerts, I believe those grades should be included.</p>
<p>Also, my suspicion is that the common data set adds back in gym and choir, etc., further confusing things.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Not sure of what tokenadult is meaning [by "the prudent student will always have activities outside of class and personal habits that can document genuine intellectual interest and academic ability"].
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'll give a few examples. There is at least one college, in its supplement to the Common Application, that offers a section of optional information from the applicant. One kind of optional information the applicant can provide is a list of books the applicant has read in the past couple years. Some straight-A high school students don't read any books that aren't assigned, but some read many others, and that is a difference that is meaningful to some college admission officers. Another example is the math-liking student who gets straight A grades through a high school course in AP calculus BC, contrasted with a student who also participates in the AMC math contests, which produce a book listing top scoring students from around the world each year. Some colleges surely check who is in that book when evaluating applicants. Debate is another favored, and independently verifiable, activity that some students participate in and some don't. It's the overall content of the admission file that makes the best case that a student is "the real deal," to quote one admission officer, and that content of the admission file will include a description of the student's involvement in extracurricular activities.</p>