<p>Anyone with a 3.5-3.7 UW gpa get into any elite schools? Or does anyone know anyone who did? If so, please try your best to list your/ their stats. By "elite", I mean Ivy League, or top 25, like Stanford, MIT, UChicago, UCAL Berkeley, etc. Thank you, I appreciate all the potential commenters, even though there won't be many.</p>
<p>Yes, if they fall under the following:</p>
<p>1.) Recruited athlete
2.) URM (under represented minority)
3.) Development cases
4.) Children of major donors (millions+)</p>
<p>stephen: I recruit for one of those schools. you’re in a tough situation. The fact is these “elite” schools have thousands more ultra high-GPA applicants than they can accomodate each year. You should face the fact that they are not realistic in your case. Instead, your search should be focused on the best suite of colleges that can best fit you and your circumstances. </p>
<p>Good luck to you</p>
<p>I think it’s possible, but there are many other factors that AO take into account when deciding whether or not you’re accepted.</p>
<p>My D got into U of Chicago, Swarthmore, and Harvey Mudd last year with a 3.7 UW GPA. She did have outstanding test scores (2380 superscore on the SAT, Subject tests - 800 Math II and 800 Literature). Interesting ECs, but not superstar quality. She is a “true intellectual”, though, and I think it came through in her recommendations, essays, and ECs. She is not a URM, athlete, development case, legacy, or child of a donor at any of these schools. She was a national merit finalist. She did not apply to any ivies (considered Cornell, but got into Chicago EA so did not apply after all to Cornell). In fact, she got in everywhere she applied, and got considerable merit aid at several schools. She even got merit at U of Chicago ($5000/year).</p>
<p>I do feel like a 3.7 is the bottom hurdle you have to clear to be considered at the very top schools, though, unless you have one of the hooks mentioned above. And with a 3.7 you really need a strong application in all other areas to be considered. I don’t know if it made a difference, but her lowest grades are consistently in her foreign language study. I have heard that schools are just a trace more forgiving on a few grade slips in that area vs. a core academic subject. Don’t know if that played in her favor, but thought I would mention it.</p>
<p>Go ahead and take a flyer on a couple of top schools. But you need a more realistic list of matches and safeties as well. My D was very happy with her choices in the spring. She ended up choosing Harvey Mudd.</p>
<p>I’m very happy for your daughter! Thanks for taking the time to reply (this goes for everyone). I have seen someone with a 3.7 gpa get into Cornell though, someone who had good ECs but obviously lacked in the gpa department.</p>
<p>
A good portion of the <= 3.7 GPA acceptances do not fit into these categories. I did not fit into any of the categories, had a 3.4/3.5 GPA, was not in top 10% of my HS class (basic public, not selective magnet), and had a 500 verbal SAT. Nevertheless, I was accepted to 4 of the 5 highly selective colleges to which I applied – Stanford, MIT, Brown, and Cornell. Many highly selective colleges are not obsessed with near-perfect stats. Instead they are looking for a group of great people who are likely to do amazing things in and out of the classroom, in college and beyond. They also consider your whole transcript. For example, which classes had the lower grades? Only freshman year? Electives unrelated to your major? College prep classes related to your major? Does your HS grade harshly? All of these can make an important difference in the decision. That said, yes the overall admit rate declines quite a bit at most highly selective colleges when you drop below a ~3.8 UW GPA.</p>
<p>To be fair, Data10, I believe you had Math SAT and Math II subject test scores of 800/800. And your undergraduate admissions were 5 years ago or more (grade inflation in high schools continues to accelerate, unfortunately).</p>
<p>Yes, my math and math II were 800. Chem was near 800 as well. I also had various other unique details that implied I could succeed in coursework at highly selective colleges, in spite of stats. For example, I took several classes at SUNYA and RPI while in high school, beyond the highest course level offered at my HS. I had a 4.0 GPA in all of these classes. If you combined my SUNYA & RPI GPAs with my HS GPA, my overall average would have increased to ~3.6.</p>
<p>The Stanford CDS mentions the % under 3.75 GPA is nearly unchanged in the 7 years that they have reported that value, implying that they have not dramatically changed their policies on lower HS grades over the past few years. Other colleges I checked also did not have dramatic changes. Some had slight changes. For example, the current Princeton CDS shows the following average HS GPA progression in two years steps from 2006 to 2012: 3.85, 3.86, 3.89, 3.87.</p>
<p>Data10, what year was your admission to Stanford?</p>
<p>Few persons at Stanford have various details I’ve posted about myself in these forums. To maintain anonymity, I’d prefer not to give a specific year. Instead I’ll say I was admitted several years ago, in a year when my HS GPA was in the bottom ~3% of the admitted Stanford freshman class.</p>
<p>My unweighted in HS was around a 3.65. I got into UCLA and UC-Berkeley. I also scored 1480 SAT/790MathIIC. I did track and field and did not varsity. And UCs do not care about legacy or URM.</p>
<p>Two of my friends who both had a 3.7, (one having an SAT of 2290, the other having something in the mid 2300s) with average amounts of extracurriculars, both got into Vanderbilt. They’re both Asian. Another had a 3.5, 22XX (I don’t remember) and research experience (he was also Asian) and got into WashU.</p>
<p>fReMoNtPeA, were you in state for UCLA and Berkeley? I assume it is easier to get in with a slightly lower GPA if you are in state, maybe. I know that is true for schools like Michigan.</p>
<p>a 3.7 will give you a shot, though not a very great one, and depending on how hard your courses were and when you got your B/C’s. If your frosh GPA was a 3.1 and then your soph/junior GPA was a 4.0, I don’t see how you couldn’t have a reasonable shot at some of those schools.<br>
3.6 is very very very iffy, but again apply the reasoning above to determine how acceptable it is.
Unless a 3.5 puts you in at least the top 15% in your grade, I would say that a 3.5 basically disqualifies you from the schools you listed. Well unless you are truly exceptional in other areas(such as athletics), you are URM, etc.</p>
<p>
Some colleges recalculate HS GPA, excluding freshman year. Stanford and UC schools are among them. UC schools also exclude non-“a-g” courses in their recalculation. However, holistic schools that recalculate without freshman year do view the whole transcript and are aware of freshman grades. Beyond recalculation, most colleges favor an upward trend in grades. [This</a> report](<a href=“http://academic-senate.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/committees/aepe/hout_report.pdf]This”>http://academic-senate.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/committees/aepe/hout_report.pdf) on Berkeley admissions found that an upward trend in grades was one of the tested variables that had the strongest correlation with a low read score (lower read scores get admitted). Colleges are also particularly interested in the course grades that are most relevant to your college performance. Junior year college prep classes are often far more important than freshman year general foundation. Each year, the NACAS does a survey asking a large number of college admissions what factors are “considerable importance” in admissions decision. In the latest one I found (2011), the highest rated factor was “grades in college prep classes”, with 84% indicating considerable importance . “Grades in all courses” was far lower at 52%.</p>
<p>I was a patent frantically asking this question here last year around this time. S had an unweighted gpa approximately 3.65(school provides
Only weighted gpa). But he had 2350 SAT 1 and 800 on phy, chem and math2. It is not like he was lazy and his grades were effected. Four B’s is all it takes to get to a 3.7 ish gpa. we were very concerned about this and so he applied to a lot of schools. here is his result
MIT- rejected
Stanford-rejected
Carnegie mellon- accepted for computer engineering but wait listed for school of computer science.
Berkeley- accepted for EECS- attending</p>
<p>Cornell- accepted for college of engineering</p>
<p>Caltech- accepted for computer science</p>
<p>He applied to a couple of safties -
Accepted with good merit money.</p>
<p>What I learned from cc about gpa and from our experience is that gpa varies from school to school, u can not compare gpa like that. I am very positive that colleges
Will look at your strength-
S had good grades in science and math classes, it came to him naturally, at the same time he took classes like
AP US history etc and was willing to take the hit on gpa but enjoyed being in the class and the discussions that took place there.</p>
<p>It all depends on what you
Want to do and how your application present it.
So don’t be discouraged.</p>
<p>classes,</p>
<p>
UCLA Admit Rate During 2000 and 2012
**In-State Students ** : 31% (2000) -> 19% (2012)
Out-Of-State Students : 20% (2000) -> 30% (2012)
International Students : 14% (2000) -> 33% (2012)</p>
<p>It may be that the the out-of-state and international students are far more qualified than in the past, but I think the more likely explanation is top UC schools are trying to make up for budget cuts in recent years by increasing the number of higher tuition students (out-of-state and international) to the point where they may be favored over in-state students.</p>
<p>With 3.7 GPA & decent test scores, one should consider Canadian schools. A few of these are ranked in the top 50 in various fields, and admissions is not as unpredictable as the top 30 in the US. </p>
<p>With grade deflation, getting good grades is another story at Canadian universities.</p>
<p>Data10, interesting stats on the UCLA acceptance rate.</p>
<p>What do you mean with…
… “a-g” courses?</p>