<p>Citrus Belt - The new GPA requirement for the UC's goes into effect next year, not this year.</p>
<p>Citrus:</p>
<p>What did you mean by: "The higher the gpa the lower the SAT1 and have to be. So his relative index will probably be okay as long as he has a minimum 3.0 UC gpa. "?</p>
<p>If your son is really into Computer Gaming and wants to make that a career option you could also consider a specialty school.</p>
<p>Check out <a href="http://www.fullsail.edu%5B/url%5D">www.fullsail.edu</a> They are based in Orlando and have a very good track record at placing game programmers. Here is a description of their Game Design & Development program -</p>
<p>You pride yourself on holding the record for solving brain teasers faster than any of your friends. Beating your own high scores has become a drag - you want more. Developing code for a genre-busting game for next generation hardware is where your head's at. You want to learn C++, Direct X, and OpenGL so you can bring your quest-driven concept to reality. Well hang on, because Full Sail's Game Design & Development Bachelor of Science Degree Program is a major score. Our pro staff fills your brain with game essentials like game docs, programming, gameplay, and artificial intelligence: the tools you need to CTF (capture-the-flag) - your job in the game industry.</p>
<p>The Game Design & Development Degree Program may be attained in only 21 months and, upon successful completion, will result in a Bachelor of Science Degree. The Entertainment Business curriculum may be taken in addition to Game Design & Development and will result in a second Bachelor of Science Degree when both are completed.</p>
<p>UC eligibility index is about halfway down the page.</p>
<p>Have him retake the SATs. If he got semifinalist he ought to be able to put up a 1500, which would help, I think</p>
<p>"One other question for you knowledgeable parents, do you think son has a snowball's chance of advancing to NMS finalist with his 2.9 GPA? I told him I thought he blew it -but that he should be happy to be Semi as it is an honor in and of itself."</p>
<p>As a mother of one of the few (10% I think) that made semi-finalist, but not finalist, I would say no. My S had something like a 3.3 grade point (UC weighted turned out to be 3.7 or something like that), and did not make it to finalist. Had nice high PSAT and SAT's, but the grades, ugh . . . this one is at UChicago now, though, (got in off the waitlist) and I'm waiting to see how things go there. </p>
<p>My other underachieving son, who has stats very similar to your S's, ended up going to community college and then transferred to Humboldt State, where he is a "fifth year junior" or something like that, LOL. He recently wrote that he has been studying a lot more and the classes seem twice as easy that way. (Maybe there's hope yet!) He applied to and got in to University of Puget Sound and Pacific Lutheran when he was a senior in high school but decided not to go. University of Puget Sound even invited him to apply for their honors program, based on his SAT and writing ability, I surmise. I think for him community college was the right way to go, though at the time I was not happy with his decision. He just wasn't ready to buckle down right out of high school.</p>
<p>Mstee - I'm somewhat horrified...a 3.3 didn't make the cut! That's a B plus average...hardly "poor grades" in my opinion...truly I think that's pretty unreasonable on the part of the NM folks...glad to hear your son got into a great school, tho'! Hope he's happy there...</p>
<p>A 3.3 isn't a B plus average - it's a solid "B" A B+ would be above 3.5.</p>
<p>That doesn't make sense to me, Carolyn...I thought 3.0 was a solid B...
what would be considered an A-...if a 3.5 is a B+, then where does A- kick in?
I don't know how grades are calculated as far as what determines + or -, since our schools don't give them...
anyway, I stand by my comment - I think knocking someone with a 3.3 average out of National Merit is ludicrous...of course, just my two cents...</p>
<p>Citrusbelt - thank you thank you for your encouragement! He is definitely his own person which I hpe will serve him well down the road!</p>
<p>Letter Grade GPA<br>
A 4.00<br>
A- 3.67<br>
B+ 3.33<br>
B 3.00<br>
B- 2.67
C+ 2.33<br>
C 2.00<br>
C- 1.67<br>
D+ 1.33
D 1.00<br>
D- 0.67</p>
<p>At my daughter's school it's a simple 4 point scale for computing GPAs - no extra points for pluses or minuses, although honors and AP classes are weighted on a 5 point scare. A 3.5 is considered a B+, a 3.3 a B. Minimum to get on the honor roll is 3.6. My daughter will be happy to hear that at some schools she'd actually be considered a "B+" student rather than a "B" student with her 3.4 GPA! :)</p>
<p>The student that I know who did not make the Finalist status because of grades had a high 2's/low 3's GPA. But the GPA is misleading--if he liked the class, he'd do the work and get A's. If he didn't like the class, he'd get C's and D's. I think the NMS people weight that heavily.</p>
<p>As for being satisfied with Semifinalist status--how useful is NMS status anyway? It's useful as an application boost and can open doors to scholarships (NMS and others). If you are not interested in the scholarships (which I assume would require finalist status), then an applicant will get as much of an application boost with semifinalist status as he would with a finalist status, since applications will be turned in before finalist status is determined.</p>
<p>Carolyn, In most schools, I think.</p>
<p>Ellemenope, your post made me wonder about something that's probably obvious but still something I don't know. Is it fair to assume that in college admissions your range of grades is just as important as your actual GPA. Example: Two kids with 3.3 GPAs. One has fairly consistent grades - mainly B's, some A's, one or two C's. The other's GPA is all over the board with lots of C's, maybe a D, some A's and a few B's. Which would be better for college admissions and even for consideration of something like NMS?</p>
<p>Good point ellemenope..I had forgotten that the finalist list was not announced until after February 1st.</p>
<p>Another question comes to mind...if a learning disabilitly is addressed in GC's recommendation and student's essay, will that help with a favorable decision...and maybe overlooking some GPA inconsistencies....or will it be looked at as an excuse?</p>
<p>I feel really, really bad saying this, but claiming a learning disability - even a documented one - will not help at all. The schools expect that a student will be able to do the work, and if he or she has a disability, it is merely assumed that perhaps they got more time on tests, NOT that low grades are excusable. Though it is politically incorrect for the schools to say, the professors of all the schools I've ever worked at HATE the LD card and mutter under their breaths that the kids shouldn't be there if they can't handle the work. I assume the same thing is true with most scholarships and the NMF status - it looks like an excuse.</p>
<p>Once a student and her mother claimed that her disability was that she "couldn't reason from premises to a conclusion!"</p>
<p>For the record, I believe real LDs exist and that any accommodation that can properly be made should be, so don't flame me please!</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>Is it fair to assume that in college admissions your range of grades is just as important as your actual GPA. Example: Two kids with 3.3 GPAs. One has fairly consistent grades - mainly B's, some A's, one or two C's. The other's GPA is all over the board with lots of C's, maybe a D, some A's and a few B's. Which would be better for college admissions and even for consideration of something like NMS?<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>In my opinion, grade range is important and the consistent grades would win. Student A is a "mainly B student"--Student B is a "mainly C student". </p>
<p>And D's and F's are the kiss of death unless explained or repeated (or explained AND repeated).</p>
<p>voronwe--I agree with you that the "LD" designation is losing its currency. People who are adept at gaming the testing system have wrecked it for kids who are really learning disabled. I remember reading in a post last year that at some exclusive schools, over half of the kids applied for an LD designation that would get them more time at the SAT sitting.</p>
<p>ckr1147:</p>
<p>I would not be so categorical about dismissing documented LD. It depends on the nature of LD and its impact on GPA. There's a documentary airing tonight about Brooke Ellison, a young woman who was left quadraplegic as a result of an accident. It was directed by Christopher Reeve. Brooke graduated from Harvard several years ago with Honors. She received very considerable accommodation in and out of the classroom and in exams.
Colleges have offices of disabilities that not only study what kind of accommodations are most appropriate and make recommendations to the college, seek to educate faculty and staff on how to deal with LD students, but also made decisions as to which students will be entitlted to accommodations (such as the use of computer for tests, or time and a half).
It is true, however, that it has become much harder to receive accommodation on standardized tests because of abuses. The CB has cracked down on the practice and far fewer students are now eligible for extended time.</p>