<p>The title pretty much says it all. Thanks for all the help.</p>
<p>I don’t know if one is considered “better” than the other. They have different purposes. What many highly selective schools do iis unweight the GPAs and then try to put them into a form where students can be compared with each other. The colleges are looking at all kinds of weighting, so they need to try to find a common denominator to compare. They then take into consideration the difficulty of the course load a student is taking and the weighting does come into play there.</p>
<p>An unweighted GPA is standardized and therefore easier to use for comparison purposes. Once you start using weighted GPAs, you need to factor in the weighting (not every school offers the same maximum weight) and the formulas get more complicated.</p>
<p>Not all schools offer the same opportunities for AP, college, etc. Weighted GPAs put students from those schools at a disadvantage because they cant pile on the advanced coursework. </p>
<p>That doesn’t mean that either one is better, it just depends on what your perspective is on fairness. </p>
<p>Adcoms will look at each situation, each school differently based on the school profile. </p>
<p>Scholarships are a different matter. Usually thats a numbers game, so schools will weight (or unweight) so they get a consistent measure.</p>
<p>A weighted GPA only has meaning in the context of a single school, for class rank purposes…not every school has the same number of honors/AP courses that would be weighted, and not every school weights the same (or at all).</p>
<p>Weighting is used primarily for class rank, and if your school doesn’t rank, no need for weighting.</p>
<p>Weighting can also get kids to take a class for the wrong reason - higher GPA vs. really wanting to be in the class. Or you could view it as a bribe to get kids to take harder classes than they otherwise would.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s not considered better.
They’re just two different things.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, it’s not.
There is no (or very little) GPA standardization among the 37,000 high schools in the U.S.</p>
<p>That is why college officials say they consider standardized 
test scores much more so than GPAs.</p>
<p>I’ve never seen that. Can you point us to that citation? Thanks.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Absolutely NOT true. Every elite college will tell you rigor and GPA within context are considered the two most important aspects of an application. Standardized test scores are always below that in rank at the elite schools, sometimes to the point of even being optional.</p>
<p>Some schools are test optional. There are no GPA optional schools.</p>
<p>Agree with the last two posters, here’s an example from Cal’s CDS:</p>
<p><a href=“http://opa.berkeley.edu/statistics/cds/2012-2013.pdf[/url]”>http://opa.berkeley.edu/statistics/cds/2012-2013.pdf</a></p>
<p>I don’t think I’ve ever seen a CDS that has test scores more important than gpa and rigor.</p>
<p>The answer is simple. There is no standard for weighed GPA. So one cannot compare the wGPA among students from different schools.
Although uwGPA is also not really equal among schools, but that can usually be normalized by the class rank. At least, most schools use a 4.0 max scale. If not, the adcom will convert that to a 4.0 uw scale.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Lehigh lists test scores as more important than both GPA and rank, but not course rigor. But it appears to be an outlier. <a href=“http://www.lehigh.edu/~oir/cds/lucds2012.htm[/url]”>http://www.lehigh.edu/~oir/cds/lucds2012.htm</a></p>
<p>In any case, weighted GPA cannot realistically be compared between high schools, since each high school has different weightings (exceptions may be if there is a standardized weighting system being referred to, such as the method used by the state universities in California). Unweighted GPA eliminates the differences due to weighting schemes.</p>
<p>Of course, unweighted GPA still has other problems, such as a given grade in a given course not meaning the same level of performance as the same grade in the same course at a different school (unlike in places like Canadian provinces). That is why standardized test scores and rank are often used in addition to GPA, even though those measures are not perfect either.</p>
<p>At my school, only 7 honors classes are offered, most of which good students replace by AP. They are also in only two subjects. A lot of schools offer far more. Also, weighted GPAs are inconsistent. For example, honors can be worth +.5, +1, and APs +1. +2. </p>
<p>Weighted masks actual GRADES. The point of a GPA. Schedules show rigor.</p>
<p>Agree. Unweighted gives more of an equal playing field, assuming there is not grade inflation.</p>
<p>Thanks ucb! </p>
<p>Lehigh is very interesting. They don’t even have gpa as important, only considered.</p>
<p>
For that matter, a given grade in a given course often does not mean the same level of performance as the same grade in the same course taught in the same school by a different teacher! And there lies the argument for standardized tests…</p>
<p>That why they call it a holistic reviewing process. Standardized test alone is also not fair. There are students spend their whole life (or at least high school years) preparing just for the test.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Posters are confusing rigor and excelling in challenging classes, with a specific number that is supposedly universal across all high schools.</p>
<p>Not the same thing.</p>
<p>Every self respecting college admissions official will tell you that there is no standardized grade-based GPA across all schools.</p>
<p>Sometimes, I really wonder about what some CC posters are thinking. But I guess it’s mostly that they’re just reading too fast and not absorbing a hundred percent of a post.</p>
<p>See this below, which is correct:</p>
<p>
</p>