<p>I keep reading these threads where students say they come from a competitive school, and they say they have a 3.7 and are ranked in top 15 % or top 10% of their class. In my opinion i don't find a 3.7 very impressive for a top 20% student. I have a 3.9 unweighted and am ranked out of top 20% at my school. I just jope colleges don't take ranking seriously because if they do I am screwed. I believe class ranking is worthless and does not represent who a student really is.</p>
<p>i agree, GPA means more than rank. Rank is one of those things that is nice to put on your resume to show that you are one of the tops at your school but if you are in a really competitive school colleges will see that and will take that into account. Dont worry, a 3.9 is wicked good. Please if you could comment on my chances thread <a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=365470%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=365470</a></p>
<p>thanks</p>
<p>3.9 is great.</p>
<p>Ranking really does help sort out the grade inflation and rigor problem</p>
<p>There were 101 of 600 kids at my school who had 4.0 for Freshman year.
Next year, we get weighted GPAs. There will only be the top 15 kids at the honors ceremony for sophomores. Kids without the tough classes will keep their 4.0s but they won't be at the top.</p>
<p>keyword: competitive.</p>
<p>gpa's don't always mean or tell too much about the student i had a really high gpa close to a 4.0 but my junior year we nt really bad due to me moving areas and coming into a school late with no transfer grades so now my chances at a competitive college are toast :(</p>
<p>imo rankings only look good if its valedictorian, salutatorian, or top 1%.</p>
<p>Not true. Somebody in the top 20% with a 3.7 shows that, while they might not have an "amazing" GPA like yours, they do well in comparison to their classmates. It's a way to sort out grade deflation/inflation.</p>