<p>^ The latter situation that you described is actually not the case in my school, as everyone takes the same number of courses per year, but it is a very blatant injustice in some systems, IMO, and it (as well as similar cases) can be further explored in this thread: <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/559068-gpa-ranking-system-fallacies.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/559068-gpa-ranking-system-fallacies.html</a>.</p>
<p>
That’s not the point at all. The point is that some classes that are labeled “AP,” like vicariousparent said, are not necessarily more rigorous. In addition, we have classes labeled “GT” (basically Honors) which are weighted the same as APs, and some of them (like Art II GT, which I took because I love art – and I didn’t even know that non-core classes were weighted at the time anyways – so don’t think that I’m saying that Art isn’t a WORTHWHILE CLASS) are by any standards less rigorous than classes like LATIN FOUR, which is the AP level course (but isn’t AP because the teacher didn’t want to do Vergil.) Holy run-on sentence Batman. </p>
<p>I dunno what I would consider fair, though. I don’t want to say, you know, “Art II GT shouldn’t be weighted and Latin should,” because as an artist myself I understand that taking an advanced Art class is just as much work, albeit work in a different vein, as an academically-demanding class. Really, my only problem with my school’s system right now is that Latin is unweighted… and I suppose Band should be, too, starting at the second or third year, ‘cause staying in Band requires dedication and lotsss of hard work. So uhhh, if I were in charge of that, that’s what I’d change (in addition to making grades percentage-based instead of 89.5%+ = 4.0.) I mean, I know, no system is perfect. I’m just sayin’ what I think would be more fair.</p>