<p>Discuss...</p>
<p>Everyone in the world seems to make completely different assumptions about the implications of being a junior transfer or a sophomore transfer, so any ideas?</p>
<p>I think that the subject is a little tricky. This is just my opinion, but I think that most people see the first college year (or at least semester) as a learning experience, and colleges know that. They are eager to get out an experience life, but once they settle in a realize that it takes work, then they will either do better or party until the school kicks them out. </p>
<p>If I were an adcom, I would expect a higher GPA from junior transfers because that might let them know how serious a student is about his or her academics.</p>
<p>...On the other hand, classes might be harder sophomore year....See - it's tricky!</p>
<p>But you have to factor in that a Junior transfer will have completed alot more classes than A Sophmore transfer. I would think they would look easier upon someone who is more proven, with more classes under his/her belt, than a sophmore transfer.</p>
<p>exactly, which is why sophomore transfers' high school transcripts and SAT scores are considered. after one year, you haven't really taken enough classes to establish yourself as a consistently well-performing student, while junior transfers have.</p>
<p>Not worth comparing, better to look at each individual person's case - just do your best.</p>
<p>Well just out of curiosity, let's say you were an adcom looking at two people, one a sophomore and one a junior. They both have GPA of 3.55. All other parts of their applications are equal, and they were looking to transfer to a slightly tougher school. The junior had 3.35 GPA freshman year (with an excuse of sickness for one semester) and 3.8 GPA sophomore year. Do you think one of these candidates would have an advantage based on GPA/classroom performance?</p>
<p>Transfer admissions is simply not as automated as freshmen; there are much fewer applicants and they can thus be judged on a case-by-case basis. Every applicant at Georgetown, for instance, is 'committeed'.</p>
<p>What do you mean by 'committed'? Commited to attend the school if accepted?</p>
<p>I believe he ment committeed from the word committee. However, I believe such word does not exist.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I believe he ment committeed from the word committee. However, I believe such word does not exist.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That is correct, which is why I enclosed it in quotes;)</p>
<p>bump......</p>
<p>Case-by-case. For sure. Sophmore you must have an excellent HS record though. When Jr's dont count as highly</p>
<p>I have a question: I am applying as a junior, and all my schools require that I declare my major on my application (History and either Spanish or Religion). </p>
<p>The thing is, I have taken 5 social science/ language courses before this semester, and received all A/A+s in them. I am taking 5 social science/ language courses right now, and in my midterm report that I had to send to the colleges, I am receiving As in them. </p>
<p>However, my school encourages us to fulfill their general education curriculum as freshman, so I took classes such as mathematics, biology, physics (definitely not my strong point, but these were also very rigorous courses), and received Bs. So my freshman year GPA is like a 3.65. However, since I began loading up on humanities/history/writing intensive courses, my sophomore GPA is a 4.0. Do you think that the colleges would more or less overlook the Bs in the science courses when they evaluate a junior history major applicant? I only took them because I wasn't sure what I wanted to major in coming in and wanted to fulfill the college's honor program thing.</p>