MODERATOR’S NOTE:
The OP asked to be chanced, so this is not the thread to school a respondent about what holistic means, nor is it the thread to ask if a B is “bad.” That’s called hijacking, and in addition to violating the forum rules, is rude to the OP. The responses should focus on the original question and/or defending your response once; after that, it’s just debate. Several posts deleted.
For the OP: note than anyone can respond to your inquiry. As a result, you may get responses from users who have been here for years and have gone through the process themselves or with their kids. You will also get opinions from HS students who have never been through the process at all. You, as the questioner, needs to parse through and decide whose advise to trust and whose to ignore. Good luck.
I can’t tell how many AP classes OP took, but it sounds like some were honors rather than AP. Sp with that and the GPA, I would not bother with Ivies. OP doesn’t show AP or PSAT scores and doesn’t have SAT / SAT II scores. So hard to evaluate whether this is top 50 or top 150.
I’ll add in some scores, since multiple people asked for them.
PSAT score: 1480
SAT scores: 1520 first try, expected 1550+ second try
SAT II will be taken later this summer (August 26th)
ACT score: 35
AP Scores: APUSH (3), AP Computer Science (5), AP Biology (4/5), AP Calculus BC (5), AP Lang (4/5), AP Microeconomics (5)
***All scores, except the first two, are expected. The 3 in APUSH doesn’t worry me since it’s not anywhere close to a field of study.
I also don’t know if the fact that I got some bad teachers means anything. At my school, getting a bad teacher is nearly certain to lower your GPA. Luck plays a huge role.
I also am not sure if an A in a higher level course will make up for the B in the lower level course. It would either demonstrate that I was unlucky or the fact that I had upward growth, in my limited opinion. I should also note that my school doesn’t do pluses or minuses. I would have gotten multiple B pluses as opposed to straight up Bs if that was the case. Again, don’t know if that has an impact on the evaluation of my GPA.
IMO, my GPA is the only bad part of my application. @lookingforward The reason that I wanted to add those parts into my application is because I think they demonstrate that I’m an active part of my community. The LoR from my mentor is because she knows me and can add substantial insight into my character that my teachers don’t have access to. I’m thinking of majoring in Economics, and I got a very safe A in AP Micro, along with a recommendation from my Econ teacher. I also majorly dislike the fact that I got a third B in Junior year, because my teacher absolutely acted unfairly and it would have been a major risk to talk to administration as something that I saw as unfair but perhaps the adults didn’t see in that way.
Working with children is no tip for econ studies at a top 20. Whether the public service helps depends on more than titles or the founding.
You don’t need a mentor to note your character. Its not about simeine “saying” a good person. Rather, drives you show (not just tell,) challenges, responsibility. And the level of thinking.
So that’s why I’m suggesting you revisit your assumptions about what it takes, whether you match. And the volume of B grades will be noticed. There is no making an excuse about bad teachers, bad luck. It’s not the maturity they expect. Not relevant.
Yes, the APUSH 3 will be noticed. It does bear relation to econ studies. Math can, too, and sometimes foreign lang.
Sticking with the OP’s original question, your chances are low with a 3.6 GPA. Thing is…your chances are low with a 4.0 GPA. Sure, people get in, and it’s not a lottery per se. Each school has admission objectives, but they won’t let YOU know what they are. If you align by sheer happenstance, you get in. If not, you don’t. There are simply far, FAR too many students applying to too few slots.
What I would counsel you to do, is to dig deeper into what “top 20” even means. Most simply take rankings as gospel, without digging into the methodology to determine if it jives with their personal objectives. Rankings can and have been rigged, in many ways. I would suggest you use them as but a tiny piece of data, if at all in vetting your schools. Once you dig into the methodologies, you’ll quickly find that very few of them speak to the undergraduate experience (class size, who teaches, graduation rate, job placement, etc.).
Sorry, meant MY advice is the same. My kid with a 3.7, nearly perfect test scores, and some unusual EC accomplishments did get into a couple of top schools. But I don’t see enough interesting in your app to overcome a 3.6. Sure, apply to a couple. But find a range of schools you’d be willing to attend. My kid actually didn’t pick the highest ranked couple of schools she got into. Rank isn’t everything.
@intparent My full resume wasn’t included here. I think I have some unusual and interesting ECs as well as a couple things in the works that, if they go through, would add a lot of weight to my application, according to things I have seen here on CC when it comes to ECs.
@lookingforward Sorry, I should have added more detail. The classes and clubs that I started were known as the STEM Clubs. I started one in each of my two libraries, and they were called as such because I was teaching elementary and middle school kids different aspects of STEM. I apologize for not including all the details. As for the LoR, I have many things on my resume that were connected with my mentor, so I decided to ask her for a recommendation. Many things on my resume that were connected with her come across as difficult, challenging or unusual, and so I think it adds weight to my application.
Bottom line is the same for you as it is for anyone. You must honestly asses your academic stats - including GPA, standardized tests (actual scores, not scores you hope to get), and course rigor as well as your financial needs and apply to a wide range of reach, match, and safety schools that appear affordable (you will have to run a net price calculator for each school you consider) and that you would be excited to attend.
Certainly with a 3.6 GPA the very top schools must be considered to be reaches. You will be competing against some people who have perfect grades, perfect standardized tests, and who have accomplished a lot in terms of ECs and you are looking at schools that don’t have enough room for all of the well qualified applicants. I would think your have a better shot at some still excellent schools a bit further down such as NYU. It is perfectly fine to put in applications to a group of top schools and give them your all.
As a bit of unsolicited advice – It is easy to focus on the very top schools, but IMO a hugely important and often overlooked part of this process is to find those low match/safety schools that appear to be affordable and that you truly would be happy to attend. Spend time seeking out these schools. At the end of the process you want a group of acceptances that are realistic financially and that you are happy about.
@happy1 said “Certainly with a 3.6 GPA the very top schools must be considered to be reaches.”
I think it’s fair to say that any school with an acceptance rate less than 10% should be seen as a “reach” no matter what an applicant’s stats look like. When we visited Brown (son did not apply), the director of admissions told us they’d received 35,000 applicants the prior year (2013) for a little over 2000 slots. Of those, she said 29,000 were fully qualified to matriculate.
OP, a lot of kids are involved with local stem clubs for younger kids. It’s not the same level of challenge and peer collaboration as, say, state level math olympiad. Plus, you still haven’t salid what you’re involved with at your hs besides a sport.
Adcoms will see you have 9 B grades out of 18 courses (unweighted, that could be a 3.5.) Even one or two B is risky, unless, eg, that’s in gym. Not cores. All you’ll show by an early deadline or December is one more semester, if that. Holistic doesn’t mean they overlook a weakness. It means every aspect matters.
I’m not trying to be harsh but you need to think this through carefully, rationally, and with the target colleges’ wants in mind. You need to dig into what these colleges say and show. Show that levle of energy and thinking. And find safeties and matches, as we are all saying.
Princeton, eg, shows a 2.9% admit rate for GPA 3.6-3.69. A chunk of those are likely recruited athletes.
@lookingforward said “Holistic doesn’t mean they overlook a weakness. It means every aspect matters.”
I respectfully disagree. If that was the case, no elite school would admit a student with less than a 4.0. They all have plenty of applicants with perfect grades to fill their class MANY times over. Anything less than that is certainly a weakness. Harvard admitted students last year with GPAs below 3.25. They offer no athletic scholarships. Nor does Princeton for that matter. All Ivy League institutions are forbidden.
Princeton admitted students with GPAs below 2.5 last year!
Holistic means they can indeed overlook weaknesses if something they care about is more compelling.
Does the OP have that? It doesn’t appear so. Since we don’t SPECIFICALLY KNOW what “that” is for ANY school, we can’t say for certain.
Not my experience.
I think you’re oversimplifying. Lower grades are a serious concern because they can mean the kid can’t hit the ground running, for the four years, won’t be as competitively prepped as peers, etc. Sometimes, it means the kid doesn’t have the study skills or writing abilities, gets distracted, etc.
And not offering athletic scholarships is not saying there is no athlete hook.
Look, I think an 89.3 is darned good. But I know first hand how ridiculous the competition is. I’ve seen adcoms report, “Has a B.” Here, we’re talking half the grades are B, including 3 in junior year.
What will help this OP is a dose of practical realism. FInd safeties andmatches and only later pick two uber reaches to throw a chance at. And learn what it is that those most-competitive colleges expect, so you can both properly self assess and know what to present in your app/supps, how to do that well.
The best my kiddos did with 3.6uwGPA/4.6wGPA (class rank <15%), with lower standardized test scores, some state level EC awards, multiple ECs and varsity sport captainships was #42. Most of the schools that accepted them were in the #60-#100 range. You might hit the “lottery” with a school or two just below #20, but most likely will find the most success in the #25ish-#75ish range. I’d say you might have a shot a Rice or UofChicago if you fit their mold and depending on how compelling your essays are and the relative value of your ECs. Sorry if that isn’t what you wanted to hear. Good luck!
Perhaps ask yourself why you really are narrowly focused on top #20 and below schools; are they really that much better than schools ranked #20-#50?
I am not oversimplifying. I am responding to your statement that “holistic doesn’t mean they overlook weakness”. Holistic specifically means they CAN overlook weakness. It doesn’t mean that’s the norm. Using Princeton for example, they admitted roughly 86% of their class with GPAs 3.75 or above. They admitted 14% with GPAs below that, and some with GPAs below 3.0. They CLEARLY overlook weakness. We have no idea why, but can conjecture that the ones admitted with less than perfect GPAs had something compelling to offset that, be they athletes, legacies, URMs with compelling stories, celebrities, no one knows but Princeton. Am I advocating everyone has a chance with a GPA below 3.75? Of course not. I am saying that the fact that they had 30,000 applicants, 99% of which who were in the top quarter of their class, and admitted 1200, means it’s a long shot for anyone.
OP: You are asking for chances of admission to “Top 20 schools, Ivies, MIT, NYU, etc.” without giving enough detail. Why school X ?
A 3.6 GPA does not automatically exclude one from being admitted to a top 20 college or university, but it wont get one admitted either. You need more–even with a 4.0 Unweighted GPA-- to get into the most selective colleges & universities.
In short, not enough information. Garbage in, garbage out.
Know what? There’s a huge difference between having your gpa pulled down because you weren’t good at gym or foreign langs, but everything else is an A, you’re advanced in stem beyond the usual hs offerings and had rigor and A’s in other cores. There are kids like that. I said it matters what OP got less than A in and don’t think there’s an answer.
As publisher just said, OP is giving info in dribs.
When you’ve got 25-40,000 apps and very few seats, you move through quickly, eliminating. Yes, they’ll read the whole app. But yes, they’ll be concerned by academic weakness in the record. And this idea OP has an MIT or Ivy tip from working with kids won’t outweigh that. Lots of high schoolers work with younger kids on stem, debate, tutoring, whatever, plus other relevant ECs, and have strong academic records. We have no indication OP worked with peers in hs activities, except a sport.
Ime, a kid with half B’s would need a lot more than a “compelling story,” legacy, a big donor parent, etc. More than being an actor or Olympic athlete, unless recruited. And yes, the 3 in APUSH adds to it.
NYU is the easier of all of these, but if OP needs fin aid, not a reliably generous school.
Now, lets try to wait for OP to give more info.
It isn’t that bad an application.I would apply to top 30 / top 50 schools as reaches. Bs in honors classes when there are AP classes isn’t good though.