<p>Hmmm, that sure is a lot of levels per course.</p>
<p>When I went to high school, there were generally only two levels of each academic course, regular and honors. Most of the few APs offered were just top level honors courses (e.g. calculus, senior English, level 4 foreign language; calculus was then only offered as AP BC). The same high school now has a lot more APs, although most of the academic courses follow the same pattern of just having regular and honors, with AP being the top level honors course.</p>
<p>In any weighted GPA based ranking system, there is a penalty for taking an extra elective that is a non-weighted course, even if that makes the schedule more rigorous than the same schedule with an empty period instead of the non-weighted course. Seems that extra visual or performing arts (including band or orchestra) courses not being weighted is a common complaint on these forums.</p>
<p>I have read of competitive public high schools with lots of Asians taking lots of AP classes moving from weighted to unweighted GPAs, which has a disparate impact on Asians, whether intended or inadvertent. It is impossible to say a priori that an A in an AP class is worth 5.0, 4.5, or 4.0. One could determine the proper size of the AP “bump” by finding what size of AP bump in GPA calculations results in class ranks that best predict college grades or best correlate with SAT or ACT scores.</p>
<p>^^This is what happens in some of our competitive schools. Take one extra lower weight class that appeals to you and a perfect A student can drop about 1% in ranks for no reason.</p>
<p>They count every class taken in high school.</p>
<p>The variations in calculations of rank are dizzying. At our HS class rank and GPA are calculated differently with the ranking calculation using weight for AP’s, DC and pAP’s. It is possible for a student with a lower GPA to have higher class rank. Furthermore the specific weight given to different types of classes has changed several times over the last few years. The district has not changed the rules within a given class and the changes have instead only applied to incoming freshmen resulting in different weighting for students depending on their year. The one change they did make after the fact was to count HS classes taken in middle school in the GPA when previously they had just been listed. It does seem to be an incredibly unstandardized methodology for something that has such profound effects on students. It is definitely not a perfect system but it is what it is. As long as you know the rules and make informed choices you deal with the outcome.</p>
<p>The tuition increase is not surprising. The cumulative inflation of the CPI (for a market basket of goods & services) from 1984 to 2013 is 124%. Back in '84 we were also paying $1.30/gal for gasoline.</p>
<p>UT Austin tuition has gone up 100 times what it was in 1984!>></p>
<p>It was $4/hour back then. I graduated in 1985 and it went up right after that; my husband had the higher rate for his last semester (fall '85). I think it was $12/hour.</p>
<p>Ucbalumnus, I simplified it. It’s actually pretty complicated. They weight ranking, but the actual gpa they always report is UNweighted. So you can easily have a 4.0, and not be in,the top 10%. All you have to do is take regular and some advanced. To be competitive, you have to take the most rigorous coursework wherever available and make good grades. Because of the multiple levels and the requirements in coursework, there’s room for electives. The salutatorian carried 4 electives her senior year. She was active in music and athletics all through high school.</p>
<p>“I’m curious about the racial mix of the top% kids at the more academically competitive/higher SES schools.”</p>
<p>If there’s a racially diverse, academically competitive/high SES school in America where black, Hispanic, and native American students are proportionately represented in the top 10% of the class in most years, then I’ve never heard of it. I doubt that it exists. That’s why they call them under-represented minorities. This is also why affirmative action is still a live topic of debate. It’s not about historical racism – it’s about stuff the URM kids have to deal with now, today, that weighs on them regardless of SES.</p>
<p>Of course there is an element, among some strong proponents, of righting historical wrongs. I don’t know how we separate those folks from others whose views start from more recent inequities. But, there are flaws in all sides. </p>
<p>It’s hard to call something “fair” when our personal perspective focuses on “merit” as one constrained hierarchical, measurable channel. As in: best stats, most rigor, highest rank, even captain of the football team. (That’s a narrow definition, just one way to look at things.) And then project merit forward along the same hierarchical lines: who gets the best college gpas. Who is at the tip of the funnel that graduates. Who goes on to earn more. </p>
<p>To me, the point in AA isn’t to magically/noblesse oblige pick a few kids, take them off one train and put them on another that is meant to guarantee a better life. Then sit there baffled if their gpas don’t match up. The point is to offer opportunities, assuming even the minimum- ie, exposure- offers influences that roll out and can flow deeply into communities and next generations. (I’m stopping at that, for the moment.)</p>
<p>Oh, dear. Again with the “some are born smarter and deserve more.” Doesn’t even that ever strike you as arbitrary? Doesn’t IQ need, usually, something to foster it’s manifestation? And, aren’t the stats you cling to just one scheme for determining who will have impact? </p>
<p>And, wouldn’t your argument have convinced us masses by now, if it were that strong? Maybe you need another angle on it.</p>
<p>"Quote:
Also, there is such an academic difference between Abigail Fisher and the middle of the pack at St Marks that they could be on different planets.</p>
<p>True. Probably even true for the lower percentage of any St. Marks class. "</p>
<p>It is entirely possible she could not even get accepted into St Marks or any such selective high school. Some of those schools are way more selective than the vast majority of college. Those kids already go through a screening to get accepted. So it makes sens that a class there is going to be highly qualified. Trying th rank those kids, many times is a foolish endeavor. Might as well draw straws.</p>