For those who use admissions predictions sites, when you enter unweighted GPA, do you base it on core academic courses only or do you enter the overall unweighted GPA? The sites provide no guidance, but base estimates and scattergrams on user inputs. So I’m wondering what users do in practice, especially those of you who have found the sites accurate. Thanks a lot.
And therein lies the problem. I don’t know parchment too well, but my D used college data a lot and just put in her UW gpa as listed on her grade report, including all classes. As far as I am aware, there are no instructions for what GPA you use. These sites can only give you a general ball park idea and are best used as a guidance tool.
As to accuracy, anyone who can say the sites were 100% in predicting admissions is a rare exception, no doubt. My kid applied to quite a few very selective colleges and college data would give her equal chances at schools with quite different acceptance rates. I would say as a guideline it was very useful, but no more than that. It’s also very important to understand that so many factors can effect admission chances, such as ED acceptance rate, URM, extenuating circumstances, and a myriad of other possibilities.
Put in the info as accurately as you can. I don’t think these websites expect students to recalculate their GPA with just core classes. No doubt there are plenty of students who do though, or kids who are not fully honest with themselves, even anonymously. Also, it is hard to know how frequently college data updates CDS info from various colleges. Don’t expect total accuracy and you won’t be disappointed.
Thanks a lot, @Lindagaf. I always appreciate your thoughtful posts. It sounds as if the algorithm they use is suspect whether or not inputs are systematized, since they are spitting out identical odds for schools with different admissions standards. On the other hand, I think they base predictions on actual outcomes of previous users of the sites, which isn’t a bad way to go. Thanks again.
Parchment is a parlour game. People can lie, put in estimates instead of real info, and there is nothing scientific about the sample of who enters their data. If your school has Naviance, that is a better source.
That’s an excellent point, @intparent. But I do feel at least somewhat trusting of the kids who say they were accepted or rejected, and the stats they report.
I don’t think you can count on it being accurate or representative. We found it to be pretty inaccurate on my D2’s chances (it wasn’t around for D1). D2 got in everyplace she applied, and Parchment seriously understated her chances at several schools (gave her a less than 10% change at 2 schools she got into). Part of the problem is “holistic admissions” does mean something, and Parchment is just stats tool. It can’t judge recommendation quality, essay quality, or EC quality.
Thanks, @intparent . Glad to hear about your experience (and congrats to D2).
My D did update all her outcomes on college data, but it is interesting to see that the vast majority of dots on the scattergram are still blue, meaning the student only entered info saying that he applied, but never bothered to update. For my D, who applied to mostly very small colleges, some not well known, I am not sure how accurate the data was because far more students did not update than did. She applied to a couple of colleges that recieve many thousands of apps, and it seems that the more popular the college, the better it is to get a more accurate idea because more people will update their info. In general though, college data was, again, generally accurate-ish.
Naviance is of course a great tool, but at our school, hardly any of the colleges my D applied to provided accurate scattergrams. For privacy reasons, her school will not publish data if too few students applied. So Naviance was useless for her.