Such people who talk are misinformed if they use terms like “required.”
Third party websites are not always accurate. Each college’s Common Data Set is a better source. But comparing multiple CDS is comparing and since it rarely states which GPA is used.
Also, colleges do not all report HS GPA the same way. Some recalculate, and they may recalculate in different ways, while others may take HS GPA at face value from high schools, and high schools calculate differently as well.
Unless you know exactly how the school calculates GPA, the information out there is useless, even GPA data on CDSs. Relatively few schools report GPA on CDSs anyway.
There is no standard guidance as to how to calculate average GPAs on CDSs, further some institutional reporting depts (generally responsible for CDS completion) calculate avg GPA in a different way than the GPA that is used when making admission decisions.
The values seem to match those listed at http://commondatasets.com/ . This site says GPAs are for students who matriculated in 2019 (2019 CDS), not the admit class of 2022. More importantly, the listed GPAs use different recalculation systems. For example some give 4.3/4.33 for A+. Others do not. Some give extra points for AP/IB. Others do not. Some recalculate unweighted GPAs on a 5.0 scale to 4.0. Others do not. The end result is the specific numbers have little meaning. For example, Chicago has the highest listed GPA of 4.48, ,but that does not mean that Chicago expects a higher GPA than other schools. Instead they likely have a different recalculation system. The list certainly does not reflect GPAs “required to be admitted.”
Agreed: the word ‘required’ is problematic. Maybe ‘typical for admitted students’?
Some of the Collegekids went to secondary schools where it was simply impossible to have a GPA over 4.0, b/c there was no weighting option. One of those schools hadn’t graduated a 4.0 student in memory (definitely not within the previous 5 admission cycles, per the Naviance table & the GC). But students from their schools attended the full range of the schools on that list.
This GPA Reference list clearly illustrates several points:
GPAs reported by each school represent a rough zip code guidance for the grades they look for, which seems to be over 3.9 for the majority
Because everyone (High schools, International Students, IB Students, College Admission) computes GPAs differently, it is only meant as a rough zip code
zip code is rough guidance, not an absolute law
Hope this remains a useful guidance for applicants/families
It looks like the majority are >4.0, which can present more questions than answers for the many students who attend HSs for which the maximum UW GPA is 4.0. For example, are they using a weighted GPA rather than unweighted? If so, what is the weighting? Are they counting 100%/A+ as more than 4.0? Does a particular student’s UW 3.8x out of 4.0 correspond to the listed 4.1 average GPA?
More meaningful might be to look at Naviance for your HS, and see what types of GPAs are common among admitted and rejected students from your HS.
I agree - Naviance scatterplot grams is a good tool to compare yourself to rest of the peers from your school and who got in to which schools since that is how AOs compare students.
Naviance works for US applicants, but doesn’t for overseas/international students not attending US schools
Generally the zip code means that the majority of the students applying to these schools have a 3.9+ GPA zip code. overthinking the difference between 3.95 and 4.17 adds little value
I just hope parents aren’t pressuring their kids from looking at this list and saying they need to get perfect grades. Most of these admission offices are holistic.
that’s more of a cultural issue, coming from a town where there are parents asking their kids to score SAT 1560+ to be certain that’s not an issue. Then again, the Harvard lawsuit identified a SAT gap of 120+ between Asian and Caucasian admits, and another 120+ between Caucasian and African Americans.
And assuming a 3.9+ GPA zip code (in spite of most on the list being >4.0) is appropriate for overseas/international students? If you are from a location with a very different system from typical US grading, that is all the more reason to consider the typical grades of students that are accepted and rejected from your school/location, rather than a assume a list like the one from the original post will be meaningful. If Naviance is not available, then there are often similar types of information from other sources.
most overseas students use a conversion formula to go from their grading system to a 4.0 scale. that applies to the vast majority of overseas students, and allows them to compare with a 3.9+ indicative zip code. no point splitting hairs
Many countries use a very different grading system with very different rates of grade inflation and have very different typical GPA ranges of accepted students. Assuming a 3.9 zip code is not appropriate. For example, it’s my understand the UK uses 3 grading systems – one with a highest grade of 9, one with a highest grade of A* (not A), and one with a percentage out of 100. I’ve seen >=70% correspond to an USA 4.0.
So if a UK student has a 70% average that converts to 4.0, does that mean their grades are probably good enough to meet Harvard’s expectations? I have no idea, but I’d suggest that student looks at typical grades of students from their school/location who are accepted/rejected to Harvard or similar US colleges and/or consults a GC with access to this type of knowledge, rather than rely on the guidelines in the first post.
Are these numbers just guesses? The lawsuit found Asian admits had an average SAT 22 points higher per section that White admits. This total includes all admits – both hooked and unhooked. White students have a much higher rate of hooks than Asian students, such as a higher rate of being varsity athletes. If you only compare unhooked Asian admit to unhooked White admit, then the SAT gap drops.
and 
since it rarely states which GPA is used.