<p>This question came to mind when I was looking at my boarding schools recent matriculation statistics. Only about 10-11% of the graduating class had GPA's above 3.7, but nearly 30-40% enrolled into top schools (T30 NU and T15 LAC according to USNWR, not 100% reliable but it gives a general idea). This isn't to say that the other 40% didn't have GPA's very close to 3.7, but typically when applying to some of the most competitive universities in the nation, the college admissions officers would expect from a student in a relatively unknown public school to have a 4.0, 2250+ SAT scores, as well as incredible EC's and AP littered schedules. Would this suggest that colleges understand/consider students less-than-perfect grades at top schools?</p>
<p>Would this suggest that colleges understand/consider students less-than-perfect grades at top schools?
yes, there’s a thread for that somewhere. search bs standing with colleges</p>
<p>when you apply to college, your school sends a letter called the school profile to the colleges explaining things such as rigor of grading, how many classes kids take at once, the amount of APs available, etc. prep schools explain that their grading is very tough- hence the ability for a higher percentage of people to enroll in top schools than the GPAs would otherwise suggest</p>
<p>@rad</p>
<p>I wasn’t able to find the thread, could you post the url link?</p>
<p>Thanks for the input peab.</p>
<p>agreed. They take into account the rigor of your school and of your classes. They understand that a B+ is the same as an A or A+ at the local school down the road. Needless to say, that doesn’t mean that you can just get B+'s and expect to go to Harvard…</p>
<p>The school profile is one point-of-reference. Another important reference is the Adcom person in charge of the geography in which your school resides. If your school has had a number of applications to a specific college, the Adcom in charge of your geography has some familiarity with the rigor of your school. In general, college applications are read by the Adcom in charge of your geography, and usually there is at least one more person reading the application. So be nice to the Adcom who visits your school! By the way, if you go to school in MA, colleges will read you as a MA applicant, not your home state.</p>
<p>If your school subscribes to Naviance aka Family Connection, you can ask for an ID and get some good information on how specific gpa/SAT combos from your school fare.</p>
<p>Burb Parent</p>
<p>Do you know by any chance how I might be able to come across a Naviance ID? Just wondering…</p>
<p>Your school has to subscribe to Naviance. IDs are usually given to Juniors around January. Ask someone in college advising if you can have an ID. If they do not want to give you an ID now, ask a Junior or Senior if you can review the college scattergrams using his/her computer. The Naviance data is specific to your school, so reviewing info from other schools is not that helpful.</p>
<p>If you are wondering about your gpa and classes, you should also be able to make an appointment with someone in college advising to discuss your concerns.</p>
<p>Rigor of the school is taken into account. Also, colleges have some idea of the success of prior applicants. </p>
<p>In the converse, my daughter attends public school and is applying to boarding schools. Her Latin teacher, for instance, not only wrote a letter of recommendation, but explained the teaching method, the text books used and the NAL she was meeting.</p>
<p>A student from a less rigorous school who has lots of A’s may not be as academically prepared as one from an extremely rigorous school with a lot of B’s.</p>
<p>But again - grades are only one component of a student. Some students are very bright but stuck in less desirable schools so aptitude, drive, ability, etc. weigh into it.</p>
<p>Which is why I get concerned on these boards that students get fixated on “grades”, “scores” “ecs” trying to give themselves an edge. The criteria for what admissions is looking for changes from year to year depending on what students are in that specific pile.</p>
<p>Don’t sweat it. Just do your best.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>…which is one of the reasons tests like the SAT and the SSAT are still in use.</p>
<p>But only as a preliminary tool. After that, we look at your total package. Some of the brightest kids suffer from test anxiety. Sometimes SAT and SSAT test “test taking” skills.</p>
<p>And even when my own daughter was going through prep school interviews, my “parent interviews” with admissions officers confirmed what I know from the college process. That a significant number of kids who look good on paper have spent years prepping and skew the tests. Which is why you see schools reporting averages instead of ranges. Because someone will cry fowl if a kid with 99% scores gets rejected while someone else with a 75% gets accepted.</p>
<p>Scores - for schools - are brag points. But ultimately, it’s about the kid behind the scores and what mix of student the school is trying to fill that specific year. Doesn’t mean the lower testing kids that get in are not as good, just as it doesn’t mean the higher testing kids would have been a fit if the slot were available. Applications are very complex beings which is why some schools reject applicants their equally rigorous competitors accept readily. </p>
<p>Hence I highly recommend personal interviews for BS and for college.</p>
<p>I agree with you Exie. Perhaps you could clarify something for me. Would it be safe to assume that in college admissions SAT scores vary with importance from candidate to candidate. Obviously, a student couldn’t get a B average at Andover without being extremely capable and a low-ish SAT would point to test anxiety. But on the other hand, a public school kid with a 98 average and barely 500 on each section of the SAT would look much worse, eh? I give this example because it’s not that far-fetched in our public school. The grade inflation and lack of rigor is really that bad. Wouldn’t the SAT be more important for a kid coming from a completely unknown po-dunk high than from a known quanitity? I mean, at the top schools, they really need to make sure that a students is prepared to handle the courseload.</p>
<p>I had always heard that the interview wasn’t so important for college. Is this false?</p>
<p>Neato, I hope exieMITAlum answers your question.</p>
<p>In my opinion, the interview is very important for the most competitive colleges, particularly if you have a high SAT score. Why? Well, nowadays, for the Ivies and such, the lowest 25% of the class may well have SAT math and reading in the 700s. Many rejected students will score in the 700s. A high SAT score might grant you entrance of the pool of applicants who are smart enough on paper to handle the academic load. How does the college distinguish between applicants? Recommendations help, but again, many applicants have high test scores and glowing recommendations. The interview is important. It may not get you in, but it can keep you out. There are many very bright people in the world who would be terrible roommates, or wouldn’t contribute to the college experience. If you don’t schedule an interview, it looks as if you a) don’t really want to go to that college, or b) someone feels that you “don’t interview well.”</p>
<p>When you get around to college admissions time, look for the common data set <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/76444-links-common-data-sets-posted-colleges.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/76444-links-common-data-sets-posted-colleges.html</a> of the colleges that interest your child. Some give importance to interviews and some don’t. Some very competitive colleges don’t offer interviews; others state that interviews are “highly recommended” or something to that effect. If the interview is optional and your child interviews well (many boarding school kids do because they are used to being around adults), then it’s a good idea to go for the interview. Interviews can also fall under 'demonstrated interest."</p>
<p>Not sure if I am still on topic 
- For the most selective colleges with an admit rate below 10%, high GPA and high SAT’s are a given (doesn’t matter what pool you are from) unless you are URM or recruited athelete, in which case the bar is slightly lower. It’s just that there are so many applicants with stella stats that the stats mean “nothing”. It’s the hooks - major awards, legacy status, great EC’s etc. that get you in the door.</p>
<p>Benley and Periwinkle,</p>
<p>What you have both written sounds a lot like the way prep school admissions seem to work. No wonder the top schools have such high Ivy admit rates - their students have already been vetted and tested.</p>
<p>And…some highly competitive colleges only interview at the good boarding schools 
One of my kids had two interviews with regional readers at schools that don’t offer interviews to the general population. Not very democratic, but it worked for us ;-)</p>
<p>Neato - depends on the college, but in general, interviews help clarify a lot.</p>
<p>If you can’t get to campus, or find an alumni interviewer locally for instance, some schools will waive the interview. But the percentage of students admitted with interviews seems statistically higher than those who don’t get them at my college. I think that extra “data point” really enhances an application. Don’t know if that is universal.</p>
<p>My husband is on the admissions committee for a different college and you can’t be considered without an on-campus interview on campus. There, you’ll find no “graces” for URM’s, public schools, athletes, etc. You either score high, or you don’t get an interview. Mostly because they are flooded with apps and have to cut somewhere because the interviews are mandatory and there’s only so many hours in the day.</p>
<p>But yes - the importance of SAT (or ACT) scores do vary by student which is why most colleges don’t use them as a single determinant and some are moving away from them altogether.</p>
<p>A student with straight B’s at Andover is likely not a slacker - though lack of any A’s in core courses may be a red flag. If that student has low SAT scores it may very well be test anxiety. If it is - it should be explained in the recommendations (if the teachers are doing their jobs). </p>
<p>However, if a student has A’s from a public school (rigorous or not), and has lower SSATs, AO’s would look at other factors to determine if they are capable of doing the work and would examine what type of rigor is presented at that particular school. Kids from our local college prep, for instance, may be more prepped for a competitive college than from other area high schools because of IB and AP exposure, advanced foreign language instruction and extremely competitive teams (debate, NAL, etc.) </p>
<p>If a kid from Andover has B’s, a less than ideal SAT and no extracurriculars, they may be beat out by a kid from public school with A’s, a less than ideal SAT and substantial extracurriculars. People forget that MIT, for instance, has creative people as well as science nerds so nontraditional EC’s can stand out.</p>
<p>It just depends - on the mix of students in any given year. AO’s are doing a delicate balancing act. </p>
<p>So how low is low? Neither student is going to get considered at 1500. In most cases admissions officers might look at ranges within a few hundred points, but below 1800 is going to be a flag for that school without a lot of other factors to explain why the score is an anomaly. But EVERY admitted kid is within a reasonable range in terms of scores.</p>
<p>And remember, colleges have hundreds or thousands of courses that allow bright students to quickly get up to speed if they need a boost. At MIT I took a course affectionately nicknamed: “Physics for Poets” (taught by a professor who was science advisor for NOVA) instead of “Physics for normal people” or “Physics for Masochists” (people planning to major in Physics) and suddenly Physics made sense. Despite going to Exeter and despite scoring well on SAT’s, high school physics was still an enigma whereas my brain totally wrapped around chemisty. So I wasn’t a “perfect” student, but I was a good one.</p>
<p>So the school, if it is doing its job - looks at the whole person not the score. But the score still counts.</p>
<p>The lesson - be the best you can be and the universe will put you where you need to be to fulfill your destiny (even if you don’t agree with the plan) :-)</p>
<p>Ha, I love MIT ^<em>^ but it’s just not for me T</em>T (that rhymed!)
yeah… just thought I’d put that out there… >.></p>
<p>:-) :-)</p>
<p>(to make up some of the ten characters required)</p>