<p>Okay, I'm still confused about this. So if say you are an outstanding academic student, meaning high GPA, top 1% of your class, good test scores, then is it to your benefit or detriment to have come from a competitive high school? because I feel like it could go both ways.
if say you are from a highly ranked high school, then your GPA will be more impressive since the students are generally more competitive. but then your test scores might not be as impressive, since there may be many students that get awesome SAT/ACT test scores.
meanwhile, if you come from a noncompetitive high school, then won't your GPA and good test scores stand out from the crowd even though your high school is not that prestigious?</p>
<p>Being Valedictorian at Andover, for example, is an and of itself a great accomplishment. Being Valedictorian at Nowhere HS is not a great accomplishment, but it can be compensated for with excellent ECs and standardized test scores. Many kids dont have the opportunity to attend a competitive HS and colleges realize that.</p>
<p>Colleges are also more willing to look below the top 1% at more competitive schools. For instance, if 20% of your graduating class goes to Ivies, then you don't need to be in the top 10% in order to go.</p>
<p>in response to ses' comments, I don't think that is necessarily true. The colleges definitely do take into account whether you go to a more competitive school or a non-competitive school. But often times, getting a high ranking at a non-competitive school shows that you have the initiative to get stuff done, even though you have less opportunities, less college/SAT prep, and less individualized attention. It doesn't mean that the colleges look at class rankings differently between schools, with competitive schools having more of an edge. At a private competitive school, where nearly everyone has 4.6 GPA's and 2300 SATs, it is not nearly as impressive as if you went to a public noncompetitive school. Ranking, on the other hand, is the one thing colleges can use to level the playing field. I believe it would make more sense if they treated rankings between schools the same; a top 10% in a non-competitive school should be just as good as a top 10% in a competitive school (but truly, who knows, the college admissions process doesn't make much sense anyway. I admit, I am a bit biased, going to a non-competitive impersonal school)</p>
<p>This question has been raised, in different form. Do you have an advantage or disadvantage going to non-compet HS and be a standout there? </p>
<p>I will answer this way, </p>
<p>someone from: non-compet HS/great GPA (discounted)/great test scores
will need a hook to get into selective schools because adcom asks what else is there.</p>
<p>Same student but from Andover/Exeter already has a hook - the private school itself.</p>
<p>Actually, if anything being a mediocre student at Andover/Exeter could hurt you. But if you succeed there, than you've already outpaced the kid at the average public high school.</p>
<p>And most top private schools I know of/went to do not rank or weight grades. The weighted GPA is an invention of the public school system and an incentive to get kids to take harder classes.</p>
<p>What's better?</p>
<p>Barely being in the Top 10% at an ultra competitive magnet IB or Top 1% at an average school?</p>
<p>Everything being equal ie, both candidates are outgoing with EC's to prove, the ultra compet school will give you an edge, because of the familiarity factor. Ultra magnet or Ultra Private is familiar to the college - thats why they are called feeders. The college have admit many students from there and they were successful and is comfortable taking future students from those schools. Average schools by definition is not as college-driven and do not offer variety and no of AP's and honours. Student there will suffer in comparison in terms of academic rigor. Many an adcom will discount your top grade because you were not in a tough school. Sure there are exceptions like one Asian girl from Jersey admitted to Yale and MIT because she gamed the system and chose to go to a high school 30 mi away in an under performing area. I guess you could say she bet the farm and won. But that's rare.</p>
<p>Why does it matter? I doubt anyone will ever have to make a choice between attending 2 high schools so vastly different. You just do the best you can at whatever high school you happen to attend - not that complicated a task, really.</p>
<p>^^coming from a competitive school is not a hook...
though being valedictorian from the most competitive highschool in the country may be.</p>
<p>I don't think the OP asked about whether or not it was a hook, just which was better.</p>
<p>Colleges see it both ways as well. If anything, they'll believe that it is easier to be valedictorian at a noncomp. school; there is less leniency. Both have their pros and cons, but private/competitive schools often have the advantage of SAT prep and experienced teachers as well, so colleges will take that into account when evaluating possible lower scores of noncomp. school applicants.</p>