Of course, the 89/90/93 or whatever percentage thresholds for an A grade are arbitrary. Teachers could presumably adjust their test and project grading to account for whatever grading scale is mandated by the school. However, it may be that many teachers just load up 65-75% of the graded work with easy stuff for the C/D students to get correct, with relatively little more difficult work to distinguish A/B students (so then the class becomes a drive for perfection, even though college or real world work on difficult problems may not lead to perfection, at least on the first try).
Of course, a teacher who wants not to have too much easy stuff crowding out the harder stuff could do something like this: with four problem test, the easy problem is worth 65 points (D, barely passing), the easy-medium problem is worth another 10 points (C, passing), the medium-hard problem is worth another 10 points (B, good), and the very hard problem is worth another 15 points (A, excellent).
That’s our school, too. 89.45 is a B+ (S21 felt this burn in AP Chem both semesters and the last semester of Honors Math sophomore year). 89.5-92% is an A- at our school, so go figure.
The kids who are all in on academics with below average ECs take community college classes (but not all counselors are consistent in approving them so if your counselor is strict like S21 and D25, class requests can get denied at the Com College) and their A is an automatic A/5.0. Our valedictorian has 4.68 but if you strip his boat load of CC classes away, S21 4.41 is very close to the valedictorian’s 4.49. The boys are close so that’s why they know each other’s classes and scores.
Several years ago I read a loong article in the NYTimes about the college entrance exam system in China. SOOO brutal! I am grateful for the American system even with all its flaws.
Even without a brutal entrance exam, systems like the UK (and a number of its ex colonies) where your entire high school career is distilled down to a few exams at the end of your final year in high school can also be brutal. One bad exam day can have a much bigger impact than it would here.
Grade inflation is rampant at our affluent public school that sends 20-30 kids per year to elite colleges. There are no class rankings per district policy but roughly 5-10% of students have an UW 4.0 GPA. The average ACT is 28.
Students do work very hard for their grades but, in some classes, they are allowed to revise and resubmit work until they earn full credit. Class curves can be generous and unevenly applied too. My D had a solid B (86%) in a class that turned into an A on her final transcript because the teacher liked her. In another class, an 88 was an A.
Despite the grade boost, D was well-prepared for her STEM major and developed good study habits that have benefited her in college.
This thread makes me laugh a little bit – the whole value of standardized tests is to have a measure that is the same across every high school, public, private, international, home school, whatever. But we seem to be moving away from them as a society, leaving the only measure the rigor and grades of a high school curriculum, which vary so widely from school to school, as this thread demonstrates.
Exactly. The ACT/SAT is so maligned as being “unfair” as if the transcript were any more fair.
The whole movement to get rid of the ACT/SAT just puts more weight on transcripts, ECs, LORs and essays – ALL of which favor higher income kids, arguably even more than the ACT/SAT does. It takes $$ to pursue almost any EC to a “spike,” essays favor those who can afford college consultants and LORs favor kids who are comfortable interacting with adults (likely because they have parents and parents’ friends who talk to them as equals).
“…puts more weight on transcripts, ECs, LORs and essays – ALL of which favor higher income kids.”
Again, this misses the “more” an elite looks for. Much more. Affluent kids are not necessarily more intriguing. Not at all… Nothing about their higher SES status is all it takes. And all the chat on CC- and all the kid posters who emphasize their stats- are missing the rest that matters.
What? You are misunderstanding because I agree with you. I never said that stats are everything! (what?) I am saying that the ACT/SAT isn’t anymore unfair than ECs, essays, etc. I feel like I wrote very clearly…
I was just responding to the idea (so common, not just you,) that affluent kids are advantaged because they can buy support or afford depth in some ECs. Etc.
Are you saying affluent kids are not advantaged when it come to ECs or any other aspect of college apps? Have to disagree with you there. GPAs are impacted by tutors (many kids in our relatively affluent district get tutors for hard subjects like AP physics or calc.). A kid that is a successful athlete or musician is going to have lessons/programs outside of school. Even having the time to belong to ECs and take a leadership role is not possible for many poor kids.
We also not just talking about the super elite schools, but those a notch below that are still looking to admit applicants with good grades, tough curriculum, and ECs that display interest and leadership. That can sometimes be met by a poorer kid through a job, but there are not that many jobs for HS kids in poor neighborhoods.
Stats are still the thing that gets kids into most colleges.
But we are indeed advantaged because of our affluence! Not every single type of EC, of course, but YES – we do “buy” EC spikes for our kids! My D21 is an all-state athlete so we are familiar with the money being thrown around in elite athletics. $10K+ each year to play elite travel soccer or to compete nationally for tennis. D21 is also an accomplished dancer and I personally witnessed all these talented dancers in middle school drop out or get cut from her super competitive hs dance co. because they can’t afford the training required to stay competitive! And don’t even get me started on the kids in boarding schools like Exeter and Deerfield, where GCs are friendly with the AOs of the top colleges! I honestly don’t know how you can deny that money plays a big part in this whole process.
This is not to take away from the accomplishments of kids from more affluent families. D21 certainly worked very hard for her all-state status and for her performing arts skills. Just saying that her parents’ money helped. A lot.
Perhaps a better way to put it is that parental money can buy more opportunities (or remove obstacles) if the parents choose to use their money that way. The kid still has to make use of the opportunities and earn the achievement, but then the point is that parents with less money (or unwillingness to use it that way) can limit what opportunities the kid has to achieve in ways that matter for college admission.
This is not just in terms of ECs – it includes basic academics in regions where K-12 school quality is very unequal. Parents with money can use it to choose a residence in a better public K-12 school zone or enroll their kids in academically-oriented private K-12 schools, for example (although some parents choose not to use their money this way).
Of course, parental money and willingness to spend it also affects what range of colleges is financially possible for the kid.
It is funny – in an ironic way – that standardized tests started as a way to broaden the access to elite schools. The Ivys knew the rigor of schools like Exeter, Andover, Deerfield, Lawrenceville, and the like, but they had no idea about the relative strength of the thousands and thousands of different high schools in the country. Hence, the idea of having a standard measure that could enable them to compare kids from very different secondary schools.
From a PBS overview of the SAT: "In 1933, James Bryant Conant, on becoming president of Harvard, decided to start a new scholarship program for academically gifted boys who did not come from the Eastern boarding schools that were the regular suppliers of Harvard’s students. He gave Henry Chauncey, an assistant dean at Harvard, the task of finding a test to evaluate candidates for these scholarships. Chauncey met Carl Brigham, and came back to Conant with the recommendation that he use the SAT. Conant liked the test because he thought it measured pure intelligence, regardless of the quality of the taker’s high school education.
In 1938 Chauncey talked all the member schools of the College Board into using the SAT as a uniform exam, but only for scholarship applicants. "
this reply thing is odd! never know where my post will be.
Sorry to all if this seems out of context. I’m trying to reply to @ucbalumnus from above. (sure missing the post # feature!)
in our low SES school; the AP classes are taken in High school during the day, and taught by teachers with masters; who are qualified to teach at the college level. So no, not at the college but getting college credit. my son’s junior year: out of 500 2020 kids; more than 100 kids took the Dual Enrollment/AP path and most got credit for college. Its a cash cow for the college. They don’t pay the teacher (teacher is a HS employee), they charge like $250 for each class, and do nothing but start a transcript for the kid. 1 kid had “AP distinction” out of those kids; so not at all high AP scores; yet high HS GPA/college credit grades. I’d hope the classes are on par with other state university classes. UGH. tired tired tired of the school, situation, and pretty much everything else! It looks like there’s rampant grade inflation everywhere.
This thread has been eye-opening. I had no idea there was such variation in grading. I suppose I’d never given it much thought. It prompted me to lookup my D’s school profile, which was also an interesting read. Considering I know this is a document sent to colleges by the GC, I’m not sure why I never thought to look it up before!
Both schools my D attended grade on a 100 point scale (no letter and no conversion to a 4.0 point scale). When I joined CC everyone was using the 4.0 scale so we converted my D’s GPA ourselves. But then, I noticed that different places define 4.0 differently; 94-100=4.0, 90-93=3.7 vs. 90-100=4.0, etc.) No wonder AOs recalculate!
It is interesting to see the differences. I thought our mid-size CA public was pretty standard
80-81.99 is a B-
82-87.99 is a B
88-89.99 is a B+
The transcript shows + or - but those all would be a 3.0
Of course it’s up to the college/uni to determine their gpa calculations, CSU and UCs don’t care about plus and minus.
The only way a teacher could up a grade is by giving extra credit, my daughter would never think to go haggle with a teacher over a grade change.
4.0 UW is not super common for the high achievers at our high school, mostly due to the AP English and AP Calc teachers being tough graders (they grade as though it is a college course), but the top kids get pretty close to that. All of the non-honors courses have pretty easy As if you do all the work and make a good effort.
Our public high school Avg ACT is 27.5. I was curious after you made that comment so looked at our profile since I had no idea. We have many kids scoring above 32 but then I also know a few that have scored low 20’s. This was for class of 2020.
Pretty sure extra credit is not the only way… and btw, in many cases, even getting the opportunity to submit an assignment for extra credit is a “haggle” in and of itself. But see, while your D would “never think to haggle with a teacher”, my D21 thinks EVERYTHING is subject to haggling! Adding an individual-level variable into the already many ways schools calculate GPAs. To say that somehow transcripts are fairer than test scores just doesn’t make sense.