<p>I've read that colleges know how to factor in the academic rigor of your particular HS. That's easy to imagine if you go to a large, well-known HS that sends lots of applicants to a particular college.</p>
<p>But I'm wondering about a small HS sending it's first applicant to a college 2000 miles away. Is there a way that the college attempts to factor in the rigor of that unknown HS?</p>
<p>High Schools provide colleges with a school profile. Here's an example of the contents an idealized one:</p>
<p>You can imagine that, armed with all that information, an admissions office could at least have a ballpark sense of the resources that the HS has.</p>
<p>I think this is something of a problem, but much more of a theoretical problem than a real one. Academically rigorous high schools don't sprout out of nowhere. Established ones are known quantities to admissions officers at selective colleges, even if they aren't "feeders". The colleges will have lots of experience with looking at the relationship between grades and national standardized tests, as well as where graduates are accepted and how they perform in college. (It's part of the job of someone in the office to keep track of stuff like this for a given region.) High schools that don't have a track record but are working to improve their rigor generally see themselves as in the business of trying to support their students in applying to selective colleges. So they have every incentive to market themselves to college admissions offices, making sure the colleges know how great the high school and its students are.</p>
<p>Now, maybe somewhere out there is a high school that has a limited track record and is clueless about how to/whether to sell itself, but is nonetheless a great, rigorous school. Are the first few applicants to College X from that school somewhat disadvantaged? Probably. But I don't think there are a lot of such high schools out there.</p>
<p>And there are some factors that cut the other way. Colleges generally WANT to take kids from not-great high schools who nonetheless perform at a high level. So if the college doesn't recognize what a great high school a particular school is, that does not necessarily hurt its best students (although it does hurt its almost-best students).</p>
<p>No matter how rigorous and if school rank or not, I agree about usage of school (class) profile by colleges. I asked similar question during one college information session. The answer was: School Profile.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Is there a way that the college attempts to factor in the rigor of that unknown HS?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Like it or not, standardized test scores help. Obviously you can have a great kid from an unknown High School that tests poorly. But if the test scores are there, and the academic transcript to back it up, I'm guessing the novelty of the kid will outweigh any doubts the College might have on the rigor of the HS.</p>
<p>When a college doesn't know a school, a key factor in establishing rigor is average SAT score for the school.</p>
<p>Great link, mm. I just sent it to ds's HS college counselor. Our profile does a pretty good job, but there definitely are some things mentioned in the link that aren't in ours that I think it would be great to include.</p>
<p>I am curious. How do colleges distinguish between hs classes when the gc checks off most rigorous when requested to do so? ie. student A, some honors, some APs, but not all APs offerred. Noted as 'most rigor'. Student B, all honors, all APs and those taken are known to be within the student body - tougher ones -BC calc over calc over stats, and APlit over honors english? Do admins get that detailed such that they would realize that student B is in a tougher class load? How would they know?</p>
<p>I wonder that, too. I would guess gcs are generous with the "most rigorous" designation because they think it helps the kids, but if every kid is taking the most rigorous courseload, surely the colleges see that and it becomes meaningless. For instance, I have a good friend whose ds is in the top 10% but is working on grade level in math, which affect the level of science he takes and so it's certainly not the most rigorous. Other kids, my ds included, are working years ahead in math, taking the more difficult sciences, etc and therefore have a lower rank. I would hope both boys don't get the "most rigorous" designation, but I could see our very sweet counselor checking it for both great kids!</p>
<p>Obviously one can't generalize, but my kids' guidance counselor was very parsimonious with the "most rigorous" designation.</p>
<p>Some GCs may check "most rigorous" if the student is taking the most rigorous curriculum available to him or her, even if it's not the most rigorous curriculum available in the school.</p>
<p>Some kids enter high school without having taken Algebra 1 or a foreign language. Others have Algebra 1, Geometry, and two years of foreign language under their belts before 9th grade. It seems unfair to penalize the first group of students for things that happened before they even got to high school, even though they will never be able to take AP math or foreign language the way the students in the second group will.</p>
<p>Not being able to take the highest level courses because circumstances before your arrival at high school made it impossible for you to complete the sequence of prerequisites is a very different thing from goofing off.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Some kids enter high school without having taken Algebra 1 or a foreign language. Others have Algebra 1, Geometry, and two years of foreign language under their belts before 9th grade. It seems unfair to penalize the first group of students for things that happened before they even got to high school, even though they will never be able to take AP math or foreign language the way the students in the second group will.
[/quote]
I don't see it this way at all. First of all, within the school system kids have a choice as to whether or not to start on the high school curriculum in middle school. Some kids, take summer school classes to get ahead of or catch up with the advanced kids. My son was one of only three to take the first year of the high school math system in 7th grade, but several other kids took pre-calc in the summer so there were actually enough kids to offer a linear algebra class to when he was a senior. My son took Fast Pace Chemistry via CTY one summer so that he could take three AP sciences. He also taught himself enough computer programming on his own time that he took AP Computer Science as a freshman. His curriculum was definitely more rigorous than most kids in high school.</p>
<p>I actually don't think the colleges care that much about the gc's use of "most rigorous." I think they look at the offerings and decide themselves.</p>
<p>One of my kid's gc said she wouldn't check "most rigorous" because she wasn't taking 7 APs at the same time. She said a student had to either be taking 7 APs or be full IB.... except only HL IBs are considered AP-equivalent and full-IB seniors at the school only take 3-4 HL IBs at the same time. (I can't remember the number.) So she checked whatever she checked and my kid had plenty of acceptances at top schools. The truth is my daughter had plenty of rigor, having taken APs in every major subject and completing over 4 years in math, foreign language, English and science. (She actually took 7 years of science.)</p>
<p>
[quote]
It seems unfair to penalize the first group of students for things that happened before they even got to high school
[/quote]
Marian, I agree. It's great when middle school students have the choice to begin the hs curriculum early, but in our system, kids don't choose, they're chosen. There's a lot of gate-keeping, especially in math and science. Which would be fine if the standards made sense, but I don't think they do. I don't, for instance, think that a student with an 89 average in the faster-paced 6th grade math class should be refused a spot in pre-algebra in 7th grade just because he/she didn't post the required A-minus average.</p>
<p>My next-door-neighbor's son didn't get along well with his 7th grade science teacher. No major behavioral problems, but probably a bit of a smart aleck. His teacher refused to allow him into Earth Science (usually a 9th grade class) in 8th grade on the grounds that he was immature, despite his high A science average. This meant he couldn't take our high school's most rigorous curriculum, because he had to start 9th grade with Earth Science, while his academic peers began with Honors Biology. He had a real interest in science, too - he was on the state championship Science Olympiad team for a couple of years, and placed first in several events.</p>
<p>I'm in favor of high standards, but I question the gate-keeping mentality. Why not let every kid who feels up to it take on the challenge of a rigorous curriculum, and move down those students who can't keep up?</p>
<p>Chi - I have been asking that question myself, since my D was the first applicant ever to two of her choices from our HS. The school sends a profile with the weighting factors for honors and AP, etc., but our school is notorious (at least around here) for its hard grading - very rarely does someone graduate with a 4.0 or above, even weighted. Also, the school almost never allows a student to take more than 4 APs during the same year.<br>
I would have loved to have an average SAT score to send to schools like Hmom suggested...that would have definitely helped.</p>
<p>We noted our schools ranking on the Newsweek list, plus some statewide awards it got for academic excellence, etc., perhaps you could do the same if your HS made that list.</p>
<p>How about the "role reversal kids" these are the ones who began a rigorous courseload
starting in 9th Grade or perhaps the summer before then (in AP's & Honors). Come Senior year, these kids are cruising with just filler classes such as Health, PE, FL 1 or II., while the "non role reversal" kids are taking all AP's and Honors (because they have already taken their filler classes). At the end of the day, both kids did rigorous classes, the difference is the time these classes were taken. Considering the most rigorous is cumulative over 9-12, do both kids get the nod from GC for most rigorous? If not cumulative and only senior year , what are your thoughts?</p>
<p>The only thing I see lacking from our school's profile is the dollar amount for financial aid, which is considerable and should definitely be out there. It does, however, give the % of those receiving aid, but based on the number, I don't think that that it includes teacher and administrator's kids who attend at a discount. What is also missing is the school requirement to take four semesters of the Arts -- could be drawing, painting, printmaking, theater, music etc. Some students complain that this requirement doesn't allow enough time for them to take all science or math, but I think some of the worst cuts that schools make is to the arts and I am glad our school instills the value of a liberal arts education from the beginning.</p>
<p>I don't agree with the gatekeeping, but at my kids' school the classes have an average of 15 kids or less. It is not usually their math or science ability that kids lack, it's the ability to maintain the pace of the honors curriculum. And actually, from a pedagogical point of view, DEcelerating a kid would do more harm than any good that would come from accelerating him.</p>
<p>Waiting until senior year to introduce yourself to the most rigorous curriculum because first and foremost... colleges wont see your year end grades in those classes. If you apply ED, they wont even see the first semester of your senior year. We don't really have a lot of filler classes - except if you consider an Art a filler, which I don't and besides it's required. So my son did intentionally save his last Art to take second semester senior year. AND.. he gets to take it with his sister who is just a freshman this year. To be honest, with the onslaught of seniorities (hype or excuse), it works for him wonderfully.</p>
<p>I can be surprising how narrow the horizons are of some schools. My east coast private HS always sends some kids to ivies (occasionally H) and similar schools. UNC (oos), Georgetown, Northwestern, and Norte Dame are common for an average student's reaches. It has a college acceptances list that runs at least a decade. The only west coast school listed is USC. Not a single Claremont college, UC, CSU, Stanford, or Caltech. Mind you, this is not only matriculations, just acceptances.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>Like it or not, standardized test scores help.<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Agree with Operadad. A great academic record from a school that the adcoms don't have a lot of experience with needs an SAT back up more than an application from a school that the adcoms are quite familiar with as being rigorous.</p>
<p>School profiles often lay out what AP/IB classes are available and colleges where last year's crop of seniors matriculated. That gives the colleges a little more info.</p>