My rant about ranking

<p>no, the 10% of some schools in the sticks are not better then me. You want me to go get sum kid in an inner city school whos top 10% in his class and compare him. </p>

<p>You seem to be missing the point big guy. The 10% in my school is without a doubt better then me. However, the 10% of some other school may be much much lower then me. So why is it that those kids get to apply to the program just because their school is garbage and their classmates are not smart and because my school has a first decile full of future HYSP grads?</p>

<p>well doogie, as i said. if these kids had the same advantages as you, same education up to this point etc, you could compare that. i am not missing the point. the point is garbage. and as the others said if you're really so great and special, an exception may very well be made.and i know that the kids in the "Sticks" may not be as "smart" as you but thats because they havent had the opportunities. the world is being just by giving them a similar opportunity in the here and now that you had in the past.</p>

<p>The point is not garbage. Some kid with a 3.5 GPA who is top 10% of his class because the other kids are dumb and he took easy courses does not deserve an opportunity such as this one. I worked my tail off, maintained a 4.0 GPA in many AP classes, but since my school is extremely competitive and there are many intelligent students, I cant because im not top 10%, although my GPA is still igher then sum other student. IT MAKES NO SENSE.</p>

<p>The fact is that any criterion colleges use to pick their classes will cause some students to be rejected, and some of the rejected students will argue that the decision was made unfairly. </p>

<p>As soon as a college decides to emphasize SAT/ACT scores, some students will complain that "a four hour test" is a poor marker of their abilities. When the colleges use unweighted GPAs some students express dismay that peers in easier classes have an advantage, and when colleges use weighted GPA other students are upset because they could not enroll in heavily-weighted classes due to schedule or other conflicts. When colleges prominently feature extracurricular activities, certain applicants are unhappy because family situations, availability, or other conflicts prevented them from engaging in these activities. When colleges decide based on recommendation letters, candidates worry that teachers and guidance counselors might not have represented them as well as they think they deserve, and when essays/personal statements make up a large part of the application, some students complain that since their intended major/career doesn't involve much writing they should not be judged on writing ability. Nothing will please everyone.</p>

<p>To Doogie311: if you're as fixated on this program as you seem to be, call them back again. Try to talk to someone else besides the person you contacted last time. </p>

<p>If they turn you down again, though, remember that most universities have pre-med programs, many of which may be better than this one.</p>

<p>doogie these students dont necessarily "chose" to take easy courses. their schools may not offer the hard courses. if they do offer the hard courses and they're not taking them, colleges will take note to this and that will hurt them. and if they do get into college they will be screwed if they dont know calculus, but they do know how to basket weave. </p>

<p>on a side note: i find classes like arts and woods much, much more difficult and i always do worse in them than i do in the harder classes like high level math, science, english, etc. basket weaving isnt everyones piece of cake. people take classes that they like and can do well in.</p>

<p>Basket weaving actually seems fun...I'm not being sarcastic!</p>

<p>Schools look for diversity and if they took every 2400 perfect GPA kid they'd fall fast. Grades don't define character and either does rank, but i know schools would rather take a risk with someone from a small town because it makes em look good. </p>

<p>also where did ya'll get the idea that youd be good in a small school just because ur ranked higher than 17 in your school doesn't convert into going to a small school and being valedictorian.
My point is that yes for some kids its unfair but for others itz hope</p>

<p>a small and non-competitive school doesn't necessarily mean a bad one</p>

<p>i'm valedictorian and my gpa is a 5.2638, (4.0 uw) i don't really think you'd be beating me at all</p>

<p>last year the valedictorian had a 5.41</p>

<p>(the high weighting is due to sheer number of AP/IB courses)</p>

<p>My point is i dont even have a chance because im not allowed to apply and dont give me this hope stuff. Since when was life about making people feel all happy and warm inside. It should be if you dont have the GPA/SAT scores then you shouldnt be accepted. Why should the ignorance of the rest of your class be a factor that helps you.</p>

<p>we know that. you have made that clear. but the opposing point is that you may not actually be more qualified to apply than others. others deserve the chance first because of different reasons. (i.e. they didnt have good classes earlier) and if you are truly passionate about this, well, then ask them or even BEG them to let you apply. from what your saying your other stats are so stellar that it shouldnt be a problem that your not top ten percent</p>

<p>also life is not about making YOU feel happy and warm inside. because you didnt have that extra edge, you were out of luck. i kind of like to think of it as a sampling. they take the best from each school to form their dream team. you arent the best, tough luck. im sure there are other programs that dont require that percent.</p>

<p>if they dont have the classes, thats tough. At the Naval Academy (where my brother goes) the kids who came from po-donk schools had to leave because they couldnt cut the academics. No one is gonna hold your hand through courses like this. If you dont have the classes, you arent ready, simple as that.</p>

<p>also if you dont have the rank, you arent qualified, simple as that. you must meet all the rigorous criteria. end of story. and not to mention that not a lot of "dumb" people are going to apply in the first place. they may be dumb but they are smart enough to know if med school is right for them.</p>

<p>im not qualified because the other students in my grade are scoring higher then me? That has no reflection on me as an individual. Class rank says nothing about you as an individual, and this is why its pointless. </p>

<p>And btw, if sooo many students go into pre med knowing that it is right for them, why do only 50% go on to medical school?</p>

<p>If you want to choose an applicant based on how they perform as an individual, look at their stats that show that.</p>

<p>You sound kind of mean. I wouldn't like you to be my doctor.</p>

<p>I think you need to stop defending yourself and start looking for other opportunities. Complaining is not going to get you anywhere.</p>

<p>Im mean because I want to see a system that rewards the students that have truly worked hard??</p>

<p>BTW, trader your philosophy is basically saying that those who are not the top 10% at a school as Harvard or Yale shouldnt be given the same opportunities as the top 10% of the class at my local community college.</p>

<p>so lemme get this straigth grades and rank cant tell you about an individual, but standarized tests can. </p>

<p>I honestly hate the system too, but if ya cant fix it ya might as well find a way to live in it.</p>

<p>it does reward the hardest workers of the schools; those in the top 10%. my philosophy is not about students already in college. its about those applying from high schools into programs. so talking students earn their way through a college THEY pick. you dont necessarily pick your high school because of sending districts etc etc . those students stuck in a poor high school deserve a chance, they shouldnt be excluded because they're parents cant afford to live in a wealthy neighborhood.</p>

<p>thats very sweet, really it is, and i feel bad for those kids. However let me get this right. You are saying because i go to a good school with intelligent competitive students, get good grades, and because i have money...that some student in an inner city should be given the opportunity over me?</p>

<p>That is what you are saying, and that is the most rediculous thing i ever heard. How is using rank as a factor better then simply using GPA and SAT?</p>

<p>SAT is supposed to be standardized, it puts every1 on the same court. So why cant that be enough to show intelligence, why should a picture of how the rest of your peers are doing be used to judge you?</p>