My rant about ranking

<p>no i never said i could guarentee i would be 1 in a sticks school, but id be top 10% if i went from my school to that school. Psh i can cheat the system and do 2 years and my school get a high GPA, and go to sum sticks school to be top 10%. And whos to say sum kid who has a lower GPA then me can apply to this program because his class isnt smart, but i cant. </p>

<p>The use of class rank as a requirement is stupid because it shows nothing about your individual performance and your abilities as a student.</p>

<p>And btw the way, there is a HUGE difference between being a National Merit finalist and being in the top 10%. Being a finalist doesnt change from school to school, if you are recognized then you are recognized throughout the nation. If your score wasnt high enough to get it, then that sux, because everyone with your score doesnt get it. But people with my GPA elsewhere can have more opportunities then me because my school is competitive.</p>

<p>First, National Merit Finalist is done off STATE. The cutoff score for semifinalist for NY(220's) is much higher than for Arkansas(low 200's). It is from those semifinalists they that they individually look at records to see who is National Merit Finalist.</p>

<p>Secondly, this is how it panned out at our school.
Our soon to be valedictorian has about a 1000 SAT but has gotten 5's on all her AP's and a 6 on the only IB she's taken so far. Her reading comprehension scores are about 30% lower than the AVERAGE senior. She hAs worked heR butt off all 4 years of high school and has eaRned her rank, and my schOol is no cakewalk either. You could have worked harder and been in the top 10% of your school. I would much rather have her than you if I were tryinG to pick a student for a competetive progrAm. She woNt accept anyThing less than number 1 and you're just complaining that you're not because your school is harder.</p>

<p>who are you to judge me or my school? And who are you to say you know everything about me and my situation?</p>

<p>You have made a judgement that was based on ignorance. I am complaining because i dont feel i should be cut off from a program over something that varies from school to school. i could care less whether sum1 from the sticks gets to apply, thats great. But dont prevent me from applying because my school is competitive.</p>

<p>and you are judging the kids in the "sticks"</p>

<p>Please, stop complaining. A lot of programs have these cutoffs. Learn to deal with it. Life involves adversity</p>

<p>you were prevented because they cant let just any tom, dick, or harry apply. they want to be selective and they selected to not let you in and that pretty much sucks for you..so power to the "sticks"</p>

<p>OSU is right; that's some pretty disconcerting hypocrisy.</p>

<p>i will bring in this example again because you have yet to realize the stupidity of your argument. </p>

<p>Lets say you have a job opening for your fortune 500 company. Would you only allow students from the top 10% of 4 year universities to apply or would you rather seek students who have an overall strong transcript to apply.</p>

<p>By choosing the 10% of 4 year universities, you have given those at my local community college a chance to apply, which is great, now they have a chance, but u just cut off the other 90% of students at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton and other very reputable universities. Why not give those students an opportunity. Obviously they are intelligent.</p>

<p>Dont mean to be picky, but a community college is not a 4 year university since only those "students from the top 10% of 4 year universities" would be allowed to apply those in the top 10% of your local community college would not be allowed to apply.</p>

<p>I just wanted to say that you have somewhat of an arguement, but I feel you are very judgemental of others and take offense easily.</p>

<p>thank you for totally missing the point of my example.</p>

<p>
[quote]
but even fixing it will create a new problem that others think is worse. this isnt necessarily being defeatist because people still get in BASED on their advanatages and disadvantages.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Any social change always creates new problems. For example, the Civil Rights movement deeply threatened the social structure of Southern white society. The question is whether the benefits would outweigh the costs. In this case, I believe it would. </p>

<p>Nobody is disputing that people should get in based on their advantages and disadvantages. That is exactly how a meritocracy is supposed to work. The question is how reliable are the measuring sticks used to weigh advantages and disadvantages, and specifically, how reliable is class rank as an indicator. I agree with Doogie311 that rank is not terribly reliable. For example, the worst basketball player in the NBA is still one of the best basketball players in the world. His "rank" relative to the other NBA players is obviously very low, but that's only because you are comparing him to the absolute best. There are millions of guys in the world who can only wish that they were as good as the worst player in the NBA. Hence, the use of 'rank' in this case would be an extremely unreliable indicator of quality. </p>

<p>I don't think that Doogie is saying that he would necessarily be a superstar in some other high school. But there is something to be said for the fact that hard ranking cutoffs tend to a poor indicator of merit. A university that is fixated on those top 10% of students may end up overlooking somebody who graduated from the top 11% of his school, but who may actually be better than somebody who graduated in the top 9% of a entirely different school. </p>

<p>It is also true that there are other problems in the admissions process as well. But hey, just because there are many problems doesn't mean that you shouldn't fix one problem. Fixing one problem is better than fixing nothing at all.</p>

<p>well said sakky, well said</p>

<p>sakky and Doogie agreed on something?</p>

<p>Hitler and Stalin are having a snowball fight.</p>

<p>Oh Doogie, Doogie, Doogie. Your example about the colleges I already said I was arguing only at the high school level using high school stats to get into college programs. So, your fortune 500 example is the sukz. I do understand your point but you thinking you should be priority over those that are in the top 10% in rural high schools is crap. Think of it like this: they take a sample for each school, the best 10% of each school so that everyone is represented in their school. Your argument would mean something along the lines that people shouldn't get cheaper college because of the state they live in.</p>

<p>Aye Ranking has its evils. I suggest if you are a junior/sophomore or even senior dedicated to your school and the future of students, work with your student gov't organization to abolish ranking in school.</p>

<p>Our school stopped ranking. With 1000 kids in the class, a .01 drop can move you from 30th place to 100th.</p>

<p>I feel Doogie's pain because I was in a similar situation, not involving academics, but athletics. I agree with Doogie's agruments and would like to add that a program admitting the top 5% from a less competitive environment is a bit risky. Why? Because since Doogie has always been in a very competitive environment, then he won't have to make that many adjustments to adapt to the environment of his competative med program compared to a person from a less competitve environment. </p>

<p>I have a personnal experience from my english class. In 10th grade, our english teacher said she would give the top 5% in her class consideration to move up to honors. I wasn't in the top 5% because of laziness, but I knew that anyone moving up from her class to honors wouldn't survive. Why? Because nothing she taught prepared those top 5% for the rigors of an honors course. She couldn't teach for crap. She recomended 3 of her students for honors. One of them looked at the honors reading list for the summer and dropped out. Another lasted 2 weeks and dropped out. The 3rd lasted a whole semmester and dropped out. In the end, it didn't matter what rank they were. They simply weren't prepared to handle an honors class.</p>

<p>I think ranking is ridiculous at any school w/o grade weighing. when a full diploma IB student ranks under 30 other regular students because he had recieved a B in his higher level physics class, while the 30 regular kids took cooking and jewlery making and received straight As, someting's wrong. if a school reports rank, it better be adjusted for the level of classes. like stated earlier, an 100% in IB math HL is not the same as 100% in home ec</p>

<p>Ranking is cruel. I have a 3.88 GPA, (4.17 is the highest gpa anyone has) and I'm 4th in class rank... this sounds good, right? Top ten, and all? Heh. I'm fourth in a class of SIX. That puts me in the bottom 50. Beat that.</p>

<p>class of 6!? is this a private school? what class has six people???? michigan has class sizes of six!? do they even have honors classes?</p>

<p>that doesnt matter, he proves my point</p>