<p>for the same reason that a higher GPA at Reed is more respected than the same GPA at Penn. It's not a logic jump. It's called grade inflation.</p>
<p>hmm...and what is your evidence for that? Your credibility was better when you stuck to your argument with W and M. That assertion just weakened your credibility. For the sake of time, I will present a simple case study to prove my pt why Penn is better than both W and M and Reed.</p>
<p>HLS, well Harvard no longer provides aggregate numbers on their website. But if I recall, Penn had more than 50+ students there, and W and M did not even have more than 15 and Reed, probably did not have more than 8 or 9 kids.</p>
<p>Penn outdid both on the wall street journal study. It is ranked higher. It has a higher SAT average (near 1420-1430). W and M is around a 1330-1340.</p>
<p>1280-1460 Reed
1260-1440 W and M
1330-1510 Penn</p>
<p>Hmm, I think Penn is clearly the best school. And lastly, this is not a deciding factor, but being an ivy league never hurts either...</p>
<p>hmm...wikipedia...very credible!!</p>
<p>When comparing schools, we must consider for what purpose, so we don't end up with apples and oranges, because there is no simple "better." Reed is in a group of academic schools that produces a high level of grad school attendees and future PhD earners, and is not so well known for future professional graduates (law, business, medicine). If you want to do research and/or be a professor, you might want to consider one of these academic schools for your undergrad work (the top ten): CalTech, Harvey Mudd, Reed, Swarthmore, MIT, Carleton, Oberlin, Bryn Mawr, U Chicago, Yale. The prestige schools might be better for professional careers. There is some overlap.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Your credibility was better when you stuck to your argument with W and M
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Says Columbiahopeful, the final authority. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>Look, I'm not going to continue to debate this with you because any rational poster on CC has already come to the same conclusion as me. Attaining a high GPA at a grade-deflated school like W&M, Reed, Chicago, Swarthmore, etc. is more impressive than attaining the same GPA at Penn. Why? In a nutshell, it's because you are a rarity.</p>
<p>Perhaps it will help if I approach things differently for you. If the average GPA at Reed is a 3.2 now (it was a 3.18 in 2002) then if one attains a 3.7 they are undoubtedly within the top 10 or 5% of students there. If the median GPA at Penn is a 3.5 (it was a 3.38 or so in 2001) and you have a 3.7, you are probably in the top quartile. Impressive either way, but you are the cream of the crop at Reed whereas there are quite a few students just like you if you have that GPA at Penn. Grad/prof schools are well aware of the rigor of those schools that I've mentioned. </p>
<p>Obviously in the end it's not going to matter as Penn, W&M, and Georgetown are all great. However, a higher GPA at a grade-deflated school with a student body of similar quality (and more demanding professors/academics) is going to be more impressive than being slightly above average at Penn.</p>
<p>You can believe what you want. But if you think Harvard Law is going to be more impressed by a 3.8 at Reed than a 3.8 at Upenn, you are clearly wrong.</p>
<p>according to your logic, a 3.9 at Harvard is something to scuff at, after all, it is a very grade inflated school along with Stanford. Meanwhile, these schools produce some of the most successful people in the world.</p>
<p>Hopeful, you've just graduated from high school. Things won't be so clear to you in a few years.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But if you think Harvard Law is going to be more impressed by a 3.8 at Reed than a 3.8 at Upenn, you are clearly wrong.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You've completely missed my logic. I've never said a 3.9 at Harvard is something to scoff at. However, it's about percentiles. If you are at Reed, arguably one of the hardest schools in the country, and you are getting a near perfect GPA, you are an anomaly. Grad/prof school admissions are going to crap their pants when they see someone like that because it's very rare. In the same sense, I don't believe ANYONE has ever graduated from the University of Chicago with a 4.0, whereas in the not so distant past approximately half of the class at Harvard was graduating with honors. :rolleyes: That has to say something about the difficulty of the school obviously if the students are of the same caliber (academically) as those at top ivies and go on to do equally great things. Take a look at Harvard/Penn/etc. and find out how many students graduate with above a 3.7 GPA. I'm going to bet it's a LOT more than at grade-deflated schools like Reed/W&M/Chicago/etc.</p>
<p>listen, before you can show me FACTs that those schools are deflated, all I can say is that this is heresay. And, perhaps why these schools are deflated is because they are not that selective compared to their peers. At a place like Penn, the student body is filled with not only the best talent out there but with just well accomplished individuals (i.e, science winners, presidents of student bodies). Penn's yield rate (near that of HYP) is evidence that it is one of the hottest schools in the country. And do not think that Penn like does something to manipulate their yield. They get a ridiculous amount of ED aps and STILL accept a smaller percentage than does Duke....</p>
<p>you base all of your information, columbia hopeful, on USnews rankings, which is kinda sad, because in other rankings, schools like berkeley and ucla trump penn on any level and on every ranking (except USnews). I would also like to bet that schools like berkeley have more nobel prize winners than penn, even though they dont rank as high.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Penn's yield rate (near that of HYP) is evidence that it is one of the hottest schools in the country
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Dude, that's probably literally the 4th time you've said that in this thread. Got it, thanks, but yield rate has very little to do with academic quality. </p>
<p>
[quote]
before you can show me FACTs that those schools are deflated
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You've already conceded in a previous post that Penn et al are inflated. If you don't think Swat/Reed/W&M/Chicago are grade deflated, I can't help you. It's a pretty well accepted fact. Of course one could contact the schools themselves to get the avg. GPA of graduating seniors if you really want.</p>
<p>haha. I can show facts! so i guess im going to help brand on this one.</p>
<p>Here they are so you can shut up once and for all!!</p>
<p>Penn:</p>
<p><a href="http://gradeinflation.com/penn.html%5B/url%5D">http://gradeinflation.com/penn.html</a></p>
<p>William And Mary:</p>
<p><a href="http://gradeinflation.com/w%26m.html%5B/url%5D">http://gradeinflation.com/w%26m.html</a></p>
<p>all sources came from: <a href="http://gradeinflation.com/%5B/url%5D">http://gradeinflation.com/</a></p>
<p>Obviously, if the average gpa @ william and mary is a 2.9 in the 90's while at Penn its a 3.1, then there is obviously grade inflation at penn! Because according to you, penn is the "harder/better" school.</p>
<p>Overall, most private schools are grade inflated (if you check out the charts), over public schools, which tend to be deflated (william and mary).</p>
<p>In a way, columbia's theory may be right, except for the one fact that both ucla and berkeley are deflated and they are almost as selective as Penn.
Here is an explanation:
[quote]
“It would bother me more if schools that were less selective had grade inflation. Then it would raise the question of whether people are being trained at all.” Experts and Penn administrators have offered a variety of explanations for grade inflation.In his report, Rosovsky reviewed— and discounted — several of these explanations. The theories included professorial compassion for men on student deferment during the Vietnam War who needed certain grades to keep from being conscripted, watered down course content and the hypothesis that professors give higher grades to poorly prepared students admitted under affirmative action policies in order to keep them in school.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>With that said, stay @ W&M!! Your gpa is worth more!!</p>
<p>let's just conclude that penn is OBVIOUSLY the better overall school.</p>
<p>the OP has just found his niche at w&m that makes him want to stay. seems like he's doing quite well for himself, but in the end.. penn > w&m.</p>
<p>i dont know if its the better school overall when you arent learning anything and its easy to get an A.</p>
<p>In the end the only quantifiably true statement is that Penn students have slightly better SAT score than W&M students. Every other statement has been subjective and depends on the individual perspective. There are approx 50 schools out there that are "good". After that, it depends on the student as to what is their "best" school for them.</p>
<p>We might as well be debating whether LA, NY or Mayberry is the best place to live. It sounds like W&M is the best place for the OP if he can get riduculous "rankings" out of his head.</p>
<p>Good luck and ask someone who knows and cares about you what their opinion is. That is immimently more credible and worthwhile than this chatroom.</p>
<p>Well said. Both schools are the elite of colleges and have been for hundreds of years. splitting hairs in these rankings is a pointless exercise. US NEWS would be better served by explaining which colleges are similar with in the top 50 U's and LAC. (ie UVA/UNC/Michigan and Tufts/W&M/Dartmouth) than which school is 13 vs19.</p>
<p>All this talk of grade inflation and prestige is ridiculous. </p>
<p>W&M is a very decent school. If you feel like you are challenged and growing academically, it is perfectly reasonable to stay.</p>
<p>Be careful for false logic on these boards. A school like Penn does not turn a standard pool of students into world leaders, but attracts more gifted students and is well suited to teach them. A gifted student that goes to a college that is less prestigious but also very intellectually enriching will do very well in the world.</p>