<p>Unlike most (any?) here, my D is able to compare both: she spent freshman year at UMichigan (Shipman scholar, so towards the top of her cohort) and transferred to Yale as a sophomore. She says classes at Y are NOT easier than at UM, quite the opposite. It’s not necessarily that the content is more difficult, but rather the competition is greater since the overall level of the students is higher, as you’d expect.</p>
<p>Athletes are in a different category in the sense that they often have special tutoring available to them.</p>
<p>^^ bump…anyone know if people who got into top schools with luck or a hook, end up having lower gpa’s than the ones who got in without a hook, or luck…</p>
<p>There is no easy answer. By definition, half of your Frosh Chem (premed) class will receive an average grade (C+/B- depending on the school and the curve). By definition, half of the graduating seniors will have the median gpa, which is way below what is needed to be a successful med school applicant (absent a hook).</p>
<p>However, the fact that you were WL’ed does not mean that the college thought that you were less capable than others who they accepted. It just may have been that they had way too many premed applicants from your state with your stats and demographic profile. Instead, they chose the premed from North Dakota who also plays the oboe.</p>
<p>It takes more than good grades and good sat scores for a successful college career. Two years ago the valedictorian of my school got accepted into Dartmouth. Mind you, this was probably the most competitive class in the last 5 years. He had excellent grades, awesome sats, and he was brilliant. Most people who met him thought he would do an amazing job in Dartmouth. Fast forward a year. He transferred back to a state school. Why he did that? Idk. Maybe an overload of work, homesickness, or (add million other reasons). Now a girl from that same class graduated 18th and did not have excellent sat scores. For some reason she got accepted into Duke and many people did not believe she was going to succeed. Anyways, she went to Duke. She graduates this year with 3.8+ gpa and she got accepted to Columbia Law.
This goes to show that it takes more than numbers to succeed.</p>
<p>^^^ lol, I don’t want to be like the kid who went to darthmouth…it must be really embarssing to go to a top school, and then have to transfer to a lower school because of grades…I’d rather just go to a state school, than go through that type of mess…</p>
<p>This is called imposter syndrome, and it’s not limited to college. I felt like that when I first came to my top graduate school, and a lot of people feel like that when they get prestigious new jobs or awards or positions.</p>
<p>clutch, it’s because you’re putting too much emphasis on the kinds of skills acquired in high school as being essential to college. I take it you’re not a college student? Some of them are additive, but in general college is very different from high school. A lot of students who feel constricted by the tight, rigid directives in high school flourish in an environment in which they are encouraged to seek their passions and have much more flexibility in what they do. (And on the other hand, students who are used to being led by the hand and getting As just for showing up - because they were expected to - often flounder when they are expected to think for themselves).</p>
<p>SAT scores are only moderately correlated with first-year grades, and after the first year the correlation disappears. High school GPA is a better indicator, but there are a myriad of reasons why someone could have a GPA lower than their potential. And the other stats (recommendations and ecs) are just bull as far as academic achievement goes. Every student is going to find teachers who will write glowing recommendations, and ECs have little to do with academics.</p>
<p>Colleges00701, I find it REALLY interesting that you believe that a score in the 93rd percentile (one that only 7% of the college-bound population scores higher than) is just “mediocre.” Also, no one cares what your GPA is after college unless you’re trying to go to graduate school/medical school/law school. Yes, a 3.0 from Harvard or Yale is worth it because in the end…you have a BA from Harvard or Yale. Your GPA is not on your diploma and no one will ask you what it was. MAYBE your first job if you are applying to a very competitive employer, but then they will only care that it was above a 3.0.</p>
<p>Juillet, you are missing the point. The OP is premed and a 3.0 + diploma won’t cut it for med school apps. (Heck, a 3.0 + diploma from Harvard or Yale won’t even cut it for grad school, or at least any grad school with $.)</p>
<p>IMO, the OP is asking a great question for which there are no answers. There are literally thousands of kids at Cal-Berkeley, for example, that would have been better off grade-wise at a lower tier UC, particularly if premed or prelaw (where gpa is extremely important). Sure they can and do graduate, but premed dreams are over in the first semester with that C in Frosh Chem.</p>
<p>I think you’re putting way too much thought into a slightly-lower-than-average GPA. Just because someone didn’t get a perfect 4.0 doesn’t mean they can’t handle college classes.</p>
<p>I know some very smart students who don’t have straight A’s for one reason or another: absences, mean teachers, etc.</p>
<p>Functionally, I see very little difference in the work ethic and intelligence of all students with 3.8+ and 2000+ scores. At that point, it’s mostly just luck and I’m sure most would be able to succeed fine.</p>
<p>Really, why are you secondguessing admissions departments? Why are you telling someone with a 3.8 UW (which is still a great GPA) that they shouldn’t go to a top school?</p>
<p>This thread is bring CC to a whole new level of ridiculous. Give me a break: you don’t need perfect grades to succeed at a top school.</p>
<p>Very true. Top colleges will do what they can to make you successful. The last thing they want to admit is being wrong about the kids they admitted. </p>
<p>I guess the heart of it comes down to what success is to you. If that is going to a great school and getting a great education; the decision becomes pretty easy. If it’s going to a top grad school, know that getting B’s at a highly selective school is not going to cut it. </p>
<p>Also, just because someone let’s you in doesn’t make it a good idea to go there. It’s far more important to select the program that interests you the most.</p>
<p>"In april, many of us find out we have been rejected/waitlisted/accepted. After a period of rejoicing some of us start wondering “What if I got in with luck?”, “What if the only reason I got is was because of my hook(urm/athlete/legacy)?”, “What if I can’t succeed at the college that accepted me?”, “What if I can’t make the grade at the college that accepted me?”</p>
<p>I don’t want to be like the kid who went to darthmouth…it must be really embarssing to go to a top school, and then have to transfer to a lower school because of grades…I’d rather just go to a state school, than go through that type of mess…"</p>
<p>Without trying to sound like a high school coach…if you’ve decided you’re going to fail, you will.</p>
<p>The University that took you off the waitlist obviously feels that you’re capable of doing the work. It’s not in their interest to bring you in if they think you’re going to fail. </p>
<p>College is a very different game than high school. High achieving students in high school go off to “easier” state schools only to find themselves struggling to keep their heads above water. Seemingly less high powered students get into elite schools and flourish. </p>
<p>All universities have support programs, free tutoring, breakout sessions and extra review classes to name a few. But no one will hold your hand and make you take advantage of them, it’ll be up to you. </p>
<p>College is a job. A good rule of thumb is 2 hours of work per week for each hour of in-class time; (16 credit/class hours per week= 32 homework hours=48 hour work week). It’s not just about brainpower, it’s about work power. Or to use my high school coach’s favorite saying, “Hustle beats talent, when talent doesn’t hustle”.</p>
<p>To me while the concern about “succeeding” at the top school is real it is not very logical. The first problem is defining “success” … if you mean get a 4.0 while partying everynight it is going to be a tough 4 years … if you mean do well in school (at least B average) and have a fun time then it should not be an issue. Why am I so cavalier about the odds of success.</p>
<p>It’s the (positive) flip side of the brutal admissions odds. Top schools are only accepting 10-20% of their applicants while 80+% of applicants are qualified and quite capable of doing the work. The affect for the kids who attend is that their academic ability does not represent a full normal distribution with a tail of kids who are at the low end and who are at risk … but instead it is the cut off top of a normal curve; there are a few kids who are truely brilliant and then a hoard of very smart motivated kids … and virtually all of them will do just fine as long as they spend any reasonable amount of time on school work.</p>
<p>I went to 3 top schools and probably can count on one hand the number of kids who worked hard and truely struggled (grades on the verse of academic probation) … 95+% of kids with poor grades were because of personal decisions/issues (maturity, drinking, or drugs). </p>
<p>Bottom line … if a good school let you in you’ll be fine if you do a reasonable amount of work … just remember the quality of all the applicants they turned down!</p>
<p>OP, I agree with you that I don’t know if it can be done realistically (versus the romantic vision of the coed life.) I’ve been thinking about this subject too. My DS is a very good student. He wants to play his sport in college. We’ve talked about balance and getting school, sport, and leisure to fit into a positive college experience. So compromises will have to be made. Maybe the name-brand school gets exchanged for getting lots of playing time on the field, for example. We have also talked about being able to keep up with a high caliber student body, while committing to hours and hours of year-round conditioning and practice. Not to mention a social life and making friends and the “college experience.” </p>
<p>Because it takes a lot of effort, time, and causes mucho stress, we believe it’s a matter of being realistic and making compromises. That takes maturity in a teenager.</p>
<p>^^^ Thanks for the advice guys…I like the part about working 2 hours for every hour spent in class…I can do that…I never did hw in school, just took notes, and studied for a test the day before…sometimes I fell asleep in class for the majority of the week…won’t do that in again in college…</p>
<p>3togo, my college isnt’ top 3 lol…its Emory…</p>
<p>Oh, well then the situation is much worse than you said. If you didn’t do homework, then you definitely might have some time adjusting to college.</p>
<p>But you shouldn’t make generalizations about OTHER students with 2000-2200 SAT or 3.8 GPAs. I’d say the majority of us are more responsible than you and <em>do</em> homework. Frankly, it’s a wonder you were accepted having done no homework.</p>
<p>^^^ I was accepted after being rejected from 13 other schools…I had a 3.8 unweighted, but I did my hw the period before the class…rarely did hw at home…</p>
Emory is also a great school … with a long trail of rejected students … if they let you in you certainly are capable of doing the work.</p>
<p>FYI - I started college having never done any HW or studying in HS … and pretty much got smoked my first 2 years until I figured out I had to study … and then got 3.6+ GPAs … I had the ability and was a reasonable admit … the whole question of success was on me (and not the school)</p>
</p>