psh GPA's are so overrated

Applying to College
21

<p>lol sorry about my incorrect inference...it's hard not to make one when your SN reads "i'm a jap"</p>

22

<p>well true but GPA isn't the only factor and sometimes going to Exeter or some tough school is not in ur control so a 3.7 at Exeter is good, but it doesn't necessarily denigrate the 4.2 at my public high school b/c the public school kid could have had less opportunities than the Exeter kid.

[quote]
4.0 with "meh" test scores and 444444 hours of comm service

[/quote]

my question is that how can u tell if that kid is not passionate about comm service just by reading the apps. Also it's really hard to believe that one would do a ridiculous amount of comm service just to get into college. I'm sure there r some people, but from the adcom's perspective u can't just denigrate the kid with 4.0 and a lot of community service and assume that they did it for college. if u start assuming like that really everyone seems like they did it for college.</p>

<p>oh yeh this is how i think about "challenging" myself. strangely enough i probably wouldn't get an A in a easy level course instead of an AP because it's just so easy that i wouldn't do the work. But at an AP level i would do the work and thus get the grades. It's no wonder that i got As in APs while i get Bs or B+s in regular classes. I don't know about u guys the concept of "challenging" is like that for me. I can't regularly do easy work. But i can do a massive load of "easy" work at the end of the quarter just b/c with a lot of work and less time i am challenged.</p>

23

<p>@ random person the fact sheet shows the opposite </p>

<p>


</p>

<p>although SATI + SAT2 has a higher percentage SAT2 + GPA is much stronger</p>

24

<p>Don't get me started. To me, the unweighted GPA is almost worthless, yet that is exactly what most schools use in admissions such as University of Cincinnati et. al. Schools should always use some form of weighted GPA, taking honors and AP courses into account. To not do this is plainly mad.</p>

<p>Moreover, class rank does have some predictive value. The problem, however, is that the tougher the school, the less class rank should be considered. Lets face it, if a kid is in the top 20% of a magnet type school, are they less qualified than a kid in the top 10% of a mediocre public school? I would highly doubt it; yet many colleges view the higher ranking student as the better applicant. Again, another example of stupidity.</p>

25

<p>i think they use multipliers for AP/honors courses. For ur second comment, the public school kid is not necessarily less qualified either and i think adcoms should look at them, but from a different perspective since the magnet school kid did have morer opportunities.</p>

26

<p>Personally, I think cumulative GPAs are overrated. My mistakes in 9th grade and part of 10th bring down an otherwise excellent GPA. My GPA in 11th alone was great, and this year it's even better, but because of what happened early the overall GPA suffers. I think GPA for each year should be kept separate, and class rank determined based on the past 2 or 3 semesters only.</p>

27

<p>imiracle911 notes,"i think they use multipliers for AP/honors courses. For ur second comment, the public school kid is not necessarily less qualified either and i think adcoms should look at them, but from a different perspective since the magnet school kid did have morer opportunities."</p>

<p>Response: This is usually NOT the case. If you don't believe me, go to the web site of Univ of Cinncinnati school of Design, Art, Architecture and Planning as an example. Trust me on this, schools do look at the courses that people take,but the evaluation usually is on unweighted GPA. Even if they do try to up the GPA for course toughness, they usually don't give much of a raise for this.</p>

<p>As far as the public school kid not being less qualified, you may be correct. However, I can guarantee that for most public schools, the competition isn't nearly as tough as that of a magnet school or a school where average SATs exceed 1200. Thus, class rank at these top performing schools is very skewed. A kid who might be in the middle of the pack at a top performing school, with an SAT of 1250 might be in the top 10% if he or she attended a regular, non- top performing high school. I can almost guarantee that the top 10% of each school requires a very different GPA. For example, the top 10% of our high school has a weighted GPA of 4.6! in fact, you aren't even in the top 35% unless you have a weighted GPA of over 4.0. This isn't true for most of the other highschools in our county or state.</p>

28

<p>I would say GPA's are quite important in college admission if not more important than the SAT's. I know a few friends who had very high SAT scores and pretty low GPA's, and they did not do well in the admissions process. A few who had vice versa did unexpectedly well.</p>

29

<p>I personally have a better GPA than SAT scores, at least in my opinion. 6.8/7 vs 2030. I work very hard in school, in classes that do not prepare in the least for standardized testing. Nor do my classes correlate with SAT II's offered. So I'm hoping that GPA's are definitely taken into account.</p>

30

<p>GPA are definately wirth more than SAT scores. Are you saying that a person who has a horrible GPA cant get good SAT scores. I know people who cheated on SATs to get 2000+ and their overall GPA is horrible. However, the opposite is true as well. You can really have a good GPA and mess up on the SAT. Therefore, the GPA is weighted much more than SAT. One test-that lasted for 4 hours- cannot overweight a GPA (which has 4 years effort)!!</p>

31

<p>To zpmqxonw: I agree with your earlier post completely, and you said it a lot more articulately than I did. </p>

<p>To everyone else: I AM a hardworker. I always get help, I always ask questions and genuinely like to learn, and I USE what I learn. That being said, there are kids, "geniuses" who just GET the grades. Or they just get whatever's being taught easier, maybe they're more nimble, I don't know. But I didn't waste away high school not working. I think 10th grade really killed my self-esteem, where I got a 3.14 throughout the year and probably could've ended up with the same GPA if I goofed off and chilled at lunch with everyone else. That is probably the most disappointing thing. That I didn't get to have a nice, normal social life OR get the grades. It wasn't even worth it. Not to the colleges, anyway.</p>

<p>But if these colleges look at the caliber of the classes I took, the AP scores, the consistent extra-curriculars-- things that I did because I truly love doing them and will never give up, the essays I write--a direct result of AP English, I hope they see that I'm worth it.
If they don't, I'll go to a "meh" college and still succeed by forging my own network and using the motivation that I KNOW I HAVE whether or not the AdComs can see it.
Comprende?</p>

32

<p>GPA is definitely not a good measure of intelligence or ability. It many ways it has more to do with effort than intelligence. Sometimes people just get unlucky, and get stuck with some teachers that are determined to give them low grades without regard to their actual performance in the class. I personally slack considerably (try to do no hmwk at home, etc.), but I still get good grades. I am ranked somewhere between 7-10% of my class at a competitive high school. But I know that if I really tried my hardest, like some people in my school, I could be a contender for valedictorian. Of a class of 385 or so, I have one of the top 5 SAT scores. I think class rank should be found by dividing GPA by the effort put into school. :) . </p>

<p>It sucks how important GPA is, especially at difficult high schools. But I am much more dismayed by the importance of ECs and other BS subjective factors in the admissions process.</p>

33

<p>Anytime someone (colleges) tries to compare people based on something, there will be a problem. Just think of GPA as the lesser of 2 evils.</p>

34

<p>I have gotten 1 B, and thats totally because I got lazy, it wasn't even in a AP class. But since then I have gotten 4.0'sIm a junior now so since the B was a long time ago I'm notto worried</p>

35

<p>
[quote]

my question is that how can u tell if that kid is not passionate about comm service just by reading the apps.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Your question was answered in my orig. post</p>

36

<p>no it isn't. just on paper u can't tell. there's no guarantee the second kid will write a crappy essay. so in person u might know but on paper no way</p>

37

<p>This maybe something random but at my school along with the regular grade report they send home reports/grades for effort-class behavior and ect
I think all schools should have this to make things more fair for the students who study five hours a nightfor a class but still do not do well-example me in math</p>

38

<p>that's good! too many school systems like to throw around their AP scores rather than nurture curious students</p>

39

<p>G.P.A. is reflective of how smart and hard working you are over 4 years, SAT is only reflective of how smart you are over 4 hours.</p>

<p>4 YEARS vs. 4 HOURS</p>

<p>You be the judge?</p>

40

<p>Not sure if is immajap88 is refering to my message otherwise I would respond to them directly.But I just want to say this I have a sucky GPA Unweighted even though I took an honors course equalivalent and I am taking an AP Euro class this year- I basically had all As and A-s, one or two Bt/bs but I had a C+ in math. I know I a not getting into Harvard but I hope with my effort grade of an A due to almost every day working with my teacher- I can go to a somewhat good school anyway Working hard is an advantage for evn though I got only a C= in math I learned about the strength of myself for evn though i was not doing well I kept trying-that's what school for me is trulely about
Sorry if wrong or too long-I'm new</p>