<p>I posted this thread on the general college search board, and I'm curious to see what you Penn folks think of it:</p>
<p>Specifically, I'm wondering about the 99% in top decile of the HS class number for UPenn. It seems strange that Penn wouldn't at least take a chance on more than just the 1% of its class that does NOT come from the top 10% in a high school class...</p>
<p>Penn is always really, really big on class rank.</p>
<p>I think they care a lot because it demonstrates that you’re able to be accomplished and make yourself outstanding in wherever you grew up, be it at a public school in the ghetto (where being in top 10% means that you care, despite having a possibly difficult childhood), or a prestigious private school (where being in the top 10% means that among other privileged children, you are among the best of them, and aren’t merely an average rich person).</p>
<p>So,hypothetically if student A is valedictorian, and has like ~2100 SAT, s/he is more likely to get in than Student B who has a 2400 and is like in the top 25%?</p>
<p>It seems to be that way… I dunno, it looks like Penn relies too much on getting the top 10% from a high school class. I’m sure there are some amazing kids not in the top 10% who have 2300+ SATs, great ECs, or are great at sports, or whatever. Having 99% of the class from the top 10% seems to be needless.</p>
<p>Many hs with many high scorers do not rank students. They are not included in the stat, I think.</p>
<p>FiddlinEcon - really? I imagine a lot of the top private high schools don’t rank, but pretty much all the public schools do. I have no doubt that Penn is a bit biased toward the top private schools, but it shouldn’t be shutting the door on all the promising public school kids just bc those kids aren’t in the top 10% and aren’t in a position to go to non-ranking top private school.</p>
<p>Cue7, it’s actually more common than you think. I went to a private school which did not rank but the public school I would have went to (that’s in my city) also did not rank (there were 2000 kids in the whole school). Also a very highly ranked (by the US News) public high school in my state which many of my friends go to also do not rank. This is actually quite common with schools that don’t use weighted GPA systems. Most schools that don’t weigh GPA don’t use ranking.</p>
<p>So does Penn then have a bias against high schools that DO rank by focusing more on getting the kids in the top 10%? Again, I dunno, but however many schools rank or don’t, having 99% in top ten % of HS class seems a bit needless.</p>
<p>^It really depends. It probably only hurts you if you’re at a top prep school like Andover where generally top 15% means Ivy League, but for Penn you might want top 10% without athletics or legacy. </p>
<p>My top public high school did not rank officially. They gave out percentiles in the school profile like 4.5 was top 7% etc. I don’t know if Penn counted me as unranked or as top 10%. </p>
<p>
Well it really depends. If both are from the same high school who knows. If the high school is very tough then maybe student A isn’t great at standardized tests but very good in classroom situations. If the high school is not very tough maybe student B just doesn’t put forth enough effort in the classroom, which could be very bad at a place like Penn. It will show through in recs, ecs, essays, etc. Either way, there are enough students with the rank and the SAT scores that student A and B could very well be rejected.</p>
<p>Wait I thought Andover didn’t rank its students officially…?</p>
<p>They may not officially rank students, I wouldn’t know. I do know that if you’re in the top 15% (and you probably would have an idea and so would Ivies) you have a great shot at most top schools.</p>
<p>Venkat, right but what I’m assuming is, Penn is much more lenient in its admissions of prep school kids, mainly because, since these schools don’t rank, they can’t adversely affect the “% from the top ten% of the class ranking.” </p>
<p>Furthermore, since Penn seems intent on keeping it’s top ten % number high, it probably is more forgiving with students at schools that don’t rank, and more harsh with students from schools that do rank. The top ten % portion of US News is 40% (forty percent!) of the selectivity rank, and UPenn can keep itself (like Wash U) in the top half-dozen by manipulating the numbers a bit here.</p>
<p>(Note - Many more schools besides UPenn and Wash U manipulate the numbers in a more favorable light, I’m just focusing on Penn in this thread.)</p>
<p>Yeah you definitely don’t have to be in the top 10% at schools like Exeter or Andover to get into Penn/ivies. I went to Exeter, and the majority of the people I know going to Harvard weren’t even in the top 20% (we don’t rank, but I know who the top 20% are because of Cum Laude Society–I’m assuming the school also sends out this paper that says what gpa’s are in what quintile)–of course, several of them were black which probably helped a lot (not that they aren’t smart–they are very smart–but it’s impossible to ignore the fact that other white/asian people with better stats/just as well rounded probably got rejected/waitlisted whereas they got in)</p>
<p>We have probably around 70-80 students going to ivies when the top 10% is only around 31 students. I know many people not even in the top 20% who got into Ivies (and other great schools).</p>
<p>–I’m trying to figure out how this post is relevant anymore and kind of failing. I think I should be in bed!</p>
<p>I was just throwing out a random example. Maybe it doesn’t hold true. I do think that for a non legacy, non athlete, white/asian at Andover or Exeter, you need to be in the top 10-20% to have a strong shot at an Ivy. If most top competitive high schools do not release official ranks, then it doesn’t matter. If you’re going to do well at Penn, you really should be in the top 10% at a non competitive high school.</p>
<p>cue, we get the point you are trying to make here. you don’t need to repeat the same sentence on three separate equations.</p>
<p>im just saying it feels like you are trying to bash penn, and it’s not necessary. unless i’m completely wrong, i just dont know what EXACTLY do you want right now…</p>
<p>all top schools game the rankings in some way or another so instead of just focusing on penn (and washu), i dont know why you arent venting about every other single top school</p>
<p>This means I might be sunk. I’m legacy with good test scores (2160) but rank in top 17% of my public school. Don’t know if legacy/ED can overcome the rank issue but I’m sure gonna try!</p>
<p>Well, i’m currently in the top 1% …but my standardized test scores are not so great…but i’m gonna try too!</p>
<p>mathmajor92688 - yah I dunno, I’ve focused the most on Chicago and Penn because I went to both schools, and then Wash U because I feel, out of the top 15 or so schools, that Wash U and Penn are the most significantly overrated. </p>
<p>It’s a very fine line, but I feel some gaming of the rankings is acceptable and actually enhances the school itself. For example, I have a strong allegiance to my undergrad alma mater, Chicago, and I think the school would be helped by having a stronger graduation/retention rate and better alumni giving. Moreover, by improving these two stats, Chicago could probably rise a spot or two in US News, and that’s certainly not a bad event. </p>
<p>On the other hand, when a school makes a move like looking for 99% in the top ten% (UPenn), or looks to hyper-inflate it’s application pool through smarmy outreach programs (Wash U), I find that frustrating. Again, I know it’s a fine line, it just rubs me the wrong way.</p>
<p>
And where would you put Penn? Most people I know would say Columbia is better, but that really only drops us one spot. I personally don’t see how Columbia is better. It is more attractive to prospective students because NYC is more popular than Philly, but that has nothing to do with the education quality of either school.</p>
<p>Penn and UChicago both have made great strides to improve the undergraduate experience in recent years. Penn may have just jumped on the wagon first. In either case, Penn is basically in the same tier as Columbia, UChicago, and Duke. I wouldn’t say Penn is out of its league. It’s a little high considering that it has always been right bellow HYPSMC and right above COlubmia and Duke, but that might just be the error term in the rankings. Same with WashU. It’s right there with peer schools, but the slight quirks of US News rank it ahead of them.</p>
<p>Venkat - oh I would just group Penn with Columbia/Chicago/Duke. My biggest problem isn’t the actual numerical ranking, I’d have no problem with, say, Penn Chicago and Columbia being tied for #6 or #5 in US News.</p>
<p>My biggest issue is I feel HYPSM are a CLEAR cut above the rest, and really no other school should be on the same plane as HYPSM. Penn should not be included with these other schools.</p>
<p>In terms of WashU, I also think it’s about a level higher than it should be. It’s fine to be grouped with Emory, Vanderbilt, etc., but I just don’t think it’s on the same tier as Cornell, Northwestern, etc. </p>
<p>One example of this - in the selectivity rank, Penn and WashU are tied for #6 in the nation, but I don’t feel that either of these schools are more selective than Stanford, Columbia, Brown, etc.</p>