<p>How much do they matter and do they matter more at certain schools?</p>
<p>sophomore grades are pretty much always as important as junior and senior. freshmen year grades are mostly as important, tho there are a few exceptions, stanford, for instance.</p>
<p>In my opinion, junior year is the most important. I had ok grades freshmen and sophomore year, and very good grades junior year, and I was accepted to my 1st choice, and recived a scholarship An upward grade trend also helps.</p>
<p>You really shouldn't worry about freshman year.</p>
<p>Umm Celtic, what exactly was your first choice? Anywhere in the top 20?</p>
<p>DePauw, in the top 50 for LACs, I probably could have gotten into a better school, but I needed money, and DePauw gives lots of it. I'm not saying freshmen and sophmore year are not important, but I feel junior year to be the most important. Furthermore, schools like UMich throw out freshmen year grades. Also, my grades were not bad my first two years, but I did not have all As. I think it is more important to prove yourself you junior year than it is to let your grade slip your junior year and rely on freshmen and sophomore year grades. This happened to some of my friends when they started the full on IB curriculum and they consequently got deffered from schools like Cornell. However, it is always of course preferable to maintain a solid 4.0 all four years.</p>
<p>in today's cut-throat competition, I'd say freshman score does make a difference, at least to some extent. There is a chance that another virtually identical candidate will be chosen above you due to the "B" you've received during freshman year, though very slim, I hope. However, unless your grades are far off-track, don't worry about it; there are myriads of other important factors that are accounted into the admission process.</p>
<p>Celtic, my point is that it's pretty misleading on CC to say you got into your first choice college with "OK" grades for 2 years without naming the college or at least where it ranks. Let's face it, the vast majority of people on this web site are hoping for top colleges, and "top 50 LAC" doesn't fit that description. </p>
<p>What happened t6o your friends in typical. Most high schools get progressively harder between freshman and junior years. Many people who can carry 4.0s in intro freshman classes fall off and won't be contenders for top colleges.</p>
<p>At the really top schools, they want to see that you've done well all through. Even those few that don't include freshman grades when they calculate GPAs to their standards will get a strong feel for how one has performed as a whole in high school.</p>
<p>Sorry, just trying to prove my point. Every year is important, and a person will have a far better chance if they have a 4.0 all 4 or 3 1/2 years, but I think that and upward grade trend will be looked upon more favorably than a downward if you are on the edge when it comes to admissions. Also, many people on these boards want to go to top schools, but not all top schools require a 4.0 for admissions. Therefore, wouldn't academic progress rather than falter look more impressive? Furthermore, when I visited top schools like UMich and Notre Dame they contended that a 4.0 was of course preferable, but if somebody did not have a 4.0, overall academic gain looked better. Of course, maintaining a 4.0 is great, as I stated before, but doing that is hard to do for many bright kids when they take on a rigorous course load. Therefore, in my opinion, grade improvement shows an increased commitment to academics, and a greater academic curiosity, and it thus preferable if one does not maintain a 4.0.</p>