<p>Would a 2400, 3x800, 5's on 8 AP Tests make up for a poor gpa, lets say 3.4uw?</p>
<p>this is hypothetical.</p>
<p>and im talking about the elite universities.</p>
<p>Never.......</p>
<p>Absolutely. By far.</p>
<p>lol</p>
<p>one person said never</p>
<p>and the second said absolutely..</p>
<p>anyone else?</p>
<p>3.4 uw is not ****ing 'poor'</p>
<p>you dont thikn 3.4 is low for HYP?</p>
<p>Grade point averages are subject to individual academic regulations at various high schools. Some add 1.0 point for an honors class, some add 0.5. Some don't weight classes at all. Some do GPA on a 4.0 scale, or a 5.0 scale, others on a 6.0 scale. There is always the option of loading up with honors and advanced placement classes and just do decent in them to drive up the GPA. Every student is different.</p>
<p>The thing about standardized tests is they are just that -- standardized. Scores can be compared side by side, since they're not subject to unique conditions.</p>
<p>It's better to have good standardized test scores and bad GPA than bad standardized test scores and good GPA. If your case is the latter, admissions will suspect major grade inflation going on and thus, none of your grades are reliable.</p>
<p>yeah also:</p>
<p>competitive high school, 100% college admission</p>
<p>upward trend</p>
<p>rigorour schedule, 16 AP's by graduation.</p>
<p>That's why rank is much more important than GPA. There are a few high schools where a 3.4 is top 10%, very few. And at top colleges, the only people who were not top 10% at their high school (top 5% at the very top) are recruited athletes, URMs, special legacies and development candidates.</p>
<p>High test scores/low GPA screams lazy. Underachiever. Check the archieves, this question has been covered over and over. The bottom line is that the top 15 schools get it all, kids that have gotten high GPAs taking the hardest classes and have high SATs and great ECs.</p>
<p>my school is weird...because of the IB Program our weighted gpa is out of 4.0 though some go to 4.2..................and i have a 3.5 weighted gpa....which is about a 4.2 to 4.3 out of 5....im guessing</p>
<p>yougotjohn is very wrong on this one. GPA and class rank show several years worth of work. A test is a couple hours on a Saturday morning. Suze is correct.
Test scores are just one time things. But your GPA and rank (in context of your school/class) is who you are on a regular basis. Test scores show that you're competitive, but GPA and essays will say more about you.</p>
<p>yes but if the school does not rank?</p>
<p>most competitive privates do not.</p>
<p>Then they'll know that everyone is competitive. They'll probably look at GPA, recs, and essays. Since it's competitive, it's likely they've had applicants from it in the past and be familiar with the system at your school.</p>
<p>Yes, many good privates don't rank, but the colleges absolutely know where you stand in your class. The big disadvantage in going to a top prep is that top colleges know your school inside and out. Ever read A is for Admission by a former Dartmouth adcom? She tells how that have every prep school's grading system down to a science. </p>
<p>Your school's college counselors need to be honest with adcoms or they are sunk. Your school's profiles tells how many kids get what grades most probably. Do you really think you're about to fool anyone?</p>
<p>But that 3 hour test is the only standarized thing in the whole admissions process. Rank and GPA have huge discrepancies between schools. An example is, I take classes at a University, but my school only counts those classes as half of what a class at the high school is, even joke classes. My Calculus class counted less that band. Because of this people, were ranked higher than me because their weighted classes counted more than mine. Essays, Recs, ECs are all subjective. While people hate the SATs, especially if they scored bad and have good grades, its the only way to compare a student from some no name high school in the middle of nowhere, to a student from a prep school that costs $30,000 a year</p>
<p>having worked a number of hours with admissions at Cornell, I can 100% without a doubt say that standardized tests do not cover poor grades. </p>
<p>As mentioned, a low gpa with high SATs is usually a sign of an unmotivated person. </p>
<p>At top colleges, it is really hard to gain admission without high SATs and a high GPA, but if you're gonna have one over the other, it's the GPA that matters most. </p>
<p>Having high SATs will not get you in, but low SATs can keep you out.</p>
<p>In my situation I had a huge upward trend and good SAT scores. My overall GPA may look low, but theres a trend. Doesnt mean im unmotivated now and theres evidence of that in my current grades. I hate it how if you have low GPA high SAT your lazy, and if High GPA and Low SAT your school is too easy. Dont colleges take into consideration alternatives to their assumptions</p>
<p>
[quote[ As mentioned, a low gpa with high SATs is usually a sign of an unmotivated person
[/quote]
what about high gpa and low sats? cuz i have that and not a good test taker....cant do well in sat type of test......cuz get very nervous and cant think at these times....practice i do well but in the real thing, under pressure, start to have panick attacks</p>