@SouthernHope: that would depend on the context. If your hypothetical students both attend the same school, you can 100% bet that the later student is more valued, all other factors being equal – you can clearly discern that yourself – a college with >10% admit rate MUST be able to discern that.
If the kids go to different schools and the 4.0 kid w/fewer APs because that’s all her school offers— but yet she takes weekend courses at the community college or otherwise shows she’s got academic grit – THEN she might be seen as equivalent to the 4.0 kid w/the super hard transcript.
Post 18 nails it. For the ultra competitive schools, there’s a surfeit of super high GPA kids with super strong transcripts. If some 4.0 kid w/meager APs and honors courses thinks he can compete, then he’s got a rude awakening. But I’m sure the OP is grinding this axe b/c of the sting of the Cornell ED rejection despite spectacular SATs
The reality is we don’t know what was the tipping factor – but IT CERTAINLY wasn’t his 5 or 6 Bs. Because his EA deferrals from MIT and CalTech certainly show that they like something in this kid’s file.
Looking at the California State University system of schools whose selectivity ranges from lower mid-level to higher mid-level, all except one admit by a GPA and test score formula, though thresholds may vary by major and local area preference at each campus. But GPA is recalculated to include weighting for honors and AP courses, so that rigor is included in consideration (note that honors courses must be designated as such by the state university systems; some high school designated honors courses are not counted as such for this purpose). However, it certainly is possible for a student with a high GPA in baseline college-prep course work to be admitted.
Every college reps also says that applying early doesn’t matter. We now know that is not true except at a handful of schools who say that and have stats to support it - like MIT.
Either way I think another poster has it right; GPA over rigor when there’s a conflict, but you need both. So I don"t think rigor doesn’t matter, but I think it matters somewhat less than they say.
In preparation for writing a book on selective college admissions I pulled the common dats sets on as many of the 100 top colleges as I could find. Maybe five were not available. In every case “course rigor” is listed as a very important criteria in admissions decisions. Maybe some colleges are not completely forthright in all data they disclose on the CDS but to me this means that course rigor is, by far, the single most important criteria in selective college admissions
Course rigor is very important; but when applying to a college that has less than 30%, a fortiori less than 20% admissions, the stakes are higher. Once the “basics” have been checked (5 core courses every year, 4-8APs, sense that the kid didn’t apply the “everything but the kitchen sink” strategy to APs but showed choices that make sense), essays, recommendations and ECs become supremely important. It’s almost impossible to get into a Top 25 university/LAC if you don’t have at least state-level recognition in something. Many applicants will have national (some international) level awards so “best in school” type of awards won’t matter much. Having a dozen ECs with no recognition is also a problem. Having no time for ECs because you’re taking 6 APs is another red flag.
In short, yes, course rigor does matter a lot - a necessary but not sufficient condition.
When you’re competing against the best students in the world (as you did for Cornell), the competition is at an entirely different level. Most rejected students are qualified; there’s just not enough space to take them all.
That’s why you need matches (for you, those would be universities with admission rates of 30% or more) and safeties ( your state flagship’s honors college, another college that has most of the characteristics you like - vibe, spirit, major- but is sure to admit you – all of which have received proofs of interest throughout junior and senior year.)
You can also read Andison’s story.
I didn’t read through every post here, so sorry if this has been said already.
I graduated from a cut throat, top of my state high school. My GPA was not perfect. I was under a ton of stress. And boy, I lost some sleep. However, I was challenged, I loved learning, I made incredible friends (who are mostly quite successful), I pushed myself in ways I never knew I could. It was worth it for me.
That being said, if the more rigorous work load tarnishes your GPA so much that you lose out on scholarship opportunities, it isn’t worth it. I think that if you can do the tougher course load and get a GPA 3.5+ (that is the cut off for many scholarships at universities), then do it. Work your behind off! But, if the GPA slips, I’d take the less advanced classes and make sure I get those scholarships.
