Strong Extracurriculars or Strong GPA/Scores

Maybe it’s just me, but I’ve noticed that the two most important parts of a college app (other than essays) are your transcript and your EC’s. But which one is ‘more important’? I know college admissions is holistic so no one part of the application will make or break it. But here’s a scenario I’ve been thinking about:

Student A has amazing grades (all A’s) in the most rigorous courses they could be taking. Their scores are also nearly perfect after months of practice tests. But their extracurriculars are lacking. They’re only really involved in three things and they don’t have a leadership position in either. He doesn’t have any extenuating circumstances either.

Student B has great extracurriculars. They are involved in many activities (that they are genuinely interested in) and have leadership positions in the three that they are most passionate about. They go to programs over the summer (nothing crazy like RSI or TASP but something more like a pre-college program at a prestigious university) and they have an internship in a field that they are interested in. But their grades aren’t the top (ranging from A’s to B’s) and their scores are on the low end of the middle 50 %ile for the schools they are applying to. They are taking rigorous classes (but maybe not the most rigorous). No extenuating circumstances either.

Assuming all other parts of their application are good, who is more likely to get into a top 20 school? This question has been on my mind for a while because I’m entering Junior year and so far I’ve kept a good balance between the two but I don’t think it will be as easy next year and if I end up having to choose one of these paths, which is better?

To some extent this is unknown. My best guess on it is as follows: The most important part is your grades. You course rigor, test scores (SAT or ACT), and references are also very important. Top schools use ECs to select from among many, many applicants who have nearly perfect grades, high course rigor, and great test scores.

You can check the common data set for each college in question. That will tell you each colleges preferences.

It is likely both students would be rejected from the T20 schools, as the successful applicants will have excellent grades in rigorous classes AND some level of accomplishment in their ECs.

As for yourself, you’ve managed to be successful at balancing everything so far, so that is likely to continue. If you have to make a choice, choose your grades. It’s easier to come and go from most extra curricular activities than it is to check in and out academically, and still manage an A average at the end of the year.

In all likelihood - neither.

As you said, it’s holistic.But many applicants will have both strong extracurriculars or strong GPA/scores

@skieurope and @Groundwork2022
That makes sense. I guess I’ll just have to try really hard to maintain that balance. Thanks!!!

I agree that it’s both, but amazing ECs are not going to compensate for lower grades and rigor.

What you should go is make sure you build a list of safety, match, and reach schools that you’d be happy to attend and seem affordable. Then do your best on grades, test scores, and ECs that are meaningful to you. Don’t live your life trying to parse what T20s want, or assuming that a T20 is essential for happiness or success. It definitely isn’t.

Neither (unless they are a recruited athlete). It also depends on whether they are a URM, a legacy and/or able to pay full tuition, but those kids generally still have to be qualified in all areas too.

Have a “good enough” GPA, and then focus on extracurriculars. While GPA is the number #1 factor, most of the time the person reviewing your application see if you “pass the threshold” or meet the GPA requirements or GPA statistics at the applied school. Then, the look at your extracurriculars.

For example, say you were applying to Yale and and a 4.16 Weighted GPA in high school. That would be good enough. Then, you need to shine in your extracurriculars. The reason for this is because everyone has good grades, and almost everyone passes the vernacular threshold.

In summary, your extracurriculars are more important if, and only if, your GPA is up to par.

Even if you’re strong across the board, it’s still a crap shoot.

97.5 UW GPA, 1st in class
1570 SAT/35 ACT
9 APs
NMF
6-Time Regional 1st Award Winner in Science competition & going for 5th State 1st award in Science competition
3-Sport Varsity Athlete, Captain and MVP in her best sport
Girls State
Orchestra and Choir, including playing in the Pit Orchestra for school musical
Certified referee in state lacrosse organization
2-Year Captain for schools Mini-Thon & over four years helped raise over $900,000
6 years ago founded an organization with her brother to raise money for her brother’s disease and they’ve raised over $20,000

Rejected at all the Top 20s she applied to including Duke, Penn, Johns Hopkins and Princeton

What we’ve learned is that she isn’t unique, so my suggestion is to do what you love and do what builds skills, then apply to your favorite Top 20, but expect rejection and be pleasantly surprised if you get in.

“For example, say you were applying to Yale and and a 4.16 Weighted GPA in high school. That would be good enough.”

Not exactly… different schools give different weights to honors and AP/IB/DE classes. So that 4.16W could be a 3.5UW, which would not be high enough (without a $trong hook). You really need a 3.98/4.0 UW GPA in a rigorous course load in order to be a competitive applicant at a T20. As Tpike12 proved above, you’re still going to face plenty of heavy competition.

Go to the “Common Data Set” for any college, look in section C7, and for each college it would tell you how important each aspect is.

My thought is that Top 20 schools aren’t looking for “good enough.” They’re looking at individuals who will make a good class.