<p>I have been hearing from several people that a 4.0 is really attactive. To me, it is kinda blown up. I mean, I know several people who have it, including myself, but if so many people have it, why is it so impressive? This entire post was worded kind of weird, but I hope you understand it anyways.</p>
<p>It depends, like everything else in life.</p>
<p>4.0 or a 100 from Stuy/Thomas Jefferson? WOW AMAZING!!!
4.0 from a public school I know that is underfunded and inflated? Not so amazing.</p>
<p>Also, a 4.0 after a rigorous IB curriculum: Awesome
A 4.0 after gym, art, health, etc. and few honors courses: Irrelevant
Also, 4.0s from public schools can be great if a. the school is highly ranked or b. one takes the most challenging curriculum offered and faces adversity</p>
<p>I am a sophmore, yet I am taking the Junior IB diploma classes, such as IB Math(the harder one)Pt. I, IB E. Systems, IB History of the Americas Pt. I, IB TOK Pt. I, IB English 11, and IB Spanish 4. Also, my school was ranked in the top 100, was like 19 a few years ago. And I still have a 4.0.</p>
<p>Personally, I don't find it impressive. I've found that many people I would consider bordering on dim-witted can obtain a 4.0 through tireless effort or sycophancy whereas far more intelligent students can receive mediocre grades. Unfortunately, grades are highly subjective and do not reflect one's grasp of the material; extraneous factors are invariably considered. That's not to downplay your accomplishment; certainly, you should be commended for maintaining such high grades. Nonetheless, it's not a reliable indicator of anything whatsoever.</p>
<p>Sadly, there isn't another system for measuring achievement that has been thought of. While it is true that many intelligent students can receive mediocre grades, I would contend that the majority have been trained to earn good grades from an imperfect system. Those that do not but are genuinely intelligent are the disadvantaged, but in school and in life it is all about playing "the game". A 4.0 says, "I know how to pander to the desires of others" and that is what many employers want, as when money comes into play pandering to one's audience is all that matters.</p>
<p>^ I know. There is a difference between the "naturally smart" students and the "hardworking students." Unfortunatly, I am more of a hard worker, not the naturally gifted type; however, I have beed told that my mind ajusts to situations quiet well, which is what I consider one of my best attibutes.</p>
<p>An excellent point. One can be brilliant in understanding the concepts behind surgery for example, but that same person might be horrible at working hard enough to master procedures, whereas someone who can easily adjust to situations and works quite hard at practicing the procedures would operate at a much better level than the first person. It all depends on one's skills, and since the school system cannot be that subjective the GPA is our best guess at one's level of achievement. Personally I think it is more valuable to put in tremendous amounts of work trying to receive good grades rather than being intelligent and not trying...</p>
<p>^ What you have to watch out for, however, are the naturally smart people who are also hard workers. I am glad that you think working hard to get good grades is "more valuable" than being gifted and not trying. I can;t stand it when the really intelligent kids complain that they are getting good grades when they got a biological head start. I, on the other hand, had to work for it. I started off with the eqivalent(sp?) of Ds in 2nd grade, then moved to Cs in Elementry school. Next I got A-s in Middle school. Finally, in high school, In 9th and 10th grade, I have gotten 10 A+s and 6 As. This upward trend is a result of my own determination, not natural skill, making me proud of myself(sorry if I sound arrogant.)</p>
<p>Don't be sorry at all! You should be proud of hard work, as too many people take for granted the sacrifices some make for their grades, including those who are naturally smart. Let's face it: if getting a 4.0 were easy, everyone would have one.</p>
<p>^ Thanks for those comments. You have been very helpful. :)</p>
<p>An unweighted 4.0 GPA is attractive.</p>
<p>I had an unweighted 4.0 GPA until I started Senior Year.</p>
<p>Excuse me, but a 4.0 is great no matter where you go. It may not be enough to get you into Harvard without other things, but anybody who thinks that it is not impressive doesn't have a 4.0 themselves (despite what they may post.)</p>
<p>Umm... I think that a 4.0 isn't always great and I go to a Newsweek top 10 public high school and have a 4.0</p>
<p>To hpg90, Why would I lie if I am asking a question about it? I really don't think it is all that impressive, or I did not know it was before I came to this site. The focus at our school is more on the W GPA than anythings else.</p>
<p>I'll add this just to lens support to those people who did NOT get a 4.0 (or anywhere near it). </p>
<p>smart.cookie: "A 4.0 says, "I know how to pander to the desires of others" and that is what many employers want, as when money comes into play pandering to one's audience is all that matters."</p>
<p>Well, in the real world, this is not necessarily how things work in the long run. If you were to look closely at the educational backgrounds of the most uber successful people in the world, you would quickly notice that they are not a group of 4.0's from Ivy League schools. </p>
<p>Perhaps for entry and low level jobs in certain fields, a 4.0 is an advantage. However, beyond that, so many other traits come into play. Being a creative maverick is much more likely to land you in the upper echelons of economic success. Creative mavericks often (though not always) are unable or unwilling to jump through hoops in order to consistently be awarded with A's. Many who are destined for fantastic success are hard-wired to resist contorting themselves in order to get the pat on the head that good grades can sometime represent.</p>
<p>GPA system can be really flawed, if you look at cumulative average. For example, because of a couple 92s you won't have a 4.0 but if you have high As in everything else it can average out to perhaps a 97% cumulative average. Compare that to a student who gets 93s in every single class. The GPA (4.0) of that student will be higher, but the 97 cumulative average is far better.</p>
<p>^Good point!</p>
<p>B
Bu
Bum
Bump
Bump!</p>
<p>"Perhaps for entry and low level jobs in certain fields, a 4.0 is an advantage. However, beyond that, so many other traits come into play. Being a creative maverick is much more likely to land you in the upper echelons of economic success. Creative mavericks often (though not always) are unable or unwilling to jump through hoops in order to consistently be awarded with A's."
Perhaps in some fields, but in business, engineering, and medicine being a creative maverick doesn't really mean anything. When you are offered a residency coming out of med school they look at two things: the grades you got and the research that you did. Out of business school: where you attended and your grades. Out of engineering programs: pretty much grades alone.
My dad is a higher-up in the auto industry and hires engineers as part of his job. Basically what matters is one's grades. Creativity can be great for the arts, but in careers that typically pay nice salaries, grades are important. Just look at any company's hiring procedures.</p>