Looking at UChicago. I did an info session where the guy spoke about applying, he said that “transcripts are definitely not the most important part of your application. Do not think that GPA will make/break your application”
Is that an accurate statement? for some reason I don’t buy that the #4 college says that (but at the same time if its true id be the first one to be celebrating). What i am assuming is that if it is true, they would expect impeccable SAT/ACT and Essays and extra curriculars. Did i just answer my own question? Thanks for the help!
I think the ‘transcripts are not the most important part’ is just another way of saying that if you meet their academic cut off - whatever it is - then they are looking at other factors. This saves them from having to deal with frazzled students who keep asking if 2 Bs or a C in freshman year will keep them from being viable candidates.
U Chicago has suffered from the ‘where fun goes to die’ reputation for quite a while and is trying to combat the appearance of being a school for grinds. The rep’s statement is consistent with that objective.
Of course they did. But the student with the lowest GPA that gets in will have a hook or two. If you are unhooked, 3.7 is about as low as you can go, and you need to make it up in other areas.
Perhaps you mis-heard. A common idea that presenters from selective schools must stress is that they seek students who are pushing themselves – taking the hardest courses – even w/o regard to GPA.
What it means is that if you get a 3.8 or 3.9 in your school’s toughest offerings, you’re much more viable than the other student who got a 4.0 but with only middling level classes. They seek adventurous learners – not GPA protecting lemmings.
THAT’s what the UChicago rep probably meant. Ideally, you want the topmost GPA ALONG WITH a super hard curriculum, of course.
As long as you are in the top 10% of your class, you’re golden. GPA doesn’t matter that much. I do know someone who got in with a 3.5 from a private school in Maryland.
Very good conversation! Thanks to all who have contributed so far. My thoughts would probably go along what many of you said, is the whole “strength of schedule” things. If a school offers a lot of APs, taking 9 or 10 probably puts you ahead, even if, as many have said, they have a harder GPA. Going off of that, would people agree or disagree that submitting a weighted GPA is better? I know many schools who are moving away from the unweighted GPA system because of what T26E4 argued, that kids can take watered down classes and snag a 4.0. Again, thanks to all who have contributed to the discussion.
The other really obvious answer to this question is that Chicago cares a lot, and arguably more than any other college, about the essays on an application. In the past – before its acceptance rate was in the single digits – there’s no question that really good essays would get a student accepted to Chicago (and maybe even offered a merit scholarship) notwithstanding less-than-ideal grades or test scores (but not both). For a long time, there was a wonderful poster on CC, Corranged, who was in the class of 2010 at Chicago with its highest merit scholarship; she claimed to have had a B+ high school GPA. She was, however, among the very best writers and thinkers I have seen among student posters – among any posters – on CC, and there was no question her writing ability carried her.
I don’t know if great essays can be enough to overcome a substandard GPA anymore – everyone I know accepted at Chicago recently pretty much had it all.
Also, historically Chicago has really looked for Chicago-type students, which means a certain kind of commitment to intellectual inquiry and debate, not matter what other qualities they have. High school transcripts and test scores don’t reveal that at all; it’s perfectly possible to be very smart and to do great in high school (and college, too) and to be anti-intellectual. The way to assess those qualities is through teacher recommendations, and of course the essays. Not transcripts.
