<p>What makes you qualified to be one? I heard some people say all you have to be is number 1 and you're in.. but I think that's ridiculous. There should be character/activity thrown in there as well, in my opinion.</p>
<p>yeah, but the thing is the valedictorian is the one that is very well-rounded (tackles academics, sports, ECs, etc.) and is well-liked/respected. Atleast thats how it is in my school.</p>
<p>It goes by class rank at our school, but you also have to an old SAT score of 1270 or an ACT score of 28, then 75 hours of community service.</p>
<p>At my school the only requirement is a 4.0. The grades are so inflated that the junior class is going to have 13 Valedictorians if I remember correctly (if none of them slip up). My senior class is most likely going to have 3.</p>
<p>The whole point of being valedictorian is that it is rewarded to someone with the highest rank/grades/et al. It really has nothing to do with ECs, community service, blah blah blah, but those with the highest grades are usually the ones with ECs.</p>
<p>Character/activity have no bearing on becoming valedictorian. It's technically supposed to be for the person with the best grades. Assessing character/activities is very subjective. Grades are more easily analyzed, the one with the highest is numero uno. </p>
<p>I don't think it's THAT big of a deal. The difference between #1-#10 in a big high school is pretty miniscule...</p>
<p>At my school it is based entirely on GPA, and I think that is how it should be.</p>
<p>mine is based totally on GPA...which it should be. People who are great at activities and school and SATs will get their due for college, anyway, which is more important</p>
<p>Well I meant that there should be only one val, and that should be based off of all of the above. I'm not saying hand the position over to a jock or something. How good does that look on your application anyways? Is being number two the same thing basically?</p>
<p>I don't have a problem with a second award for all around achievement, but Valedictorian should be based strictly on numbers.</p>
<p>I once went to a school where this guy was labeled the "valedictorian" because he was the only person in the senior class...</p>
<p>At our school, it's a 4.0 all four years. This year, we have 11 people. But I think you have to have some kind of minimun number of AP classes or something...otherwise people could just take only regular classes and sail through to val.</p>
<p>Oh, ours goes by weighted GPA, and truncates to one decimal place. This year, me and one other girl will get 4.6, so we will be co-valedictorians.</p>
<p>Highest weighted GPA. Period.</p>
<p>It should be the individual with the top rank.... I get tired of this "well-rounded" lingo being thrown around.... that's fine if they have a title for that, but it should certainly not be valedictorian</p>
<p>My high school is the only one in the nation that classifies every person that gets above a 4.0 W GPA as a valedictorian... Unfortunately, colleges don't quite agree with my school's policy.</p>
<p>For my school its 4.0 and your a val. We might possibly have 4, with at least 2 guaranteed already.</p>
<p>for my school it's anyone with 4.0 gpa or above. its not that hard when it also has a massive IB program with +.5 in practically every class. </p>
<p>so out of a class of 800, there's gonna be like 40 valedictorians, so its not considered that much of an academic honor anymore.</p>
<p>i dont mind tho, coz im gonna be one, and valedictorians recieve their diplomas first at the grad ceremony. since my last name starts with "Z," i would have been practically last to recieve my diploma.<br>
i can snooze the rest of the 2 hours since ill be like the 40th out of 40, with 760 to go.</p>
<p>The valedictorian should be the person with the highest weighted GPA. The title is simply an academic honor.</p>
<p>Although, there's merit to eliminating the class rank system altogether, but that's a whole new thread ;)</p>
<p>ours is if u have a 4.0 or above based on the school gpa system</p>