<p>First Quarter
AP Government 80
AP Physic C 86
AP English 91
AP Economic 95
AP Chem 94</p>
<p>Second Quarter:
AP Govt mid-90
AP Physic C 85
AP English 91
AP Economic mid-90
AP Chem 90</p>
<p>So my question is would my chance to get in Cornell be hurt by these horrible grades? I just lost my incentive to work hard anymore in my senior year...but I have excellent SAT, SATII, Summer Research, excellent Teacher Rec... and avg EC...
GPA weighted from 9-11 grade: 97.something, about 97.</p>
<p>First of all, grades mean something different at every school, and I think we all know that they look at your grades RELATIVE to the rest of your class. That said, if you have grades a lot lower than your grades last year then yes you do have a "downward trend"...I'm not sure how much this actually HURTS you, but it's definitely something they look at (but it's not like you're going to be rejected because of a few B's either.) The only thing I'd worry about is that you had a really difficult schedule in previous years as well, and it's not like this is your first year taking hard classes and you aren't doing as well...cus that might be bad.</p>
<p>Anyway...GOOD LUCK!!:D(Unless you're applying to CAS, in which case you should withdraw your app now and not even waste your time with it. :p)</p>
<p>i am applying school of engineering there, last year i took calc bc, ap bio and ap physic b, got all 5s, except 4 for ap physic b...
why should i draw my app. from CAS, if that's the case? Is it hard to get in?</p>
<p>I saw your posts on the Coulmbia and Penn boards. If you don't mind me asking, what similarities do you see between these schools and Cornell? Do they even have good engineering?</p>
<p>Columbia - Fu Foundation
PENN - Jerome Fisher Program
Cornell - An amazing Engineering prog...my cousin told me, who is a sophomore over there...</p>
<p>Another similarity among them is they are all ivy league!</p>
<p>
[quote]
Cornell - An amazing Engineering prog...my cousin told me, who is a sophomore over there...
-JZL1129
[/quote]
</p>
<p>did you even visit, so that you can make an informed decision yourself? or are you just going by whatever anyone says about all of the schools you are applying to</p>
<p>First, a visit gives you a very superficial view of the college. The only thing you truly discover is whether you like the environment.
Second, many people don't visit the schools they apply to. I visited only 4 out of the 7. Lets say I visited all 7 (all but one of them being 500+ miles away since I live in NC). Given the admission % of the schools that I applied to I will most likely get into 2. Appromixately 30% admit rate average multiplied by 7 will equal about 2 (a bad way to estimate it but thats irrelevant). If I would've visited all 7 of the schools, the travel and lodging would've accumulated to about $2000. If I was denied by 5 of the schools, I wasted $1428.57. In addition, I just missed a record amount of school days and will have to work my sphinkter off to catch up and succeed on our beloved AP exams.
Clearly, it is much more logical to wait for the admission decisions before visiting the colleges. However, I will have to apologize for the hypocrisy since I did fly across the continent to visit a school by which I will most likely be rejected, and I did drive for 9 hours to visit 3 schools that I think are 50/50s (decided not to apply to one of them). The fourth one is in-state so that wasn't that much of a sacrifice.
I was just trying to make a point that it is OK to apply to a school w/o visiting it.</p>
<p>"The only thing you truly discover is whether you like the environment."</p>
<p>Not true. There's a lot more to visiting a college than just the environment. How else could you attend a real class, meet real professors, and converse with real students? Of course the tours can be cheesy, but you have to be exploring the school in the right way.</p>
<p>However, I do agree that you don't have to visit a school before you apply. What is the point in spending thousands on airfare when you're putting down only $70 for the application fee? It definitely makes more sense to wait if you've applied to a lot of schools all over the place. :)</p>
<p>oh, i definitely based part of my decision on campus. I actually applied to Cornell, Penn AND Columbia, but I liked Cornell's campus the most by far.</p>
<p>And i visited many schools i didn't apply to - seeing them (these were mostly small lib. arts schools) made me realize that that was NOT the place for me. Esp. when the Haverford tour guide said that one of the reasons juniors opt for study abroad is because "after a few years it tends to get claustrophobic around here...you see the same people all the time, and if you get into fights with them there's a lot of tension. so lots of people choose to study abroad." what a wonderful way to attract students! "you might get into such bad fights with people, have no friends to turn to, and flee the country to escape the hostility" right in the freakin TOUR.</p>
<p>Likewise, Swarthmore students told me that they had renamed McCabe Library "McCage"...because YOU NEVER LEAVE. In short, campus visits can tell you a lot.</p>
<p>
[quote]
This is the only simlilarity I'm aware of. I couldn't even consider applying to both Cornell and Columbia, talk about opposites...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Eh, Columbia was actually my second choice, so had I been rejected/deferred from Cornell ED, I'd've also applied to Columbia. The reasons:</p>
<p>1 - Both close, but not too close, to home (like UPenn is...)
2 - Both great schools, obviously
3 - Legacy at both (mom went to Cornell, dad to Columbia) so I heard a lot of positive things about both.
4 - Cornell was more appealing overall, because of the location (nice and cold), general feel of the campus, and courses it offered. I kinda liked the idea of Columbia's core curriculum though (again, parental influence). </p>
<p>There's no reason that two relatively different schools can't appeal to the same person -- it just might be for different reasons.</p>