Why do some schools place strong emphasis on class rank?

<p>I agree that class rank is an important piece of the total picture. But, just as curmudgeon did, I'll speak from my own child's experience. When so many of the top students take pretty much all the same level courses, a specific interest may be the deal-breaker on whether you're in the top 10%, particularly in a small school. </p>

<p>My D graduates with a class of 100, the top 8 - 10 regularly going to the top schools. But she chose to study a language that is too small at our school to have an honors track - unlike the other languages, which have both regular and honors tracks. So that one interest of hers is enough to put her out of the top 10%. I knew it would hurt her GPA, but her interest is so strong, I bit my tongue and stood back. I don't regret it, but I sure hope the GC mentions the lack of honors in that program! And I hope the schools take it into account.</p>

<p>My daughter started an elective in human anatomy, hated the teacher and dropped it to take an acting class where she had a strong interest. Probably dropped her down 20 spaces due to weighting. I don't know nor care whether that will make any difference in the long haul. I suspect it won't.</p>

<p>That's where the GC can help (or we can only hope). </p>

<p>My D must take an unweighted Journalism class to be Editor-in-Chief. Her counselor will note on his rec that the class is required for the position. This placement will certainly cost her 10+ spots in her ultra-competitive 900 student class.</p>

<p>Goodness. At first I was angry that my D's school doesn't weight the GPA, because, as is expected, the top few kids in the class haven't taken AP exams. But I read these posts about what happens to rank with this crazy weighting these schools do, and I guess it's overall better off not to weight in a small school.</p>

<p>quiltguru, it is a total mess, isn't it? Can't win for losing. For every system we devise, there will be a way to game it. Other than working to change the rules for the future, all we can do as parents, and I do mean all - is to make sure our kids know the rules that are in place (and make sure that everyone else is living by the same rules).</p>

<p>My kid is one that may or may not be val. I've told her that her choices to be in marching and symphonic band and be in varsity athletics at the same time have obviously made her row a tough one to hoe. While the other top students are being an office aide or having a free period or going home early-she has chosen to have an overfull schedule senior year. So be it. She'll work hard. I'll be proud of her come what may. I told her it was pretty much up to factors that were cast when she chose her extracurriculars. We'll just have to see, won't we? </p>

<p>As to the idea that kids from smaller schools (below several hundred graduating class) are not considered as a plus- At every school we have visited they all have said my daughter's class rank in her grad class of 140 given her courseload was THE main factor. That coupled with top 1% scores verifies there are top students at little schools, too. So a 32,1470 first sitting female Val compares pretty well to a 1500+ kid who's number 35 in a class of 500 and took multiple tests to get there. At least that's what we have been told along the way.</p>

<p>Here in California, due to the large size of the state and the large number of students who continue on to public colleges it's possible to perform a statistically meaningful comparison of the objective value of a given grade point average at different public high schools. The Cal State University system keeps a record of the average GPA and SAT scores of all of the students from each high school who go on to attend a CSU. (The CSU's, for you non-Californians, are the "second tier" Universities in the State, not as prestigious as the University of California campuses. But still pretty good. I assume that UC could do the same - if they have done so, I haven't seen the charts.) A suburban school with ~2,000 students typically will have 50 to 80 graduates going on to a CSU each year. It's simple enough to compare the average GPA of a school's CSU-bound graduates against the statewide GPA of CSU-bound students as a whole - and then compare their 1st year collegiate GPA against the statewide average as well. For an example - my kids' school's graduates typically have a lower gpa than the state average going in, but achieve a higher gpa in their first year of college, despite enrolling in the more demanding and competitive CSU campuses. This suggests that the gpa at that high school is graded tougher than average. </p>

<p>So you could have an objectively valid conversion chart which would adjust the GPA's for students at every public high school to correct for schoolwide grading discrepencies - and I suspect it would be valid for use at non-California Universities' use as well. But I don't think that's been done. If it were done, I think it could be more effective than class rank as a way of addressing the problem of grade inflation and differential grading philosophies at different schools.</p>

<p>Washington also has a comparative analysis of all the state HS's. They use it for admissions.</p>