<p>According to Collegeboard, the average GPA is as follows:</p>
<pre><code>* 45% had h.s. GPA of 3.75 and higher
* 28% had h.s. GPA between 3.5 and 3.74
* 16% had h.s. GPA between 3.25 and 3.49
* 9% had h.s. GPA between 3.0 and 3.24
* 2% had h.s. GPA between 2.5 and 2.99
</code></pre>
<p>Is this the result of the many different school within Carnegie Mellon? Like for someone doing arts, his or her GPA will likely be less than a prospective engineering student but still these stats are absolutely horrible for such a top ranked school. Anyone else agree.</p>
<p>Compared to the other top 25 schools, most have at least 75+ percent of their students with GPA higher than 3.75.</p>
<p>Still, I believe test scores aren’t as important as your GPA since SAT is a four hour test whereas the GPA is one’s four year accomplishment. One may be intelligent but unless one puts effort into one’s work, one will not be successful. </p>
<p>Also many students are capable of taking many AP classes and still attain a perfect or near perfect GPA so that’s no excuse.</p>
<p>colleges know that “GPA” is the most unreliable and easily twistable statistics that they get. those numbers hardly mean anything. they won’t take a 3.90 over a 3.80 by simply comparing two numbers that mean very different things within the context of each school.</p>
<p>test scores are more reliable than grades. everyone takes almost the same test and allows people to compare data on a national scale. (ie. 600, 700, 800 all represent standard deviations from the mean 500). that is something that you just cant do with “GPA”. saying that, however, it is important to note that the rigor of your curriculum says more than what your grades average out to. GPA is correlated with academic performance slightly, but never enough to just factor in a GPA into some equation refuse to consider anyone who has below a 3.5.</p>
<p>I understand that GPA is not standardized; however, are you guys really saying that just because someone is good at taking a test that he or she will succeed at CMU. CMU is known for its tremendous workload. For someone who is intelligent and does good on the SAT but is lazy when it comes to schoolwork, he or she will not succeed at CMU. Furthermore, there is a reason why colleges ask for class rank so that they can compare one students GPA to another so that CMU has an idea of what the GPA means. Also most admission officers are aware of HS reputations and what is a good GPA at that certain school. </p>
<p>I for one definitely believe that GPA holds more weight than SAT, but also I’m not saying that its the only thing that’s important.</p>
<p>If you can take a test, it is something you CAN do. If you are a “bad” test taker, it is something you CAN’T do.</p>
<p>“For someone who is intelligent and does good on the SAT but is lazy when it comes to schoolwork, he or she will not succeed at CMU.”
Correct, but in America’s less-than-impressive public education system, everyone has a 4.9 GPA. It’s hard to find someone who is remotely interested in college but doesn’t have a 3.0+ GPA. It can certainly weed some candidates out, but its effectiveness at selecting the best candidates is highly questionable.</p>
<p>I would have to agree with floodrush because GPA’s vary SIGNIFICANTLY between different high schools. For one, my average freshman year was around a 96, but then I was offered admission to a more competitive high school and I decided to go there. My average sophomore year then fell to roughly an 88…so an average is very indefinite and unreliable. After trying very hard, I’ve only been able to get around a cumulative average of 89.14, but that’s because my school is really tough. And I’m also only in the Top 40% of my class at this school, as opposed to the Top 5% during my freshman year. In short, a GPA doesn’t really mean anything because it’s hard to compare it with other applicants, so I’d say that standardized tests are better for judging an applicant.</p>
<p>Agree with them. SATs/ACTs may not be the best method to measure an applicants’ abilities but it is the surest and the best we have now. Some schools weight classes while others don’t. There are also varying course rigors and difficulty of academia at high schools.
There is a difference of gpa in the diff schools at cmu</p>
<p>High school grades are stupid (especially in America’s typical high school). They are watered down by participation grades, and notebook grades, and “fun” grades, and “does the teacher like you?” grades, and “did you work hard? i dont care if you learned anything” grades.</p>
<p>Essentially, high school grades are not to be trusted. Admissions people are not stupid enough to forget this.</p>
<p>Well, most admissions officers are stupid and do use GPA’s, but I wish they placed way more emphasis on standardized test scores, essays and extracurriculars.</p>
<p>I don’t think CMU is stupid enough to plug a GPA into a formula and come up with a list of best applicants. They aren’t going to admit a 4.0 over a 3.5 without looking into the context of those numbers, either.</p>
<p>My cumulative unweighted GPA from high school was a 2.9. However, it was a rigorous private school that made a point of not inflating grades at all (you’d be surprised at how many schools dumb down their grading scale or class difficulty to make their students look better on paper), and I also had a huge upward swing, so I had a high GPA for my later year, just brought down by horrible freshman and sophomore year grades. However, I had a high SAT score, and going from personalized response I got on acceptances at other schools, I had a very very good easy. Also, I’m in CFA, so design was less concerned about grades and more about my portfolio.</p>
<p>Even in more academic majors, they don’t want all perfect numbers. In fact, at orientation, there was an assembly where they read off the rejection stats, and mentioned the hundreds and hundreds of 4.0+'s and 1600’s (yeah I’m old) that got rejected. CMU’s goal in assembling a class is to create a well-rounded class, which will contain plenty of pointy and less even students, not a class full of well-rounded students. Because the latter would just be a really really boring class. </p>
<p>Just because you’ve dedicated your life to high scores and good grades doesn’t mean you’ll have much to contribute to the class other than your perfect numbers. What about the people with other stuff to offer, like interesting life stories, unconventional talents, valuable work experiences, etc. There’s more to making a good class than numbers. And CMU is particularly good at getting away from the numbers and looking at all aspects of the student.</p>