<p>forgive me if this is a stupid question, but why do colleges put such an importance on class rank? why should "application A" look worse than "application B" because there are more "smart" people at "school A" than at "school B". hypothetically, someone could go to one school and be in the top 50% of their class, whereas someone at another school with the same classes, gpa, etc. could be in the top 25%. (i'm talking about average, run-of-the-mill schools. not "magnet" or that type.)</p>
<p>I think it's because, like you said, schools vary in difficulty. So they want to see how your gpa stacks up with others in your school. For example, in some schools the honors classes are super easy, making an over 4.0 easy. However, some students will still work harder than others, and have a higher gpa/class rank than them because of it. In other schools, the honors classes are really hard, making a 4.0 hard to attain. But that's shown b/c a person with a 3.9 would still have a high class rank.</p>
<p>that makes sense. what really gets me though is that there are certain scholarships that i don't qualify for solely because of my rank. is there any way around that, or am i just going to have to keep looking?</p>
<p>You apply anyway.</p>
<p>areyounobodytoo:"For example, in some schools the honors classes are super easy, making an over 4.0 easy. However, some students will still work harder than others, and have a higher gpa/class rank than them because of it. In other schools, the honors classes are really hard, making a 4.0 hard to attain. But that's shown b/c a person with a 3.9 would still have a high class rank."</p>
<p>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~</p>
<p>I wish that were always true: d's friend took 4 h/AP class compared to d's 9. (D made A's and B's in honors/AP classes; A's in regular.) However, friend's class rank is higher (ranking system at school is, ummm, unique), as friend has nice high A's in all those regular classes. Probably would have been better rank-wise for d to steer clear of some of the honors classes; and isn't that statement sad?</p>
<p>Just think of all the kids in schools where there's no weighting for any classes. </p>
<p>I know a few friends of mine in undergrad came from schools where APs were weighted by .01. That way, in the case of a "tie" between someone that didn't take AP courses and someone that did, they'd come out ahead, but otherwise they'd be behind.</p>
<p>Our school doesn't weight classes at all, or rank us. Anyone with a 4.0 for all four years speaks as "group valedictorians" at graduation...which is weird, because some of us take as many AP and honors classes as possible, and some people take the bare minimum and art classes or something, and we end up with the same GPAs...so I think rank is important for some schools, but unfair for places like ours</p>
<p>what bugs me is that at my school, there are a ton of kids with 4.0's who get A's in home ec, remedial classes, and PE, while the rest of us who work our butts off in advanced classes are ranked lower. (my school only weights AP classes. honors and advanced classes are worth the same as everyother class, but are much harder.,)</p>
<p>I think it's still somewhat unfair, even for schools that weight. I'm 29/90 for my class this year, but i have a senior friend who is 11/102 for his class and both my weighted and unweighted are higher. He is top 10% and i'm am barley top 30% even though i have a higher unweighted. Sucks to have a smart class.</p>
<p>Hypothetical situation:
Student A has a 3.9 GPA and is top 30%. Student B had a 3.7 and is top 10%. This tells the college that school A has much more grade inflation than school B.</p>
<p>However, I still don't think all ranking systems are fair. My school has a system where student X, who got all As in 7 honors classes, would outrank student Y, who got all As in 7 honors classes and one regular class. So grade-grubbing students have to give up their electives to stay valedictorian.</p>
<p>It's still pointless, however, as it is somewhat based upon the supposition that students perform uniformly at each school. So to be within the top 10% of one school is just as good as being in the top 10% of another. Suppose you attended a school and you were at the bottom tier of your class, but the people ahead of you were Russell, Tesla, Whitehead, and Descartes. Would that make you academically and intellectually inferior to a person who was first in his or her class which was comprised primarily of Britney Spears'?</p>
<p>I don't like class rank, personally. At my old school, the top 20 or so kids in my class all had the same GPA, and the ONLY way you could even be in that top 20 was to take PE and health in summer school and take advanced band.
My new school does not have class rank whatsoever. It's NICE!</p>