<p>My grades aren't that great, however, my class rank is actually pretty high</p>
<p>would colleges care about where I rank in the class in terms of my transcript and rigor?</p>
<p>Yes, it’s all about rank.</p>
<p>I believe that class rank definitely puts things into perspective for the schools, as they have a chance to see how you “stack up” in relation to your peers, however, it ultimately depends on how strong you are individually, as an applicant.</p>
<p>Hmom5- What about Unweighted rank???</p>
<p>I agree that it should be all about rank, but help me understand. Why do so many colleges say that both GPA and rank are “very important” in the admissions decision? If you’re number one in your class at a good school, why does it matter whether you have a 4.0 or a 3.0?</p>
<p>The key thing is the “good school” part. If you are valedictorian with a 3.0 GPA, your school is not a good school, no matter what other statistics may say. And the fact is, there are a lot of people like that; they have a good class rank not because they are actually that good of a student, but because they happen to come from a bad school.</p>
<p>Hate to play devil’s advocate here, but what we have found in our grade deflated high school, class rank DOES NOT trump GPA unless the college is prudent enough to pick apart the transcripts for rigor of curriculum…</p>
<p>many, many students in the top 10% were rejected/waitlisted from schools where much lower ranked students from comparable high schools were admitted with higher GPA’s…</p>
<p>Like I said, it all depends on the college and how it looks at rank and GPA…</p>
<p>That is so messed up. Why even consider class rank if you won’t consider GPA. In an ideal world it would all be about class rank and not about GPA at all, so long as you are in the top 10th. Why? It is hard to be valedictorian at almost ANY school. Every school has a few grade grubbers, no matter how hard. And if you are in the top tenth with a 3.0, then that means that the school is hard, not that the student is lousy. </p>
<p>My school has heavy grade deflation as well. We have noticed our enrollemnt in the top schools diminish slowly over the past 4 years. Maybe this is why…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Are you serious? It’s the top high schools where few ever get a 4.0. I think there have been 2 in the past decade at Exeter. And there’s a top day school in Boston known for giving few A’s. </p>
<p>Colleges don’t care a bit what GPA the top students at these schools have.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This would imply good grades in non rigorous classes. That won’t help at selective colleges.</p>
<p>There are schools where it’s hard to get all As of course. I know that, and it’s certainly something that is true in college. That doesn’t mean that the best students at those schools regularly get straight Bs.</p>
<p>Our HS doesn’t rank, but every student in the entire school takes exactly the same courses for four years with only two small variations (choice of AP Calc or AP Stats and which level of Spanish you start in). So when they look at GPA for the students, colleges are comparing apples and apples, so to speak.</p>
<p>I like the weighted rank. I am in the top 3% at my HS when weighted. If it wasn’t I might be around 15%. I take hard classes and have had a few B+s. All those kids who take easy classes to get all As and a 4.0 would then be ahead of me.</p>
<p>Hmom5 is right. I found that to be true when looking at the acceptances at most of the top twenty - it seemed that rank was extremely important. I think that is because that is the equalizer of the school. A kid could get a very high SAT score but only be ranked in the top 20% in his class - which means on a day in and day out basis - he isn’t the best or one of the best. Graduating at the top of your class is viewed highly and I think most likely people that graduate in the top three in their class are viewed pretty highly.</p>