Is there a gpa cutoff beyond where it does not matter

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there a gpa cutoff beyond which candidates are grouped in the high academic bucket. Some people seem to think at private schools 3.9 is a cutoff. When a 3.93 and 4.0 with same rigor are evaluated, does the 4.0 get a slight edge? Or AOs pretty much focus on ECs at that point. Should a student who has a 3.94 apply to same school as a 4.0 in ED or is it a disadvantage?

FWIW, my DD applied ED to a school with a 4.341, her friend (almost exactly the same class load) applied to the same school EA with a 4.35. My DD got a "no" and her friend got a "yes". This is in the data that our private school shares, it's anonymous, but there is enough data to know who is who.

All the decimals matter - especially at a large school. It's how they make these decisions.

If they really differentiated between a 4.34 and 4.35 then that is crazy. I am hoping there is more at play here like the major or recos etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there a gpa cutoff beyond which candidates are grouped in the high academic bucket. Some people seem to think at private schools 3.9 is a cutoff. When a 3.93 and 4.0 with same rigor are evaluated, does the 4.0 get a slight edge? Or AOs pretty much focus on ECs at that point. Should a student who has a 3.94 apply to same school as a 4.0 in ED or is it a disadvantage?

FWIW, my DD applied ED to a school with a 4.341, her friend (almost exactly the same class load) applied to the same school EA with a 4.35. My DD got a "no" and her friend got a "yes". This is in the data that our private school shares, it's anonymous, but there is enough data to know who is who.

All the decimals matter - especially at a large school. It's how they make these decisions.

If they really differentiated between a 4.34 and 4.35 then that is crazy. I am hoping there is more at play here like the major or recos etc.

They don’t. Look up the recent NYC suburban high school thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rigor has always mattered regardless of school type (private or public). The 4.0 with easy classes will have far worse outcomes than the 3.85 with the most difficult courseload.

This is old advice. Not at all true if the supposed “rigor” courses (math? STEM?) have nothing to do with the 4.0 student’s interests. Major matters more than ever: colleges are sick of STEM, Econ, and biosciences applicants — as well they should be,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our school publishes gpa distributions, not standardized for weight, and test score averages etc. Are you looking to see where your child falls relative to others? This doesn’t account for rigor though per se

Yes, my kid has a 3.94 with top rigor at a very good private but we are deciding where she should apply ED. But we know a couple of other kids with higher gpa might also be looking at the same schools. So I am wondering if she should apply given she has a slight disadvantage gpa wise but I think her ECs may be stronger but if her gpa is a disadvantage I would have her look at another ED. Also, I am unable to figure out what percentile she is so ideally it would have been good to find out where she stacks up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rigor has always mattered regardless of school type (private or public). The 4.0 with easy classes will have far worse outcomes than the 3.85 with the most difficult courseload.

This is old advice. Not at all true if the supposed “rigor” courses (math? STEM?) have nothing to do with the 4.0 student’s interests. Major matters more than ever: colleges are sick of STEM, Econ, and biosciences applicants — as well they should be,

You are pushing an agenda. This is completely false. Rigor matters the most.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rigor has always mattered regardless of school type (private or public). The 4.0 with easy classes will have far worse outcomes than the 3.85 with the most difficult courseload.

This is old advice. Not at all true if the supposed “rigor” courses (math? STEM?) have nothing to do with the 4.0 student’s interests. Major matters more than ever: colleges are sick of STEM, Econ, and biosciences applicants — as well they should be,

You are pushing an agenda. This is completely false. Rigor matters the most.

If you want to analyze, offer substance. But we get that you are old school. Go CS majors!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rigor has always mattered regardless of school type (private or public). The 4.0 with easy classes will have far worse outcomes than the 3.85 with the most difficult courseload.

This is old advice. Not at all true if the supposed “rigor” courses (math? STEM?) have nothing to do with the 4.0 student’s interests. Major matters more than ever: colleges are sick of STEM, Econ, and biosciences applicants — as well they should be,

This is absolutely true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there a gpa cutoff beyond which candidates are grouped in the high academic bucket. Some people seem to think at private schools 3.9 is a cutoff. When a 3.93 and 4.0 with same rigor are evaluated, does the 4.0 get a slight edge? Or AOs pretty much focus on ECs at that point. Should a student who has a 3.94 apply to same school as a 4.0 in ED or is it a disadvantage?

FWIW, my DD applied ED to a school with a 4.341, her friend (almost exactly the same class load) applied to the same school EA with a 4.35. My DD got a "no" and her friend got a "yes". This is in the data that our private school shares, it's anonymous, but there is enough data to know who is who.

All the decimals matter - especially at a large school. It's how they make these decisions.

EA/ED - Michigan?
If so, major matters a LOT there as well as that long essay - they can decide to admit or deny based on the essay alone. Also, they like national accolades of any sort.

This - if it was Michigan, the results are easily explainable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school publishes gpa distributions, not standardized for weight, and test score averages etc. Are you looking to see where your child falls relative to others? This doesn’t account for rigor though per se

Yes, my kid has a 3.94 with top rigor at a very good private but we are deciding where she should apply ED. But we know a couple of other kids with higher gpa might also be looking at the same schools. So I am wondering if she should apply given she has a slight disadvantage gpa wise but I think her ECs may be stronger but if her gpa is a disadvantage I would have her look at another ED. Also, I am unable to figure out what percentile she is so ideally it would have been good to find out where she stacks up.

Sigh. Major and gender will be 10x more important than small gpa gradations.

As a general rule, though, don’t apply ED where everyone else is applying…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there a gpa cutoff beyond which candidates are grouped in the high academic bucket. Some people seem to think at private schools 3.9 is a cutoff. When a 3.93 and 4.0 with same rigor are evaluated, does the 4.0 get a slight edge? Or AOs pretty much focus on ECs at that point. Should a student who has a 3.94 apply to same school as a 4.0 in ED or is it a disadvantage?

FWIW, my DD applied ED to a school with a 4.341, her friend (almost exactly the same class load) applied to the same school EA with a 4.35. My DD got a "no" and her friend got a "yes". This is in the data that our private school shares, it's anonymous, but there is enough data to know who is who.

All the decimals matter - especially at a large school. It's how they make these decisions.

Something in your daughter’s friend’s application was more appealing to the school—essay, recs, ECs, or some combination. There’s no way one-one-hundredth of a point in GPA was a factor in the decision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rigor has always mattered regardless of school type (private or public). The 4.0 with easy classes will have far worse outcomes than the 3.85 with the most difficult courseload.

This is old advice. Not at all true if the supposed “rigor” courses (math? STEM?) have nothing to do with the 4.0 student’s interests. Major matters more than ever: colleges are sick of STEM, Econ, and biosciences applicants — as well they should be,

You have no proof of "colleges are sick of STEM," one way or another. Just because you are sick of STEM doesn't mean "as well they should be." This sounds like the wishful thinking of a mom whose child is inclined towards non-STEM and didn't have the highest rigor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rigor has always mattered regardless of school type (private or public). The 4.0 with easy classes will have far worse outcomes than the 3.85 with the most difficult courseload.

This is old advice. Not at all true if the supposed “rigor” courses (math? STEM?) have nothing to do with the 4.0 student’s interests. Major matters more than ever: colleges are sick of STEM, Econ, and biosciences applicants — as well they should be,

You have no proof of "colleges are sick of STEM," one way or another. Just because you are sick of STEM doesn't mean "as well they should be." This sounds like the wishful thinking of a mom whose child is inclined towards non-STEM and didn't have the highest rigor.

Np. Why is everything so personal here? This is so weird.
Noone is "sick of STEM". It's oversaturated, and the AO eyes roll when they see another application. Nothing is personal or even specifically about your child, whatever their inclinations are.

- T20 application reader

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rigor has always mattered regardless of school type (private or public). The 4.0 with easy classes will have far worse outcomes than the 3.85 with the most difficult courseload.

This is old advice. Not at all true if the supposed “rigor” courses (math? STEM?) have nothing to do with the 4.0 student’s interests. Major matters more than ever: colleges are sick of STEM, Econ, and biosciences applicants — as well they should be,

You have no proof of "colleges are sick of STEM," one way or another. Just because you are sick of STEM doesn't mean "as well they should be." This sounds like the wishful thinking of a mom whose child is inclined towards non-STEM and didn't have the highest rigor.

College admissions is a holistic review process. GPA is a factor, rigor is a factor. We do review transcript carefully to see which courses the applicant has taken in junior year and senior year.

And no, colleges are not sick of STEM. This is absolutely false. It's just STEM is so popular and attracts so many applicants.

- T10 Admissions Officer

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rigor has always mattered regardless of school type (private or public). The 4.0 with easy classes will have far worse outcomes than the 3.85 with the most difficult courseload.

This is old advice. Not at all true if the supposed “rigor” courses (math? STEM?) have nothing to do with the 4.0 student’s interests. Major matters more than ever: colleges are sick of STEM, Econ, and biosciences applicants — as well they should be,

Schools are shutting down their humanities departments and expanding their stem offerings.
I'm sure they would like students to be interested in the things they want to teach but with large language models a lot of humanities are as useful as an abacus in an age of calculators.
Students are choosing Purdue STEM over Brown humanities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rigor has always mattered regardless of school type (private or public). The 4.0 with easy classes will have far worse outcomes than the 3.85 with the most difficult courseload.

This is old advice. Not at all true if the supposed “rigor” courses (math? STEM?) have nothing to do with the 4.0 student’s interests. Major matters more than ever: colleges are sick of STEM, Econ, and biosciences applicants — as well they should be,

Schools are shutting down their humanities departments and expanding their stem offerings.
I'm sure they would like students to be interested in the things they want to teach but with large language models a lot of humanities are as useful as an abacus in an age of calculators.
Students are choosing Purdue STEM over Brown humanities.

Wow, you are so wrong it’s funny.

In 5 years, AI will make most STEM majors obsolete.

Companies are recruiting for people who can think creatively, communicate in ways that motivate and touch people, and can lead strategically. Sadly, STEM majors are taught none of these things.