GPA Necessary For HYPSM At Big 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

California is 5% black.

The United States is 14% Black. OOS can/do apply to UC’s.

Is racial diversity only measured by the number of Black students?

That’s how I’m measuring it.

Why?

Because I’m Black and that’s the group I’m most interested in knowing about on these campuses.

Do you think a person who is not Black should be interested in knowing about the Black population on these campuses?

Non-Black people should ask themselves that question. I’m sure the answers will vary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

That is a lie.

UCB is 4% AA and UCLA is 6%.

The enrolled student population at University of California-Los Angeles (110662), both undergraduate and graduate, is 26.6% White, 26.2% Asian, 20% Hispanic or Latino, 6.23% Two or More Races, 3.62% Black or African American, 0.213% American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0.157% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islanders.

“The enrolled student population at University of California-Berkeley, both undergraduate and graduate, is 30.3% Asian, 22.9% White, 17.5% Hispanic or Latino, 5.48% Two or More Races, 2.52% Black or African American, 0.139% American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0.135% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islanders.”

https://datausa.io/profile/university/university-of-california-berkeley#:~:text=Enrollment%20by%20Race%20%26%20Ethnicity&text=The%20enrolled%20student%20population%20at%20University%20of%20California%2DBerkeley%20is,Hawaiian%20or%20Other%20Pacific%20Islanders.

We are talking undergrad here.

UC Berkeley: “We are 4% black”

https://diversity.berkeley.edu/reports-data/diversity-data-dashboard

UCLA: “We are 6% black”

https://www.ucla.edu/about/facts-and-figures

I’m concerned about the total campus population. We don’t have to have the same interests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

California is 5% black.

The United States is 14% Black. OOS can/do apply to UC’s.

Is racial diversity only measured by the number of Black students?

That’s how I’m measuring it.

Why?

Because I’m Black and that’s the group I’m most interested in knowing about on these campuses.

Do you think a person who is not Black should be interested in knowing about the Black population on these campuses?

Non-Black people should ask themselves that question. I’m sure the answers will vary.

Why do you think they should ask themselves that Q?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

California is 5% black.

The United States is 14% Black. OOS can/do apply to UC’s.

Is racial diversity only measured by the number of Black students?

That’s how I’m measuring it.

Why?

Because I’m Black and that’s the group I’m most interested in knowing about on these campuses.

Do you think a person who is not Black should be interested in knowing about the Black population on these campuses?

Non-Black people should ask themselves that question. I’m sure the answers will vary.

Why do you think they should ask themselves that Q?

I really don’t care, one way or the other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

California is 5% black.

The United States is 14% Black. OOS can/do apply to UC’s.

Is racial diversity only measured by the number of Black students?

That’s how I’m measuring it.

Why?

Because I’m Black and that’s the group I’m most interested in knowing about on these campuses.

Do you think a person who is not Black should be interested in knowing about the Black population on these campuses?

Non-Black people should ask themselves that question. I’m sure the answers will vary.

Why do you think they should ask themselves that Q?

I really don’t care, one way or the other.

They why do you think UCLA or Cal should care if you don’t?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After California voters banned affirmative action at state universities in 1996, the University of California system saw a 12 percent drop in underrepresented groups, while campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles both reported more than 40 percent declines, according to Bleemer’s research. Over time, those numbers have climbed at the most selective UC campuses, which have used multiple strategies to bolster diversity, in part also because of growth in the state’s Hispanic population. But the race-neutral alternatives increased enrollment of underrepresented minorities far less than affirmative action.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/06/29/affirmative-action-supreme-court-college-queens-harvard/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3e218e7%2F66802e4c819144733535b687%2F596a57bfae7e8a0ef33d8b02%2F7%2F47%2F66802e4c819144733535b687

Yes - UC found it harder to have diversity when there wasn't an easy box to sort their applicants. But they absolutely care about diversity and still try to achieve it. URM is still a hook at any school that values diversity and can find a way to achieve it after the SCOTUS ruling. HYPSM all still care.

That’s the lie you want to believe. It doesn’t matter if a school cares about diversity. It’s now ILLEGAL to base admissions decisions on a student’s race. Being an URM is not a hook.

Btw, UCLA and Cal are both less than 3% Black. How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?

California is 5% black.

The United States is 14% Black. OOS can/do apply to UC’s.

Is racial diversity only measured by the number of Black students?

That’s how I’m measuring it.

Why?

Because I’m Black and that’s the group I’m most interested in knowing about on these campuses.

Do you think a person who is not Black should be interested in knowing about the Black population on these campuses?

Non-Black people should ask themselves that question. I’m sure the answers will vary.

Why do you think they should ask themselves that Q?

I really don’t care, one way or the other.

They why do you think UCLA or Cal should care if you don’t?

They don’t have to care. State schools have never been of interest to me or my family. Just because I’m discussing a particular school’s demographics, it doesn’t mean I have a personal interest in that school. I’m from California, and I applied to zero state schools. I wasn’t interested then, I’m not interested now.

[Anonymous]

So much for “How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So much for “How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?”

What are you arguing about? Do you and I speak for the UC system?!?
Go take a nap and rest your tired mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So much for “How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?”

What are you arguing about? Do you and I speak for the UC system?!?
Go take a nap and rest your tired mind.

You’re having a hard time following the thread, I see. It’s ok. You don’t care anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So much for “How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?”

What are you arguing about? Do you and I speak for the UC system?!?
Go take a nap and rest your tired mind.

You’re having a hard time following the thread, I see. It’s ok. You don’t care anyway.

You’re having a hard time composing coherent sentences. It’s ok, I understand you’re slow. I think we’re done here.
Have the day you deserve. 😊

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NCS SCOIR does not show H,Y, or M but average GPA of Princeton admit is 3.99 and average for Stanford is 3.92. So, you can essentially get one A- in all of high school.

YIKES

yes, SCOIR for NCS is scary. Vanderbilt, Duke, Rice, etc. You basically need a 3.98. One A- max over 4 years and it can only be in a semester long course (not a full year). There are really only 1 or 2 girls per grade who qualify for these schools.

That’s definitely not the case at GDS, STA, and Sidwell. Students from those schools consistently get into those colleges with cumulative 3.80 to 3.90 GPAs.

What’s going on at NCS?!?

My kid has a 3.86/1550 and per NCS SCOIR she is in the Boston College, Colgate, Davidson type band. Pretty much all the top 25 universities are above her pay grade (i.e. the star representing her stats is in a sea of red denials). Which means they're really only available to girls in the top 10% of the class. It's sobering.
Can any other NCS parent comment? I'm confused by this whole thing.

Get ready to apply ED to Chicago.

Are these recommendations for ED or RD? Doesn't that make a huge difference?

No. the girls getting in to Duke/Vandy, etc are doing ED. but they don't get in without the 3.9++ as well.

In CO 2024, there are 12 girls going to ivies. Plus 3 to georgetown, 1 to MIT, 1 to Chicago, 1 to Wash U, 1 to Duke. That's 19 right there. They all got about a 3.9? Or even a 3.85? Seems very doubtful. I think only a few of the 19 are legacies or recruits.

Out of the 12 Ivies at least 3 had a 4.0. The rest all had above 3.9 except a legacy. The Wash U had a 4.0.
The MIT and Duke had a 3.9+. One Georgetown is a faculty kid.

How do you know any individual child’s GPA?

well there were 4 valedictorians who all had a 4.0. Then the rest were cum laude girls who had a 3.9+.
it's all school-wide knowledge.

This is surprising. We had one DD graduate from NCS and her not even the flag winner had a 4.0. I think the grading changed during COVID.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NCS SCOIR does not show H,Y, or M but average GPA of Princeton admit is 3.99 and average for Stanford is 3.92. So, you can essentially get one A- in all of high school.

YIKES

yes, SCOIR for NCS is scary. Vanderbilt, Duke, Rice, etc. You basically need a 3.98. One A- max over 4 years and it can only be in a semester long course (not a full year). There are really only 1 or 2 girls per grade who qualify for these schools.

That’s definitely not the case at GDS, STA, and Sidwell. Students from those schools consistently get into those colleges with cumulative 3.80 to 3.90 GPAs.

What’s going on at NCS?!?

My kid has a 3.86/1550 and per NCS SCOIR she is in the Boston College, Colgate, Davidson type band. Pretty much all the top 25 universities are above her pay grade (i.e. the star representing her stats is in a sea of red denials). Which means they're really only available to girls in the top 10% of the class. It's sobering.
Can any other NCS parent comment? I'm confused by this whole thing.

Get ready to apply ED to Chicago.

Are these recommendations for ED or RD? Doesn't that make a huge difference?

No. the girls getting in to Duke/Vandy, etc are doing ED. but they don't get in without the 3.9++ as well.

In CO 2024, there are 12 girls going to ivies. Plus 3 to georgetown, 1 to MIT, 1 to Chicago, 1 to Wash U, 1 to Duke. That's 19 right there. They all got about a 3.9? Or even a 3.85? Seems very doubtful. I think only a few of the 19 are legacies or recruits.

Out of the 12 Ivies at least 3 had a 4.0. The rest all had above 3.9 except a legacy. The Wash U had a 4.0.
The MIT and Duke had a 3.9+. One Georgetown is a faculty kid.

How do you know any individual child’s GPA?

well there were 4 valedictorians who all had a 4.0. Then the rest were cum laude girls who had a 3.9+.
it's all school-wide knowledge.

This is surprising. We had one DD graduate from NCS and her not even the flag winner had a 4.0. I think the grading changed during COVID.

I assume if there was a 4 way tie that they all had 4.0s? This year's grade was the last class that had a year of remote grading. A 4.0 seems insane to me---I don't know how it's even possible. My rising senior is a strong student but was in class sections (several times) where there was a single A given our of 15 girls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NCS SCOIR does not show H,Y, or M but average GPA of Princeton admit is 3.99 and average for Stanford is 3.92. So, you can essentially get one A- in all of high school.

YIKES

yes, SCOIR for NCS is scary. Vanderbilt, Duke, Rice, etc. You basically need a 3.98. One A- max over 4 years and it can only be in a semester long course (not a full year). There are really only 1 or 2 girls per grade who qualify for these schools.

That’s definitely not the case at GDS, STA, and Sidwell. Students from those schools consistently get into those colleges with cumulative 3.80 to 3.90 GPAs.

What’s going on at NCS?!?

My kid has a 3.86/1550 and per NCS SCOIR she is in the Boston College, Colgate, Davidson type band. Pretty much all the top 25 universities are above her pay grade (i.e. the star representing her stats is in a sea of red denials). Which means they're really only available to girls in the top 10% of the class. It's sobering.
Can any other NCS parent comment? I'm confused by this whole thing.

Get ready to apply ED to Chicago.

Are these recommendations for ED or RD? Doesn't that make a huge difference?

No. the girls getting in to Duke/Vandy, etc are doing ED. but they don't get in without the 3.9++ as well.

In CO 2024, there are 12 girls going to ivies. Plus 3 to georgetown, 1 to MIT, 1 to Chicago, 1 to Wash U, 1 to Duke. That's 19 right there. They all got about a 3.9? Or even a 3.85? Seems very doubtful. I think only a few of the 19 are legacies or recruits.

Out of the 12 Ivies at least 3 had a 4.0. The rest all had above 3.9 except a legacy. The Wash U had a 4.0.
The MIT and Duke had a 3.9+. One Georgetown is a faculty kid.

How do you know any individual child’s GPA?

well there were 4 valedictorians who all had a 4.0. Then the rest were cum laude girls who had a 3.9+.
it's all school-wide knowledge.

This is surprising. We had one DD graduate from NCS and her not even the flag winner had a 4.0. I think the grading changed during COVID.

I assume if there was a 4 way tie that they all had 4.0s? This year's grade was the last class that had a year of remote grading. A 4.0 seems insane to me---I don't know how it's even possible. My rising senior is a strong student but was in class sections (several times) where there was a single A given our of 15 girls.

**meant her year the flag winner did not have a 4.0. Though this was before COVID grading. I am shocked by this as we also had similar experiences with very few As being given.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So much for “How is “caring about racial diversity” working for them?!?”

What are you arguing about? Do you and I speak for the UC system?!?
Go take a nap and rest your tired mind.

You’re having a hard time following the thread, I see. It’s ok. You don’t care anyway.

You’re having a hard time composing coherent sentences. It’s ok, I understand you’re slow. I think we’re done here.
Have the day you deserve. 😊

And you, little friend. Bye!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NCS SCOIR does not show H,Y, or M but average GPA of Princeton admit is 3.99 and average for Stanford is 3.92. So, you can essentially get one A- in all of high school.

YIKES

yes, SCOIR for NCS is scary. Vanderbilt, Duke, Rice, etc. You basically need a 3.98. One A- max over 4 years and it can only be in a semester long course (not a full year). There are really only 1 or 2 girls per grade who qualify for these schools.

That’s definitely not the case at GDS, STA, and Sidwell. Students from those schools consistently get into those colleges with cumulative 3.80 to 3.90 GPAs.

What’s going on at NCS?!?

My kid has a 3.86/1550 and per NCS SCOIR she is in the Boston College, Colgate, Davidson type band. Pretty much all the top 25 universities are above her pay grade (i.e. the star representing her stats is in a sea of red denials). Which means they're really only available to girls in the top 10% of the class. It's sobering.
Can any other NCS parent comment? I'm confused by this whole thing.

Get ready to apply ED to Chicago.

Are these recommendations for ED or RD? Doesn't that make a huge difference?

No. the girls getting in to Duke/Vandy, etc are doing ED. but they don't get in without the 3.9++ as well.

In CO 2024, there are 12 girls going to ivies. Plus 3 to georgetown, 1 to MIT, 1 to Chicago, 1 to Wash U, 1 to Duke. That's 19 right there. They all got about a 3.9? Or even a 3.85? Seems very doubtful. I think only a few of the 19 are legacies or recruits.

Out of the 12 Ivies at least 3 had a 4.0. The rest all had above 3.9 except a legacy. The Wash U had a 4.0.
The MIT and Duke had a 3.9+. One Georgetown is a faculty kid.

How do you know any individual child’s GPA?

well there were 4 valedictorians who all had a 4.0. Then the rest were cum laude girls who had a 3.9+.
it's all school-wide knowledge.

This is surprising. We had one DD graduate from NCS and her not even the flag winner had a 4.0. I think the grading changed during COVID.

I assume if there was a 4 way tie that they all had 4.0s? This year's grade was the last class that had a year of remote grading. A 4.0 seems insane to me---I don't know how it's even possible. My rising senior is a strong student but was in class sections (several times) where there was a single A given our of 15 girls.

The flag winner/s are determined based only on the highest gpa calculated from junior and senior year. This as well as cum laude is explained in the handbook. So flag winners can have a 4.0 for those 2 years but their overall gpa from 9-12th is not necessarily a 4.0. Winning the flag is not the same as valedictorian because it’s only based on the last 2 years of high school.