Straight As versus almost straight As

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our college counselor (competitive private north of DMV) says being in top 10% is important, not grades themselves. This tracks with stats of colleges reporting how many students in top 10%. For example, northwestern is something like 98%(?) and Wash U “just” ~86%(?). Just like SAT scores, colleges won’t want to admit kids who will lower their average

For high schools that do not rank, how do we know whether kids are in top 10%? Admission directors repeatedly said they don't compare kids from the same school, but only compare each kid to the reported school profile to understand the rigor and offering. This is what they meant by holistic review.

comparing kid A to the profile (rigor and GPA quartiles are on ours) and comparing kid B to the profile is essentially the same as comparing kid A to kid B. Many top colleges have straight up said they compare kids within the high school first, then the region, then the whole pool.

For the rank Q, if the profile does not make it obvious, ask the head counselor. They will usually tell you the decile and maybe more. Also look at naviance at the very top schools. You can start to see that for the three years listed there are only 5 GPAs above 4.9. Those are the GPAs of very top students. If your kid has a 4.3 and that looks borderline on naviance for UVA in-state, yet you know well over 15% of the class gets in....your kid is not likely in the top 15% but if they have other wow factors could still make it.

Of course they compare kids from the same school. They literally evaluate them all from the same school at the same time. I’ve heard that only MIT allows each application to “stand in its own” which is why getting in there seems random at times.

The admission director of another top school also said that they do not have regional rep and do not evaluate students from the same region or same school together. They said it is very possible that students from the same school are being evaluated by different admission staffs, and unless the students raise to the top, the different admission staff may not even know other students from the same school apply.

[Anonymous]

Don’t most privates have cum laude? Top 10% are inducted end of jr/beginning of senior year. That’s how schools signal rank without actually ranking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our college counselor (competitive private north of DMV) says being in top 10% is important, not grades themselves. This tracks with stats of colleges reporting how many students in top 10%. For example, northwestern is something like 98%(?) and Wash U “just” ~86%(?). Just like SAT scores, colleges won’t want to admit kids who will lower their average

For high schools that do not rank, how do we know whether kids are in top 10%? Admission directors repeatedly said they don't compare kids from the same school, but only compare each kid to the reported school profile to understand the rigor and offering. This is what they meant by holistic review.

comparing kid A to the profile (rigor and GPA quartiles are on ours) and comparing kid B to the profile is essentially the same as comparing kid A to kid B. Many top colleges have straight up said they compare kids within the high school first, then the region, then the whole pool.

For the rank Q, if the profile does not make it obvious, ask the head counselor. They will usually tell you the decile and maybe more. Also look at naviance at the very top schools. You can start to see that for the three years listed there are only 5 GPAs above 4.9. Those are the GPAs of very top students. If your kid has a 4.3 and that looks borderline on naviance for UVA in-state, yet you know well over 15% of the class gets in....your kid is not likely in the top 15% but if they have other wow factors could still make it.

Of course they compare kids from the same school. They literally evaluate them all from the same school at the same time. I’ve heard that only MIT allows each application to “stand in its own” which is why getting in there seems random at times.

The admission director of another top school also said that they do not have regional rep and do not evaluate students from the same region or same school together. They said it is very possible that students from the same school are being evaluated by different admission staffs, and unless the students raise to the top, the different admission staff may not even know other students from the same school apply.

Which school is this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don’t most privates have cum laude? Top 10% are inducted end of jr/beginning of senior year. That’s how schools signal rank without actually ranking.

yes and the next 10% is announced at our school right after first semester senior finals, early-december, via email, so they can put it on all but early applications.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our college counselor (competitive private north of DMV) says being in top 10% is important, not grades themselves. This tracks with stats of colleges reporting how many students in top 10%. For example, northwestern is something like 98%(?) and Wash U “just” ~86%(?). Just like SAT scores, colleges won’t want to admit kids who will lower their average

For high schools that do not rank, how do we know whether kids are in top 10%? Admission directors repeatedly said they don't compare kids from the same school, but only compare each kid to the reported school profile to understand the rigor and offering. This is what they meant by holistic review.

I think at ours admissions officers at HYPMS know that despite the grade deflation (average GPA 3.5, average SAT 1500) there are about 6-10 kids a year who get above a 3.95. They then assume that level GPA is possible (because it is) and so they mostly hold out for those kids. No one is telling the college that these kids are the top 10% but they know that year-over-year that a handful of kids at this level apply to their university so they look for them and they decline the kids under this bar.

Yes, schools can look in the app (Slate) to see what GPA prior admits from a private HS (and prior matriculants) had....they can all see the avg of 1st year GPA and final GPA by HS of kids who end up enrolling from a HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our college counselor (competitive private north of DMV) says being in top 10% is important, not grades themselves. This tracks with stats of colleges reporting how many students in top 10%. For example, northwestern is something like 98%(?) and Wash U “just” ~86%(?). Just like SAT scores, colleges won’t want to admit kids who will lower their average

For high schools that do not rank, how do we know whether kids are in top 10%? Admission directors repeatedly said they don't compare kids from the same school, but only compare each kid to the reported school profile to understand the rigor and offering. This is what they meant by holistic review.

comparing kid A to the profile (rigor and GPA quartiles are on ours) and comparing kid B to the profile is essentially the same as comparing kid A to kid B. Many top colleges have straight up said they compare kids within the high school first, then the region, then the whole pool.

For the rank Q, if the profile does not make it obvious, ask the head counselor. They will usually tell you the decile and maybe more. Also look at naviance at the very top schools. You can start to see that for the three years listed there are only 5 GPAs above 4.9. Those are the GPAs of very top students. If your kid has a 4.3 and that looks borderline on naviance for UVA in-state, yet you know well over 15% of the class gets in....your kid is not likely in the top 15% but if they have other wow factors could still make it.

Yes, they do compare. That's why it's important to have something - some random accolade (open sea racing, blacksmithing, carpentry, car mechanic, archery, beekeeping, equestrian) tied to a narrative that TOTALLY sets you apart from the competition because it makes the side-by-side comparison harder. Makes one kid stand out (even with lower or less impressive stats).

[Anonymous]

The emphasis on A’s v A-minuses can be very misleading for schools that are truly holistic. Not only that, but a 93 at one school can be an A-minus, while it can be a solid A somewhere else. My kid’s small private calculated GPA’s by the actual number grade with points added for advanced courses…and let the college admissions offices do their own conversion to a 4.0 scale. There’s no one right way or formula…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The irony is in college, grades hardly matter at all. C’s get degrees.

This is such a dumb outdated statement. First, at the vast majority of colleges even historically "deflated" william and mary and cornell, 3.5+ is the median graduating class GPA and 2.5-2.9 "Cs get degrees" is bottom of the barrel. At ivy/T10 it is more like 3.8 median. A college gpa under 3.0 or even under 3.3 these days puts you on academic probation and in some cases bans you from progressing in the major. An occasional C is 100% fine especially known tough classes. Mostly Cs is however is very poor, bottom 10%, and will not lead to good job offers, if one is even able to get to the degree due to some colleges having minimum gpa needed to progress in the major.
Even mostly Bs (3.0-3.3) is bottom 15% at many schools and eliminates law, med, phD and the majority of jobs that want 3.3+. In tough job markets the GPA and the actual courses on the transcript matter more than ever.
Even most masters programs that could be considered pay to play want to see 3.3+ at a minimum from US schools. Masters have 25-55% admission these days depending on program, and they have plenty of "average" applicants (3.5+) willing to pay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don’t most privates have cum laude? Top 10% are inducted end of jr/beginning of senior year. That’s how schools signal rank without actually ranking.

My experience with private HS as well, though the cum laude/honors awards happen towards the end of senior year so timing wise not relevant to college apps. However, I would expect that the indications of where a student ranks relative to peers comes through in the recommendation letters from teachers/counselor even at schools that say they don't rank.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our college counselor (competitive private north of DMV) says being in top 10% is important, not grades themselves. This tracks with stats of colleges reporting how many students in top 10%. For example, northwestern is something like 98%(?) and Wash U “just” ~86%(?). Just like SAT scores, colleges won’t want to admit kids who will lower their average

For high schools that do not rank, how do we know whether kids are in top 10%? Admission directors repeatedly said they [b]don't compare kids from the same school, but only compare each kid to the reported school profile to understand the rigor and offering. This is what they meant by holistic review.

comparing kid A to the profile (rigor and GPA quartiles are on ours) and comparing kid B to the profile is essentially the same as comparing kid A to kid B. Many top colleges have straight up said they compare kids within the high school first, then the region, then the whole pool.

For the rank Q, if the profile does not make it obvious, ask the head counselor. They will usually tell you the decile and maybe more. Also look at naviance at the very top schools. You can start to see that for the three years listed there are only 5 GPAs above 4.9. Those are the GPAs of very top students. If your kid has a 4.3 and that looks borderline on naviance for UVA in-state, yet you know well over 15% of the class gets in....your kid is not likely in the top 15% but if they have other wow factors could still make it.

Of course they compare kids from the same school. They literally evaluate them all from the same school at the same time. I’ve heard that only MIT allows each application to “stand in its own” which is why getting in there seems random at times.

The admission director of another top school also said that they do not have regional rep and do not evaluate students from the same region or same school together. They said it is very possible that students from the same school are being evaluated by different admission staffs, and unless the students raise to the top, the different admission staff may not even know other students from the same school apply.

[/b]


I'm a college counselor. Every college I have ever dealt with has a regional rep. The readers do the first cull on applications, which then go to regional rep. Of course, they know which students come from which high school because the very first thing the readers do is pull up the high school profile and review the applicant's course rigor and rank the applicant vis-à-vis the other students from the same high school. This is how high schools get away with "we don't rank" but knowingly provide the class profile which allows the readers to do it in a minute. Read Admissions by Jean Hanff Koreitz or any other good book on admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The irony is in college, grades hardly matter at all. C’s get degrees.

This is such a dumb outdated statement. First, at the vast majority of colleges even historically "deflated" william and mary and cornell, 3.5+ is the median graduating class GPA and 2.5-2.9 "Cs get degrees" is bottom of the barrel. At ivy/T10 it is more like 3.8 median. A college gpa under 3.0 or even under 3.3 these days puts you on academic probation and in some cases bans you from progressing in the major. An occasional C is 100% fine especially known tough classes. Mostly Cs is however is very poor, bottom 10%, and will not lead to good job offers, if one is even able to get to the degree due to some colleges having minimum gpa needed to progress in the major.
Even mostly Bs (3.0-3.3) is bottom 15% at many schools and eliminates law, med, phD and the majority of jobs that want 3.3+. In tough job markets the GPA and the actual courses on the transcript matter more than ever.
Even most masters programs that could be considered pay to play want to see 3.3+ at a minimum from US schools. Masters have 25-55% admission these days depending on program, and they have plenty of "average" applicants (3.5+) willing to pay.

after your first job, no one asks for a GPA. Are you working in a white-collar job? You sound unfamiliar with how the real world works.

[Anonymous]

Yes, OP, the difference between an A and A- counts. This is especially true with the top schools that are concerned about reporting GPA to USNWR. SCHEV tells us that last year the UVA entering class had a 4.5 at the 75th percentile, a 4.4 at the median, and a 4.20 at the bottom 25th percentile. Every digit counts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our college counselor (competitive private north of DMV) says being in top 10% is important, not grades themselves. This tracks with stats of colleges reporting how many students in top 10%. For example, northwestern is something like 98%(?) and Wash U “just” ~86%(?). Just like SAT scores, colleges won’t want to admit kids who will lower their average

For high schools that do not rank, how do we know whether kids are in top 10%? Admission directors repeatedly said they [b]don't compare kids from the same school, but only compare each kid to the reported school profile to understand the rigor and offering. This is what they meant by holistic review.

comparing kid A to the profile (rigor and GPA quartiles are on ours) and comparing kid B to the profile is essentially the same as comparing kid A to kid B. Many top colleges have straight up said they compare kids within the high school first, then the region, then the whole pool.

For the rank Q, if the profile does not make it obvious, ask the head counselor. They will usually tell you the decile and maybe more. Also look at naviance at the very top schools. You can start to see that for the three years listed there are only 5 GPAs above 4.9. Those are the GPAs of very top students. If your kid has a 4.3 and that looks borderline on naviance for UVA in-state, yet you know well over 15% of the class gets in....your kid is not likely in the top 15% but if they have other wow factors could still make it.

Of course they compare kids from the same school. They literally evaluate them all from the same school at the same time. I’ve heard that only MIT allows each application to “stand in its own” which is why getting in there seems random at times.

The admission director of another top school also said that they do not have regional rep and do not evaluate students from the same region or same school together. They said it is very possible that students from the same school are being evaluated by different admission staffs, and unless the students raise to the top, the different admission staff may not even know other students from the same school apply.

[/b]


I'm a college counselor. Every college I have ever dealt with has a regional rep. The readers do the first cull on applications, which then go to regional rep. Of course, they know which students come from which high school because the very first thing the readers do is pull up the high school profile and review the applicant's course rigor and rank the applicant vis-à-vis the other students from the same high school. This is how high schools get away with "we don't rank" but knowingly provide the class profile which allows the readers to do it in a minute. Read Admissions by Jean Hanff Koreitz or any other good book on admissions.

IEC here.
Agree.
The college reps even know who the "hard teachers" are at each school. They know which LOR make a difference, which ones are generic and which teachers matter......

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our college counselor (competitive private north of DMV) says being in top 10% is important, not grades themselves. This tracks with stats of colleges reporting how many students in top 10%. For example, northwestern is something like 98%(?) and Wash U “just” ~86%(?). Just like SAT scores, colleges won’t want to admit kids who will lower their average

For high schools that do not rank, how do we know whether kids are in top 10%? Admission directors repeatedly said they [b]don't compare kids from the same school, but only compare each kid to the reported school profile to understand the rigor and offering. This is what they meant by holistic review.

comparing kid A to the profile (rigor and GPA quartiles are on ours) and comparing kid B to the profile is essentially the same as comparing kid A to kid B. Many top colleges have straight up said they compare kids within the high school first, then the region, then the whole pool.

For the rank Q, if the profile does not make it obvious, ask the head counselor. They will usually tell you the decile and maybe more. Also look at naviance at the very top schools. You can start to see that for the three years listed there are only 5 GPAs above 4.9. Those are the GPAs of very top students. If your kid has a 4.3 and that looks borderline on naviance for UVA in-state, yet you know well over 15% of the class gets in....your kid is not likely in the top 15% but if they have other wow factors could still make it.

Of course they compare kids from the same school. They literally evaluate them all from the same school at the same time. I’ve heard that only MIT allows each application to “stand in its own” which is why getting in there seems random at times.

The admission director of another top school also said that they do not have regional rep and do not evaluate students from the same region or same school together. They said it is very possible that students from the same school are being evaluated by different admission staffs, and unless the students raise to the top, the different admission staff may not even know other students from the same school apply.

[/b]


I'm a college counselor. Every college I have ever dealt with has a regional rep. The readers do the first cull on applications, which then go to regional rep. Of course, they know which students come from which high school because the very first thing the readers do is pull up the high school profile and review the applicant's course rigor and rank the applicant vis-à-vis the other students from the same high school. This is how high schools get away with "we don't rank" but knowingly provide the class profile which allows the readers to do it in a minute. Read Admissions by Jean Hanff Koreitz or any other good book on admissions.

IEC here.
Agree.
The college reps even know who the "hard teachers" are at each school. They know which LOR make a difference, which ones are generic and which teachers matter......

+1. Since the regional reps visit the high schools in the region every year - and get to know the admissions counselor - they know the rigor, the types of advanced courses offered, some of the teachers, the types of letters of recommendation, and how well graduates of that particular high school have done in the past at their institution.

[Anonymous]

There are kids with only straight A grades who get rejected for being dull

if your kid has one or two Bs but is otherwise unconventional, go for it