This happens with honors classes. We encourage our kids to challenge themselves as much as possible, but in our high-performing school district, there’s no upside and only potential downside. What’s worse, the curriculum development team has discretion over whether to identify an honors class with a GPA boost (as with AP classes). In our district, honors chemistry gets the boost in one school but not the other three schools; yet the online honors chemistry course that was offered during the pandemic DID get the boost at all three schools. Honestly, I think it’s a matter of certifying the course at each school and the curriculum development team rests on the “it doesn’t matter because colleges and universities re-calculate their own GPA equivalents to create as much of a level playing field as possible during the admissions process”, and only do the work of certifying when either the principal or parents raise enough of a fuss.

Anonymous wrote:I think I'm missing the point. How are they identical if one is .5 credits and one is 1 credit?

Are you saying the school systems doesn't do the math to differentiate between the credits? That's crazy.

I'm saying they attempted to differentiate, but they did it badly, and this is what happened.

So, let's say there are two kids with all As. They each then earn a B in a .5 and 1 credit class, respectively. The B would do less damage to the one who took the .5 credit class, right?


Conversely, there are two kids with all Bs. They then each earn an A in a .5 and 1 credit class, respectively. The A would help the kid who took the 1 credit class more, right?


Am I getting this wrong?

I think I'm missing the point. How are they identical if one is .5 credits and one is 1 credit?

Are you saying the school systems doesn't do the math to differentiate between the credits? That's crazy.

Anonymous wrote:So, I think this is really dependent on what you're talking about.

If you are saying that someone gets an A in a sea of grades that has a lot grader lower than an A, yes, that A will not make as big of a positive impact if there are more credits.

However, if someone gets a B in a sea of As, that B will make less of a negative impact with more credits.

It's all relative. I don't think it's a problem, it's just the way GPAs work.

Yes, but if Student A and Student B have identical grades, courses, weighting, etc.
Except for one of the classes, Student A takes a 1 credit course and Student B takes a .5 credit course, Student B is ranked higher.
With the same grades and weighting for every class.
The only difference is Student A took half a credit more. They did just as well. But they are punished for taking a higher credit class.

Thanks for responding!

So, I think this is really dependent on what you're talking about.

If you are saying that someone gets an A in a sea of grades that has a lot grader lower than an A, yes, that A will not make as big of a positive impact if there are more credits.

However, if someone gets a B in a sea of As, that B will make less of a negative impact with more credits.

It's all relative. I don't think it's a problem, it's just the way GPAs work.

Anonymous wrote:OP, the credits figure into both the numerator and the denominator. If your school uses a fairly common system I’d double check your own work first.

In the numerator, each course should be ((grade + weight) x credits)). The denominator is all the credits summed.

It sounds to me like, in computing the numerator, you might have forgotten to multiply each course by the number of credits.

Thanks for your response. I think that would make more sense. Here is the actual calculation:

Weighted Average (WA) =

[ Sum of (Grade x Credit) + Sum of (Grade x Credit x Weight)] DIVIDED BY Sum of Credits Attempted

OP, the credits figure into both the numerator and the denominator. If your school uses a fairly common system I’d double check your own work first.

In the numerator, each course should be ((grade + weight) x credits)). The denominator is all the credits summed.

It sounds to me like, in computing the numerator, you might have forgotten to multiply each course by the number of credits.

Anonymous wrote:

"I'm not a math guy!"

Sounds familiar only our HS Principal had been a high school level math teacher. I brought a few grading anomalies to his attention. As with any messaging, info probably has be repeated three time, and additionally in writing. And, in a few years after you're out of the school system, the issue may get some attention. Info you've uncovered, is probably best used just for your own family's (minuscule) advantage. Be too vocal, not matter how much brilliance it shows, and imo the act of being vocal will only draw negative attention to your kid.

I'm definitely worried about this! -OP

"I'm not a math guy!"

Sounds familiar only our HS Principal had been a high school level math teacher. I brought a few grading anomalies to his attention. As with any messaging, info probably has be repeated three time, and additionally in writing. And, in a few years after you're out of the school system, the issue may get some attention. Info you've uncovered, is probably best used just for your own family's (minuscule) advantage. Be too vocal, not matter how much brilliance it shows, and imo the act of being vocal will only draw negative attention to your kid.

Anonymous wrote:Every college recalculates GPA, so your GPA calculation is irrelevant. Class rank is important, but unless the criteria for you/your kid is different than the rest of the class (which is obviously isn’t), you’re fine whether you like the result or not.

OP here and all I'm saying is that a student who objectively took less credits and rigor shouldn't be ranked higher. Who would like those results? Everyone should have a problem with it.

Everyone has the same - bad, inappropriate - criteria.

Having said that, if folks think I should let it go, I appreciate that perspective a lot and I thank you for responding.

Anonymous wrote:OP, it's not right", sounds like you did a fabulous job of unraveling the finer details, but some things you just have to let go.

+1

Every college recalculates GPA, so your GPA calculation is irrelevant. Class rank is important, but unless the criteria for you/your kid is different than the rest of the class (which is obviously isn’t), you’re fine whether you like the result or not.

OP, it's not right", sounds like you did a fabulous job of unraveling the finer details, but some things you just have to let go.

Please let me know if you have advice for me. Sorry this gets math-y. Our HS published its annual coursebook and I noticed that the calculation for Ranking was different. So I ran some numbers with different course values to see how much advanced courses help you. I saw some weird things. I think the main problem is that the denominator of the calculation is the number of credits. Lower denominator (credits), higher quotient (weighted average). So basically taking more credits hurts you. Weighting helps mitigate this- but not enough.

Some of the numbers I ran showed that taking a half credit class instead of a full credit class for one of your classes (same grades, weights across the board) will get you ranked higher. (Because your denominator is one-half lower.)
Another example showed two people with identical schedules, except one challenged themselves with an an additional honors class (same grades in all classes) did worse. (An AP class does you better. But the weighting has to compensate for the additional credits.)

I brought this to the principal and he sort of tried to engage, but he obfuscated a lot, too, and finally said "I'm not a math guy! Our data coordinator has reviewed the system and assured me it's working fine." Either the system/algorithm is fair and the way it's explained in the Coursebook is too simplified and inaccurate, or it's not fair. We use the eSchool system, and the principal said this is how "lots" of high schools do their ranking.

I told him that I wasn't really satisfied with his answers and what should I do-- he referred me to the Curriculum Office (by which I think he means the District level). I really didn't want to do have to do that. I don't want this to be a whole thing. But this feels really wrong. Guidance tells kids to challenge themselves- but a lot of those course selection decisions will hurt them, if they care about Rankings.

I know many college admissions offices re-do GPAs. Perhaps they know that school districts have all kinds of shenanigans going on and you can't trust rankings. I'm just telling my own kids to keep their heads down, take rigorous classes, and do as well as they can, and don't worry about all of this. I'm certainly not a math expert so I don't readily understand all of the repercussions, but I get the sense this system will hurt kids in the middle the most.

It's not right. Has anyone been in a similar situation? Any advice? Please be kind. And if you think I am misunderstanding something about the calculation-- I'd be thrilled if that were the case. Please tell me.