Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
GPA is an indicator of a few things, but it doesn't tell the whole story. I know quite a few lazy asses that had rock solid GPA's in H.S. and college. Some of them were intelligent and others weren't. I could of easily graduated high school with a 4.0 GPA because I went to an inner-city 80% black, 19% hispanic, 1% other high school where the curriculum wasn't very challenging. IMO GPA indicates the ability to conform. If you can conform to the system at hand, then you'll do well society more often than not.
What do you think? There are a lot of students that navigate their way through school by picking easy teachers and getting good grades; then there are other students who take hard teachers, learn a lot, and get lower grades. Should the importance be taken off GPA and focused on some other aspect of the learning process?
No, I do not. I knew I wanted to attend graduate school before I even stepped foot onto a college campus and I knew that with my school's "ranking" I had to put in a lot of leg work to make that happen. In essence, I knew I had to take the hardest courses my school[s] offered (I later transferred) as in effort to make up for their less-than-presitigsous rankings. As a result, my GPA was a "horrible" 3.4 while all of the pre-meds who took only the required courses and easy electives had 3.9s and 4.0s. Guess who got all of the rewards
GPA at my high school was a game. Students would get their parents to sign them out of classes like health, because it wasn't an honors course--so it wasn't weighted.
They had to stop designating anyone a valedictorian, because 20% of my graduating class had a 4.0 or better.
Junior high students are now taking as many classes at the community college as possible, so that by the time they get to high school every single one of their classes is G/T or AP. There are kids graduating with 5.0's and 60 credits at the community college.
And this is just an average public high school.
YES, please put the focus elsewhere...but I'm not sure how to measure it any other way for college apps.
If you have to take remedial anything in college, and you have a 4.0 coming from high school, I think that says a lot about grade inflation. I'd stop it by having the college's require students to go back to high school for remedial classes.
i prefer standardized tests. the best way to compare all students equally is to make them all take the same test and see who does the best on it. that should be the basis of all education, standardized tests and teaching for the tests.
Standardized tests can be gamed and teaching to test is teaching for short-term memory. Plus students from wealthier backgrounds can afford to take test prep, which in reality teaches you how to take standardized tests, the tricks employed by the particular test maker, and how to score high by studying how to take the test rather than actually studying the material.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliTerp07
Junior high students are now taking as many classes at the community college as possible, so that by the time they get to high school every single one of their classes is G/T or AP. There are kids graduating with 5.0's and 60 credits at the community college.
Perhaps a few, but I do not believe for one second this is anywhere near the norm. Even though it is illegal for a Federal funded program/institution (such as a community college) to practice age discrimination, most colleges have a standard policy of not admitting below the age of 16. Yes, occasionally a 13 or 14 year old might be admitted, but these instances are rare. Junior high students are what, 12 to 14 years in age? I highly doubt any community college is going to allow droves of 13 year olds onto campus. I am sure I will get flamed for this, but is a 13 year old mature enough for community college? Outside of the rare exception, I do not think so. The teaching styles, learning styles, and expectations are so different they are not even on the same planet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliTerp07
YES, please put the focus elsewhere...but I'm not sure how to measure it any other way for college apps.
Despite the misconceived notion believed by high school students, GPA is only a small part of the college application, even at selective schools. Most universities, in particular any one that is selective, employs algorithms that not only unweight your GPA, but also rescales your grades depending on many factors. It is the only way to really compare Student A from the no-name Podunk High against the Student B from the well-known Best Public High In City X.
Most universities admit students based on how well the applicant fits into the particular university's culture. So they look at other criteria outside of GPA/SAT/ACT.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP
If it is for college admissions isn't that good that students are taking accelerated courses and getting recognized for their smarts and efforts? Perhaps if the school wasn't average but was excellent and had a rigorous gifted course of study students wouldn't go elsewhere for the challenge.
The problem with AP courses, and courses in general, is that the quality and rigor not only varies from school to school, but can also vary within the same school. When I was in high school years ago, we only had maybe 4 AP courses tops. The thing to do for gifted students was to take Honors courses, which you had to be formally invited into in order to take. It is still that way today and I think it works out a heckuvalot better than tons of students clamoring to take APs considering that the value and "prestige" of AP courses has dropped and many, or at least some, colleges do not accept AP credits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Francois
In a generally way, it is a measure of "success", since success in an academic setting is usually defined by mastering the courses. But I say "in a general way" because of course, I don't think anyone believes that someone with a 3.941 GPA is "more successful" than one with a 3.940 GPA.
No, it does not measure success. I agree with the poster that it measures the students ability to follow. For example, when I was in high school I was deftly afraid of giving presentations in front of the class. I always took the zero instead of standing up there shaking, losing concentration, and looking like a fool in front of the entire class even though I did the project well. Of course, that affected my course grade[s] and my GPA. It said nothing of my knowledge of the material. I am sure these days I would be given a prescription of some sort to combat social anxiety
Quote:
Originally Posted by Francois
SAT scores, etc measure intelligence, better than grades do, in fact, but the question was whether GPAs measure success. You can be very smart and not try hard in school, and I would not call that really "succeeding", although it may be if it's high school and your goal is to get in XX college, and you do, then whatever GPA/SAT combination it takes to get in would be "success".
The SAT, ACT, and GRE are not IQ tests. The "A" in SAT used to stand for Aptitude, then it was changed to Assessment, not intelligence. Now it holds no specific meaning as it has simply become the "SAT". You are given, what, a minute, a minute and half, to answer each question. Fast test takers are rewarded with a higher score, even though an intelligent test taker would eventually figure out the question if given enough time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OdeToArsenal47
My GPA went from a 1.9 to where it is now. If you took my last 3 years, I'd probably have a 3.75+.
GPA takes 4 years into account and your very first semester becomes your most important for your GPA. That's something not many 13/14 year olds realize and they pay for it. It's a backwards system.
It is common for college admissions to overlook the first year for this very reason. Even graduate schools have a tendency to overlook the first two years of college. Not all, but it is more common than not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by miyu
As you progress to higher education and people become more competitive, the GPA becomes more volatile and it is more difficult to predict what it means. However, it is also more difficult to consistently get good grades in everything unless you are genuinely trying. It also depends largely on how cutthroat your major is.
A low GPA means you are really unmotivated, + or - less intelligent than your peers. There isn't much excuse for a low GPA. You can possibly do very well outside of school, but probably means that school is not for you.
As I stated in a previous post, I went out of my way to take the hardest courses I could while in college. As a bio major in a "middle-of-the-road" university, we were not required to take any math course above calc I (well, stats was placed higher than calc as it had calc I as a pre-req), nor where bio students required to take any chem course outside of gen chem and orgo. I took calc II, differential, linear algebra, inorganic chemistry, and p-chem (thermodynamics) as electives, and 300-400 level history courses, etc. to fulfill core requirements. I also took an independent research course twice so I would have had a solid year of research when I graduated (I ended up with 2 1/2 years worth in the end). The majority of the bio students, perhaps as high as 90%, were pre-med, pre-vet, and a handful of pre-dental. These students did not take any rigorous course that was not required and took the easiest core requirements. Granted, it was a good game plan for them because for them GPA did matter in terms of admittance into Med School, but on paper I looked like the odd duck while they got all the benefits of students with high GPAs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliTerp07
Only if it was worth a 5.0/4.0 for an A. We had a lot of really awesome courses on campus, but because they weren't "weighted", no one took them. (For example, we had an engineering track, that allowed students to take robotics and programming and mechanical design. REALLY cool stuff, taught by an awesome teacher--but we all chose not to take them because they weren't AP courses.) People took classes they didn't care about and ignored things they were interested in, just so they could graduate with the highest possible GPA.
I threw a fit because my parents made me take drivers ed in high school. My friends all paid $300 to take a private course through a company during school breaks. Why? Because drivers ed was an unweighted, quarter long class and dropped your GPA.
Way too much stress for nothing.
The irony here is that a robotics, programming, or mechanical design course would look a heckofalot better on a college application than a run-of-the-mill AP course. It shows breadth of interests and thinking outside-the-box, which college admissions love. As I previously wrote, that 4.X GPA is going to be unweighted by college admissions anyways and all college admissions officers know that high school students use AP courses to game admissions. What high school students do not know, or understand, is that this tactic does not work, generally, in particular because the value of AP courses has become so cheap and a good number of students take AP courses who otherwise should not qualify to do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arrgy
The SAT is very simple:
The "Verbal" section is nothing more than a vocabulary test. You want to do well, take 3-4 years of Latin.
The "Math" test is nothing more than an Algebra exam with some geometry problems thrown in.
Most colleges, sadly, don't care about the writing section or what used to be the language arts section.
That's it...some aptitude test.
Ugh, the Verbal sections on both the SAT and GRE contains words that not even a renowned academic (outside of Chomsky) would use.
Geometry is algebra. Most of the math is presented in the form of a word problem. Even an astute algebra genius might not pick up on how to set it up in such a short amount of time. That is exactly why SAT test prep courses (and books) teach you how to take the SAT...which has nothing to do with studying actual math. In reality, a test taker with poor math skills can score high in the Math Section as it is designed to test reasoning skills, not math skills (and yes, math is reasoning).
GPAs do tell about a students drive and the ability to complete things and to what degree they will complete tasks. However, if you are a physically slow, socially akward, timid, 4.0 GPA poindexter, I'll pass.
I'll take a 3.5GPA graduate with some social abilities, some cajones and mechanical abilities any day. This why we prefer BSMEs over BSEEs at our company. We had a guy who was a brilliant EE, 4.0 GPA from a good school. Unfortunately he was slow, over thought everything, he was afraid of the machines and he wouldn't go near a furnace. No one liked him, and his presence irritated me because he was so awkward and afraid of..... everything.
What do you think? There are a lot of students that navigate their way through school by picking easy teachers and getting good grades; then there are other students who take hard teachers, learn a lot, and get lower grades. Should the importance be taken off GPA and focused on some other aspect of the learning process?
Not necessarily. There is too much variance between majors, schools, and classroom methodologies. Also, must consider economic background and family values. In that regard, it is good to know that adcoms say they look at the entire package.
I did work-study at my alma mater's admissions office and can attest that among the factors in the hollistic approach, HS studentn GPAs were normalized by academically scoring the high school they're applying from. We had lots of applicants with 4.0 GPAs. All other aspects of the application being equal, a valedectorian with a 4.0 GPA from a #2 HS (on a 1-5 scale with 5 being highest) wasn't going to get the same focus as a student with a 3.8 GPA from a #5 HS.
The normalization of GPAs occur for law school applicants as well. For example, some universities award A+, a 4.333 point value, while the highest grade at other campuses are As, a 4.000 value. So comparing GPAs between candidates A and B with the different grading system is comparing apples-to-oranges.
What do you think? There are a lot of students that navigate their way through school by picking easy teachers and getting good grades; then there are other students who take hard teachers, learn a lot, and get lower grades. Should the importance be taken off GPA and focused on some other aspect of the learning process?
GPA is all relative. especially at a big school like mine. in my dept alone there are 4 of us who teach US History to 11th graders. each one of us has our own ideas on grading and assessment so a kid in teacher A's class may have a grade that reflects that particular teacher's assessment of that student versus student B who is in my class.
gpa does not define success. but realizing you are not making it in college is like realizing it you are not making it anywhere its a reality check it means look for another way to do this.
[SIZE=-2]WYCK: George, the quailifications for this scholarship were suppose to be.. largely academic.
GEORGE: I'm sure we're all aware of the flaws and biases of standardized tests..
WYCK: These aren't standardized tests - these are his grades.
[SIZE=-2]script from the seinfeld episode the Van Bur[SIZE=-2]e[/SIZE]n Boys :-)
[/SIZE][/SIZE]
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
while all of the pre-meds who took only the required courses and easy electives had 3.9s and 4.0s. Guess who got all of the rewards 
