<p>I understand Princeton and Stanford (albeit non-Ivy league) exclude freshman grades from one’s cumulative GPA. With this personal benefit, my 3.71 UW is raises to a 3.87 UW after first trimester of senior year in HS (this includes electives).</p>
<p>I’ve taken all Honors/AP core classes. From the grades standpoint alone, I know my GPA is on the low side at any prestigious school that includes freshman year. However, for colleges that don’t factor in freshman year, are my grades in a standard/typical range for competitive applicants? My HS doesn’t rank.</p>
<p>Ppl with 4.0’s get rejected and ppl with 3.6’s get accepted. It’s more than just grades. It’s about substance. What makes u SPECIAL?</p>
<p>I’m a girl in engineering! I <3 math and science; I’m do Robotics; I volunteer in providing relief for Detroit; I’m Editor in Chief of my school’s yearbook. Do I sound special to you?</p>
<p>I can’t believe this, to Stanford and Princeton, is considered “my GPA!” After freshman year it seemed like a 3.9 cumulative UW was pretty much not gonna happen. (I got 2 Cs and various Bs in 9th grade)</p>
<p>Past a point GPA (and other statistics) stop mattering so much, and they’ll care more about your essays and extracurriculars.</p>
<p>Depends more on your rank. If you are in the second decile at a grade-inflated school, your chances at Ivy are really slim. (Your HS Profile which is sent to colleges will show a grade distribution…colleges can estimate your rank from that document.)</p>
<p>Note: Both P & S stretch their credibility when they say they don’t count Frosh grades…since your class rank is an admissions criteria, they DO use Frosh grades.</p>
<p>Note: my school does not rank</p>
<p>…and either way, I’d be top 20% at least; perhaps 10%</p>
<p>My school has a good reputation apparently with adcoms; it’s public but ranked 3rd for college readiness and one teacher was saying many colleges think of a B at our school as an A anywhere else - just sayin’</p>
<p>I don’t believe they send anything like that to colleges; I saw the document they send detailing our courses and the like, but I don’t believe it has anything like the “grade distribution” thing you mentioned.</p>
<p>Okay let’s be honest for a minute here. There are many applicants with SAT scores over 2250 and perfect 4.0 GPAs that get rejected from Princeton and Stanford every year. There are very few that get accepted with anything less (not to say that none are). Realistically speaking, unless you’re a recruited athlete, URM or a legacy, chances are slim. I know a whole group of young women, such as yourself, who want to go to an Ivy League institution and intend to major in physics, chemistry or engineering. You have to ask yourself why would Princeton/Stanford would take you, who does not have a 4.0, over someone who does. I am in no way trying to discourage you or be mean, but unless there is something outstandingly special about your circumstances, you must be a bit realistic.</p>
<p>I fail to believe 0.13 on a 4.0-scale makes my chances that much “slimmer.” You don’t know my interests, ECs, leadership, test scores, etc. I made it a point to just ask about the GPA, and the GPA alone.</p>
<p>If you are so convinced that it makes no difference, why ask? If you have such amazing “interests, ECs, leadership, test scores” then I guess you don’t have anything to worry about. </p>
<p>The Bottom Line: You asked for our opinions so mine remains. Having anything less than a 4.0 does, in fact, lower your chances, even if it is a .13 difference. Many people with great ECs/Recommendations/Test Scores and GPAs get rejected. Having anything less makes your chances even “slimmer”. Hard to argue with that.</p>
<p>Why are you quoting yourself?</p>
<p>Seeing as you’re being rude and rather arrogant…
I am going to quote your question (you seem to have forgotten it) “Is a 3.87 UW GPA Ivy League-competitive?”
Competitive? Let’s define that:
“As good as or better than others of a comparable nature.” (OED).
Now look at the majority of the applicants at Princeton. </p>
<p>I see no need to try to help anymore seeing as you won’t be happy with anything but “Of course! You’re definitely going to Princeton or Stanford because they don’t care about GPA at all!”</p>
<p>It seems like you’ve been on CC enough to know that Ivies use a holistic review of the applications they receive. If that is the case, why would you be concerned about your gpa? Your .13 difference won’t be the downfall of your application, but if other areas are weak compared to other applicants, it would matter. But I don’t know about your other aspects.</p>
<p>Just keep up your grades (or improve them, if at all possible) and continue doing what you enjoy doing.</p>
<p>
^i agree, looking at the results thread, which is albeit a small skewed sample, a lot of people that got accepted had 4.0 UW. The applicants that have the best realistic chance as unhooked applicants have 4.0 UW’s. Btw, many applicants have those ec’s that you listed. It’s a big world out there…The biggest thing you got going for yourself is being a girl in engineering, hopefully that helps out a lot.</p>
<p>Because the 3.7 GPA is always the weak point of the application. I’m just ensuring that, with this “new” GPA (at a select few colleges), it’s actually within the common range for those of accepted applicants.</p>
<p>I didn’t list my entire resum</p>
<p>3.87 UW means nothing. All numbers on these boards mean entirely nothing unless they are standardized (id est, standardized test scores).</p>
<p>Pretty much if you get more A’s than B’s you are ‘competitive’ in that that element of your application indicates that you can probably handle an ivy-caliber workload. I’m not sure what the point of your thread is though as, like I mentioned, there is no context to your number. Ask your GC what ivyesque applicants from your school usually have in terms of GPA or, if you have naviance, look at that…</p>