<p>No class rank per se. At the end of junior year, the students are given a weighted GPA and a bar graph.</p>
<p>There are 500 students in the class.</p>
<p>10 students fall into the highest bar (2%)
15 more students fall into the next bar (top 5%)
50 (!) fall into the next bar (not top 10%)</p>
<p>For the top two groups, the system is fine. All can say “top 5%” and back it up with data. But for the top students in the next level, they cannot even say “top 10%”.</p>
<p>Simple question: is this school causing students in the 5+% to 10% grouping problems when they apply to highly selective colleges and universities?</p>
<p>That makes no sense… you should talk to a counselor or a school board member to get that changed.</p>
<p>With any reasonable amount of logic it should be:</p>
<p>5 students in 99th percentile
5 students in 98th percentile
5 students in 97th percentile
5 students in 96th percentile
5 students in 95th percentile
5 students in 94th percentile
5 students in 93rd percentile
5 students in 92nd percentile
5 students in 91st percentile
5 students in 90th percentile</p>
<p>So there are 50 students in the top 10% so if I understand what you are saying 25 of those 50 students are being incorrectly grouped into the “lower than the top 10% group”</p>
<p>You understand correctly. 25 of the 50 (in the third distribution) are in the top 10% but the school doesn’t tell anyone who those 25 students are. So none of the 50 can credibly claim top 10%.</p>
<p>Maddening. And probably a drag on top tier admissions.</p>
<p>That is maddening and it definitely hurts those 25 who round out the top 10%. I assume you’ve talked to your counselor about this already? Write a letter to the school board expressing your concern if your counselor is unwilling to take action on the issue. My school (Washington-Lee High School in Arlington, VA) does class rank by weighted GPA (favoring those who take AP and IB courses) and I think that is the fairest way to do it. The students who do the best in the best classes should be rewarded with a high class rank. The school board would appreciate it if you not only identify the problem but come up with a solution as well. It sounds like you think that they should just include a top 10% right? </p>
<p>Always tough to rock the boat in some towns, and mine is no exception. Many parents are unwilling to rock the boat out of concern for the well-being of their children. Retaliation is alive and well where we live and let’s be honest, grading is a subjective business.</p>
<p>The prevailing attitude among administrators is (other than the obvious, “shut up, we know better”) that they want to reduce competition among students, hence no clearly definable class ranking. But the way they’ve gone about it is, in my opinion, harmful to the student body as a whole. I know first hand that we have some remarkable students in the third grouping - students who took difficult classes, performed well, and are probably in that 6-8% rank area. When they apply to schools that boast 95+% of the incoming class is in the top 10% of their high school class, I surmise these students are likely to have a problem.</p>
<p>My sense is that what happens here is that the students in the 6-8% range are rejected at “top tier” schools (and there is sufficient historical data to support that) and they fill spots at schools in the “next” tier. This likely has a ripple effect with those students taking spots at schools where the next group might have gained admission, and so on down the line.</p>
<p>As far as what I think, I think there ought to be a class rank and the school should live with the fallout. But I’m old-fashioned.</p>
<p>Full disclosure, this has no impact on my child, so it’s not a sour grapes post. I’m genuinely interested in what people have to say on the subject.</p>
<p>25 are in the first two groups. Only 25 of the next 50 round out the top 10%. The totals are not cumulative. 10 plus 15 plus 50 = 65 so if you’re in the third grouping, you’re in the top 13%.</p>
<p>OK, you’re probably right - I’m terrible at math. But the bar graph makes perfect sense to me. 10 people, then 15 people, and then an additional 25 people to make a total of 50 people…what am I missing?</p>
<p>It doesn’t really matter. The GCs will know which students are top 10% with certainty. Those student transcripts will get that annotation. It only makes the STUDENTS more uncertain as to where they are if they are in the third block. The school may believe they are keeping the students more engaged in school since they are uncertain how close they are to falling out of the top 10% (creating more competition).</p>
<p>Op, those 25 students are definitely at an unfair disadvantage. However it
may be true that the GC recommendation means a lot more than these
arbitrary groupings. If the GC quotes these groupings then yes those students
are being hurt.</p>
<p>It doesn’t really matter. The GCs will know which students are top 10% with certainty. Those student transcripts will get that annotation.</p>
<hr>
<p>That’s simply not true at this school. The official transcript sent to colleges does not contain a class rank. No such annotation is added to transcripts.</p>
<p>I’d just like to say my high school does the same thing, with just about the same number of students. And from my perspective, it sucks because I have a 4.19 unweighted but as far as I can tell, I’m only in the top 20%. It’s so disheartening to have truly no idea what my rank is.</p>