<p>What is better- a valedictorian who has gotten progressively lower grades each year (like they end up with a 4.2, but got 4.33 frosh year, then 4.2, then 4.1) or someone who got 3.9 frosh year, then 4.25 both 10/11 and ends up with 4.13? (same courseload). and our school doesn’t rank so it won’t be like they’re listed as a val.</p>
<p>i would say the second student. some schools don’t even look at freshmen year grades (ie princeton?). junior and esepcially senior year grades are a better indicator of how the student will do in college right?</p>
<p>The only situations where your GPA going down by .1 is considered a bad trend is when ranking is in effect at competitive schools–and since your school doesn’t rank, there really isn’t a difference between the two situations.
Oh and by the way some schools might find out he/she’s valedictorian by simply asking the school what’s the highest GPA in the class (to put your own grades into perspective)</p>
<p>The student with the higher GPA for the junior and senior level classes would be favored. </p>
<p>Just draw trend lines on the graphs. Extrapolation tells the whole story.</p>
<p>I honestly don’t think it will matter AT ALL, it’s such a minute difference. Classes get harder, grades go down a little. Colleges really won’t care if you get all A+'s in freshman year and only As in your senior year APs. I think it’s a really, really common trend.</p>