<p>Would Columbia University rather see consistency (high grades, good amount extracurricular activities, and excellent standardized tests) or large improvement throughout high school (low grades, low amount of extracurricular activities, and low standardized test scores in the beginning of high school, but was inspired by the school and improved to have high grades, good amount extracurricular activities, and excellent standardized tests during the middle and end of high school)?</p>
<p>Consistency for sure. Improvement shows that you have potential, but having good grades all throughout high school is worth more than having only good grades half your high school career.</p>
<p>The answer is not so simple. While I am sure they value consistency, plenty of students do not always have a smooth road. There are many reasons why someone would show vast improvement during their high school years. I think the most important thing is not to worry about what a school wants, but to do the best you can. Find things you are passionate about and pursue them. Enjoy your studies. Work hard. These are the keys to a successful future, not predicting what will look good on college applications. I wish you great success!</p>
<p>they don’t prefer either.</p>
<p>My grade went like this:</p>
<p>cumulative 3.7</p>
<p>9th 3.5 3.5
10th 3.7 3.5
11th 3.8 3.9
12th 4.0</p>
<p>and I got a likely letter from Columbia</p>
<p>Think about it: You’re sifting through tens of thousands of applications as an adcom–which would look better? </p>
<p>That’s not to say that upward trends aren’t important or looked upon favorably. But with so many applicants, it’s getting harder and harder for adcoms to “take a chance.”</p>
<p>That is a major problem with the state of admissions right now. Many quality candidates are not given a chance. Without a holistic approach worthy candidates are not even considered, and that is a sad state of affairs.</p>