Greendale High School became the latest institution to eliminate class rankings Aug. 17, joining the likes of Shorewood and Whitefish Bay.
School officials said, after studying the issue for seven months, that class ranking unfairly hurts some students whose ranking is lower than it would be at lesser high schools. As a result, students have been denied admission to schools such as the University of Wisconsin even though their qualifications were better across the board.
Is this a good idea? Should ACT scores and extra-curricular activities count more than class rank? Let us know what you think, but please keep your responses to less than 1,000 words or we will not be able to post them.
(24) Read All Responses
in response to Maillard, people also need to realize that class raqnking differs on school population too. a person that ranks 10 in a class of 100 will have the advantage over the person that was 100th in a class of 1000 pupils, even though they are both the same percentage for students.
Not at all. There is no rational reason to abolish rank. Colleges do not make admission decisions based soley on rank; rather they use a combination of factors including academic rigor, extracurricular activites, test scores, etc. As rank only has value within a high school, you cannot compare ranks between different schools.
A combination of objective and subjective criteria is obviously ideal. The problem is in how one defines ranking as "objective." As universities are taking in more and more applications every year, the temptation to reduce achievement to a few numbers increases, thus putting more emphasis on ACT scores, GPAs, and class rankings, and less on labor intensive anecdotal data. Of the numerical data listed above, class ranking is the least reliable measurement for upper echelon schools as it squeezes 50, maybe 100 high GPA students together. As a result, a student with a GPA of 3.75, an ACT score of 30, and a sizable extra-curricular portfolio at one school might be ranked 10 at one area school and 80 at another. Simply, any admissions equations that include class ranking cannot account for these inequalities. And any number of alumni from the upper echelon schools will give you accounts of high-achieving students who've been rejected by high-demand schools like UW-Madison because their class ranking fell below the top ten percent. Take that class ranking out, rely in GHS's reputation, and force admissions personnel to take a second glance at the subjective data.
Ranking a student is absurd, because it assumes that each student has the same teacher, and same classes. We all know that really is never the case. What I do think would be interesting, is a way to gauge student performance, based on their respective teachers. It can be a useful tool in seeing if poor student performance is widespread among specific teachers.
Jeff, that's the point - some colleges put a lot of weight on class rank even though comparison between different schools is meaningless. The only reasonably objective way to compare students between schools is through standardized testing. Unfortunately, schools will take what the high schools give them and some feel that limiting their admissions to a specific percentile is good for marketing.
Absolutely abolish class rank. Small schools have more of an advantage. Also, regardless of weighting grades, those that take only "basket-weaving" classes still get in the upper echelon of the class. Rank means nothing. What you know and have learned is shown on your ACT & SAT. Colleges almost always ask for rank, so they obviously use it, although it is skewed.
While I do recall our GPAs and ranks being 'manipulated' by weighted scales, more study halls, or non-weighted scales (after all, 5 AP classes and 3 study halls = 5.0 vs 5 AP classes and 3 other classes = 4.~~), rank IS useful. And colleges do know what HS's are competitive, offer challenging curriculums, and how big the class is (percentile the student is in). The top students will know their rank and send it to their competitive schools they apply to, and the group below the top will not. UW and other school systems will simply assume that people not reporting it are not happy with their rank. And question marks on apps add up quickly. Sorry to hear the school board gave in to whining people. aesthetics like that don't "get someone in" to a competitive school anyhow.
On one hand I agree class rank is misleading as some students take tougher classes than others, but at the same time kids need to be ranked somehow for the purposes of evaluation. One who does not rank high can still get into a good school. A long time ago I graduated with honors, but got into an ivy league school and my family never contributed a dime to that school. I am not a minority either, but a white male. I received no special scholarship, so I find it hard to believe rank really counts for that much in the grand scheme of your overall record.
If every student took an end of the year test that was based on all the college entrance academics, then yes they should rank the students. If a student over their high school career took the basic classes and held a high GPA then the standard test would proof the ranking more clear.
Actually, students have no say in whether the class ranks are submitted to the colleges they apply to. The high school provides that information whether the students wants it to be released or not. And it does make a difference. The problem is that it has turned into a game of who takes the most AP courses so that their weighted grades are higher than everyone elses. My daughter graduated with a 4.2 on a 4.0 scale but, because she was very active in sports and clubs, did not take as many AP classes as other students who focused solely on academics. Even though she did extremely well in all her classes, which still included many honors and AP courses, and did quite well on her ACT, she could not compete with students who loaded up on weighted grade courses. She finished in the top 12% of her very competitive class at Brookfield East. While she got into many good schools, she was essentially eliminated from certain colleges that have a 10th percentile cutoff. Clearly, this is more a problem with some college's admissions practices but if that is what they are going to continue to do, why feed them this meaningless data? I guarantee that my daughter and other students like her would have finished much higher in class rank at many other schools in the area. Why should they be punished because they are attending an academically competitive school and they don't feel the need to overload their schedules with AP courses purely to improve their class rank when they could be taking courses that will help them choose a career path, such as Accounting, Marketing, Journalism, etc. Class ranks take the focus off of student development and turn high school academics into a circus.
Whoever is the mod of this forum is quite the authoritarian. I posed valid points about the stupidity of the removal of class rank, yet you didn't accept my post? Move to China if you enjoy censoring the internet. [Editor's note: We can't see your comments if they are too long. Please keep them to less than 1,000 words and we will he happy to post!]
What people don't understand is that colleges are looking for competitive students who are strong at their specific schools. Although the quality of the high school is important, if you're in the lower ranks, that means that you simply aren't one of the best candidates from your specific school. They aren't comparing apples to apples when dealing with class ranks from different high schools. They are comparing each group of students to other students from the same high school with the same opportunities (in terms of teachers not socioeconomic status which I think is a problem), and this is completely fair. It gives a poorer high school a chance to allow some of their students into the best colleges.
No, excellence demands recognition!
I got nailed for taking advanced placement classes. The 10 people above me on the list took easy courses. I missed a $2500/year scholarship (a bid geal at the time) because the person that got it was higher on the list and took MAINLY ART CLASSES her entire senior year. She went to the same university as I did and dropped out after ONE SEMESTER. Can the class ranking.
It's not comparing apples to apples so why use it? Not everyone takes the same classes or has the same teachers. Dump it!
Boo-hoo on class rank. Just do your job in high school and things will work out. Not every college or university wants the number one ranked or even top ten ranked student. The university's criteria is much more complex than that. Also if your parents or relatives are big contributors to that school you have a much better chance of getting in. Just because you take AP courses etc means little, you have to perform well in any course you take plus you need some other outside activities at which you excel. There were alot of idiots at the ivy league school I went to and not all of the students there were top 10% in high, myself included. The reality is the top flight schools are overwhelmed with applications, and they pick 2% maybe. So get over it. Rank really does not outweigh any other criteria used by a school. Sounds to me like Susan is crying over spilled milk. Maybe your daughter is better off going to some other school. The college you attend does not guarantee your success in your future endeavors.
No Jay, no crying here. Just trying to explain that most people on this forum just don't get it because they haven't experienced it themselves. The closer you are to the system, the clearer you see that it is completely meaningless. Why have a system that does not serve any logical purpose except to confuse the matter? I am on an admissions committee so I know. Colleges who utilize class rank to narrow down their applicant pool are attempting to simplify the process for themselves but, in doing so, are not selecting the best class because of the gross inequities of the system. Outstanding students are never even considered because they went to a highly comepetive high school where almost 100% of the class is college-bound. It is the college's prerogative to do that but it makes sense for a school district, especially one with high academic achievement, not to put their students at a known disadvantage in such a process.
Yes indeed. It should strictly be based on ACT/SAT testing. One student could be taken advanced placement courses while another is breezing through on strictly basic required courses or easy "A+" classes, causing them to rank higher but not necessarily at their learning potential.
If we abolish rank it's another example of our "everyone gets a participation ribbon" society. Sure, there are flaws but it's only one of many factors separating students at college entrance time. The suggestion is as silly as not keeping score during a H.S. football game. Let's not continue to purge the spirit of competition out of our youth and raise a generation of passive, socialistic conformists.
I think the teachers should be be ranked. Muskego has lots of good teachers, but there are a few stinkers. This way the teachers that are there just to collect a paycheck will be exposed.
Rankings are very important to some colleges. However, when a student carries a 3.5 GPA and take honors courses and is still only ranks approx 125 out of 350 that student has little chance of getting into a top school because of his/her ranking.
Yes!!!
Absolutely! My opinion is based solely on the psychological and social effects of class rank. The constant competitiveness, peers always asking "what's your rank?" constantly after report cards came out, being labeled for your rank. This is how it was in our high school, and yes it was ridiculous. Manipulation of class selection for ranking purposes (because of weighted classes) was rampant at our school. My senior year, I knew exactly which classes I needed to take to maintain my rank of 1 out of approx. 500 in my class. Yet, I really wanted a studio art class instead of AP Chemistry. So I took it. And my #1 rank dropped to 3. So what. Rank was locked in after 1st semester, so a student that got bumped up to 2 decided to slack off the 2nd semester. At the end of the year I got bumped back up to 2, and to this day remember this student asking "how does it feel to be Salutatorian and not get recognized for it?" What a shame that students (children!) are subjected to such detrimental competitiveness and competition. What lessons are we teaching them? To learn for the sake of learning? Or to learn for recognition? To learn to get into the best college? And then what? No wonder so many young adults are confused about their life path and career goals. College is not meant to be the destination. It is meant to be the journey. Let's make high school about learning, about finding one's passion and strengths, and of pursuing those in higher education - not for an end goal of a top GPA.
absolutely!! test scores are much more important than where someone is ranked in class. students who go to a tough high school and are ranked 100th are being judged against someone from an easier school who is ranked 10th.