If you were awarding a scholarship...

[lewber]

Based on academic performance and promise, would you look more to classes taken and GPA, or test scores?

[FriedClams]

I'd look at the personal interview, recommendation letters, and the whole person - grades, strength of schedule, and somewhat test scores. Unless it's based solely on some matrix of grades and scores, but I wouldn't give that kind of scholarship. :lol:  

Edited March 26, 2017 by FriedClams

[lewber]

Smaller scholarship. No recommendations or interviews. Essay, transcripts and scores only.

[Julie of KY]

Based on academic performance and promise, would you look more to classes taken and GPA, or test scores?

 

In answer to your question, I'd look more at classes taken and grades rather than simply test scores.

 

If I were to design a scholarship, I'd look at more.

[snowbeltmom]

If there were no interviews or letters of recommendations, I would base the awards on classes taken and test scores.  Imo, there is too much variation in gpas among schools to make gpa a fair criteria.

[Lori D.]

Unless you're asking this question because you're setting up a scholarship... ;)

 

I assume you're asking for wanting to know how to focus energies during high school. JMO, from what I've seen of schools I've looked at, I don't think there's a one-size fits all answer to this question. It depends on what money each specific school has to offer, and what are the stipulations of some of the specific endowments. I would say that in general:

 

Test scores and GPA are probably looked at first.

 

Academics next -- both level of rigor and volume of course load, but also types of coursework, to fit into the degree programs where the school has scholarships to offer.

 

Interviews and essays (when required) probably come in next, so learning how to write a good essay and how to give a good interview would be very helpful skills to learn during high school.

 

And then volunteering/extracurriculars are considered, which helps a school decide how to award when academically and test/GPA wise students are similar. Some scholarships actually require volunteering / community service hours, so I would not leave that off the list of things to include as part of high school.

 

Also, don't forget sports. That is a pretty big area for scholarship awards. And a student can actually stand a pretty good chance if participating in a less-popular sport (like golf), or willing to attend a Division II or Division III school.

 

 

Edited March 26, 2017 by Lori D.

[lewber]

I am actually volunteering to review applications for a small scholarship awarded based on academic achievement and promise. I have kids with mediocre grades but higher ACT scores and kids with higher GPAs and lower ACT scores.

My DS is not in high school yet so I'm wondering what actual high school parents think is most important.

[Bootsie]

I am actually volunteering to review applications for a small scholarship awarded based on academic achievement and promise. I have kids with mediocre grades but higher ACT scores and kids with higher GPAs and lower ACT scores.

My DS is not in high school yet so I'm wondering what actual high school parents think is most important.

Are these kids coming from the same high school?  Have they taken similar courses?  If so, then GPAs can be useful.

[klmama]

If GPA is based on a weighted scale related to course difficulty, I would balance it equally between these three components:  GPA, ACT, essay.

 

If GPA is not weighted, I would balance it between four components:  GPA, course difficulty, ACT, essay.

 

ETA:  If some applications have weighted grades, but most don't, you could refigure GPA without weighting on the ones that have it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 26, 2017 by klmama

[Guest]

Test scores trump grades as they show mastery and the willingness to prepare.

Grades unfortunately have a political component via the chunk for 'classroom participation' and 'homework completion'.

[RootAnn]

I know some kids who don't (standardized) test well who have high GPAs. I know others who test well, but their GPAs are not 4.0 because they are taking some seriously hard subjects and/or a smattering of other reasons (they take awhile to 'get' the material, the grading is really tough, the grading is curved & some of the other kids in the class are really, really smart, etc.).

 

If the GPAs are all from the same school, I'd go with the higher GPAs because some kids really don't test well. If the GPAs are from different schools, I would wonder if there was grade inflation at the higher GPA schools. But, I'd definitely look at the classes taken. You can have a high GPA with low quality classes...

 

You have a tough job ahead of you. Good luck!

 

 

[creekland]

Having taught at our school and seen the typical difference among kids, I'd go with test scores first, then GPA close behind.  

 

As much as they are maligned, IME test scores usually show who has the most "brain power" or pure ability (esp ACT IMO) to think.  It doesn't work for all subjects and there are a handful who truly get test anxiety, but kids who realize the importance of higher test scores can work to improve their scores.  I'd want the breakdown of the scores - not just the composite - and I'd allow exceptions for students who didn't do well on one of the four individual tests, but did well or reasonably well on the others.

 

That said, test scores do not show work ethic or the ability to get along with others.  GPA is usually a better predictor for that (which is why most colleges want to see both for merit aid awards).  I wouldn't give a merit award to a student who had a high ACT and a pretty darn low GPA (2.something).  I'd even be wary if it were a low 3.something.  They are (probably) lacking some important people skills and those are quite necessary to survive in the real world.

 

If my only choice were totally unbalanced options (high one, low the other and vice versa), I'd even be tempted to look for the student(s) with the highest in both - even if not the highest in any single one.  If comparable GPAs, I'd look at the list of classes taken.  Advanced Chem is going to be more difficult than Photography in most high schools.  A lower grade in Photography would give me a red flag about that work ethic though...

[HTRMom]

Both would have to be good IMO, although you could consider one or the other if it were really exceptional and there was an explanation from teachers about a reason for lack in the other. Like, brilliant but bored in school, or curious and an in-depth learned with test anxiety.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[madteaparty]

If there were no interviews or letters of recommendations, I would base the awards on classes taken and test scores. Imo, there is too much variation in gpas among schools to make gpa a fair criteria.

This exactly.