I think the titles are nice, but I also think, as others have noted, that class rank is due to many factors and you could take hard classes and have a lower GPA. I think some people put too much weight on them and it shouldn't be such a pressure situation.
One thing that bothered me is that there were co-valedictorians in my class, but then they still gave out a salutatorian for 3rd place. That doesn't seem right to me.
So...in a 4.33 scale, where A + is tops, you're telling me that a 4.25 doesn't look better than a 3.96 in a 4.0 scale.
4.25 makes it seem like this guy gets at least all A's, and sometimes rates high enough to get an A+. In a 4.0 scale, if you get a 3.96 it means you get at least 1 A-. Also..in a 4.0 scale you can NOT make up for an A- where in a 4.33 scale you can.
Your logic is flawed, as is the 4.33 scale.
I would probably go from D- at 0.33 to A+ at 4.00 (A=3.67, B=2.67, C=1.67) if I was trying to use a 4 point scale. But again, all I am saying is that the +/- should apply to all the grade levels where you are actually getting points...regardless of the scale being used or you should not apply the +/- at all.
The bottom line is that they told us that they were looking for students that had challenged themselves (taken the advanced courses and not just the bare minimum), had success (got good grades...As and Bs), and were "involved" in some form or fashion.
Another interesting thing is that most of the schools downplayed the standardized tests (ACT and SAT). In fact, some schools no longer require them (Wake Forest for example...it is optional to submit a standardized test score). I think these schools are starting to realize that kids are taking all kinds of courses to learn "how to take the test" and are taking the standardized tests multiple times (5, 6, 7, 8 times) in order to try to catch lightning in a bottle one Saturday morning...ultimately they are finding these tests are becoming a less accurate predictor of success at college.
I once got an A+++++++++ for a theme about a BB gun.
I was the Valedictorian of my class, however my high school didn't use +/- when considering your GPA, thus you had 2.0/3.0/4.0 and I had my fair share of A- in classes.
High School in general is a joke and I have no problem with college level/AP courses being weighted in order to encourage students to actually try to challenge themselves
Edit: I was also the Salutatorian and Senior Class President and pretty much the ****
Thanks for the responses to those who managed to stay on topic. I'm doing research for a paper specifically assigned to me by our principal. I think his reasoning was that my GPA has fallen to around 3.9 while I've been taking courses at the local college while the top 3 or 4 kids in our grade our taking stuff like child development and housing. I could care less, but I think he is actually looking at adopting a new process for this reason.
1) I'm a valedictorian, so all you riff-raff can suck it. :jimlad:
4.0 on a 4.0 scale, but given some of the criteria here it woulda been in the 4.3 range.
2) High School is a joke, college was only marginally harder. Squeaked out of the CPRE program with a 3.8.