Question

M

mbergq9632

Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2016
Messages
19
What Does WP and congressmen look at the most in determining acceptance? And is weighted GPA above a 4.4 safe if the unweighted is 3.6?
 
USMA looks at the whole person score, so everything is important. But academics (class rank and test scores) make up 60% of you whole person score.

They look at class rank more than GPA. Last year 70% of those admitted were in the top 20% of their class. Over 10% were valedictorian or salutatorian.

MOCs will set their own standard
 
Congressmen look at how the nomination will affect their re-election status. Their preferences have absolutely nothing to do with what the academy is looking for.

While mostly true with a member of the HOR, some candidates (nominees) don't have to be qualified at all if the MOC has less than 10 applicants.

Some congressmen have also been notorious for nominating on the basis of sex and race, not to mention political influence.

Of course I'm not talking about all, or even most, but some. There should be a better way to geographically represent the population of the US, but I can't think of any.

Luckily, it's not up to me. I'd end the nomination process as we know it. I'd certainly make MOC''s publish their nominees after selection, and I'd eliminate principal nominees. I might also censure representatives that did not fill their nomination lists with qualified nominees. It happens all the time.

The academies are wonderful institutions, and the chance of a lifetime for a lot of kids. Shamefully, there are MOC's out there that not only don't fill their alloted nomination lists, they don't nominate anyone at all.


As for looking at class rank... often a kid will post a high class rank with dismal SAT or ACT scores. I think it's a head scratcher when a kid ranks high in their school, but has ordinary or even subpar test scores. That indicates to me that their high school may be under achieving or isn't very demanding. Sometimes it also is indicative of a student that gets lots of help (parents, tutoring, etc) throughout the school year, then has to take the standardized tests alone.

I'd look very closely at kids with high class ranks and low test scores. Something doesnt jive.
 
Maplerock said:
Congressmen look at how the nomination will affect their re-election status. Their preferences have absolutely nothing to do with what the academy is looking for.

While mostly true with a member of the HOR, some candidates (nominees) don't have to be qualified at all if the MOC has less than 10 applicants.

Some congressmen have also been notorious for nominating on the basis of sex and race, not to mention political influence.

Of course I'm not talking about all, or even most, but some. There should be a better way to geographically represent the population of the US, but I can't think of any.

Luckily, it's not up to me. I'd end the nomination process as we know it. I'd certainly make MOC''s publish their nominees after selection, and I'd eliminate principal nominees. I might also censure representatives that did not fill their nomination lists with qualified nominees. It happens all the time.

The academies are wonderful institutions, and the chance of a lifetime for a lot of kids. Shamefully, there are MOC's out there that not only don't fill their alloted nomination lists, they don't nominate anyone at all.


As for looking at class rank... often a kid will post a high class rank with dismal SAT or ACT scores. I think it's a head scratcher when a kid ranks high in their school, but has ordinary or even subpar test scores. That indicates to me that their high school may be under achieving or isn't very demanding. Sometimes it also is indicative of a student that gets lots of help (parents, tutoring, etc) throughout the school year, then has to take the standardized tests alone.

I'd look very closely at kids with high class ranks and low test scores. Something doesnt jive.
Click to expand...

Thanks a lot. But in my situation, my high school is in the top 100 of the us, and my class rank is not that high but I can still test about a 1420
 
My DD is one of those students with a high GPA and ranked 8th out of 89 students with a 1200 SAT score. She studies until the sun comes up, extremely driven when it comes to her GPA but the standardize tests are another story. Taken it 3 times, increased her score by 200 points and will take it one more time. Math is high but the reading section messes her up. Her dad and I scratch our heads with this issue but she's still in the running. Time will tell.
 
Maplerock said:
Congressmen look at how the nomination will affect their re-election status. Their preferences have absolutely nothing to do with what the academy is looking for.

As for looking at class rank... often a kid will post a high class rank with dismal SAT or ACT scores. I think it's a head scratcher when a kid ranks high in their school, but has ordinary or even subpar test scores. That indicates to me that their high school may be under achieving or isn't very demanding. Sometimes it also is indicative of a student that gets lots of help (parents, tutoring, etc) throughout the school year, then has to take the standardized tests alone.

I'd look very closely at kids with high class ranks and low test scores. Something doesnt jive.
Click to expand...

1. No unqualified candidates get into service academies, although some on the lower end of qualified are given special consideration. Most MOC's nominate through a fair evaluation process using a panel of academy graduates, former military officers, and other responsible individuals to make selections. Of course, as with any process, there are a few outliers, that through ignorance or calculation, make poor selections. Those poor selections will not be 3Q and will not receive appointments.

2. I agree with the comments on class rank. Most colleges today have chosen to ignore "strength of school" in evaluating academic potential. A 3.50 GPA or top 20% at (pick your top school) carries the same weight as a 3.50 GPA or top 20% from (pick your weaker school); thus the disconnect between class rank and test scores. Sometimes students just don't test well, but, arguably, that aberration from class rank/GPA is less common than differences in school rigor.

Differences in rigor make class rank an unreliable indicator. An NFL team doesn't draft a quarterback from a Division III football program just because he threw for more passing yards than quarterbacks from Division I programs.
 
Maplerock said:
Congressmen look at how the nomination will affect their re-election status. Their preferences have absolutely nothing to do with what the academy is looking for.

While mostly true with a member of the HOR, some candidates (nominees) don't have to be qualified at all if the MOC has less than 10 applicants.

Some congressmen have also been notorious for nominating on the basis of sex and race, not to mention political influence.

Of course I'm not talking about all, or even most, but some. There should be a better way to geographically represent the population of the US, but I can't think of any.

Luckily, it's not up to me. I'd end the nomination process as we know it. I'd certainly make MOC''s publish their nominees after selection, and I'd eliminate principal nominees. I might also censure representatives that did not fill their nomination lists with qualified nominees. It happens all the time.

The academies are wonderful institutions, and the chance of a lifetime for a lot of kids. Shamefully, there are MOC's out there that not only don't fill their alloted nomination lists, they don't nominate anyone at all.
Click to expand...

Could you share the source of your comment? Personal observation? What state?
 
jl123 said:
1. No unqualified candidates get into service academies, although some on the lower end of qualified are given special consideration. Most MOC's nominate through a fair evaluation process using a panel of academy graduates, former military officers, and other responsible individuals to make selections. Of course, as with any process, there are a few outliers, that through ignorance or calculation, make poor selections. Those poor selections will not be 3Q and will not receive appointments.

2. I agree with the comments on class rank. Most colleges today have chosen to ignore "strength of school" in evaluating academic potential. A 3.50 GPA or top 20% at (pick your top school) carries the same weight as a 3.50 GPA or top 20% from (pick your weaker school); thus the disconnect between class rank and test scores. Sometimes students just don't test well, but, arguably, that aberration from class rank/GPA is less common than differences in school rigor.

Differences in rigor make class rank an unreliable indicator. An NFL team doesn't draft a quarterback from a Division III football program just because he threw for more passing yards than quarterbacks from Division I programs.
Click to expand...

Thanks this helped a lot. But I just think that my class rank will bring me down, and yet I still have good stats compared to others.
 
You asked
mbergq9632 said:
And is weighted GPA above a 4.4 safe if the unweighted is 3.6?
Click to expand...
and I tried to answer the question on what West Point will think. Not if they should or what it the best way.

The most reliable data I have is this old Rand Report http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR700/RR723/RAND_RR723.pdf
It states: "West Point emphasizes and scores three important qualities for each candidate: academic ability, leadership potential, and physical aptitude. Scores on these traits are combined to make up the WCS. An academic ability score is calculated by combining a candidate’s ACT or SAT scores (whichever is the highest in terms of percentile standing) and high school rank,1 making up 60 percent of the WCS (see Figure 2.1). Leadership potential is measured by the community leader score (CLS), calculated by taking the arithmetic average of the AAS, EAS, and FAS. CLS makes up 30 percent of the WCS. The final component is the physical aptitude exam score, which makes up the last 10 percent of a candidate’s WCS. " (bold is mine) It goes on the describe the components.

It is my belief that USMA does not use GPA in calculating your WCS. (The exception is if you school does not rank students, then somehow they convert GPA to a class rank equivalent). The rand report and other post grad thesis I have read all support my belief. If someone can point me to a better, more recent source or document, I will be happy to modify my belief.
 
5Day said:
It is my belief that USMA does not use GPA in calculating your WCS. (The exception is if you school does not rank students, then somehow they convert GPA to a class rank equivalent).
Click to expand...
In the absence of a reported class rank, West Point builds a class rank based on test scores.
 
mbergq9632 said:
Thanks this helped a lot. But I just think that my class rank will bring me down, and yet I still have good stats compared to others.
Click to expand...
It is better to have the numbers in your favor to start - a top 10% class rank earns a specified number of WCS points regardless of the school.

But, even though the admissions process is highly objective, it is not without some give and take. Here is where your RC can argue your case. If you have excellent grades and test scores and your lower class rank is the result of attending a highly competitive or very small school, the RC can make a case in your favor. However, if the grades are high, test scores are low, and the lower class rank is due to grade inflation (ie. everyone gets an A), you can expect no argument in your favor.

This is why many competitive high schools do not report class rank - it hurts some of their high performing students when compared against students from less competitive programs.
 
Each MOC may have different criteria they consider when issuing NOMs. We have no way of knowing what a specific MOC looks at. GPA is only one of the factors WP considers to determine who is 3Q.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top