My Grade 11 Math mark is eating me alive. What do I do?

[Beyond3D]

I'm going to make this one quick since I have little time.

Background:

Throughout my life I have always done good in Math. I almost always received 90%+, and received easily upwards of 95% when I took normal-level HS Math courses. When I took Grade 9 "De-Streamed" Math (All students must take "De-Streamed" in Canada), I initially had 98% until I got very sick and my mark had dropped to 95%. The Physics teachers and Math teachers talked about me as if I were some sort of genius. Then, an 11th Grader into doing something so incredibly, incredibly stupid that it still haunts me to this day. I had to be transferred to another school. Since my grades were high (I had a ~95% avg) they sent me to a school with a gifted program in Math. I struggled as I had to do the course in less than half the time that others did, but eventually I made it out with an average of 81 uncurved, 87 curved which was a bit below/above (respectively) the medians of 83 uncurved, 86.5 curved. I moved to Toronto the following year.

As for Grade 10, I received the highest mark in my school in Math whilst only doing 5 homework questions the entire year (yes you read that right). I got 98%. I was disappointed by the lack of rigor, so I decided to challenge myself. I switched to a new school which had an AP/Pre-AP program.

In Grade 11, I took AP Math. It was stated to have ~50% of the content from MHF4U and all of the MCR3U content, but as someone who took the course next semester, it had more like 90% of the MHF4U content and had longer, harder equations than my MHF4U course. I struggled hard, and only got a 76%. It is also worth noting that there was a discord server where there was some type of cheating (a student told me on the first day, then when his friend gave him the "no-go" he denied it ever existed), and that is part of the reason the course median was a whopping 92%. I am pretty upset over this, especially because a kid from my past Math class poked fun at it stating "even my 98% was horrible, how could you get that average and want to major in Math/Physics." I picked myself up from last semester, and had a ~93 in AP Physics I (unweighted) and ~85 (and steadily increasing, I think I would have otherwise gotten 90) in MHF4U before my sister went to the hospital and that further brought me down to 80 in MHF4U and 90 in AP Physics.

What do I do? I now have confidence issues in a subject I used to consider easy and worry about University admissions like never before. My average this year was a little under ~87%, the lowest of all of my HS years.

I know if I were to take normal courses next year I could sustain a ~95% average and possibly get a 98% in Math as I did in Grade 10 Math. Would UofT be willing to overlook me repeating Gr. 12 math and a bad 11th year?

 

[Haborix]

Even after reading everything you wrote, I have no idea if you like math. I make that observation to point out that you need to think about your priorities. If you like and want to learn more math, then you need to be challenged. None of your results appear catastrophically bad, so you haven't been challenged beyond your abilities. I'll let others comment on the gamesmanship with respect to grades and admissions.

 

[Beyond3D]

Even after reading everything you wrote, I have no idea if you like math. I make that observation to point out that you need to think about your priorities. If you like and want to learn more math, then you need to be challenged. None of your results appear catastrophically bad, so you haven't been challenged beyond your abilities. I'll let others comment on the gamesmanship with respect to grades and admissions.

I like math a lot, stated I want to major in it (and physics). It is a given you like math if you are doing physics. It just feels as if you aren't allowed to say you like it if you do bad in a course or otherwise fail. I LOVED doing the Euclid competition (Grade 12) but I did HORRIBLE not because inability, but rather because of ADHD and inattention (I zone out during practically everything, from social media to schoolwork to videogames and it drives me insane, hours wasted for the sake of it on tests, drives me up the wall).

 

[Rive]

I got 98%. I was disappointed by the lack of rigor, so I decided to challenge myself. I switched to a new school which had an AP/Pre-AP program.

Well, just as you noted sometimes consistent high grades are not about personal capabilities but about the reduced requirements in the given environment.
Been there, did that. Exactly that. The result - well, was quite a slap.
Revise, re-learn, adapt, integrate & push harder.

I know if I were to take normal courses next year I could sustain a ~95% average and possibly get a 98% in Math as I did in Grade 10 Math.

Then you would likely get the same wake-up call in the first semester of the university.

What is the average 'height' of aim in the first and the second school, for further education/career? What's the difference?

 

[Muu9]

You should get your ADHD diagnosed/treated. You can find some practice CEMC problems here: https://cemc2.math.uwaterloo.ca/contest/PSG/school/topicGen.php

I'm not sure about your odds of getting in to UofT/Waterloo without a very strong Euclid/COMC performance, given your grades. I also don't know if you even can repeat 12th considering you're on track to passing all your classes and thus graduating.

 

[bryantcl]

After reading the OP, it seems like the anxiety you're having is due to putting all of your eggs in the UofT basket. Are there other schools you are considering? Also keep in mind that if any college/university sees you took AP classes, they'll understand that those courses are more challenging, so a 76 in an AP class doesn't necessarily mean the same thing as 76 in a "regular" class.

Best of luck.

 

[Beyond3D]

You should get your ADHD diagnosed/treated. You can find some practice CEMC problems here: https://cemc2.math.uwaterloo.ca/contest/PSG/school/topicGen.php

I'm not sure about your odds of getting in to UofT/Waterloo without a very strong Euclid/COMC performance, given your grades. I also don't know if you even can repeat 12th considering you're on track to passing all your classes and thus graduating.

I only did bad because it was AP, I am sure I can get 95+ in normal, academic grade 12 math next year.

 

[TensorCalculus]

You should get your ADHD diagnosed

I second this statement - I can't tell you much about the Canadian admission system or how AP class grades work as a Brit, but what I can tell you is that someone very close to me who knew she had ADHD for a long time got it diagnosed and she considers it one of the best decisions she has ever made in her life. I know others with ADHD too, and they all agree that getting it diagnosed is something they won't regret and in most cases something that has helped them significantly.

 

[Beyond3D]

Well, just as you noted sometimes consistent high grades are not about personal capabilities but about the reduced requirements in the given environment.
Been there, did that. Exactly that. The result - well, was quite a slap.
Revise, re-learn, adapt, integrate & push harder.


Then you would likely get the same wake-up call in the first semester of the university.

What is the average 'height' of aim in the first and the second school, for further education/career? What's the difference?

1st one: So does that mean I am bad at math? I am asking this as I am genuinely starting to worry.

 

[mathwonk]

Relax. You are not bad at math, rather you are clearly better than average, way better. But you seem to be blinded by something I shared with you at your age. You have been conditioned, as I was also, to care more about your scores relative to other people, and being told you are a genius, than about the actual math you are learning. The reason some people here have said you do not give evidence of really liking math, I suspect, is that none of your posts ever mention any specific topics in math that you enjoy, just whether you have received a 98 or not. This is irrelevant.

The key is to try hard to actually enjoy the mathematics itself, the reasoning, the problem analysis and problem solving. It can really be fun when you begin to do this. Hyperventilating over whether your score was highest or second highest is a trap, which can easily lead to depression. Yes, you can elevate your scores by taking easier classes, and competing against weaker students. But the most fun is in meeting and interacting with the strongest students available, and the most challenging professors. Yes, it is scary and revealing, and your scores will almost certainly go down, and you will even question yourself; but you will learn more, and be more challenged; and then, if you realize you really enjoy the subject, eventually the scores will go up again, as you learn more and deeper material, and learn from the strongest students and profs how to study and learn more efficiently.

And even the more moderate scores will mean more, since they will be earned in the most strenuous environment. Want to find out how good you can be? Go for the hardest courses. Even if you are in the middle of the pack, you will be stronger for it, and afterwards, in any other more average environment, you will look much better in comparison. The way to excel is to train against the best, and then wherever you wind up you will be as highly rated as possible. I.e. you should be more satisfied with a B or C against young Einsteins, than with an A+ in competition with weak students.

Anecdote: As a young man wanting to improve my snooker game, I played the best player in my area for several hours, every day for a year, losing every single game, until the last day, when I won the last game on a difficult and unlikely cross-side bank shot. My opponent cursed and insulted me as lucky, and declined to play me more, but I afterwards discovered I had become one of the best players in town.

This is the way to really become good at math, physics, snooker, or anything. But I admit that real world admissions officials may not fully appreciate this wisdom, and may indeed be fooled by fake scores. But eventually the truth will out, and you can even overcome short sighted evaluation criteria by interviewing, if you really have the goods to demonstrate to them.

Relax, you have talent. Have also faith in yourself.

 

[Rive]

Just as @mathwonk wrote. Excellent summary.

does that mean I am bad at math?

You just had the wrong scale to measure yourself and that might started to dull your edge.
It's a good save (good instinct) that you switched scales, but just as you noticed, regarding admission the timing might be not the best... Happens. Don't dwell on it too much.

If you can overcome this and adjust properly then you can be confident in yourself.
But: maintain your edge. There will be more such moments.

 

[Kirti_Vardhan_1]

AP math is basically standard math in most other nations...a grade of 76 in it is nothing special and neither is 90 in AP subjects for te top universities. In fact a 76 is just a slightly high B and for AP math which is elementary subject is not worth much especially for rigorous STEM programs.

Most seripus students aiming for these usually take further maths and study even higher level physics and science as is the standard.

Are you comfortable with olympiad problems? Proofs? Real analysis and advanced math?

A 76 in AP math is not good when aiming for physics and top stem programs..even for business and economics most students get 96 in my country India in math (it is that competitive and equicalent or more difficult than AP).

Engineering and physics students here study even far more advanced stuff...all in all...unless you are olympiad material you are not getting in the best universities anywhere for top math and physics programs...while you need a 90 plus i even work your way in business and economics and commerce programs here.

A 76 in AP math isnt very good for such programs and actually does not meet their cutoffs for most programs in other countries as well (they specify A minimums).

Also note most physics and stem courses inovlve a heavy lab based component as they are requiring lab work and not just theory which is implemented in school via subjects as these degrees are meant to equip graduates with skills and not exist for intellectual showdowns etc.

So with the mention of adhd one may also ask him or herself why they feel like.pursuing a lab heavy and theory heavy stem degree? When the odds are also stacked against them.

Again..these degrees at the end of the day are for practical purposes and to fulfill key objectives and aims and not to accomodate students when the precious seat in university can go to other capable candidates.

I dont mean to dissuade anyone but please get real as to why you want to pursue a stem degree with a heavy practical lab component and how you would make the best use of a vast investment...as a teaching assistant i dealt with many arrogant students whom felt they were deserving of being accomodated by a university when they clearly werent not to mention these degrees are hard and usually place you in employment quick so can students handle these pressures as well.

Im sorry but no credible university with a respected Physics program is going to entertain a student entering with a 76 in AP math...universities are not stupid...

When someone says Im doing AP math it just means a basic A level and 12th standard globally...and it just means im.previwing the minimun entry level material for any maths science or engineering degreee... its plainly obvious someone doing poorly (a 76 is just a slight high B) would struggle in any physics and stem program of any decent calibre.

What “AP Math” Actually Is (for clarity):


“AP Math” isn’t a single subject — it’s just a label for certain Advanced Placement courses offered in U.S. and Canadian high schools. The two main math-related AP courses are:

• AP Calculus AB: Equivalent to a first-semester university calculus course (Calculus I). Covers limits, derivatives, basic integrals, and the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
• AP Calculus BC: Equivalent to a full first-year university calculus sequence (Calculus I + II). Adds series, parametric equations, polar coordinates, and more integration techniques.
• AP Statistics: An introductory statistics course similar to what non-STEM university majors take in their first year.

That’s it. These are standardized high school courses that approximate early undergraduate content.
They are not advanced or proof-based mathematics — more like a preview of standard university calculus, meant to let students earn credit or skip introductory courses.


In most of the world, this level of math is considered normal by the end of high school, and well below what competitive math/physics applicants study (who often go into proof-based analysis, algebra, or Olympiad problem solving).

Completely standard and normal 12th curriculum in India and for A levels as well. Where you need 90 percent plus and A* to A minimums fkr Physics and stem programs.

Reality check for posterity: Thousands of students finish and master such content globally often far before university.

 

[jedishrfu]

The reason for the AP courses was to solve a problem schools had with talented and gifted students. They were required to advance their education so in highschool these kids were enrolled in college courses and the school district foot the bill.

One part of their solution was to start TAG programs for these students, give them a teacher and have them work their way through the subject with little help from the teacher. In a sense, it was a way to slow them down while keeping them engaged in learning. The AP courses gave these same students a taste of college without the school district having to pay their tuition.

My friend was a math prodigy and advanced through several grades of math. By the time he finished 8th grade, he had learned all of highschool math. The school district paid for his courses at a local four year college so that upon graduating highschool he had completed four years of college math too. For college, he went off and became a programmer like me.

 

[Kirti_Vardhan_1]

The reason for the AP courses was to solve a problem schools had with talented and gifted students. They were required to advance their education so in highschool these kids were enrolled in college courses and the school district foot the bill.

One part of their solution was to start TAG programs for these students, give them a teacher and have them work their way through the subject with little help from the teacher. In a sense, it was a way to slow them down while keeping them engaged in learning. The AP courses gave these same students a taste of college without the school district having to pay their tuition.

My friend was a math prodigy and advanced through several grades of math. By the time he finished 8th grade, he had learned all of highschool math. The school district paid for his courses at a local four year college so that upon graduating highschool he had completed four years of college math too. For college, he went off and became a programmer like me.

Being "gifted" is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for success in university-level physics and mathematics programs. What is essential—indeed, non-negotiable—is a strong foundation built through years of prior study. In particular, students entering these programs are generally expected to have already mastered material equivalent to AP-level courses, if not more, as has been mentioned, olympiad level students usually are well suited for these programs, and the rest being top students too.

Unfortunately, there are far too many instances of people with neurodivergence and giftedness failing out of these programs. Again, I feel I must reiterate, while math and physics is beautiful it is ultimately the reality that undergraduate education is a training provided with aims and objectives, a pipeline, and to be in that pipeline the person must have a realistic shot of succeeding and a track record.

While the original poster expressed a desire to pursue a PhD in astrophysics, it's important to approach such goals with realism and a long-term plan. Most successful physicists and mathematicians had covered advanced material well before starting university. This is not merely anecdotal but widely reflected in admission trends and curriculum expectations globally.

From my experience as a teaching assistant, I’ve encountered students who overestimated their preparedness—some believed they should be given special consideration despite doing little beyond basic AP coursework. It’s worth noting that in many other countries, such as Germany, India, UK AP-level math is considered the standard for high school graduates. In such contexts, a high B in an AP math course may not signal strong potential in mathematics or physics, where a deep and intuitive understanding of foundational material is critical. Most students aiming for these courses tend to be enrolled in competitive olympiads at national level and generally score 90 plus or A+ with some even going up to 99 percent for their final percentage.

Top institutions often report that underprepared students, even those admitted, tend to struggle and are eventually weeded out. Similarly, not all degrees are created equal; there are cases of graduates from lower-ranked universities who lack sufficient practical training, which dilutes the overall quality of degree-holders.

In sum, success in these fields requires more than raw talent—it demands disciplined preparation, sustained effort, and mastery of prerequisite knowledge, often years in advance.
In sum, success in these fields requires more than raw talent—it demands disciplined preparation, sustained effort, and mastery of prerequisite knowledge, often years in advance.

Subsequently, the term “gifted” is often misused or misunderstood. Being labeled as gifted may reflect potential, but potential without structure is inert. When individuals conflate being gifted with being prepared, they set themselves up for failure in fields like mathematics and physics, where the intellectual rigor is relentless and cumulative. These disciplines are meritocratic in the truest sense—not in terms of innate ability, but in terms of how much depth, clarity, and fluency one brings to foundational material.

Far too often, individuals who self-identify as gifted—and this includes many who cite neurodivergence or conditions like ADHD—face very real challenges; ADHD is a well-documented condition. But academic systems do not, and cannot, function based on potential or intent alone. They require deliverables: consistent performance, demonstrated understanding, and the ability to integrate knowledge across complex systems.

In my experience as a teaching assistant, many students who struggled the most were those who believed they were exceptions to the rule. They had done little beyond an AP class or self-study, and yet expected accommodations, praise, or even advancement. Some of them cited being “gifted” or “neurodivergent” as reasons why traditional academic expectations shouldn’t apply to them. But physics and mathematics do not bend to perception—they are unforgiving disciplines that reveal gaps instantly and ruthlessly, regardless of personal narrative.

This dynamic becomes a liability in two significant ways. First, these individuals can drain limited instructional resources by demanding disproportionate attention while contributing little. Second, they often become demoralized and disengaged when confronted with the reality that others—often less self-assured but more prepared—surpass them quickly. The result is a cycle of entitlement, underperformance, and blame-shifting, all of which undermine the collaborative and demanding nature of scientific inquiry.

Moreover, the proliferation of degrees from lower-ranked institutions with diluted standards only worsens this issue. It creates a disconnect between credentials and competence, making it harder to distinguish between those with real expertise and those who simply navigated a system designed not to fail them.

In elite programs—whether in Germany, the UK, or top U.S. institutions—this disconnect is eventually corrected. Students who are unprepared are systematically weeded out, often harshly. Success in these settings isn't about how one identifies, or what conditions they cite—it is about whether they can do the work, under pressure, over time, and with precision.

One strategy is to enroll in a lower ranked school then attempt transfer to a higher one in the first year. Aiming for an astrophysics PhD with a B in AP math is almost within a territory of delusion or one must be exceptionally talented, lucky, or gifted in the long run.

I wish you the best OP.

 

[Muu9]

tend to be enrolled in competitive olympiads at national level

At the top schools, maybe, but in general this group is smaller than the group of physics bachelor's students. A PhD in non-theoretical astrophysics/astronomy is not so mathematically intensive that only students who get all As all the time in math can even think about aiming for one. E.g.

 

[PeterDonis]

In Grade 11, I took AP Math.

If I'm understanding this right, up through Grade 10, the math courses you were taking were not AP courses and were not putting you on a track to take an AP math course in 11th grade. Is that right?

If that's the case, I think you were trying to make a very, very hard transition, and you shouldn't be worried about your general math ability because you struggled. To be taking AP courses in any subject in 11th grade, you need to have already been taking the advanced courses that led up to them in several previous grades; otherwise you'll be missing a lot of background that those AP courses assume everyone in them has. (For comparison: I got put in advanced math courses starting in 8th grade, and if I'd tried to take advanced math in 11th grade without that several years of previous grounding, I'd have been in deep trouble. That was in US schools and was many years ago, but I think the basic point still holds.)

Whether you should switch back to normal (not AP or advanced) math courses and finish high school that way depends, I would say, on what you are thinking of studying at university. If you're thinking of studying math, or a subject like physics that makes heavy use of math, you might need to do some extra work in high school to give yourself the background that other students who are taking AP math in Grades 11 and 12 already have, so you can handle the AP courses in high school. But even that might not be necessary; it would depend on which university you go to and how much math background from high school their freshman level courses in whatever subject area you're interested assume. They might not assume that you already have an AP math background; they might expect to spend your freshman year teaching you the more advanced math you need to know. In which case taking normal (not AP) math courses in high school would be fine. But you would have to look at the actual universities in question and see what their curriculum looks like and what kinds of expectations they have for the courses you would be taking.