What happens to the bottom 10% of the class at an elite?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
What is really frightening is that you both don't understand that it takes 10 to 20 years after graduation from college to have any idea "what happens to someone" or what happens to any particular cohort. The first job people get and if they "have 3 job offers in January" has much more to do with the economy (expected economy) at that time than where they went to school. Over those 10 to 20 years, the economic cycles average out and the benefit of one type of background or another plays out. Any "study" that was based on the last two or three years would have cherry picked the data by definition.

I get that, but higher-ed has changed sooooo much in the last 20 years. Global, common app, fast-moving tech economy. It's just tying to connect 02-06 alums to current campus climate and outcomes is just silly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They become Republican candidates for President.

So hey we still haven't seen Obama's grades. Just sayin'

Umm, his transcripts were released in full, and his bar-pass notice and admission status were publicly posted.

Where? Link?

+1. I'd like to see them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If your last name is Bush, someday you become President, yay!

Or Kerry, and become Sec of State (W and Kerry had nearly identical GPAs).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Success in life doesn't depend on your undergrad GPA or the school you went to. I thought everybody knew that by now.

Any person's success will depend on

1) Their mindset and attitude
2) Their ability to think critically
3) Their able to communicate well
4) Their work ethic
5) Their willingness to retool and keep their skills updated

So where the bottom 10% land up will depend on whether they possess these qualities. If they do, they will do well. IF they don't they will drop to the bottom of the barrel and since you can't tell who possesses these traits just by looking at their transcripts, this question is ultimately unanswerable.

I’d love to live in a world where success is a function of those traits, but, seriously, look around you (i.e. think critically) and see if really can make that claim credibly.

(Not arguing that college/GPA are determinative either.)

Yes. I can. Can't you?

My two cents. I have an undergraduate from the University of South Podunk, an MBA from a Darden peer, and an MS in a related field from one of the top schools, public or private in the US. In the Rust Belt city where I grew up, you will see South Podunk grads rise because you have no high level school grads out here except for the person who went to Harvard and came back to run the family business. In NYC or DC, the South Podunk grads would never get a look, unless you were promoted nine times in 15 years at GE. But, My MBA and MS put me in the game because "everyone" has credentials from those types of schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t think it made any difference where you went to school until I saw what happened to my DC who goes to an IVy. He’s a junior with a 3.8 GPA and a URM with strong ECs including internships. He literally has been approached by 30 or 40 companies who want to talk to him. He has interviewed with three and as tentative job offers from all three. I understand that high achieving URM candidates are widely recruited but I really doubt he would get this much attention if you went to a state flagship.

unless it was Michigan or Berkeley.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First, it's hard to get bad grades at an elite school due to grade inflation.

Second, if you have an HYPS degree, no one cares about your grades. I've literally never put my GPA on a resume. I wasn't advised to do so by our career office, and I find it very odd when people do it.

Basically, unless you include it on your resume, no one hiring you knows where you ranked in your class. And at least at my undergrad, the only signifier of rank was whether you were Phi Beta Kappa or not.

Many places ask for transcripts, along with resumes. How do you get around that?

Apply to places that don't. I'm not saying that the people with better grades and honors won't have an easier time, but the bottom 10% of the class at an elite will be just fine if they want to be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Success in life doesn't depend on your undergrad GPA or the school you went to. I thought everybody knew that by now.

Any person's success will depend on

1) Their mindset and attitude
2) Their ability to think critically
3) Their able to communicate well
4) Their work ethic
5) Their willingness to retool and keep their skills updated

So where the bottom 10% land up will depend on whether they possess these qualities. If they do, they will do well. IF they don't they will drop to the bottom of the barrel and since you can't tell who possesses these traits just by looking at their transcripts, this question is ultimately unanswerable.

I'd like to agree with you, but I haven't been considered for many jobs simply because my college GPA was less than a 3.0. Many government agencies and private firms insist on at least a 3.0 GPA. I'm even unable to apply to grad school. So it actually does affect one's success.

It affects your options. To the extent having more options is correlated with success, that's true. But the elite degree is such a leg up that the odds are succeeding with a more limited set of options are much, much higher than almost anyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What is really frightening is that you both don't understand that it takes 10 to 20 years after graduation from college to have any idea "what happens to someone" or what happens to any particular cohort. The first job people get and if they "have 3 job offers in January" has much more to do with the economy (expected economy) at that time than where they went to school. Over those 10 to 20 years, the economic cycles average out and the benefit of one type of background or another plays out. Any "study" that was based on the last two or three years would have cherry picked the data by definition.

I get that, but higher-ed has changed sooooo much in the last 20 years. Global, common app, fast-moving tech economy. It's just tying to connect 02-06 alums to current campus climate and outcomes is just silly.

Ok, fine. I work in the tech sector. I DGAF about people's GPAs when I interview them. I notice where they went to school, but I mostly pay attention to 1) what they've done (depending on seniority that may include any relevant stuff from college incl. coursework subjects, not grades), 2) what they can speak intelligently and creatively to, and 3) how they present themselves. Honestly, my recruiters are good enough that I rarely have to worry about 1), and 2) and 3) are mixed because I'm trying to suss out whether they are smooth talkers vs. actual experts and whether they are arrogant vs. confident.

There are obviously employers that care about GPS, but they aren't 100% of all employers. Interesting and relevant experience post-undergrad can even make up for poor grades in grad school admission. The only members of the bottom 10% of Harvard who are going to fail in life are the ones who ended up in that bottom 10% because they didn't try and expected the world to be handed to them. Harvard selects for enough intelligence, that you'd be surprised the extent to which those "expect the world to be handed to them" are spread across the spectrum of rank. Elites can open doors you cannot fathom if you haven't experienced it. My siblings both went to one of the best-regarded public flagships, and I went to an elite. We are all successful, but I have flexibility and options they don't have because I can draw upon a network of people who just want to help or talk about school or whatever...and I have an impeccable pedigree.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for “DGAF” — never saw that before, LOL!

[Anonymous]

Bottom ten percent usually land up as pornstars, strippers, janitors and Presidents with mail order brides

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What is really frightening is that you both don't understand that it takes 10 to 20 years after graduation from college to have any idea "what happens to someone" or what happens to any particular cohort. The first job people get and if they "have 3 job offers in January" has much more to do with the economy (expected economy) at that time than where they went to school. Over those 10 to 20 years, the economic cycles average out and the benefit of one type of background or another plays out. Any "study" that was based on the last two or three years would have cherry picked the data by definition.

I get that, but higher-ed has changed sooooo much in the last 20 years. Global, common app, fast-moving tech economy. It's just tying to connect 02-06 alums to current campus climate and outcomes is just silly.

Ok, fine. I work in the tech sector. I DGAF about people's GPAs when I interview them. I notice where they went to school, but I mostly pay attention to 1) what they've done (depending on seniority that may include any relevant stuff from college incl. coursework subjects, not grades), 2) what they can speak intelligently and creatively to, and 3) how they present themselves. Honestly, my recruiters are good enough that I rarely have to worry about 1), and 2) and 3) are mixed because I'm trying to suss out whether they are smooth talkers vs. actual experts and whether they are arrogant vs. confident.

There are obviously employers that care about GPS, but they aren't 100% of all employers. Interesting and relevant experience post-undergrad can even make up for poor grades in grad school admission. The only members of the bottom 10% of Harvard who are going to fail in life are the ones who ended up in that bottom 10% because they didn't try and expected the world to be handed to them. Harvard selects for enough intelligence, that you'd be surprised the extent to which those "expect the world to be handed to them" are spread across the spectrum of rank. Elites can open doors you cannot fathom if you haven't experienced it. My siblings both went to one of the best-regarded public flagships, and I went to an elite. We are all successful, but I have flexibility and options they don't have because I can draw upon a network of people who just want to help or talk about school or whatever...and I have an impeccable pedigree.

Which schools comprise the elites in your sector?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Success in life doesn't depend on your undergrad GPA or the school you went to. I thought everybody knew that by now.

Any person's success will depend on

1) Their mindset and attitude
2) Their ability to think critically
3) Their able to communicate well
4) Their work ethic
5) Their willingness to retool and keep their skills updated

So where the bottom 10% land up will depend on whether they possess these qualities. If they do, they will do well. IF they don't they will drop to the bottom of the barrel and since you can't tell who possesses these traits just by looking at their transcripts, this question is ultimately unanswerable.

I'd like to agree with you, but I haven't been considered for many jobs simply because my college GPA was less than a 3.0. Many government agencies and private firms insist on at least a 3.0 GPA. I'm even unable to apply to grad school. So it actually does affect one's success.

It affects your options. To the extent having more options is correlated with success, that's true. But the elite degree is such a leg up that the odds are succeeding with a more limited set of options are much, much higher than almost anyone else.

Link? Most research and literature says the exact opposite, so I’m curious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:any company worth working for will ask for you gpa/transcript.

also, low gpa -> no reputable grad school of any sort

Exactly.

My brother got into HBS with a 3.0 from Berkeley. Don’t know whether than confirms or rebuts your claim, LOL!

He's certainly the exception to the rule, though. There are only a handful of people who get into HBS every year with GPAs that low; I imagine most of them are military or STEM guys.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:First, it's hard to get bad grades at an elite school due to grade inflation.

Second, if you have an HYPS degree, no one cares about your grades. I've literally never put my GPA on a resume. I wasn't advised to do so by our career office, and I find it very odd when people do it.

Basically, unless you include it on your resume, no one hiring you knows where you ranked in your class. And at least at my undergrad, the only signifier of rank was whether you were Phi Beta Kappa or not.

Eh. My DH and I met on Wall Street back in the late 90s in two different investment banks. We both had to put GPA AND SAT scores on our first applications. Not sure if they still do that but I wouldn't be surprised. I'm pretty sure the bank I worked with had a 1400 minimum. Meaning if you couldn't score above that, you weren't worth looking at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They become Republican candidates for President.

So hey we still haven't seen Obama's grades. Just sayin'

Umm, his transcripts were released in full, and his bar-pass notice and admission status were publicly posted.

This is completely untrue.