Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course it depends on future plans, but usually they get a job and go from there in advancing their career.

It's rarely the end of the world.

3.0 here. Went to a top 75 law school. Top of class -- federal judge law clerk, federal prosecutor, big law partner last 20 years.

3.0 is not a bar to anything. 2.5 is not as well. It just means less paths open and harder work required.

I agree with this - just need to hustle more later.

Ok but low grades in undergrad indicates lack of hustle, so what causes them to develop the hustle later?

It depends what kind of hustle. I graduated with a 3.0 ish but I partied and worked my ass off and networked professionally while in college. That is hustle too. It was my junior year internship that propelled my career.

Not necessarily. I am the PP with the low GPA and high work ethic. Academics didn't come naturally, but I HUSTLED in college in other aspects. I was the commissioner for student government elections, I was on the honor committee, I taught freshman classes on domestic violence/drinking/safe sex, I was the student ambassador to the provosts office, I volunteered 100s of hours with Best Buddies, I was a RA and summer orientation leader for 3 years...I learned far more from those experiences than Idid in the classroom...

That's great, but as your parents, I'm not paying $85k a year for you to do all that optional extraneous sheeyit, I am paying $85k a year for you to study and learn.

You paid $84948.75 too much. You should have bought a community library card from local University instead.

Anonymous wrote:Law is an option.

I had a 3.2 but went to a top 10 law school because I had a very high LSAT score.

Similar here. I had a 3.0 undergrad (with more than one F freshman/sophomore year) but scored 98th percentile on the LSAT. The doors of many highly ranked law schools were open to me.

Law is an option.

I had a 3.2 but went to a top 10 law school because I had a very high LSAT score.

And, I want to add, no employer ever asked for my GPA. Now that I am a hiring manager (though not in HR), I can state that it is rare to see someone provide a GPA on a resume. For my line of work, it is not a factor. What is more important is the interview, work or internship experience, and the x factor a person shows in terms of hustle, grit, spark - whatever you want to call it.

I had a terrible undergraduate career because I was busy partying and graduated with a 2.7. My parents were beyond disappointed. I mucked around for a few years doing entry level jobs, then finally got it together, climbed the ladder and went on to corporate success. Wanted a career change and got into an Ivy for grad school in my thirties.

There is no singular road ahead.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course it depends on future plans, but usually they get a job and go from there in advancing their career.

It's rarely the end of the world.

3.0 here. Went to a top 75 law school. Top of class -- federal judge law clerk, federal prosecutor, big law partner last 20 years.

3.0 is not a bar to anything. 2.5 is not as well. It just means less paths open and harder work required.

I agree with this - just need to hustle more later.

Ok but low grades in undergrad indicates lack of hustle, so what causes them to develop the hustle later?

It depends what kind of hustle. I graduated with a 3.0 ish but I partied and worked my ass off and networked professionally while in college. That is hustle too. It was my junior year internship that propelled my career.

Not necessarily. I am the PP with the low GPA and high work ethic. Academics didn't come naturally, but I HUSTLED in college in other aspects. I was the commissioner for student government elections, I was on the honor committee, I taught freshman classes on domestic violence/drinking/safe sex, I was the student ambassador to the provosts office, I volunteered 100s of hours with Best Buddies, I was a RA and summer orientation leader for 3 years...I learned far more from those experiences than Idid in the classroom...

That's great, but as your parents, I'm not paying $85k a year for you to do all that optional extraneous sheeyit, I am paying $85k a year for you to study and learn.

That "extranoues sheeyit" taught me to create a SOP, manage large teams of people, manage my time, create professional presentations to college executives, public speaking in front of large audiences, to create budgets and manage them, to interview people, and handle crisis situations. None it hypothetical scenarios in a classroom. Those skills were far more vauable than what I received in most of my classes. I was far more prepared for the real world than my classmates who went to every single class and spent their extra time drinking/partying.

My 3.44 with two separate bachelors degrees and a wide range of extracurriculars, along with very good GRE scores got me a funded teaching assistant position in a graduate school program and from there I took my three degrees and excellent LSAT score and picked from the top tier law schools that accepted me to earn a JD from one of them.

My parents were still never happy, though. Just like a lot of parents here never will be.

Anonymous wrote:Well, I had under a 3.5 and went to a first-tier law school...so I guess what "happened" to me was fine?

Same here!!

I had a 3.45.
Worked for a few years immediately post-grad. Went to law school.
Now im a big law partner.
My HHI is over $4m a year.

Life works out….

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course it depends on future plans, but usually they get a job and go from there in advancing their career.

It's rarely the end of the world.

3.0 here. Went to a top 75 law school. Top of class -- federal judge law clerk, federal prosecutor, big law partner last 20 years.

3.0 is not a bar to anything. 2.5 is not as well. It just means less paths open and harder work required.

I agree with this - just need to hustle more later.

Ok but low grades in undergrad indicates lack of hustle, so what causes them to develop the hustle later?

It depends what kind of hustle. I graduated with a 3.0 ish but I partied and worked my ass off and networked professionally while in college. That is hustle too. It was my junior year internship that propelled my career.

Not necessarily. I am the PP with the low GPA and high work ethic. Academics didn't come naturally, but I HUSTLED in college in other aspects. I was the commissioner for student government elections, I was on the honor committee, I taught freshman classes on domestic violence/drinking/safe sex, I was the student ambassador to the provosts office, I volunteered 100s of hours with Best Buddies, I was a RA and summer orientation leader for 3 years...I learned far more from those experiences than Idid in the classroom...

That's great, but as your parents, I'm not paying $85k a year for you to do all that optional extraneous sheeyit, I am paying $85k a year for you to study and learn.

Anonymous wrote:I was a horrible student (HS - 2.7, Undergrad - 2.8, Grad 3.4) and yet, I am a great employee. I am the person who takes on extra tasks, who orients the new staff, who pitches in when someone is needed to cover. That has proven to take me farther than any GPA.

Good work ethic, being responsible/team player, REALLY showing up, and going above and beyond counts far more than any GPA. I have co-workers with amazing GPAs who aren't great employees (I know the GPAs because I hired them....)

Has to be said though that your first employer will judge your work ethic, sense of responsibility, and record of actually showing up from your gpa. They have no other way to judge you. Buckle down, kids.

Well, I had under a 3.5 and went to a first-tier law school...so I guess what "happened" to me was fine?

Not at all. Most firms cut off applications at 3.0 and above. They then do their own testing to see which kids to interview. Do this because of college grade inflation. After 1st job no one cares.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course it depends on future plans, but usually they get a job and go from there in advancing their career.

It's rarely the end of the world.

3.0 here. Went to a top 75 law school. Top of class -- federal judge law clerk, federal prosecutor, big law partner last 20 years.

3.0 is not a bar to anything. 2.5 is not as well. It just means less paths open and harder work required.

I agree with this - just need to hustle more later.

Ok but low grades in undergrad indicates lack of hustle, so what causes them to develop the hustle later?

It depends what kind of hustle. I graduated with a 3.0 ish but I partied and worked my ass off and networked professionally while in college. That is hustle too. It was my junior year internship that propelled my career.

Not necessarily. I am the PP with the low GPA and high work ethic. Academics didn't come naturally, but I HUSTLED in college in other aspects. I was the commissioner for student government elections, I was on the honor committee, I taught freshman classes on domestic violence/drinking/safe sex, I was the student ambassador to the provosts office, I volunteered 100s of hours with Best Buddies, I was a RA and summer orientation leader for 3 years...I learned far more from those experiences than Idid in the classroom...

My DC, with LDs and ADHD, got a 3.0 in college. Went on to grad school and is doing very well in their job because it requires creative and people skills.

My other DC graduated with honors from a top 20 school with a 3.8 and is unemployed right now.