Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a member of recruiting at an engineering firm, I assure you we do look at the whole package but a GPA below 2.9 is a red flag. We wouldn't even consider a candidate with a GPA of 2.5 and under. Everyone assumes GPAs do not matter, just the degree. Not true and it doesn't matter what year you graduated. Of course, life experiences can easily overtake a low GPA.

What a stupid comment. There are many smart people with 2.5 GPA and lower.

The smart thing for candidates with low GPA to do is to get IT certifications like AWS, Cyber security, Microsoft Azure, etc.... Am I going to hire a candidate with 2.5 GPA and no certification(s)? Likely not. Am I going to hire a candidate with 2.5 GPA and AWS or cyber security certifications? Hell yeah. I'll hire that candidate over a 4.0 GPA candidate. I can charge the client at a much higher rate and a 4.0 GPA candidate with no certifications.

Not a stupid comment. We don't look at low GPA applicants either. And anything below 2.5 is really low.

- dp

I do a lot of hiring a low GPA with certifications would be hired over a 4.0 with no certifications. Low GPA’s does not equate to a bad hire.

I think you need to differentiate between the IT world where certifications are important and the CS/DS world where nobody cares about certifications. I hire data science, math and computer science graduates and have never once looked at or thought about "certifications". The help desk, networking engineers, sys admins and cyber folks have lots of certifications, but that's really different from engineering/math/computer science.

Maybe you are not informed but there are DS certifications out there. A low GPA candidate that has DS certifications will be hired over another 4.0 GPA candidate with no DS certifications.

I hire EEs....who I look out for straight out of college: 3.0+ gpa with a significant extracurricular/work experience. That combo is usually a winner for us. Being personable never hurts either.

What’s the gpa/experience (Flunky work in someone else’s lab or research) balance for graduate school in science and engineering? Maybe should have a different thread For science.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a member of recruiting at an engineering firm, I assure you we do look at the whole package but a GPA below 2.9 is a red flag. We wouldn't even consider a candidate with a GPA of 2.5 and under. Everyone assumes GPAs do not matter, just the degree. Not true and it doesn't matter what year you graduated. Of course, life experiences can easily overtake a low GPA.

What a stupid comment. There are many smart people with 2.5 GPA and lower.

The smart thing for candidates with low GPA to do is to get IT certifications like AWS, Cyber security, Microsoft Azure, etc.... Am I going to hire a candidate with 2.5 GPA and no certification(s)? Likely not. Am I going to hire a candidate with 2.5 GPA and AWS or cyber security certifications? Hell yeah. I'll hire that candidate over a 4.0 GPA candidate. I can charge the client at a much higher rate and a 4.0 GPA candidate with no certifications.

Not a stupid comment. We don't look at low GPA applicants either. And anything below 2.5 is really low.

- dp

I do a lot of hiring a low GPA with certifications would be hired over a 4.0 with no certifications. Low GPA’s does not equate to a bad hire.

I think you need to differentiate between the IT world where certifications are important and the CS/DS world where nobody cares about certifications. I hire data science, math and computer science graduates and have never once looked at or thought about "certifications". The help desk, networking engineers, sys admins and cyber folks have lots of certifications, but that's really different from engineering/math/computer science.

I agree to an extent. When hiring I look for people who can work. In other words can they follow through on their own. Have they ever had a part time job, read a paycheck, not just school. When a student leaves school with that 4.0 gpa they still know nothing. They have to be trained and onboarded. While they might be good at test taking not always good at working. It's a balance. I would not discount a young person because they had a low GPA. Not saying a 4.0 gpa isn't wonderful, just that is not the only thing taken into account.

Bottom line is GPA only matters with first job after that no one cares.

I agree; I personally worry about 4.0 GPA students; occasionally they're perfectionists who can't handle failure. Sometimes they're just that smart. I set a threshold of 3.0, but I look for upwards trends as well. If you get As is all your core classes but B and Cs in the non STEM electives it looks a lot better than the reverse. If you had a bad start to college but finish strong that goes a long way. Decent grades but excellent out of class work (side projects, personal projects) will impress me a lot more than perfect grades and no indication of a passion for the field.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a member of recruiting at an engineering firm, I assure you we do look at the whole package but a GPA below 2.9 is a red flag. We wouldn't even consider a candidate with a GPA of 2.5 and under. Everyone assumes GPAs do not matter, just the degree. Not true and it doesn't matter what year you graduated. Of course, life experiences can easily overtake a low GPA.

What a stupid comment. There are many smart people with 2.5 GPA and lower.

The smart thing for candidates with low GPA to do is to get IT certifications like AWS, Cyber security, Microsoft Azure, etc.... Am I going to hire a candidate with 2.5 GPA and no certification(s)? Likely not. Am I going to hire a candidate with 2.5 GPA and AWS or cyber security certifications? Hell yeah. I'll hire that candidate over a 4.0 GPA candidate. I can charge the client at a much higher rate and a 4.0 GPA candidate with no certifications.

Not a stupid comment. We don't look at low GPA applicants either. And anything below 2.5 is really low.

- dp

I do a lot of hiring a low GPA with certifications would be hired over a 4.0 with no certifications. Low GPA’s does not equate to a bad hire.

I think you need to differentiate between the IT world where certifications are important and the CS/DS world where nobody cares about certifications. I hire data science, math and computer science graduates and have never once looked at or thought about "certifications". The help desk, networking engineers, sys admins and cyber folks have lots of certifications, but that's really different from engineering/math/computer science.

I agree to an extent. When hiring I look for people who can work. In other words can they follow through on their own. Have they ever had a part time job, read a paycheck, not just school. When a student leaves school with that 4.0 gpa they still know nothing. They have to be trained and onboarded. While they might be good at test taking not always good at working. It's a balance. I would not discount a young person because they had a low GPA. Not saying a 4.0 gpa isn't wonderful, just that is not the only thing taken into account.

Bottom line is GPA only matters with first job after that no one cares.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a member of recruiting at an engineering firm, I assure you we do look at the whole package but a GPA below 2.9 is a red flag. We wouldn't even consider a candidate with a GPA of 2.5 and under. Everyone assumes GPAs do not matter, just the degree. Not true and it doesn't matter what year you graduated. Of course, life experiences can easily overtake a low GPA.

What a stupid comment. There are many smart people with 2.5 GPA and lower.

The smart thing for candidates with low GPA to do is to get IT certifications like AWS, Cyber security, Microsoft Azure, etc.... Am I going to hire a candidate with 2.5 GPA and no certification(s)? Likely not. Am I going to hire a candidate with 2.5 GPA and AWS or cyber security certifications? Hell yeah. I'll hire that candidate over a 4.0 GPA candidate. I can charge the client at a much higher rate and a 4.0 GPA candidate with no certifications.

Not a stupid comment. We don't look at low GPA applicants either. And anything below 2.5 is really low.

- dp

I do a lot of hiring a low GPA with certifications would be hired over a 4.0 with no certifications. Low GPA’s does not equate to a bad hire.

I think you need to differentiate between the IT world where certifications are important and the CS/DS world where nobody cares about certifications. I hire data science, math and computer science graduates and have never once looked at or thought about "certifications". The help desk, networking engineers, sys admins and cyber folks have lots of certifications, but that's really different from engineering/math/computer science.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a member of recruiting at an engineering firm, I assure you we do look at the whole package but a GPA below 2.9 is a red flag. We wouldn't even consider a candidate with a GPA of 2.5 and under. Everyone assumes GPAs do not matter, just the degree. Not true and it doesn't matter what year you graduated. Of course, life experiences can easily overtake a low GPA.

What a stupid comment. There are many smart people with 2.5 GPA and lower.

The smart thing for candidates with low GPA to do is to get IT certifications like AWS, Cyber security, Microsoft Azure, etc.... Am I going to hire a candidate with 2.5 GPA and no certification(s)? Likely not. Am I going to hire a candidate with 2.5 GPA and AWS or cyber security certifications? Hell yeah. I'll hire that candidate over a 4.0 GPA candidate. I can charge the client at a much higher rate and a 4.0 GPA candidate with no certifications.

Not a stupid comment. We don't look at low GPA applicants either. And anything below 2.5 is really low.

- dp

I do a lot of hiring a low GPA with certifications would be hired over a 4.0 with no certifications. Low GPA’s does not equate to a bad hire.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a member of recruiting at an engineering firm, I assure you we do look at the whole package but a GPA below 2.9 is a red flag. We wouldn't even consider a candidate with a GPA of 2.5 and under. Everyone assumes GPAs do not matter, just the degree. Not true and it doesn't matter what year you graduated. Of course, life experiences can easily overtake a low GPA.

What a stupid comment. There are many smart people with 2.5 GPA and lower.

The smart thing for candidates with low GPA to do is to get IT certifications like AWS, Cyber security, Microsoft Azure, etc.... Am I going to hire a candidate with 2.5 GPA and no certification(s)? Likely not. Am I going to hire a candidate with 2.5 GPA and AWS or cyber security certifications? Hell yeah. I'll hire that candidate over a 4.0 GPA candidate. I can charge the client at a much higher rate and a 4.0 GPA candidate with no certifications.

Not a stupid comment. We don't look at low GPA applicants either. And anything below 2.5 is really low.

- dp

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t believe any of you are actual engineers.

I think they are disgruntled kids whose GPAs weren't what they wanted.

It is important to remember that half of all students are in the bottom half of the class. They go on to good lives. Even the engineers.

2.0-2.4 GPA is more like bottom 5% of the class, not bottom 50%.

You are probably wrong wrt to large state engineering programs in the first three semesters. And the bottom five % is still in the bottom 50%

Thanks for the support. My point was more about the DCUM bias toward the overwhelming success - we aren't serving our kids well when our expectations are unreasonable. We know it isn't true that half of all engineering grads are total losers who can't find jobs, but we also know that half of them had grades below the median. we know this because math. No, my kid won't be hired by JPL, but she won't be at McD's either.

And yes, it is also true that the big state programs have lower GPAs than the privates and the engineering programs at the LACs. My kid's Calc III class had a median grade of C. Probably wouldn't happen at a private school. And no, the kids don't learn less. Calc is calc. They just face a different scale.

Uhm, what Slacs Besides swarthmore have an engineering program?

You would be surprised at the number of mechE majors around. And even if you include the private Us with engineering schools, they are still giving higher median grades. But all schools offer Calc III.

You think engineering is about calc iii? Basic math like Calc is for freshman. Eng classes are totally different level

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t believe any of you are actual engineers.

I think they are disgruntled kids whose GPAs weren't what they wanted.

It is important to remember that half of all students are in the bottom half of the class. They go on to good lives. Even the engineers.

2.0-2.4 GPA is more like bottom 5% of the class, not bottom 50%.

You are probably wrong wrt to large state engineering programs in the first three semesters. And the bottom five % is still in the bottom 50%

Thanks for the support. My point was more about the DCUM bias toward the overwhelming success - we aren't serving our kids well when our expectations are unreasonable. We know it isn't true that half of all engineering grads are total losers who can't find jobs, but we also know that half of them had grades below the median. we know this because math. No, my kid won't be hired by JPL, but she won't be at McD's either.

And yes, it is also true that the big state programs have lower GPAs than the privates and the engineering programs at the LACs. My kid's Calc III class had a median grade of C. Probably wouldn't happen at a private school. And no, the kids don't learn less. Calc is calc. They just face a different scale.

Uhm, what Slacs Besides swarthmore have an engineering program?

You would be surprised at the number of mechE majors around. And even if you include the private Us with engineering schools, they are still giving higher median grades. But all schools offer Calc III.

Lafayette.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t believe any of you are actual engineers.

I think they are disgruntled kids whose GPAs weren't what they wanted.

It is important to remember that half of all students are in the bottom half of the class. They go on to good lives. Even the engineers.

2.0-2.4 GPA is more like bottom 5% of the class, not bottom 50%.

You are probably wrong wrt to large state engineering programs in the first three semesters. And the bottom five % is still in the bottom 50%

Thanks for the support. My point was more about the DCUM bias toward the overwhelming success - we aren't serving our kids well when our expectations are unreasonable. We know it isn't true that half of all engineering grads are total losers who can't find jobs, but we also know that half of them had grades below the median. we know this because math. No, my kid won't be hired by JPL, but she won't be at McD's either.

And yes, it is also true that the big state programs have lower GPAs than the privates and the engineering programs at the LACs. My kid's Calc III class had a median grade of C. Probably wouldn't happen at a private school. And no, the kids don't learn less. Calc is calc. They just face a different scale.

Uhm, what Slacs Besides swarthmore have an engineering program?

Anonymous wrote:As a member of recruiting at an engineering firm, I assure you we do look at the whole package but a GPA below 2.9 is a red flag. We wouldn't even consider a candidate with a GPA of 2.5 and under. Everyone assumes GPAs do not matter, just the degree. Not true and it doesn't matter what year you graduated. Of course, life experiences can easily overtake a low GPA.

What a stupid comment. There are many smart people with 2.5 GPA and lower.

The smart thing for candidates with low GPA to do is to get IT certifications like AWS, Cyber security, Microsoft Azure, etc.... Am I going to hire a candidate with 2.5 GPA and no certification(s)? Likely not. Am I going to hire a candidate with 2.5 GPA and AWS or cyber security certifications? Hell yeah. I'll hire that candidate over a 4.0 GPA candidate. I can charge the client at a much higher rate and a 4.0 GPA candidate with no certifications.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t believe any of you are actual engineers.

I think they are disgruntled kids whose GPAs weren't what they wanted.

It is important to remember that half of all students are in the bottom half of the class. They go on to good lives. Even the engineers.

2.0-2.4 GPA is more like bottom 5% of the class, not bottom 50%.

You are probably wrong wrt to large state engineering programs in the first three semesters. And the bottom five % is still in the bottom 50%

Thanks for the support. My point was more about the DCUM bias toward the overwhelming success - we aren't serving our kids well when our expectations are unreasonable. We know it isn't true that half of all engineering grads are total losers who can't find jobs, but we also know that half of them had grades below the median. we know this because math. No, my kid won't be hired by JPL, but she won't be at McD's either.

And yes, it is also true that the big state programs have lower GPAs than the privates and the engineering programs at the LACs. My kid's Calc III class had a median grade of C. Probably wouldn't happen at a private school. And no, the kids don't learn less. Calc is calc. They just face a different scale.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t believe any of you are actual engineers.

I think they are disgruntled kids whose GPAs weren't what they wanted.

It is important to remember that half of all students are in the bottom half of the class. They go on to good lives. Even the engineers.

2.0-2.4 GPA is more like bottom 5% of the class, not bottom 50%.

You are probably wrong wrt to large state engineering programs in the first three semesters. And the bottom five % is still in the bottom 50%