<p>Sustaining a 3.6 gpa in engineering as a freshman is no slam dunk even for an excellent student. Average first year gpa’s in engineering schools are typically quite a bit lower than average first year gpa’s in other programs. Grades tend to get better as the student moves into more of the specialized classes in later years.</p>
<p>That is, imo, a very high risk bet. Very high risk. </p>
<p>Penn Engineering reported a 3.22 average freshman gpa a few years ago, and a 2008 PhD thesis at U. Michigan reported a 3.21 average gpa for freshmen engineering students – and both of these programs are selective in their admissions. I don’t have it handy, but a report on gpa’s for students in schools of education also showed that education majors had the highest average gpa, and that engineering and other STEM majors had the lowest average gpa despite ACT/SAT scores and high school gpa’s that were higher for the STEM majors.</p>
<p>ED,
My son had a full tuition scholarship at USC, which was contingent on a 3.0 GPA.
He barely eeked by with a overall 3.5 GPA, and if his major had been engineering I know it would have been lower. This is a really smart kid[ he’s currently getting his PhD at Caltech] but some of those upper division math and physics classes can be GPA killers if they are graded on the curve by an unforgiving professor.
A 3.6 GPA and engineering often go together like oil and water. And there is no question that a degree from UCLA means a lot more to employers in Calif than a degree from Utah.
My strong advise is forget the Utah “gift” and thank your lucky stars that he got into UCLA. Thousands of Calif kids would LOVE to trade places with your son.</p>
<p>Arabrab, I’m guessing that U of Utah’s freshman and/or sophomore GPA is much higher since you need a 3.35 to officially qualify to get into the major after your third semester. Totally concur with you on the GPA’s of STEM versus some other departments. That is why the blanket 3.6 seems quite “unfair” (again, I hate that word, but it’s simply true in this case).</p>
<p>My kids both maintained 3.6+ GPA’s in engineering throughout college. However, it is not easy and I would not count on it ,even for a good high school student. I would be very careful if there is no leeway with the 3.6 to maintain a scholarshp.</p>
<p>I agree - 3.6 GPA requirement is a concern. If he is a top student and the school is not highly competitive, he could probably maintain it best case. But tough things sometimes happen when kids head off to college. Some students get really sick the first semester due to all the new germs. A few encounter mental health problems not previously envisioned by parent. And many deal with other issues - sleep issues due to inconsiderate roommates, crashed laptops (hint - backup drive makes a good graduation present), yada yada. </p>
<p>“He should definitely be able to earn more than 4k.” - It depends. Certainly it is possible with a top internship and/or living at home. But you can’t count on it.</p>
<p>menlopark, leaning that way. As to your son’s GPA, I wouldn’t call getting a 3.5 barely eeking over a 3.0, but I get your point. The only problem I forsee at UCLA is the uber competitive nature of it (mind you, my son is very, very competitive). By uber competitive I mean missing a class due to illness and nobody will share their notes (not sure if this is an “old wive’s tale” or not, but have heard that it is fairly prevalent down here at UCSD).</p>
<p>sevmom, and I’ll bet that you were confident going in that both would excel. With my oldest, way more of a free spirit, so I never expected him to graduate summa cum laude…This one, probably similar to your two in nature I’m guessing. That being said, I’m very, very wary of the 3.6 even at a less competitive college.</p>
<p>Colorado mom, I run a business, so am very in tune with knowing that things don’t always work out as planned :). In fact my older sister contracted mono and that killed an entire quarter for her, ironically enough, at UCLA (of course, it cost about $2K back then…).</p>
<p>ExhaustedDad, Not confident at all with second son. First one,yes, excellent student in HS. Second one was not a great student in HS (frustrated both me and many a teacher). He has done MUCH better in college and will graduate in May either summa or magna ,depending on how he finishes things out ( and he could care less about that). He is more laid back than his older brother. I am very proud of him and never would have expected him to do as well as he has. I am embarassed to say I actually questioned him about even being able to pursue engineering when he talked about wanting to major in engineering in HS.</p>
<p>sevmom, that’s pretty humorous. As noted, my oldest was the free spirit not the youngest. Very confident in him, but not 3.6 confident in Engineering (I don’t think…). That being said, I did contact the engineering department at Utah and they claim that the average GPA “in the department is 3.6”, so, not thinking my kid is “average”…</p>
<p>Guessing UCLA would be the better place based on much of the feedback and I’m sure that would be my son’s choice as well. Thank God it’s Friday!</p>
<p>Well, even admissions wasn’t so sure about him (despite SAT’s above their average) so he had to start out in a general course (all the same classes the engineers were taking except for one) so maybe I shouldn’t feel too guilty about doubting him. He moved quickly into engineering after his first semester. But his HS analysis and AP statistics teacher was very exasperated with him. She would come to his games (he was all state in his sport) and coming out of a game one time she remarked to me about how “lazy” he was. As I noted to her then- Well, I guess he just has other fish to fry. Kids get where they need to go in their own time.</p>
<p>I would not assume that, since it could be that the major in question has a small capacity but is very popular.</p>
<p>Frosh GPAs are typically lower than overall GPAs, and Utah’s overall GPA was 3.07 recently.</p>
<p>You still have not mentioned whether he would have to drop out if he lost the scholarship.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But that is only of students who have already passed the minimum GPA bar, as opposed to all students aspiring to the major as frosh. Your son is in the latter category – perhaps in the higher part of the distribution, but still in the latter category.</p>
<p>ExhaustedDad, Just want to also respond to your comment that I was probably confident that both of my kids would excel . I should clarify about older son. I was confident he “could” excel but not 100% confident he “would” excel. As others have said, lots of things can happen once they get to college that can effect grades-partying, illness,boyfriend/girlfriend drama,etc. You just never know. Good luck with the decision!</p>
<p>UCB, I certainly will verify those things that I am making assumptions about. However, assuming what they tell me is true about the average GPA within the department being 3.6, and it takes a 3.35 to get in, that means that many of those students are posting much higher GPA’s to balance out those just sneaking in at 3.35. Does that make sense? </p>
<p>Quite frankly it all may be a moot point as my son is leaning very heavily towards UCLA with a full understanding of the financial ramifications. I know a happy student is a better student so</p>
<p>Remember that there also all of those other students who wanted to get into the major but did not meet the 3.35 GPA cut-off. So their GPAs do not count in the major’s average GPA, but are part of the distribution of frosh GPAs. That may be a larger number of students than those who actually made it into the major (and is almost certainly a non-zero number).</p>
<p>Here is an example:</p>
<p>There are five frosh aspiring to the major. Let’s say they get the following GPAs:</p>
<p>2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0</p>
<p>Those with the 3.5 and 4.0 GPAs get into the major by meeting the 3.35 GPA cut-off. Their average GPA is 3.75, so the major reports that as the average GPA for students in the major. However, the average GPA of all frosh intending to go into the major is 3.0.</p>
<p>I am not sure I would concur. I do not know squat about the schools but from your posts UCLA does not have any additional entrance requirements for engineering if you are accepted to the engineering program as a freshman. UCB requires their students to earn acceptance to the engineering program after being admitted and also a high bar for scholarships. These two requirements seem to indicate you would need to very competitive and smart to be in their program. The students would probably be some of the top students at UCB.</p>
<p>noname, you misread my statement :). I was addressing the previous poster UCBAlum, not referencing the school. The school I was and have been talking about was the Univ of Utah.</p>
Be very careful interpreting those figures. 3.35 is the automatic cutoff, and BME is a competitive program with substantial premed overlap. I checked several other engineering majors and the GPA cutoffs were much lower.</p>
Utah is a great school, but I think it may be a bit risky in this situation. Even very good students sometimes have a rough adjustment to college, and courses like organic chemistry are competitive everywhere. Is there a probationary period with the scholarship, or is it just gone if his GPA drops?</p>
<p>no imagination, checking further into some of those questions. Again, I’ll stop using the word assuming since y’all seem to hung up on semantics. That being said, I would guess that UCLA is far, far more competitive than Utah, and very few are selected for Bioengineering there as well. Your thought that the 3.6 may be “a bit risky” is spot on.</p>
<p>Oh, as far as adjusting to college, he has been chomping at the bit to move on to higher education and is very independent so I’m pretty sure (I won’t assume…) that he wont have a problem adjusting.</p>