<p>The curve may be harder at higher ranked schools, but a 2.65 from Cornell or VT or UT is not better than a 3.5 from a small, lesser school. It might be better than a 2.8 at a smaller, lesser school, but not a 3.5.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The curve may be harder at higher ranked schools, but a 2.65 from Cornell or VT or UT is not better than a 3.5 from a small, lesser school. It might be better than a 2.8 at a smaller, lesser school, but not a 3.5.
[/quote]
Actually, this might be incorrect. I think it's just really dependent on the school.</p>
<p>I've seen interesting grade situations for people who have gone to my school, average a ~2.5, transfer to an easier school and then get a ~3.5.</p>
<p>"GPA really only means something if you want to go to grad school (of any sort) and for that first job."</p>
<p>Actually, GPA matters if you want to attend grad school with less than 5 or 7 years job experience AND want to be immediately admitted into the program.</p>
<p>If you have 5 to 7 years experience and you are willing to take 2 or 3 courses as a "non-degree" student and ace them, then the undergrad GPA means less.</p>
<p>Mr. Payne and Shoebox,</p>
<p>I think we all agree that school can make a lot of difference in GPA. I’m just recommending that you not assume such a large difference. I think such a large difference would be a rare exception. In other words, a potential employer will not likely see a 2.65 from a tough school as equivalent to a 3.5 from a average school. As I said before, I went to a small, no-name school for undergrad and Va Tech for a master’s. The small, no-name school graded significantly harder (I can only compare upper-level undergrad/grad courses).</p>
<p>agreed, 2.65 is blown out of proportion...on a more realistic scale, a 3.0 from a higher ranked school i think is still better than a 3.5 from a smaller school...now, in the smaller school's defense, if their average is around a 2.8-3.1 (which is the average for most top ranked eng. schools), then they can be considered on the same grading caliber (however, they might not be on the same academics caliber...lets face it, places like UMich, UT, ect are far better than smaller state schools, and rankings just put it down on paper) however, if a school has a higher average GPA, then yes, it should be taken into consideration that a lesser grade at a higher institution should be "adjusted"...i think it deals with situation to situation, as an engineering firm is more likely to take a 3.3 from UT, Umich, ect than a 3.5 or 3.6 from a smaller, lesser school thats average is a 3.5</p>
<p>again, apologies for the 2.65 statement...i was just trying to make a harsh comparison, not a factual statement</p>
<p>10-4, shoebox. Go hokies!</p>
<p>Where do you find this information?</p>
<p>"3.0 from a higher ranked school i think is still better than a 3.5 from a smaller school."</p>
<p>That may or may not be the case. In actuality, the recruiters who come on campus will be familiar with your school. They know what is considered good or bad and how that compares to other schools'. Firms that hire frequently may have alumni review your transcript so they'll know how to make a fair judgement based on course difficulty, etc.</p>
<p>read my fine print again please you just said pretty much the same thing i di</p>
<p>Don't mean to thread hijack, but what I have a GPA ~3.2 and only took graduate level courses after sophmore year? ECE and Comp Sci.</p>
<p>Depending on your school, that could be a reasonable GPA. How were you able to take graduate courses so early? Most schools will only let undergrad seniors take graduate courses, and only with special approval.</p>
<p>What GPA do good grad schools like MIT or Cornell seek. Do they ever accept, say a 3.5-3.6 from a top 100 university from the nation...if he has reasonably good research activities? If not...which schools might be a good match for somebody with a 3.6 graduating GPA(average GPA 2.87) in honors program, and did undergraduate research two summers, and an intership one summer. Also, does GRE score matter a lot?? and wats like a "good" GRE score.</p>
<p>wait, is your overall average a 2.87? or is that your school's av?</p>
<p>my overall GPA is a 3.6. My school's overall average ECE GPA is 2.87</p>
<p>you have a pretty good shot i'd say to Cornell...I would think that MIT is going to look for the 3.8+ students...3.7 at lowest...i would still apply to both, as high GREs might push you over the edge for MIT, and make Cornell a perfect match</p>
<p>Not necessarily. I believe MIT's graduate acceptees' average GPA is around 3.6. If you assume Gaussian distribution, that means half of the acceptees' have GPAs less than 3.6. GPA is not the be all end all credential for grad school.</p>
<p>ah i would have just figured MIT being MIT would have a pretty high GPA...the funny thing people see about averages is they say "oh its so low" or "oh its so high", but in fact, a 3.6 average just means half have above, and half have below...so, in sense, half the kids could have 3.9s and the other half could have 3.3s...not everyone is going to have a 3.6 or 3.7, and i think the best thing engineering students can do is known that some classes are going to just be difficult and you can't always get that 3.8 that everyone expects/wants
and heck, i would still apply to MIT with a 3.6, i just think GREs may need to be a tad higher than average (as in minor points, not huge stretches...think 3.65 instead of 3.6 haha)</p>
<p>
[quote]
i would have just figured MIT being MIT would have a pretty high GPA...the funny thing people see about averages is they say "oh its so low" or "oh its so high", but in fact, a 3.6 average just means half have above, and half have below...so, in sense, half the kids could have 3.9s and the other half could have 3.3s...not everyone is going to have a 3.6 or 3.7, and i think the best thing engineering students can do is known that some classes are going to just be difficult and you can't always get that 3.8 that everyone expects/wants
and heck, i would still apply to MIT with a 3.6, i just think GREs may need to be a tad higher than average (as in minor points, not huge stretches...think 3.65 instead of 3.6 haha)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, I think this figure has to be put in proper perspective. By far the most prolific undergrad program that produces future MIT grad students is, unsurprisingly, the undergrad program at MIT. It is very easy to end up with mediocre grades (relatively speaking) if you're an MIT undergrad, but compensate for the fact by making it rather easy for you to get into grad school at MIT. This is especially true for those majors that have a special master's degree program that makes it relatively easy for an MIT undergrad to become a master's degree student (and thus, be "admitted" into graduate school) at MIT.</p>
<p>For example, take Course 6, or EECS, which is by far the most popular major. MIT course 6 undergrads don't really need great grades to get into the MEng (Master of Engineering) program. Basically, you need something between a 4.0-4.25/5 GPA (which corresponds to a 3.0-3.25 GPA on a 4.0 scale) to get in. I am quite certain that a lot of these students bring the average GPA numbers down. But it's an misleading skewing of the data because the course 6 MEng program is open only to MIT undergrads. A guy from Stanford or Caltech or Berkeley can't just decide he's going to apply to the MIT EECS MEng program just because it has a relatively low GPA admit cutoff. </p>
<p>"Course VI undergraduates make informal application to the VI-P M.Eng. program at the end of the junior year by submitting a checklist. During the summer following, those who have maintained an appropriate grade point average will be informed that they may continue into the M.Eng. program. While there is no sharp cutoff, students with a 4.25 gpa are very likely to be admitted, while those with a 4.0 gpa are very unlikely to be admitted. In borderline cases the admission decision may be delayed for one term. Students who successfully complete the program will receive both the M.Eng. degree and an S.B. degree, normally simultaneously. Most students complete these degrees in five years. " </p>
<p>In general, even a relatively low MIT GPA carries a tremendous amount of respect among MS/PhD admissions boards because they understand how difficult MIT is. For example, our esteemed poster, molliebatmit, has freely admitted that she got "only" a 3.4/4 GPA at MIT. Yet, she was admitted to every single PhD program she applied to, including MIT's, and that of the 'other' nearby school (which is where she's going now). And she wasn't even an engineer, instead doubling in biology and Brain and Cognitive Sciences, and she has also freely admitted that these majors are generally considered to be among the easier majors at MIT.</p>
<p>Addressing average gpa, at my school it's 2.6 for freshmen engineers and 3.0 for senior engineers (i forgot the numbers in-between). </p>
<p>As for 2.8 being respectable, it's really tough to get an internship with a sub 3.0 gpa, there was a job fair at my school a few months ago and 90% of the companies required a 3.0. I don't know how how difficult it would be to get a job with a 2.8.</p>
<p>I applied to an internship with a sub 3.0 gpa and they had to pull some strings to even consider giving me a phone interview which i subsequently failed because they called me while i was sleeping and i couldn't think straight. They'll "get back to me" it seems.</p>
<p>if you have less than 3.8/4.0, don't bother to apply to MIT grad engineering. My friend got a 3.96 and got rejected from MIT, ended up at Harvard. Master of Engineering is a different story (you don't need GRE and you work during the day and study at night)</p>