<p>The only people who know I have a learning disability is my mother brother and now you, i don't accept any extra help or extended time and such. Ive had to take every class anybody else did. so I don't and never will accept extra help. I'm to proud for that.</p>
<p>I was a Intern last year, now I am an employee. I guess they liked me enough to give me a shot.</p>
<p>everybody is different and well frm what I have seen while in school, the kids who get the super high grades aren't going to be good engineers, the kids with ok gpa like a 3.3-3.5 are the best of the best. though like me you cant judge a book by its cover, which is my transcript.</p>
<p>I was asking because beyond college, people don't tend to discuss such things. As I said, maybe it depends upon the type or degree of your disability. The services I mentioned are available in colleges for those who need them. You didn't tell anyone, which is a personal choice. But if it is something that may become obvious, perhaps full disclosure is the smart way to go. :confused: </p>
<p>Congrats on the job. It is a testament to performing well in an internship or co-op in order to make you an attractive candidate for hire.</p>
<p>Big picture: ->"Usually"<- students with higher GPAs and students who attend top schools get better jobs and better salaries.</p>
<p>That's the whole point of gpas and school rankings...to give something to measure potential cantidates for employment. I think that ECs and work experiences are another way to prove that you are an able employee. I guess i586 did a good job on that. (Rare case)</p>
<p>Therefore I think that for graudate school, gpa is usually more important than the ECs.</p>
<p>No... graduate school might be a waste of time for you... and I also think that the phD would be a waste of time for you if IBM is doing you so well.</p>
<p>But not for the majority who are seeking phD's... Graduate school gives good research and class experiences.</p>
<p>If graduate school was a waste of time, "graduate" school wouldn't be so popular in the first place...</p>
<p>And I think you've already established the point of how ibm is serving you well... I don't think further notice on your success is necessary for this thread.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Most guys with 3.8 gpa do not know there stuff, they are just bookamart which makes a bad engineer, Any engineering company would want a lower gpa with more experience
[/quote]
</p>
<p>A 3.8 gpa. THEIR stuff.<br>
You don't capitalize after a comma.
GPA is an acronym and therefore is capitalized.
a period is placed at the end of a sentence.
your writing is full of misspelled words, subordinate clauses, misplaced and dangling modifiers, sentence fragments, faulty paragraphing skills, etc. etc..
If those happened to be the skills IBM is looking for, they would of been out of business decades ago.</p>
<p>Anyone who makes the assumption GPA plays no role in employers consideration of future employees obviously has no clue about how anything in the world works.</p>
<p>You have a learning disability, yet you managed to achieve passing scores in classes such as advanced physics, advanced chemistry, differential equations, linear algebra, computer science, engineering thermodynamics, introduction to electrical engineering, CAD, and calculus courses? </p>
<p>Since you work for IBM heres a question for you - what is the procedure for calculating resistance circuit using Ohm’s law?</p>
<p>I talk how I talk and I am who I am, I guess I do have the skills ibm is looking for.</p>
<p>are you saying a person with a learning disability could not pass the classes you mentioned. your nuts, ive pass em em all already. and don't ask me stupid questions, questions that could easily be found over the internet, by a simple good search.</p>
<p>If you believe me, thats great, if not, thats ok also. I don't care. im putting in place here what I know to be true.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm beginning to question if he's a troll.
[/quote]
I must say that while I gave him the benefit of the doubt, I wondered that also. I can understand why current students, future students and parents of these would be on here. But I wasn't sure why a newly employed new graduate would come on here and berate current students for wanting a good gpa. Hmmm.</p>
<p>
[quote]
the kids who get the super high grades aren't going to be good engineers, the kids with ok gpa like a 3.3-3.5 are the best of the best. though like me you cant judge a book by its cover, which is my transcript.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>oh crap, my GPA is higher than 3.5... I should really slack off and get it down to 3.3 -3.5 otherwise people won't hire me!!</p>
<p>Here is the thing i586 - you come on this board and make very menacing comments thta obviously are far from the truth. Don't take my words out of context, engineering is difficult enough for students without learning disabilities. Most students who start engineering freshman year do not make it to graduation. It is very hard to believe that someone such as yourself, who made it through college without using proper spelling and grammar.</p>
<p>a PhD? I find that extremely amusing. What sort of thesis committee would approve a thesis that contains grammar and spelling error in almost each and every sentence. </p>
<p>You have a degree in EECS but you dont know the difference between their and there? Regardless of learning disability or no learning disability, No professor on earth will give you a passing grade (in any class) if you can not correct, revise and fix construction shift of sentances using basic english grammar.</p>
<p>sorry you feel that way, but I havent graduated yet, though have every credit I need to do so. I am just finishing some research and working. I guess you are wrong, as ive taken all of these classes</p>
<p>CHE 107 General Chemistry for Engineers*
CSE 115 Introduction to Computer Science for Majors I *
CSE 116 Introduction to Computer Science for Majors II*
CSE 191 Introduction to Discrete Mathematics *
CSE 250 Algorithms and Data Structures
CSE 305 Introduction to Programming Languages
CSE 341 Computer Organization
CSE 379 Introduction to Microprocessors and Microcomputers
CSE 380 Introduction to Microprocessors Lab
CSE 421 Introduction to Operating Systems
CSE 422 Operating System Internals
CSE 442 Software Engineering
CSE 453 Hardware/Software Integrated Systems Design
CSE 486 Distributed Systems
EAS 204 Thermodynamics
EAS 207 Statics
EAS 305 Applied Probability
EE 202 Circuit Analysis I
EE 203 Circuit Analysis II
EE 303 Signal Analysis and Transform Methods
EE 310 Electronic Devices and Circuits I
EE 311 Electronic Devices and Circuits II
EE 312 Basic Electronic Instrumentation Laboratory
EE 324 Electromagnetic Theory/Applied Electromagnetics
EE 353 Electronic Circuits Lab
EE 378 Digital Principles
EE 408 Senior Seminar
MTH 141 College Calculus I*
MTH 142 College Calculus II
MTH 241 College Calculus III
MTH 306 Introduction to Differential Equations
MTH 309 Linear Algebra or MTH 437 Numerical Analysis I
MTH 418 Survey Partial Differential Equations
MTH 435 Intro To Cryptography
PHY 107 Physics I*
PHY 108 Physics II
PHY 158 Physics II Lab
PHY 207 Physics III
PHY 257 Physics III Lab
PHY 505 Computational Physics
PHY 506 Computational Physics 2</p>
<p>now I was able to pass all of those, it took me 5.5 years, but even with my so called horrible grammar and such, i did it.</p>
<p>Last time I checked i had a degree in EECS and not English. I do math and write programs, and talking in proper syntax on the internet is not the main focus of my life. sorry. When i do reports and such, I can speak in proper English and do, and i have women to look over my work and such.</p>
<p>I find it hard to believe a 3.3 student would have an advantage over a 3.8 student in employment. On the other hand, I also don't think the 3.8 is looked at to be significantly better than the 3.3. As long as you keep it above a 3.0, HR would probably look at your other qualifications, including previous internships and such, and interviews.</p>
<p>Not to sound offensive or rude (if I am, then I apologize in advance), but I find it hard to believe that your learning disabilities hamper you from getting good grades in exam / problem set based classes, yet, you still ace lab classes, nail your research and do an awesome job at work. If you really know your stuff (which you obviously do), then why is it so hard to do well at least in problem sets? (some people are actually bad test takers, but at least you have 3 - 5 days to finish your homework and you don't have to do everything in just one sitting). People who get high grades might not really grasp the materials, but people who know their stuff should also be able to get at least decent grades (by decent, I mean 3.0 or above). Again, there might be exceptions, and you could be one. But exceptions are, well, exceptions and they are rare.</p>
<p>I just don't do well on tests, my professors knew that for example, when I was one of the few people whom was able to complete the projects in my OS internals class. but i was the only one getting 50's on the tests. It sucked, not much I could do about it. Problem sets aren't as bad, I still have trouble with them. Most of my problem sets in Engineering we were only give 1-2 days for each, except in Physics which was a week. I still do much better in labs and PS than tests.</p>
<p>The recent Valedictorian of my EE department, was 100% procedural, he wasn't a true engineer, all he did was remember precedure, if you interrupted procedure he wouldn't work to well. Problem sets and tests are straight from the book and rarely change procedure and this is why I can say that sometimes a 3.9 is not as good as a 3.3. Id much rather have a dynamic 3.3 than a procedural 3.9, though I would love a 3.9 dynamic, but they are rare.</p>
<p>If you learn by doing practice of tons and tons of problems and memorizing steps then you are a procedural engineer, if you actually learn the concepts of the tasks and they try to solve, you are dynamic. </p>
<p>When I read numbers, sometimes i see them backwards, switched and stuff, sometimes i see different notations and such, so as you can probably consider, taking a test is really hard, as I usually have to do everything 2x-3x. But thats how I am and how I was born, I wont and haven't ever taken help from anybody.</p>
<p>Good thing im not a AE or ME, I could kill somebody lol.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The recent Valedictorian of my EE department, was 100% procedural, he wasn't a true engineer, all he did was remember precedure, if you interrupted procedure he wouldn't work to well. Problem sets and tests are straight from the book and rarely change procedure and this is why I can say that sometimes a 3.9 is not as good as a 3.3. Id much rather have a dynamic 3.3 than a procedural 3.9, though I would love a 3.9 dynamic, but they are rare.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I definitely agree, but that's very different from before when you said that it's better to have a lower GPA. Companies don't assume that someone with a high GPA is a "procedural engineer" and someone with a lower GPA is a "dynamic engineer." Making that distinction should be done in the interview and not on paper.</p>
<p>Graduate school (master's degree) are very beneficial if you want to be more knowledgeable in a specific area, and didn't have that opportunity in undergrad. Some fields (I'm thinking structural engineering specifically) are very hard to get your foot into without that master's. PhD's are good for people who have a genuine interest in research in the area. For many PhD students, it doesn't cost them a dime. In fact, many actually get a stipend.</p>