MA improve chances of getting into MBA?

[sakky]

<p>

sakky; 3.1/5*4 = 2.48, not 2.1, pretty simply concept.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>

My thoughts exactly.

</p>

<p>Storch, Tax Bear, can’t you guys do your own homework? It’s not that hard to look it up.</p>

<p>*The MIT grade point average is calculated on a 5.0 scale…Grades used in the calculation are weighted as follows: A=5, B=4, C=3, D=2, F=0, O=0. </p>

<p>Conversion to a 4.0 Scale</p>

<p>Substitute the following values: A=4, B=3, C=2, D=1, F=0, O=0. *</p>

<p>[GPA</a> Calculation and Unit Conversion](<a href=“http://web.mit.edu/registrar/gpacalc.html]GPA”>http://web.mit.edu/registrar/gpacalc.html)</p>

<p>Hence, somebody who has straight C’s at MIT would have about a 3.0/5, as a C is worth 3. On a 4 point scale, a C is worth 2, hence he would have about a 2.0/4. </p>

<p>Let’s do a slightly more difficult calculation. Take a guy at MIT with 9 C’s and 1 B, and all of the courses are worth the same number of credit hours (use 1 for sake of simplicity). That would be worth a 3.1/5 on a 5-point scale and a 2.1/4 on a 4-point scale. Do the math yourself if you don’t believe it. Again, keep in mind that a C is worth 3 and 2 and a B is worth 4 and 3 respectively on each grading scale. </p>

<p>If you guys really need a basic tutorial on how to calculate GPA, you can find one here:</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.ehow.com/how_4612605_calculate-grade-point-average.html[/url]”>http://www.ehow.com/how_4612605_calculate-grade-point-average.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Pretty simple concept, right? My thoughts exactly.</p>

[Tax_Bear]

<p>I was never good about doing my homework.</p>

[storch]

<p>my mistake</p>

[gellino]

<p>

The MA wont get you in a Haas or Anderson without significant, good work experience. I diagree that a 3.3 is in range for those schools. It is possible they may average in your MA grades too, so do as well as you can.

</p>

<p>I’ve known several that got into Haas and UCLA with GPAs below 3.3. Granted, it was slightly before the most current wave of college grade inflation. </p>

<p>

I’m shocked that those GPA’s are getting into top programs, certainly was not the case in my day. Speaks to the ultimate importance of work experience today. Yet I’m curious as to where the work experience is coming from as I know ibanks and consulting firms rarely hire anyone with below high 3’s.

</p>

<p>From my experience, this is not remotely true and “your day” was considerably before “my day”. This has been the general range of GPAs for incoming top 10 MBA classes for at least the ~ 12 years that I’ve been aware of the stats (if anything, they were somewhat lower when I was applying), so I question how much recruiting and trashing of resumes with sub 3.8 GPAs you’ve been doing over the last decade+. From both my UG and my BB IB analyst class almost no one had a GPA over 3.75 that got an IB analyst job. Most of that type pursued JD, MD, PhD immediately after UG. I would say just about everyone that went into IB had a GPA over 3.2, so maybe with the grade inflation of the last decade this would translate to ~ 3.4. Consulting firms, I would grant you had a higher threshold than IBs but it wasn’t only 3.8+.</p>

[storch]

<p>at stanford - probably the hardest school to get into - the 25-75% GPA is 3.24-3.95, so plenty are getting in with relatively low GPAs.</p>

<p>haas is: 3.3-3.86
anderson is: 3.2-3.8</p>

<p>of course work exp/gmat will need to offset a below avg gpa</p>

[mackinaw]

<p>Note that the 25-75% range on Stanford means that 25% of the students have GPA’s > 3.95. That’s pretty impressive (even in the age of grade inflation).</p>

<p>That said, I would reinforce the point that it’s the whole package that counts: work experience, undergraduate GPA and training, GMAT, essays, and letters. Excellent GMAT’s can compensate for mediocre grades (but they really should be above 3.0), but excellent work experience and essays that show how this has prepared you for the MBA can trump everything else as long as the GPA/GMAT is adequate.</p>