<p>I've found PDFs from previous years, such as 2010, of the "congratulations" pamphlet that say you need to maintain a cumulative GPA of 3.0 to keep your merit scholarship. But the pamphlet we got in the mail does not mention a GPA requirement. Have they changed that?</p>
<p>It depends on the specific scholarship.</p>
<p>I believe the 3.0 requirement is still in place for Trustee/Presidential/Mork, Stamps. Not sure about Dean’s and NMF Presidential.</p>
<p>[USC</a> - Mork, Trustee & Presidential Scholars: FAQ](<a href=“http://www.usc.edu/programs/ugprograms/aif/faqscholars.htm]USC”>http://www.usc.edu/programs/ugprograms/aif/faqscholars.htm)</p>
<p>From there it says that Mork/Trustee/Presidential is a 2.0, which seems very low considering I thought I had to keep a 3.25 to retain my Presidential.</p>
<p>I think that 2.0 must be a typo.
I’ll soon hear back from the Provost re your post.</p>
<p>No, it is 2.0. My friend had it confirmed with an admissions counselor.</p>
<p>They dropped it down to a 2.0 in 2011.</p>
<p>good grief! why? top USC students cant maintain a 3.0?
pfffff.</p>
<p>That’s pretty outrageous - especially since you wouldn’t be admitted, let alone be allowed to transfer in with a GPA that low. Doesn’t an average of 2.0 means either all the grades are at that level or there’s some D’s balancing out the B’s? Where’s the merit in that? :(</p>
<p>That certainly doesn’t help bolster an academic image of the school does it? That goes more with the red cup video in the other thread. Yikes. I’m thinking maybe spend less marketing budget on these big (and yes, they are beautiful) marketing pieces they mail out and spend more on image/PR, paying attention to details like this and adjusting things where necessary. I have a student there, and sometimes I just find myself shaking my head.</p>
<p>Seriously? Some are now complaining about giving generous scholarships with minimal restrictions? I bet most (if not all) T/P/M/S scholars are no where close to a 2.0 (probably not even close to a 3.0) and why would you assume that a minimum influences these students? I think it shows a true commitment to these students (who they valued enough in the first place to offer these scholarships to entice) for 4 years, instead of putting up barriers.</p>
<p>@ArtsandLetters</p>
<p>It’s not outrageous. These aren’t ordinary people getting these merit scholarships. These are people that have been very successful in their academic pursuits up to date. It is highly unlikely these merit scholars would get a poor GPA. After all these merit scholars are the cream of the crop.</p>
<p>This is the first I am hearing about the 2.0 requirement. When DS got his scholarship in 2011 I think the pamphlet said something like a satisfactory GPA. I will agree that 2.0 is low, but I also am sure that no scholarship student has a GPA anywhere near that low. I have a young friend at another top 20 university struggling to meet his required 3.2 GPA to keep his scholarship. It is very stressful to say the least. Glad to hear that the school recognizes that having less than a 3.25 does not mean you are slacking!</p>
<p>I don’t understand the logic of the push back. I didn’t reference specific recipients. I questioned the university’s rationale for having to drop the GPA minimum to a 2.0 which is considered “not eligible” for credit within a major. I can understand using it for a student who might need a period of adjustment to a more rigorous curriculum - or someone who is discovered to have a mild learning disability (not uncommon for some to get a late diagnosis).</p>
<p>But dropping the minimum to a level that would normally disqualify a “new” applicant for admission, and doesn’t qualify for credit in a major, isn’t logical. it’s a C and may mean there are grades lower than that in the mix.</p>
<p>Again - do I think most recipients get that grade? No. But other qualified students who did not get merit aid who maintain high averages don’t get a second chance to apply for that aid. So what is the point of a low threshhold (except in rare cases?)</p>
<p>Many colleges set the threshold at 3.0. My D’s school sets it at 3.0 and raises it a point or two each year afterward. Tough, yes? Allowances and flexibility for special cases? Also yes. But not a blanket 2.0. Just seems awfully low as a “permanent” threshhold and an unusual message to send :(</p>
<p>I’m not sure the university is doing anything more than making the top merit scholarships fairly unconditional. Clearly, a student who cannot keep a 2.0 average is pretty much failing out, so they do want to protect themselves from a student experiencing serious issues. </p>
<p>Arts&Letters, I usually agree with you, but in this case I don’t see this technicality as an unusual message, unless that message is that USC is really not planning to yank anyone’s merit money away if they have a rough start. Since this message only goes to scholarship recipients (fine print), I think it says: don’t worry if you try a difficult course outside your major. Don’t worry if you have a family emergency one semester. And certainly not: we don’t think you can muster much above a 2.0.</p>
<p>Speaking frankly, the only honors students I have ever heard of who even came close to the level suggested here were those experiencing traumas and/or serious health crises. In those cases, I am relieved that USC will not also threaten a student’s financial stability as they try to heal themselves.</p>
<p>Certainly it is possibly to have a hard start (less than a 3.0) if you are a pre-med (curved science classes with C+/B- medians) or engineering student. These students usually adjust after a semester or two (either learn better study methods or change to other majors). Why put up barriers for these students to keep their scholarships? I think it is a great message to send them: we want you here for four years.</p>
<p>I never saw any language anywhere that states USC “had to drop” the GPA requirement. My D was simply told that she needed to make sufficient academic progress to keep her scholarship.</p>
<p>As Georgia Girl has posted, there are numerous scholarships current USC students can apply for once they are here if they are outperforming other USC students.</p>
<p>My thoughts on the topic: if you spend some time on the financial aid forum, you will find that the expert posters over there routinely caution students making their college decision to consider carefully if they can maintain the GPA requirement of the various scholarships at various schools, and what would be their plan if they lost the merit money. In competing for Ivy-caliber students, USC has had success with their wonderful merit scholarships, but with students who qualify for the “super-aid” offered by the top Ivies (offering need-based aid to families up to about $180,000), the GPA requirement became a negative when those students considered USC. It is important to remember that the primary purpose of the scholarships is that they are recruitment tools, so that is probably at the heart of the change.</p>
<p>I am acquainted with a number of the scholarship recipients, and I can tell you that it is unlikely there was any “need” to lower the GPA requirement other than to reduce stress on high-achieving students and recruit other high-achieving students.</p>
<p>^^ oh puuuleeze.
The type of students who DO receive acceptances at the most “elite” colleges and also are accepted into USC with a big $$ merit scholarship need to have their level of “stress” reduced so much that they can get by with an overall "C " average at USC, in order to keep their scholarship $$? really??
The posts on the financial aid forum caution students against accepting merit scholarships that require the student maintain a rigorous 3.5 , or 3.25 GPA. not a 2.0 GPA.
If a 1/2 or full tuition scholarship recipient at USC cant maintain a high enough GPA to be listed on the Deans list, there is something wrong with the merit scholarship selection process, imho.</p>
<p>I agree with the lower GPA. Although not USC, I’ve heard of a kid who lost a merit scholarship with a GPA close but under 3.0 who had substantial medical issues. It was a total shame cause the kid is brilliant but the medical issues created some special challenges in their harder courses. Or what about really smart kids with a learning disorder or ADHD who short circuit initially in college but graduate with a respectable GPA. I think it’s great USC is painting a broader stroke on this issue and agree with posters above that USC is showing the kids who got the merit scholarships that USC is going the extra mile to help them stay at USC for 4 years. I for one plan to discourage mine from going to a school where they have to mantain more than a 3.25 GPA to retain their scholarship. Sure they might do so and odds are in their favor they will have a good college GPA, but why take chances? Things happen.</p>