The dangerous scholarship has arrived

<p>I think the 'freedom to explore' aspect of this is an important one. My CompSci D ended up deciding to pursue a chem minor with a focus in O-chem because she 'likes' it. Most people think she's a bit crazy to do this because the amount of work for a CS major with this type of minor is huge. It's what she wants though, but if she was highly concerned with maintaining a particular GPA I think it would have stifled her and she probably wouldn't have gone this way.</p>

<p>This phenomenon of GPA tweaking with the corresponding lack of 'freeedom to explore' exists for other majors as well - especially those hoping to get into med school and law school where the GPA is so important.</p>

<p>Drizzit, I'd actually have your son call and say, "Can you give me the lower scholarship with the lower GPA instead?" A 3.7 GPA for any major is tough but for engineering it's insane.</p>

<p>Another vote for 3.7 being an unreasonable requirement.</p>

<p>I like Thedad's idea.</p>

<p>Thanks for the answers</p>

<p>I left a message at the Financial aid office today as they are closed on Tuesdays (weird)</p>

<p>I like the idea of downgrading to the lower scholarship and asking about the average GPAs. I also will call the engineering college with some questions. We were hoping for a 3.0 requirement as worst case scenario here. I will let you know what happens. I hope he chooses to decline this offer since he has good money elsewhere but I have restricted myself to advise only here since it is inside our $$ guidelines</p>

<p>I understand 3.7 GPA is achieved typically only by top students in engineering. But if your son really like the school and want to go for it, you may not want to discourage him. He know he need to study hard and he will, that is something money can't buy. By setting such a high bar, the school recognizes that he is a top student. A solid school in engineering have a lot of research project, he could approach professors for research support. Just think about it, if he could pull this off, four years later world will be his oyster. You will be so proud of him. Motivation is almost everything.</p>

<p>But a gpa like that can be permanently ruined by one low grade - especially in the first few semesters before the kid has many credits built up. My Ds got a just-about-full-ride to a tier 3 state school; $10,000 in engineering requires a reasonable 3.0, $4000 universitywide schol requires a 3.5, but has a decent probationary period. I thought the 3.5 was too high! 3.7 is absurd! DS also got $4000 a year at our flagship in engineering - also a 3.5 needed to retain. My son emailed the department and asked how many kids were able to retain their scholarships. Although they didn't have exact numbers, they said about 25% lost it each year..... too much stress. DS may end up at a needbased school - more expensive for us, but a great place to go and experiment with different course areas in case he changes majors.</p>

<p>To give some more perspective, suppose you want to "make up" a B- grade (average GPA in engineering), to bring it back up to 3.7, you need to counteract it with 4 A's. If you had been unlucky enough to get a C, you would have to counteract it with 6 A's.</p>

<p>As compared to 3.5 GPA, even though it's only 0.2 grade points lower, you only need 2 A's to make up that B- and 3 A's to make up that C. </p>

<p>Add on to this is that grades tend to be more normally distributed meaning the majority of grades are B-/B/B+ and A-/A tend to be more rare - sometimes only the top 20% of the students get A or A-.</p>

<p>However, it may be entirely possible that at this particular school a 3.7 GPA is achievable, maybe if there is some grade inflation, or if scholarship recipients are so far superior to the general student population that 3.7 should be easy.</p>

<p>Alternatively, this sounds a bit like a sneaky way to attract students - give them a fat scholarship, then yank it away from everyone except the very best, so they can lure some new freshman.</p>

<p>If this scholarship is at the U of Utah, then I have some third hand experience. At his old job, my dad had a coworker whose relative got this scholarship (3.7 in Eng), kept it, and went onto law school for patent law. My dad himself had around a 3.7 MechE GPA, though it was a major he choose after a few false starts. Congrats!</p>

<p>Absolutely agree with Gotopractice. DS is an Engineering Major at Clemson with a top scholarship and a 3.4 GPA requirement. He works his tail off to stay above that with some wiggle room. He would tell you that a 3.7 Engineering GPA is next to impossible especially if you expect to do anything at college besides study :-)</p>

<p>
[quote]
By setting such a high bar, the school recognizes that he is a top student.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Or, it may just be a bribe to get the kid there in the first place, with little or no intention of continuing the aid.</p>

<p>u<em>u</em>dad, when I read your post about your daughter's double major in chem because she liked o-chem, I brought me back to that scene in Good Will Hunting where Minnie Drivers said to Will-"Oh, you learned organic chemistry just for the fun of it? Are you out of your mind?" Thanks for the reminder.</p>

<p>With a 3.7 gpa requirement, few students would be willing to tackle o-chem unless it was required which it was in my curriculum long ago. I don't know why it was and my clearest recollection lingering today is my utter failure in synthesizing a phenol in one of my labs after giving it 2 or 3 tries. Arrrrg.</p>

<p>If we needed the scholarship money for my son to stay, I absolutely would not allow it to be contingent on keeping a 3.7! That is unreasonable and sounds like freshman bait to me.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Or, it may just be a bribe to get the kid there in the first place, with little or no intention of continuing the aid.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>But why they want to do that? If the aid discontinue, the student will likely leave, the schools graduation rate drop. I don't know whether there is a strong incentive for a public institution to do such thing which is clearly unethical.</p>

<p>I think some schools figure that you and your student are mentally committed to the school after one year and you will find the money somewhere . I agree that is seems unethical. Finding that cash is sometimes possible with loans, but surely not always desirable.</p>

<p>I would play the "what if" game. What if he lost the scholarship? Would he be willing to take out loans? Would he be willing to change schools? etc, etc, etc.</p>

<p>I agree, a student may still choose to stay after losing the scholarship. And regardless, the more immediate gain to the school is that is will help raise the school's rankings by raising their average admitted student stats (GPA, SATs, geographic diversity etc) which they need to attract more students to begin with.</p>

<p>inverse: Because enrolling kids with high stats improves their rankings...</p>

<p>oops...sorry scanmom I see you already posted that...</p>

<p>Way too much riding on that 3.7 pressure cooker. I think it's important not to underestimate how hard it is to keep that grade at ANY SCHOOL in a tough major like Engineering.</p>

<p>Negotiate for something else. You (and your kid) will bite your nails every semester. The consequences are too severe if not met. I too, wonder if it's freshman "bait", to quote another poster above.</p>

<p>If this school is THE ONE, make sure you understand how it works before committing. I wouldn't allow my D to be in this situation and she's a straight A student.</p>

<p>Just curious - What do you all think about a 3.3 GPA requirement at a second or third tier school where son would be in top 20% (that's a guesstimate) in engineering?</p>

<p>I think 3.3 is still challenging, but doable. There is still little room for mistakes or classes that might ruin the GPA. But for the right kid, at the right school, it might work. I think I'd make sure we could cover the costs if he lost the scholarship, though.</p>