<p>yovanka... sounds like you and your friend (too lazy to look up the page at the name of the person she was agreeing with) are rationalizing. you had low gpas and, in your insecurity, want to make it seem like low gpas are superior to high gpas.</p>
<p>i dont think that a social life, communication skills, conceptual understanding and a high grade point average are mutually exclusive. it just takes a balanced person to pull it off.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Dr. Horse, while I agree that the "social aspects" are of importance to many firms (especially smaller ones that rely on every employee to engage clients and marketing), I'll disagree with you that GPA holds no weight. It may not be the only determining factor in hiring decisions (as you pointed out in your example), but it certainly IS a factor. Would you hire someone with a 4.0 with just academics or a 2.0 with just academics? The importance of each factor is certainly debatable, but whether or not GPA is a factor is not debatable.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>GPA does hold weight, just not as much as most students think. Like ive said before, in the 40 or so interviews ive had only 1 asked me for my gpa. While this may be due to my other activities, I cant be sure. I just know that it is not incredibly uncommon for a employer never to ask a interviewee for their undergrad gpa.</p>
<p>As for hiring the 4.0 vs the 2.0 on pure academics, it depends on the job we need them for. I understand that the 4.0 may have had a much better grasp on the material than the 2.0, ive admitted that many times before. Thogh like I have also said, different jobs require different types of engineers. If the job was for cutting edge research and development, id rather the high gpa integrated with a few mid range ones. Though if the job was for something in the nature of PR, there is no need to hire a 4.0 when a 2.0 is suffice, firstly you are wasting the talent the 4.0 brings to research and development. Secondly that 4.0 is going to demand a higher salary. So we need to ask ourselves, do we pay the MIT grad with a 3.9 80K a year to do the same job a 2.0 from a state U can do for 45K. Then like I stated above, since the 2.0 from a state U is most likely more social, its a win win. </p>
<p>il continue to say, different companies hire different engineers for different reasons. Not every Engineering student is fit for every job. As for if the gpa thing is debatable, if many employers dont even ask for a gpa, I cant see it as to important.</p>
<p>they more than likely wouldnt need to ASK you... they would see it on your resume.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Then like I stated above, since the 2.0 from a state U is most likely more social, its a win win.
[/quote]
...or just really, really not good at his job... being a bad engineer doesnt give you social skills; it just makes you a bad engineer.</p>
<p>GPA is kind of more of an initial thing. They see that you have it then they want to interview you. It's all about the interview and whether the interviewer likes you. Heck, maybe it's not the networking and social skills or what not, maybe yovanka and dr. horse are stunningly attractive.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I don't think my school has even handed out 8 4.0's in it's lifetime haha.</p>
<p>That's good for you but a 4.0 with an internship or two is usually qualified for positions they apply for. In your case they apparently applied for a position they weren't. You had the skills for the job, they didn't. That's more important than GPA. But just because this was your experience does not mean it's the case the majority of the time. Most people with high GPA's are very qualified for the jobs they apply for...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well thats great for you and your school. Want a award?</p>
<p>I seem to think you misunderstand what engineering actually is. No engineering school teaches one be an engineer, in fact most employers hate new employees because of the crap they learn in school. Il tell ya this, professional engineering is nothing like school. Engineering school is like a hardware store, you go and pick out your tools and ask the guy how to use em. Thats about it, you when accepted get a toolbox and from there gain a bunch of tools which you add to it. When you graduate you have got a toolbox, and a very basic idea on how to use the tools. Then you go and get a job and if you are lucky you will get to use maybe 5% of the tools you got and learned, if you are like most you will never touch another again.</p>
<p>Let me reiterate this, no engineering student is qualified for a job. Ive had more employers then not tell me on my first day to "forget everything ive learned in school". Ive also been laughed at hysterically by professional engineers for using some academic method to solve a problem. The professional world is very very different than the academic. Engineering is not like medical or law school, nobody teaches you how to be a engineer.</p>
<p>as for me being qualified and others not being for that job. You are correct. The fact remains, one can be a engineer with absolutely no college education, nothing is stopping them.,</p>
<p>
[quote]
they more than likely wouldnt need to ASK you... they would see it on your resume.</p>
<p>...or just really, really not good at his job... being a bad engineer doesnt give you social skills; it just makes you a bad engineer.</p>
<p>
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't put my gpa on my resume. never have never will, I see no need for it.</p>
<p>getting a engineering degree doesn't make you a engineer. getting licensed and then getting a job that titles you as a engineer makes you a engineer. So the 2.0 or the 4.0 are not engineers, they are potential engineers who have graduated a engineer program. </p>
<p>Like i said above, academics and the professional world are very different. Nowhere does it state that a higher gpa means you will be a good engineer, and nothing states that a person with a law gpa will not be incredible. Alot of people get engineering degrees and get good grades and then dont even do anything remotely related to engineering, they end up as lawyers, doctors or in the finical sector.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The fact remains, one can be a engineer with absolutely no college education, nothing is stopping them.,
[/quote]
really? i respectfully disagree. there is a push for a masters to be the new standard instead of a bachelor's degree...</p>
<p>also, civil engineers are really the only ones who get licensed.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Well thats great for you and your school. Want a award?</p>
<p>I seem to think you misunderstand what engineering actually is. No engineering school teaches one be an engineer, in fact most employers hate new employees because of the crap they learn in school. Il tell ya this, professional engineering is nothing like school. Engineering school is like a hardware store, you go and pick out your tools and ask the guy how to use em. Thats about it, you when accepted get a toolbox and from there gain a bunch of tools which you add to it. When you graduate you have got a toolbox, and a very basic idea on how to use the tools. Then you go and get a job and if you are lucky you will get to use maybe 5% of the tools you got and learned, if you are like most you will never touch another again.</p>
<p>Let me reiterate this, no engineering student is qualified for a job. Ive had more employers then not tell me on my first day to "forget everything ive learned in school". Ive also been laughed at hysterically by professional engineers for using some academic method to solve a problem. The professional world is very very different than the academic. Engineering is not like medical or law school, nobody teaches you how to be a engineer.</p>
<p>as for me being qualified and others not being for that job. You are correct. The fact remains, one can be a engineer with absolutely no college education, nothing is stopping them.,
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No I'm simply saying that very few engineering graduates have 4.0's and you claim to know several that did so you can back up your claims.</p>
<p>I agree that school is not going to teach you everything you need. But college DOES prepare you to enter engineering. You will use things you learned in school and many things you didn't learn in school. Very few college graduates are fully prepared to enter the workforce. It's not just engineering. </p>
<p>As for you last paragraph I find that laughable. I don't think I need to explain what is wrong with that statement.</p>
<p>
[quote]
ally? i respectfully disagree. there is a push for a masters to be the new standard instead of a bachelor's degree...</p>
<p>also, civil engineers are really the only ones who get licensed.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That is fine, and even if there is a move to a standard of a masters there is nothing stopping a self taught individual from being a practicing engineer. The engineering curriculum is 4 years of pretty basic math and science, with little depth. There are many engineers who have the title of engineer who have nothing more than a HS diploma. My Uncle included, he is the one that got me interested in the discipline. He in a EE at Cisco and has nothing more than a HS diploma. It comes down to if you know the info or not. Nothing stops a self driven individual from learning all the material taught in a undergrad engineering curriculum. The info is not really any deeper than a wikipedia article, and old text books can be had on Amazon for sub $1. The info taught is not special in any way, its not secret. Its all public domain.</p>
<p>
[quote]
</p>
<p>No I'm simply saying that very few engineering graduates have 4.0's and you claim to know several that did so you can back up your claims.</p>
<p>I agree that school is not going to teach you everything you need. But college DOES prepare you to enter engineering. You will use things you learned in school and many things you didn't learn in school. Very few college graduates are fully prepared to enter the workforce. It's not just engineering.</p>
<p>As for you last paragraph I find that laughable. I don't think I need to explain what is wrong with that statement.</p>
<p>
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I never said I met these people in 1 place, ive met them over time and I can recall 8 or so of them. Most from low ranking abet accredited schools. Until you actually enter the work force, id ask you to refrain from talking about it. Ive actually worked, ive already graduated with a engineering degree. I talk simply from my own experiences. I have no reason to come here and lie. I came here under another name before I started my college admission process, and come here only to give back to a place that helped me. if you dont believe what I am saying, then thats fine, but you are sheltering yourself. Its your choice.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I don't put my gpa on my resume. never have never will, I see no need for it.</p>
<p>getting a engineering degree doesn't make you a engineer. getting licensed and then getting a job that titles you as a engineer makes you a engineer. So the 2.0 or the 4.0 are not engineers, they are potential engineers who have graduated a engineer program. </p>
<p>Like i said above, academics and the professional world are very different. Nowhere does it state that a higher gpa means you will be a good engineer, and nothing states that a person with a law gpa will not be incredible. Alot of people get engineering degrees and get good grades and then dont even do anything remotely related to engineering, they end up as lawyers, doctors or in the finical sector.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Of course not, didn't you already say you had a below average GPA? Plus you have had jobs out of college; after you've held jobs it looks kind of silly to put your GPA on your resume.</p>
<p>I don't think anyone is disagreeing that school and work are two different things. In fact I'd say that's a pretty obvious statement. But GPA indicates more than being a good engineer. GPA indicates the person has a high IQ and works hard. GPA indicates qualities in a student that employers want. Then they interview them and see if they possess the other qualities they want. You're right many engineering students dont go into engineering. This is because an engineering degree is flexible. And it's not just engineering majors that experiences this phenomenon.</p>
<p>It seems pretty evident from the posts in this thread that being proactive in your job search is the best way to improve your chances of getting offered a job. Those that are proactive, whether it is through networking, cold-calling, making a good impression at career fairs, etc. have the best chances of getting a job over those that just post or hand resumes to human resources in a passive manner. Self-explanatory, yes, but often overlooked by those searching for jobs; A resume alone does not have the strength to persuade a potential employer to invite you to an interview.</p>
<p>Now onto this discussion about GPA's and university rankings: the employers seeking engineers straight out of undergrad generally have very little to gauge ones ability to be productive at their company. Therefore, it is generally accepted that going to a university that is well respected by the industry helps ones chances of getting hired at a company of their choice. It is also generally accepted that the GPA provides a gauge for the company to determine a job applicant's ability to be a productive engineer for their firm.</p>
<p>Now is university ranking and GPA the be all and end all secret to getting a job offer from the company of one's liking? Of course not. Everytime a company or employer is searching for a potential engineer to hire, they are making a calculated risk of their time and money. Therefore, their goal is to minimize that risk as much as possible. The reputation of the university that a potential hire attends and the GPA of that same job applicant can only go so far in minimizing that risk. It is definitely better for that company to have concrete experience that they can observe in a potential applicant. Unfortunately, MOST recent graduates do not have enough relevant experience to help them make that determination. IF one does have experience, then the experience will be used to better determine the risk involved in hiring him/her. That is why educational experience for professionals with industry experience is not placed at the top of their curriculum vitae. Also, if an employee of the company or if a respected person in the industry/field gives a recommendation to a potential employer about a certain person, the employer can use that information to minimize their risk in their decision to hire because the information is coming from a credible source.</p>
<p>There is no concrete formula for getting a job offer. Everybody is different and everybody has a different story to tell about their experiences. Those that can only tell a short story will generally lean on their GPA and the reputation of their school in the industry to try to get a job offer. Others with a longer story to tell would not need to rely on that as much, although it never hurts them (GPA is generally irrelevant after five or more years of relevant industry experience). Some others will have connections with publishers or book critics to assist them in their job search.</p>
<p>But in general, it all comes down to how good you are at actively searching for the potential employers willing to hear your story, and ultimately, how effective you are at persuading the potential employer with your story towards getting the all important job offer.</p>
<p>
[quote]
you had low gpas and, in your insecurity, want to make it seem like low gpas are superior to high gpas
[/quote]
People trying to justify their shortcomings seems to be a pretty common theme among message boards, nothing new.
[quote]
Now onto this discussion about GPA's and university rankings: the employers seeking engineers straight out of undergrad generally have very little to gauge ones ability to be productive at their company. Therefore, it is generally accepted that going to a university that is well respected by the industry helps ones chances of getting hired at a company of their choice. It is also generally accepted that the GPA provides a gauge for the company to determine a job applicant's ability to be a productive engineer for their firm.
[/quote]
Agreed. No matter how you spin it you cannot say this isn't generally true, even if it wasn't in your specific case.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I never said I met these people in 1 place, ive met them over time and I can recall 8 or so of them. Most from low ranking abet accredited schools. Until you actually enter the work force, id ask you to refrain from talking about it. Ive actually worked, ive already graduated with a engineering degree. I talk simply from my own experiences. I have no reason to come here and lie. I came here under another name before I started my college admission process, and come here only to give back to a place that helped me. if you dont believe what I am saying, then thats fine, but you are sheltering yourself. Its your choice.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You're telling people that having a high GPA is not going to help them land their first job. You've come here and posted stereotypes about people who do well in school and then make the claim that people who have GPA's like yours are optimal and companies actually look for these people. </p>
<p>Yes. I'm just sheltering myself from the truth.</p>
<p>[Hahaha, I don't want to beat a dead horse but I'll willingly plead guilty this time and this time only.]</p>
<p>Someone rightfully mentioned that engineering hires that come straight from school need to go through extensive training from the company that hires them. There is no way to expect that an education can teach the particular skills needed at each respective company.</p>
<p>Training an engineer requires a big time and monetary commitment by the company. Getting it wrong even once is a pretty devastating experience for the companies, although I'm sure that many companies have put up safegaurds to limit their liabilities; I might be opening up Pandoras box, but it may be similar to how engineering schools accept more students than they know will make it through their program.</p>
<p>Well basically, during training the trainee is basically learning a lot of information while juggling to get assignments turned in on time even with all the seminars, training exercises, and other activities that they must commit to. Although the information taught during training is much different than the theories taught in physics or math classes due to its direct applicability to the work that is done at the firm, you can't deny that there is a lot of learning involved. In most cases, A LOT is thrown at you at once and it can get rather overwhelming. Perhaps that is why an employer might make their decision on hiring an engineer with a higher GPA, assuming the level of industry experience of most of the applicants are the same or close to known, because a higher GPA tends to show a student's ability to successfully consume large amounts of information and use it effectively to receive high marks on exams, therefore leading to the high GPA. Moreover, an employer might have a tendency to hire from universities that they know of (which is generally well known to most everyone interested in that engineering field(s)), whether it is because engineers from those universities have been productive for the company in the past or because the employer knows the type of rigorous curriculum/exams/projects that is expected out of the students from these universities. All of this helps the employer to gauge whether the job applicant can handle the training, as well as the workload, because we are assuming little to no relevant industry that the employer can use to gauge the applicants prospects.</p>
<p>Like the discussion about engineering curriculums, I don't think that hiring is an exact science, nor is it an art. IF you can make hiring into a perfect science, with 100% success rate of choosing the most productive engineer, as well as an engineer that commits to the project until the end, you can make lots and lots of $$$ owning a consulting firm. Until then, there is no ABSOLUTE right or wrong answer to this debate; Only those scenarios that tend to provide an answer that is right more often than not.</p>
<p>P.S. If one has a 4.0 GPA, I think it can be easier to find evidence that these particular students will pursue a degree higher than a B.S. before they enter the industry. Also, the type of jobs that REQUIRE a high GPA tends to be highly sophisticated and/or theoretically involved work, especially in the Aerospace and Nuclear engineering industry.</p>
<p>P.P.S. Although I don't have any surveys to cite, engineering GPAs tend to average below 3.0 for the most part, so it is probably easier to find evidence that plenty of engineers getting hired have a GPA that is close to that average, give or take 0.25. I don't know, maybe my logic is skewed, but using the laws of statistics makes me lean towards this conclusion. Well if this is true, then there are plenty of engineers being hired annually that do not have a high GPA, although I am not sure if the ratio of applicants with lower GPAs is higher than those with higher GPAs. So it is not hard to believe that many people with what is considered lower GPAs (whatever that actually is) have experiences of finding a job, even ones that they were targeting. But to give a counter example, an aerospace engineer looking to work at NASA/JPL in the EDL (Entry, Descent, and Landing) Division will NEED to have a high GPA and a mastery of mathematical theories because of the type of work they are involved with. Could a person with a lower GPA find work as a software engineer? Probably yes. How about getting a job working for Intel in developing the semiconducting material for a nanoprocessor? Probably not. The list goes on and on and on and on. Again, there is no absolute truth in this matter because every circumstance is different. I won't argue, though, that there are engineers that may not have a degree at all that are successful engineers for engineering firms. But I think it is also safe to say that it is an aberration rather than a norm.</p>
<p>
[quote]
</p>
<p>You're telling people that having a high GPA is not going to help them land their first job. You've come here and posted stereotypes about people who do well in school and then make the claim that people who have GPA's like yours are optimal and companies actually look for these people.</p>
<p>Yes. I'm just sheltering myself from the truth.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I never said having a high gpa wouldnt help people, infact if read the posts I specifically said it would. What I am saying is that different companies look at different traits for different positions. I never said people with low gpa's are optimal for all engineering jobs. Again if you actually read my posts, I stated quite clearly that engineering students with lower gpa's are looked at as better optitions for a specific type of engineering job, compared to those with high gpa's. I states that those who want a more research/development oriented engineering job will need a high gpa, and companies look for this. A company who doesnt need such a engineer, and needs one for lets say customer relations or something not as critical, will gladly take a lower gpa engineer. A company that needs a engineer to do lets say pipe fitting, has no need to hire a high gpa student, that they will need to pay more, when they can get a 2.0 for a good bit less salary.</p>
<p>So yes companies do look for these types of students, and I stand by that. Since I have graduated a few years ago, I dont know any engineering student who hasn't found a job, No matter what the gpa they all have jobs, most in the engineering discipline.</p>
<p>I would agree with the last post because again, the average GPA for most engineering majors at most engineering schools is below 3.0. Therefore, if a majority of engineering students are getting GPAs near or below 3.0, then there must be a lot of them in the engineering industry. I think some people were just turned off by the stereotype that students with high GPAs tend to be anti-social or have problems with communicating with others.</p>
<p>It's true, many engineers need good "people" skills because they often come into contact with clients. Engineers should also have good oral and written communication skills because they have to converse about their work/project with business minded people, lawyers, etc., who have no experience in engineering. Also, engineers tend to work together on large projects so there must be cohesion between group members. Also, some engineers must be able to formally present their work, whether to their boss, co-workers, people in the industry, clients, invesotrs, or a general audience; therefore, being a good speaker is a positive thing. These attributes are not exclusive to those that do not have high GPAs nor is it inclusive to them. In general, these are good attributes to have for a lot of jobs in the industry. I agree that being a book worm is not beneficial to the job search.</p>
<p>But again, in general, to get the job of one's choice, trying to outperform your competition is a good idea. Just make sure to diversify yourself so that you have a compelling story to tell, rather than just having the ability to write a physics, math and engineering textbook studyguide (of course it doesn't hurt if you can, just make sure it's not the only thing you can do outside of the classroom). I think that is what Dr.Horse was also trying to say.</p>
<p>i would like just to add up when I say that all of us here are young and inexperienced which is normall bcs majority of us are at the age of 22 when we graduate from engineering schools and we have no clue about work places.
I am sure many of you don't know that there are many engineers with high GPA from high ranking universities and their boss is a grade 8 graduate, JUST grade 8, and there are professional engineers being trained by trades people like electricians. YES it's embarassing but that's the reality. </p>
<p>are there wealthy engineers? Maybe?. are there wealthy grade 11 graduates , YES.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I am sure many of you don't know that there are many engineers with high GPA from high ranking universities and their boss is a grade 8 graduate, JUST grade 8, and there are professional engineers being trained by trades people like electricians. YES it's embarassing but that's the reality.
[/quote]
dont really think i need to respond to that......</p>
<p>
[quote]
are there wealthy engineers?
[/quote]
Yes, a whole lot.</p>
<p>
[quote]
are there wealthy grade 11 graduates
[/quote]
maybe a few... but it is EXTREMELY rare.</p>
<p>your arrogance sheds light on your ignorance.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I am sure many of you don't know that there are many engineers with high GPA from high ranking universities and their boss is a grade 8 graduate, JUST grade 8, and there are professional engineers being trained by trades people like electricians. YES it's embarassing but that's the reality.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Are you in grade 8?..</p>