Why any one wants to be a “C” student in top colleges?

Parent Cafe
21

<p>

</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I did not begin my career two decades ago. I was not <em>that</em> precocious a three year-old. :D</p>

<p>When I was applying for CS/software engineering/robotics engineering jobs straight out of college (in 2007), less than a quarter of potential employers asked for my GPA. Not that they weren’t asking me to prove my smarts - most of my interviews were basically technical oral exams, and one company required me to pass a programming test before I was eligible to be considered for an interview. GPA just wasn’t always (or most of the time) the factor they used for that.</p>

<p>Maybe the university’s big name got me exempted from that. Maybe this is one of the ways in which a big name helps. The currently-graduating C students that I know have, as a group, not had trouble finding good jobs.</p>

<p>For what it’s worth, small companies seemed less inclined to care about GPA than big ones, though there were exceptions. Smaller companies cared about what classes I had taken and what project work I had done.</p>

22

<p>I may be biased since much of my experience is in the financial services sector…with large prestigious companies. In that world, the school counts, and yes, the GPA counts too. Very competitive.
I agree that small companies will be more flexible.
And that networking can cut through some of that early screening.
It’s not easy for a C student in fin services though…not from what I’ve seen. Hey, they look at SAT scores too.</p>

23

<p>So basically the picture that emerges for me is this:</p>

<p>Big companies have developed “standards” for hiring that everyone has to meet–probably so that no one can ever sue them for discriminatory hiring practices–and they run all applicants through the same HR-generated credentials/numbers mill before they will let the managers actually see the applicants.</p>

<p>Smaller companies actually take the time to delve into how smart you really are, what you have really done, and what you will really be likely to be able to do in the future.</p>

<p>Not terribly surprising. As I mentioned in another thread, my management background is in technical communications, and I have always been astounded by the advertisements for technical writers that require knowledge of some particular word-processing or page prep package. (Not to mention degrees in specific subjects.) That’s paint by numbers hiring. Totally “safe,” totally unimaginative, not very effective in the long run.</p>

24

<p>At the very top schools, there aren’t many students making Cs because they have difficulty with the material (with the possible exception of curved science, math and engineering classes). If they get Cs, it’s usually for some other reason, like the kid mentioned above who got low grades at Harvard because he neglected course work for his other interests.</p>

25

<p>I enjoy reading all these insightful comments, thanks! The overall feel I get is that grades are important in order to find an entry level job, and for those “C” students who can get a job, the importance of other quality such as communication and personal skills takes over and grades become less relevant. Also grades are more important nowadays than they were in the past, like 20 years ago. The question now becomes: “Can a “C” student find a rewarding entry level job after graduation?” </p>

<p>I know engineering field more than others disciplines. Because of chronic shortage of engineering workforce in the US, a “C” grade engineering student from top colleges will be able to find a job easily. This may also held true for those majoring in physical science. I suspect that those in humanity and social science areas, like psychology, may have a more difficult time finding the first job. When a job is not available, then a “C” student may not be able to remove that label easily on his/her forehead in today’s market place.</p>

26

<p>Someone else said it- no one WANTS to be a C student, anywhere. Some C students will transfer to a different school, others will like the school enough, or its prestige, to continue despite their grades. Also, not everyone is looking for the most prestigious jobs, there are many jobs out there below the radar of the elites- probably 90% of the people in this country happily live ignorant of what that 10% worries about.</p>

27

<p>“Many entry level employers screen by GPA”. I’m not sure I agree with this. I don’t have the statistics to back up one way or the other what companies or what industries ask for GPA. My last two jobs were for Fortune 100 global companies and we did not “ask for a GPA” during the hiring process. Sometimes people put GPA on their resume, but it is not asked for.</p>

28

<p>As someone else mentioned, you have to consider grade inflation/deflation. Sure most employers and adcoms don’t really care if an A at School X is equivalent to a B at School Y, but it sure is something for YOU to think about. Plus the professors writing your recommendations will probably mention the policy and how it affected your grades. Top colleges are often the ones with this problem. I know that at Wellesley, we aren’t allowed to cross-register at Harvard because we have a policy to reduce grade inflation, but Harvard definitely doesn’t. That’s not to say that an A at Harvard is meaningless. I’m sure there are many students there working their arses off. It is also true that the name of your school can be more important than your GPA. I’ve heard stories of companies/internship people throwing away the applications of people who didn’t go to an Ivy or a Seven Sister. I think the point where your actual dedication and work in college is most reflected is in your recommendations and the kinds of opportunities opened to you by your department/alumni network. If you got some C’s in college but worked really hard and show a lot of promise, you’ll probably look better than someone who got easy A’s but has no faculty connections.</p>

29

<p>

</p>

<p>Live ignorant of what that 10% worries about? Say what?</p>

30

<p>[where the heck are the dot commers and wall streeties on this list?](<a href=“Do Americans think your job is prestigious? - CNN.com”>http://www.cnn.com/2007/LIVING/worklife/11/23/prestige/index.html&lt;/a&gt;)</p>

<p>;)</p>

31

<p>

</p>

<p>Interesting. It seems like most people’s definition of prestige was based on “those who do the most for society but get paid the least.” I imagine if they did a similar survey where question was “what jobs to you think are the most underpaid?” they’d get nearly identical results.</p>

32

<p>

</p>

<p>As a B/C undergrad (my grad GPA is a lot higher so far), I found a great, rewarding job (that never asked once about my GPA, or my grade in any particular class, but put me through six hours of interviews, where I discussed past project work and research with them and solved oral exam-type technical problems).</p>

<p>Again, the much-dismissed-on-CC prestige factor may have helped me here.</p>

33

<p>I usually avoid discussions that argue the merits of an elite education vs. non-elite, but I’m going to jump into this one because I’m very qualified to add to this one.</p>

<p>I’m currently a senior executive with a Fortune 500 firm. </p>

<p>When I recruit for a top-level management position I first look at a person’s resume. </p>

<p>When someone below me in the organization recruits for a mid-level position, they first look at a person’s resume.</p>

<p>When HR recruits for any position they first look at an applicant’s resume.</p>

<p>The idea that the differentiating point on anybody’s resume, for any job, is where they went to college is absurd, and frankly, disturbing in terms of what it is doing to our children and our culture.</p>

<p>For an entry level job, if you attended ASU (just to use an example), were in their honors program, spent a year abroad, were successful in one internship and had a reference to back that up, maybe fluent in one foreign language, or had played one sport (not necessarily at the varsity or DI level), or had worked to put yourself through college, read books for a hobby, knew the names of your home state’s senators and showed up to your interview on time, well prepared, dressed appropriately, knowledgeable about my company, goals in mind, and you convinced me (or HR) that you were the one for the job, the job is yours.</p>

<p>For a mid-level job, you would need the above plus years of consistent, successful work experience.</p>

<p>For a senior level position, you need all of the above, plus remarkable talent and drive.</p>

<p>If you attended Harvard, got in as an athlete admit, or because your Grandfather knew the Dean of Admissions, or because your parents were potentially big donors to the university, and you spent four unremarkable years at Harvard and then expected the world to be your oyster…nah. Pass. Many HYP graduates don’t have the common sense and people skills required to work as successful team members. Perhaps they could be great researchers, writers or professors, but after years of experience, I’ve seen many fail in the corporate world. </p>

<p>When you perpetuate the myth that where you go to college matters, all you’re doing is allowing top-tier schools to rake in more application fees from all the unwitting high school seniors and their parents who buy into the notion that their college will determine the outcome of their life. Two steps off the stage at college graduation, and the life you get is up to you.</p>

<p>I wish parents would spend more time emphasizing the rewards of effort and ethical behavior, and less time about the perceived value of a degree from xyz Ivy League school. I wish parents cared about how kind and thoughtful their children were, and less time about saying “My kid got into Yale”. We’d all be better off if they did.</p>

34

<p>R- I agree with you 100% about how parents should be emphasizing ethical behavior, being a good citizen and all that good stuff. However, your company’s hiring practices are not universal (although they sound wonderful and holistic and I’m sure yield terrific results.) Both my own company as well as others I have worked for focus quite narrowly on a certain set of schools in their recruiting. Some functions are much looser and others are quite narrow, but it would not be accurate to say that a person from U. Montana has as good a chance of getting an entry level or mid-level job as a person from Swarthmore or Princeton.</p>

<p>At the end of the day, an exceptionally persistent and talented kid from any place could talk themselves into an interview (and we do ask GPA, SAT scores, and yes, we know which schools are grade inflated and which ones are not. And yes, a 3.3 from Cornell Engineering is much better than a 4.0 from Dickinson in Sociology). </p>

<p>However, it is much harder for that persistent and talented kid to get that interview. To be blunt, recruiting is just a numbers game, and it’s much more cost effective for us to go where the “fish are biting” than to send teams of people all over the country where they may interview 200 seniors to extend 1 offer. We’d rather be at Stanford or MIT or Yale- not because the kids are morally superior or smarter or whatever… but because whatever qualities it takes to have a 4.5 GPA at MIT (they use a 5 point scale) jives nicely with what it takes to be successful here. Call it long hours, tough quantitative problems, the need to work well with your team mates-- it’s just more efficient for us to go where a large chunk of the class exhibits those skills, rather than a place where we are striking out most of the time.</p>

<p>Is this right? I’m sure not in the macro sense. Does it make sense for us? Absolutely. We could spend millions more in recruiting than we do now, but it’s not clear that our shareholders would benefit. </p>

<p>I think your company’s policies are terrific, but they are not universal.</p>

35

<p>Andrew Abbott, an occupational sociologist at UChicago, reports that the difference between a 2.8 and a 3.8 GPA at top schools in predicting future income is negligible. It appears there is little correlation between GPA and future earnings, so why not be a “C” student?</p>

<p>[The</a> University of Chicago Magazine: October 2003](<a href=“http://magazine.uchicago.edu/0310/features/zen.shtml]The”>The University of Chicago Magazine: October 2003)</p>

36

<p>I appreciated r2’s and blossom’s posts elucidating both sides of this coin. Newly minted BA/BS students will be facing both of these hiring environments. Some will fare better in the pure numbers game, some in the more holistic. </p>

<p>I may have a preference for the former over the latter, but it doesn’t change the playing field.</p>

<p>I wonder, blossom, given your experience, if you could expand a bit on this

How does that perspective fit with the hiring practices of some firms, where online resumes are submitted and “minimum 3.5 GPA” is stipulated. How does that 3.3 in Engineering from Cornell (or similar) break through that barrier?</p>

37

<p>Jmmom, we have an online application process but we don’t use pure GPA as a weed out factor. A real live human being will see the resume. Our criteria aren’t quite so rigid as other companies. Yes, all things being equal, if you have a degree in a liberal arts subject we are less forgiving on the GPA than for engineering or physics. If you are from a school we’ve never heard of (and we’ve heard of most) you had better be Phi Beta Kappa to even get a second read. Personally I am less forgiving of students who excuse a low GPA by explaining that they double or triple majored… I prefer a student who picks something, does it well, and then rounded out their academic program with a lot of other interesting things rather than tracking themselves into three majors if it means sub-par performance all around… but that’s a personal quirk. I am EXTREMELY forgiving of GPA when it appears that a student worked 10+ hours a week at a job that paid, since it suggests financial need and I think maintaining top grades is hard enough if you’ve got financial pressures without employers penalizing you for it.</p>

<p>However, at the end of the day, your typical sub-par GPA is a result of nothing more exotic than poor lifestyle choices or bad time management skills or a preference for partying vs. library. All of this is well and good… but I don’t need those people working for me. It’s not a moral judgement- most kids admitted to a particular college have the ability to be B students without killing themselves. I’m a sucker for a good exception… and usually give the kid the benefit of the doubt… but fact remains that kids with a 1.5 or a 1.8 probably could have shown up for class a little more frequently and raised that average substantially.</p>

<p>We like employees who show up for work most days… not just when they feel like it or when it’s not beach weather.</p>

<p>However, as I said, we don’t weed out on the basis of GPA. I’ve had extraordinary candidates who had terrible Freshman grades who went on to academic success; I’ve hired kids who admitted that one or two subjects proved quite challenging but they stuck with tough courses rather than pad their schedules with guts-- so their GPA’s are below what they might have been, but the kids demonstrate the “right stuff” in all the other ways, and so forth. And of course by mid-career, although we still ask (not for senior hires but for mid level hires) the GPA sort of fades into the woodwork given all the other things a person has done to distinguish themselves.</p>

<p>A 3.3 from most engineering programs is quite respectable. However-- when I hire engineers it is typically for analytical roles that are NOT engineering. What a Boeing or a UTC or another engineering intensive employer looks for would be completely different… but certainly worth asking the question.</p>

38

<p>Blossom-point well taken. My recruiting needs and observations are very division specific. </p>

<p>I don’t need people who will crunch numbers all day long, and I don’t need the brightest software developers in all the land. If I did, I would absolutely look to specific colleges with renowned departments in those fields.</p>

39

<p>There’s no easy answer to the question of where to go to school to get the most advantage in the work world. I’ve been in financial services - where an Ivy or similar degree is gold - and everyone else is invisible. But I’ve also been in fortune 500 firms where execs tend to distrust grads from Ivies and would much rather hire the state U grad with good grades and activities. In both cases, GPA was pretty important - but not always a deal breaker.
I agree fully with what r2d2 has to say. We’re running our kids ragged with all the pressure to get into top schools.
The parents are such a big part of this. I hear from so many that they would never consider our big state u for their precious children. When I announce where my bright, high-achieving son goes to school (our big state U), some of these folks go very quiet. I guess their parents taught them the “if you don’t have anything nice to say” rule. Yikes…what snobs!
GPA can be impt, but it’s how you deal with people that really counts. The guy on the park bench or the executive in a boardroom. The neighbor who sent her child to big state U. Or the friend who’s kid got into Harvard (lots of reverse snobbery out there too). Respect everyone and their background and choices. Workers who come in with a sense of entitlement and superiority don’t go very far…even in the elitist workplaces that single out only Ivy grads. And jealousy for those who have more than you is also corrosive.<br>
So, yeah, state grads and grads from low profile schools DO need to work harder to get some opportunities. But hard work can build character… and humility. Good things to have in the workplace - along with a good GPA when you’re first starting out.</p>

40

<p>There are many on this forum who scoff at fit when choosing a college, but unfortunately what people are saying here is that “fit” also applies all through life and particularly when students are looking for a company and a company is looking for a student. “Fit” is part of the equation and hiring is holistic. A good GPA is nice and it seems to be ‘the thing’ for these college grads to put that on their resumes – something I didn’t see even 5 years ago. So if you put that on your resume then yes, the reader of that resume will take note. Could be a positive thing or could be an off-put to someone regardless if it’s high or low. Our on-line system does not ask for GPA so the first parse of a person does not take GPA into consideration anyway. And once it’s passed the litmus test in HR often the choice lies with the manager. I will tell my kids not to put GPA on their resume. I’ve said on other threads that we recruit engineers at a variety of places some are relatively unknown others are known, and like the previous poster even being a Fortune 100 company we do not have the recruiting staff to “hit” every engineering school in the nation, let alone around the globe. We tend to fish where we’ve found fish before. We don’t give brownie points to a student graduating from a brand name engineering program over the kid from no-name Tech because we’ve already hired from those schools and we known the grads can do the job. And just like colleges we have diversity goals to meet. So if you are a parent that has to have some value equation associated with your students college name, look at the names of the companies recruiting and actually “hiring” grads from that school consistantly year to year. Read the alumni magazines and see where those college students are and what they are doing 5 years out. That will give you a much better indication of the potential “pay off” for a particular college. Me I don’t have a pay-off equation necessarily, I just want my kids to come out of college well rounded, articulate, confident and an adult with a degree in their hand. All this is much more important than “are they a 2.0 at an Ivy league school.” They will be fine out in the big word with those skills.</p>