Recent graduate with poor GPA, what do I do about my resume? 16

[tokki]

Hi,

I recently graduated from college with a 2.6 GPA overall. Because of some personal issues, I took an extra semester to finish up college. After getting some professional help, I ended up with a 3.4 GPA in the last year and half of college. I don't think I should put down my GPA because it's lower than a 3, but at the same time, I feel like my resume would be dumped pre-interview. The companies wouldn't get to see that I took care of my problems and did better at the end. In this case, what should I do about my GPA on the resume? Should I put down the 2.6? Or should I not put it down at all? Oh, and I don't even have any internship experience. I honestly wouldn't even want to hire myself if I was the interviewer. Any tips on how to improve my chances of landing a civil engineering job? Thanks for any help!

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

My two cents,

-GPA is a fairly poor indicator of someone's potential as an employee.
-There are many things that affect that potential more (work history, communication skills, attitude, etc).

HOWEVER,

-GPA is one of the few indicators available for companies to sort job applicants (before the interview).

I think it makes some sense for "high profile" companies that receive a lot of applicants to set a minimum GPA, how else are they going to reduce the field to a reasonable level to interview?

 

[dcasto]

I was taught the following 30 years ago and I believe it.

The first 2 years out of school employeers look at GPA.

The next 2 years it's what school you went too

The next 2 years what discipline

And after that, its what you've done and who you are.

Don't worry, you'll do fine. I was a 2.6 GPA'r overall with a 3.2 in my elective and I've done quite well.

 

[HgTX]

Ashereng wondered, "I still don't understand why high GPA = no street smarts."

It's a recurring theme in this thread--"Low GPA? Well, at least that means you're not one of those high-GPA people with no street smarts."

TWO bad assumptions in such statements--that anyone with good grades is likely to have only book learning and nothing else (either in engineering "street smarts" or general life skills), and that anyone with crappy grades makes up for that with "street smarts". Both are foolish assumptions.

I can tell you exactly why I have a 4.0 toward my engineering bachelor's degree:
(1) It was a second degree, so all my teenage idiocy was reflect on the OTHER transcript, as were all the non-engineering classes that I wouldn't be able to get A's in.
(2) I made a deliberate and considered choice to go into some debt rather than work a lot during school (once I decided that marrying my housemate just to get in-state tuition rates was taking creative financing just a little too far). I'd made the mistake of putting work over school in my prior academic life and this time I was going to take school as seriously as I possibly could. That said, I still played music in public on a regular basis and had a better social life than I have now as a working stiff. So much for lacking in human skills.
(3) It wasn't that good a school. I wouldn't have had the same grades at, say, MIT where the competition would have been stiffer and I would have been at the mercy of the grade curve rather than setting it myself.

So this 4.0 should count against me why?? I went to school with a couple of idiots who had bad GPAs for good reason. I hate to think that someone interviewing them would think, "Oh, bad GPA, at least he's not one of those no-street-smarts geeks!"

When interviewing for grad schools, I did meet one faculty member who was put off by my high GPA. I won him over, though. (I am SO freaking charming...) The fact that some people are just prejudiced is bad enough; the thought that someone might have tossed my job application on the basis of a too-high GPA, without even giving me the benefit of an interview, is galling.


Back to an interviewer perspective...Would I rather have someone who lies about the stupid reason they got their bad grades? No, I'd rather have someone who didn't make those bad decisions to begin with.

I honestly don't know if I would consider GPA; I don't do any interviewing myself, and none of the hiring I've been witness to has involved people just coming from undergrad so that hasn't been a factor that I've seen in action. I think I'd be more interested in faculty recommendations than raw GPA, but I suspect that's not the kind of thing typically requested from job applicants.

But say for the sake of argument that I would be looking at GPA (maybe HR tells me I have to). I'd be much more willing to accept a lower GPA if, like monkeydog, they can show a trend of improvement. Or if they have some "nobler" reason for lack of concentration on schoolwork--trying to go to school while working full-time, being a primary-care parent, having a new baby, having an extended illness, being active in the military reserves.

Why are those causes of low GPA forgiveable?
(1) Some are temporary, and I wouldn't expect them to reflect on what the person would be like in the long term as an employee.
(2) Some are situations that will definitely have a worse effect on school, which involves a lot of work at home, than they would on work, where the person is relatively isolated at an office and not having to try to simultaneously handle "real life". In a lot of ways, time management gets much easier in the more controlled environment of an office. Being in training on weekends can seriously cut into your study time but won't have too much of an effect on work. Having children underfoot at home when you're trying to study is a problem; having them underfoot when you're done with your workday is not. Etc.

But if you goofed off and continued to goof off right till the very end, and are entirely unapologetic and even proud of it, would I rather have someone who lied about it? No, I don't want either one of you.

So if you gave me the honest response of "Oh, I just preferred playing Ultimate Frisbee and honing my macrame skills to sitting in a classroom," my response would NOT be, "Wow, what a cool honest person with a refreshing appreciation of the roses to be smelled while stopping along the way." It would be, "Okay, convince me why I should believe that you wouldn't also prefer those activities to doing your job for me. Show me how your judgement and priorities have improved."

Actually, your answer to the GPA question should have covered that, and if you didn't think to address such concerns in your initial response, that would be a warning sign right there. I shouldn't have to ask for that clarification.

And this post is now long enough.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[UNLengineer]

Very nicely said HG

 

[UcfSE]

Indeed, well said Hg.

 

[KENAT]

....anything less than a 4.0 is result of knowingly and purposefully diverting attention away from your academic life

Things are done differently in the UK (no extra credit nonsense for starters), but my 2:2 is nowhere near a 4.0. So far I've never had any complaints from an employer and more than a few compliments, my current boss uses me as an example of how high GPA isn’t everything.

However, I’m suitably chastised by the above quote and couple of similar.

The fact I had an illness of several weeks hence missing some exams and then in my last year discovered I had dyslexia are clearly no excuse (and barring the odd self defacing joke I don’t’ use them as one) I should have worked harder and then I would have got a 1st.

To the OP congratulations on the interview. Don’t rule yourself out just because of the GPA, there must have been something on your application that interested them. Find out all you can about the industry/company and do your best. If nothing else it’s interview experience for the next one.

My top interview tip, don’t bring up the fact you once had the pleasure of working with a transsexual thread732-163938 so could handle the odd eccentric scientist OK (still have no idea what part of my brain thought that was a good thing to bring up, must be the low GPA), still got the job though.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

HgTx

I agree, you obviously shouldn't be punished for having a very good GPA.

I wonder:

If student A got a great GPA at an okay school, and student B had an okay GPA at a great school, which would you prefer? (This question is for everyone, not just HgTX).

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

KENAT,

I am also dyslexic, although I found out earlier than you.

 

[HgTX]

"If student A got a great GPA at an okay school, and student B had an okay GPA at a great school, which would you prefer?"

That's a really good question. It was actually part of my motivation for keeping the 4.0. A 3.9 at an okay school might be considered equivalant to a 3.2 (or whatever) at a great school, but with a 4.0 they would have no idea how well I could have done.

But what they would know is that I didn't have the education of the great school. I got sneered at by one grad school, even with my 4.0, because my undergrad school wasn't good enough.

I suppose it depends just how great and just how okay the respective GPAs were. In my previous life, I was maintaining a 2.5 or so at a great school without bothering to go to any classes. I worked my butt off for the 4.0 at the okay school--and learned a lot more. So from my perspective, a 2.5 at a great school is NOT worth near as as much a 4.0 at an okay school. Closer comparisons like 3.0 vs. 3.8, who knows?

I bet grad school admission departments have that comparison/conversion down to a science though. Evaluating undergrad GPAs is a big chunk of what they do.

But back to the original question, I agree with others who have said, more or less, that anyone who can show that their grades improved over the course of their education should be able to overcome whatever obstacles their low GPA places in their career path.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[Senselessticker]

I hate to beat a dead horse, but have to chime in one more time....

GPA is like everything else in life and career. It means different things to different people. Just like having a PE to some is very important (myself included), or what kind of car you drive, what kind of clothes you wear, what city you live in, what community activites you are involved in etc.. etc...

Everyone sacrifices to have what they want, and everyone places different value on different things.

I'm still thankful for all the days of class I missed while skiiing, kayaking, etc.... I wouldn't trade all that even if it meant me making twice the money I make now. I'm thankful for the work ethic I developed as i choose to sometimes place work over school. Looking back...sure, some decisions where mistakes.

However...in the end...having an extra +0.5 or +1 or +1.5 added to my gpa is simply not worth the sacrifice. My low gpa has had absolutely no negative effect on my career. However, all the skills I developed while guiding rafts, or skiing, or responding to medical emergencies and life threatening situations has helped me a thousand times over within my engineering career.

Now that I'm aging a little, and the hair is greying (and falling out), and while the career is going great...I'm happy to know that ski season is quickly approachig and soon I'll get to drop into some fresh Utah Powder and own it all the way down the hill. The same hills that took that 0.5 or that 1.0 or that 1.5 from my potential 4.0.

I'm healthy, happy, generally fun to work with, and grateful for my life experiences. The lack of points couldn't be sweeter....

 

[jimaitken]

tokki

As a department manager who is in the position of evaluating candidate's resumes and as a former student who did not break a 3.0 overall GPA in 4 1/2 years of engineering school I will give you my thoughts on this topic.

I think when you are looking for your first job out of college you need to emphasize your strong points anyway that you can to get the interview.

When I look at resumes if someone says they have a 4.0 GPA, has the relevant coursework for the position and wants to work for my company, I am going to give that person a call and schedule an interview on the strength of their GPA alone. If I get a resume that doesn't list any GPA but shows challenging coursework, design projects or some Co-op/ internship experience I would most likely schedule the interview. If nothing jumps out at me on the resume or cover letter I have no reason to talk to that person.

Once I have the inteview scheduled it is up to the individual to impress me that I should hire them.

I was once a CE grad with a 2.89 over GPA, little co-op experience and I remember going on a few interviews that went poorly. The interview that landed me my first job was the one that I decide to bring my senior design project with me, a design of a 23 story highrise that my design team assigned me the task of performing all of calculations for the steel and concrete design. I had a great time doing the project and it came through in my interview , I got the job and here I am almost 13 years later.(As a side note it was a friend who worked for the company that got me the interview.)

A good GPA is a great way to get your foot in the door after graduation, a mediocre or poor GPA just means you are going to have to work a little harder to get the interview and show that you have what it takes. You might have to write a cover letter that details your strengths and career interests and coursework or design projects. You have to sell yourself as being a viable candidate for the position.

Congratulations on Graduating & Good Luck!

 

[tokki]

I probably am not in the position to say this, but I think where you go to school does make a world's difference. Of course there are people who end up doing very well at either school, but for some of us, that's just not the case.

I graduated from one of the hardest schools in the country. Sure I should have done better and all, but my grades don't reflect the effort and knowledge I put in. Whereas someone from a not so good school might have gotten the perfect 4.0 but not know a thing. Except grad schools don't care, if you don't have the grades, you're not getting into anything. Companies don't care, if you don't meet their minimum, you're out. So how is that fair? When you don't have the grades, a lot of times that just means you never have a chance to speak for yourself and your grades... I guess I'm just bitter.

 

[Twoballcane]

“I graduated from one of the hardest schools in the country. Sure I should have done better and all, but my grades don't reflect the effort and knowledge I put in. Whereas someone from a not so good school might have gotten the perfect 4.0 but not know a thing.”


If you want to stick your foot in your mouth I think this is the sentence to do it with. You better be careful who you tell this to especially on an interview, because the person behind the desk might be a person who went to a so called not so good school who got a 4.0 who know more than you do. Last I checked engineering theories are not different from school to school. I came from a city run college who had some prestige alumni who some people would think came from some ivy league.

When I got hired, I worked along with guys from big name engineering colleges doing the same work. Now years later, I have mentored one person who cam from these high priced colleges and mentored somebody from a medium priced and found them to be about the same in knowledge.

I graduated with a 2.95, but I participated in two co ops at national laboratories, and had jobs during the semesters and summer. Once I got hired, I asked one of the guys who hired me what part of my interview stood out, and he said that you had the knowledge and also the drive to work. Work is not full of fun and games; there is the fun stuff and the down right boring stuff. I had experience in both. So they expected that when I started working, I would not be shocked how different work life would be form academia.

I’m going home, have a great holiday! (USA)


Tobalcane
"If you avoid failure, you also avoid success."

 

[whyun]

Tokki could have worded a bit better but there is some truth to it, in my opinion. Sure the coursework and engineering theory don't differ much from school to school but students in reputable schools face much tougher competition.

 

[Pulpboy]

Senseless wrote

"truth is....anything less than a 4.0 is result of knowingly and purposefully diverting attention away from your academic life. Doesn't matter if its drinkin beer, chasing women, working, video games, drugs, wife, kids, sports, or just plain laziness. Its a choice!!!"

I'd agree with that whole heartedly. I had a lower GPA and I diverted time to socialising, beer drinking, working etc. I don't think it had a negative impact however except on my GPA. I think I learned many skills by being involved with campus events, clubs, fundraisers etc. I decided that having a 4.0 with no life was going to burn me out. I truly believe I could have achieved a 4.0 but I probably never would have finished engineering because it wouldn't be worth it.

If you got a 4.0 and still were very social in school I'd hire you in a second. Brains and social = perfect. If you worked super hard to get that 4.0 but never went out, didn't socialise well and continue that attitude in your career - (all work no play) I might suspect that you would be great for the company as a worker but you might be a drag to work with as far as team building.

If you got a 2.5 and didn't work hard - I'd probably hire you too - knowing that I'd have to watch to make sure work ethic was there now even though it wasn't in school.

The only one that I'm scared of is the 2.5 GPA who worked his butt off. Probably means he picked the wrong profession.

Good luck tokki, low GPA is just a speed bump not a roadblock.

 

[GregLocock]

So, why pick a hard school then? It seems to me you want it both ways, the reputation of a hard school,and the high GPA of an 'easier' school.

Personally, I think maintaining a 4 GPA in engineering is quite an achievement in /any/ accredited school, I'd be very careful about knocking those who have achieved it.

FWIW my grades were respectable but not excellent, and I've never mentioned them to employers, so far as I can remember.

Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[whyun]

Lower Division classes during the first two years of university typically yield lower grade point average compared to the upper division (based on my own experience as well as many of my college friends).

There are "transfer" students from junior colleges or equivalent two years from another university. For the transfer students, I'm just curious whether their exiting GPA is based only on the Upper Division coursework. If this is the case, why would anyone want to enter a reputable university as a freshman?

 

[JOJOMO]

To opine on the original question:

I would leave the GPA off the resume. If it isn't something you're proud of then leave it off. Display your positives.

To Greg's comment:

I don't think anyone is knocking anybody who has a 4.0 from a smaller school as this is definitely an achievement, but I would say a 4.0 from a GA Tech, MIT, Cal Tech, Perdue, and a few other schools would mean more to me than a 4.0 from many other smaller or more liberal arts focused schools that happen to have an engineering dept.

The more prominent schools get the best of the best in professors because of the research grants and generally the best of the best in students to fill the classes because of the reputation. This will generally result in better and more in-depth training and more competition between students. This competition will result in a lower GPA across the board.

This is all my biased opinion though. I graduated from one of these "prestigious" schools with a pretty high gpa I worked hard for.

 

[Ashereng]

In my opinion, the top 5 students (in rank) at MIT, Cal Tech, Purdue, etc. is every bit as good as the top 5 from Central OK State, Universit of this and that.

Many top students elect to stay home (cheap rent, mom's cooking, don't want to leave state, girl/boy friend, etc.).

In addition to GPA, I also look at rank (where available). Ranking tells a lot, same as GPA.

"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[Heckler]

The more prominent schools get the best of the best in professors because of the research grants and generally the best of the best in students to fill the classes because of the reputation. This will generally result in better and more in-depth training and more competition between students. This competition will result in a lower GPA across the board.

Also the prominent schools have the resources for the students to use but one thing that can't be gauged is what a student does with what she/he learns. For example, SAE college design competitions is one venue for students to apply their theoretical and practical knowledge. I went to a California State College and earned a respectable GPA for someone that worked to put myself through college. It's very subjective because to compare student's GPAs from different schools.

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 5.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1400
o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

Never argue with an idiot. They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience every time.