Is GPA useful outside academia? (colleges, degree, high school, salary)

[tnff]

Over in another threat, Annandale-Man raised this point.

Originally Posted by Annandale_Man

GPA is meaningless unless you are planning on going to grad school. My diplomas don't have the GPA printed anywhere on it. The degree speaks for itself. You either graduated or you didn't.

I think that's an interesting point because while on the one hand we may want to ignore it, on the other hand HR and others don't, esp when it comes to that critical first or second job after graduation. I know for example that our HR uses it both as a filter and a rank order when presenting candidates to us, and as a sorting gate for what the max is they will offer a new candidate.

For certain jobs designed specifically for new graduates, they will filter out those below 3.0 and use GPA in their ordering of candidates. We don't have to follow their ranking but can't hire below 3.0 into these jobs.

For other jobs we can go below 3.0 but they will get offered a lower entry pay scale. Basically, giving them a year to prove their ability before they can move into the engineer pay scale even though they have an engineering degree.

I'm kind of torn by the whole thing with my biggest thought/concern being where someone got that GPA rather than the absolute value of it. Is a 3.5 from Tennessee Tech equal to a 3.5 from Georgia Tech? Does a 2.9 from TAMU beat a 3.1 from Alabama? Why would a 3.9 from CalTech even consider the job? Does Army beat Navy?

[mitsguy2001]

Originally Posted by tnff

Over in another threat, Annandale-Man raised this point.

I think that's an interesting point because while on the one hand we may want to ignore it, on the other hand HR and others don't, esp when it comes to that critical first or second job after graduation.

I agree more with Annandale-Man. Most employers do not even look at GPI. They only care that you have the appropriate degree. If anything, they see high GPA's as a negative, since they prefer employees who had to struggle academically and financially through college. Rightly or wrongly, they feel that such employees have better work ethics, whereas they feel that employees with high GPAs are more academically oriented than real-work oriented.

Also, academia and government might not understand, but most people in the real world know how meaningless GPA is, since, at least at the very top, it's basically a lottery of who gets the easiest teachers. Academia and government believe in the just world fallacy, so they believe that somebody with a 4.0 is objectively better than a 3.98, whereas in the real world, they understand that GPAs shouldn't even be alculated to that many decimal places.

I know for example that our HR uses it both as a filter and a rank order when presenting candidates to us, and as a sorting gate for what the max is they will offer a new candidate.

Keep in mind that you are doing pseudo-academic research, so your experiences do not apply to most real-world jobs.

For certain jobs designed specifically for new graduates, they will filter out those below 3.0 and use GPA in their ordering of candidates. We don't have to follow their ranking but can't hire below 3.0 into these jobs.

In other words, you only hire those who had easy teachers and were good at gaming the system. Unlike academia and government, in the real world, people understand that the person with the slightly lower GPA may have taken harder classes, may have had harder professors, may have gotten a 0 on an exam or assignment that he/she missed due to a funeral, etc.

For other jobs we can go below 3.0 but they will get offered a lower entry pay scale. Basically, giving them a year to prove their ability before they can move into the engineer pay scale even though they have an engineering degree.

Same comment as above.

I'm kind of torn by the whole thing with my biggest thought/concern being where someone got that GPA rather than the absolute value of it. Is a 3.5 from Tennessee Tech equal to a 3.5 from Georgia Tech? Does a 2.9 from TAMU beat a 3.1 from Alabama?

Even at the same school, different teachers and professors grade very differently. In college, the effect is somewhat mitigated in that you have at least some choice of professors. But sometimes, you get stuck with the hard professor, since the easy professor's section might conflict with another class, or the easy professor might not teach the class during the semester that you need it. But at least it's somewhat less of a lottery than high school.

Why would a 3.9 from CalTech even consider the job?

What types of jobs do you feel that somebody from CalTech should be considering? Why not your job? For the most part, people with high GPAs from elite colleges are chasing the same jobs as everybody else.

Does Army beat Navy?

Depends on the job and the boss's preference.

[BigCityDreamer]

Originally Posted by tnff

For certain jobs designed specifically for new graduates, they will filter out those below 3.0 and use GPA in their ordering of candidates. We don't have to follow their ranking but can't hire below 3.0 into these jobs.

Law firms tend to put a lot of emphasis on class ranking.

It is a very hierarchical profession.

[mitsguy2001]

Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer

Law firms tend to put a lot of emphasis on class ranking.

It is a very hierarchical profession.

Maybe a point can be made that there are a few professions where GPA matter: maybe law, academia, research, and government jobs. Maybe medicine? For everything else, it doesn't matter.

[jobaba]

It's dependent on the industry.

A low GPA may prevent you from getting into some of the bigger firms in my subfield, but you can always get experience and join them later.

Not to mention that later on down the road, someone who had a terrible GPA and went to a worse school and had a 'worse' major could totally be your boss telling you what to do and doing less that you.

Though I would say ... high, high brow jobs such as consulting, i-banking, etc, MOSTLY everybody who took that path did well in school. But those are tough, competitive jobs, you wanna do that for 30 years?

To me it's about big picture, not ... what's the highest paying job I can get out of school.

Also ... this assumes we're talking about 21 - 25 year old kids. Anyone else, and GPA means very little.

[Hemlock140]

Not only do most employers not look at GPA, most do not verify degrees. I have worked now for two jobs requiring degrees, one as an analyst, currently as a manager and neither verified my degree. There is only one local, huge employer that I know of that hires a lot of new engineering graduates, and does check grades, even giving a larger starting salary for a better GPA.

[joe from dayton]

Most employers don't care about GPAs. Maybe in engineering, law, or medicine, but most places don't care because GPAs don't matter all that much -- if at all -- for the majority of the real world.

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by mitsguy2001

I agree more with Annandale-Man. Most employers do not even look at GPI. They only care that you have the appropriate degree. If anything, they see high GPA's as a negative, since they prefer employees who had to struggle academically and financially through college. Rightly or wrongly, they feel that such employees have better work ethics, whereas they feel that employees with high GPAs are more academically oriented than real-work oriented.

The bolded is total non-sense. No employer is going to have a negative view of a high GPA regardless of the field. In fact, there are a lot of people who maintain high GPAs despite working through their way through college while there are many people with low GPAs who partied for 4+ years and weren't that disciplined. It's not like a prospective employer is going to look at a 2.8 GPA and think "Hmm, looks like this person was struggling throughout college and likely has a better work ethic than the person with a 4.0."

That said, GPA is likely to matter the most for recent graduates with the importance of GPA reaching zero or close to it within a few years. After being 3-5 years removed from school, you should have enough work experience where employers are judging you on THAT as opposed to what you did in school.

[markg91359]

Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer

Law firms tend to put a lot of emphasis on class ranking.

It is a very hierarchical profession.

I have to agree with this. I remember some interviews I had after graduating law school many years ago. Today, they almost seem like the "Twilight Zone". I actually was not only asked to provide a transcript from law school, I was asked what my score on my LSAT was. I try to imagine anything less relevant than an LSAT score, but the question was asked during more than one interview.

Many employers posted ads that stated something like "No one who is not in the top 25% of the class need bother to apply".

Its possible things have changed in the intervening years since this experience. However, law firms seemed less interested in what you could do for them than simply what your credentials were. Sadly, I noticed the same thing was starting to occur with respect to government law jobs. I noticed more and more of a focus on paper credentials like grades and test scores.

Hierarchical to the extreme. Probably the smartest decision I ever made in my life was to open up my own office and work for myself. I escaped a lot of nonsense that way.

[mitsguy2001]

Originally Posted by joe from dayton

Most employers don't care about GPAs. Maybe in engineering, law, or medicine, but most places don't care because GPAs don't matter all that much -- if at all -- for the majority of the real world.

Maybe it depends on which branch of "engineering." There is no one field called "engineering". There are many different fields, with relatively little in common, that have "engineering" in the title.

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

The bolded is total non-sense. No employer is going to have a negative view of a high GPA regardless of the field. In fact, there are a lot of people who maintain high GPAs despite working through their way through college while there are many people with low GPAs who partied for 4+ years and weren't that disciplined. It's not like a prospective employer is going to look at a 2.8 GPA and think "Hmm, looks like this person was struggling throughout college and likely has a better work ethic than the person with a 4.0."

I'm not saying that the employers are right, just that it's the way many employers think.