U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment > Job Search
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-02-2014, 10:23 AM
 
1,305 posts, read 1,319,780 times
Reputation: 1364

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jobaba View Post
That's fine.

But then someone who has a 2.0 and did no work in school whatsoever and just barely got by gets the same chances as you do.

You went to engineering school in the US?
I didn't say that. We don't live in a black and white world. We live in a world that has a spectrum.

There were candidates who interviewed with my now boss who had much higher gpa than me. I must have done something right in my interview for him to hire me instead of the other candidates with stronger academic background. The other guy got hired by someone working in the corporate office. My boss told them that he wanted to hire me into his team so they hired me, but they chose the other guy for him.

What I'm saying is companies should find a better way at differentiating bad candidates from good ones other than gpa. It's the worst indicator, and people continue to use it because it's a no brainer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-02-2014, 10:27 AM
MJ7
 
6,221 posts, read 8,646,771 times
Reputation: 6514
Quote:
Originally Posted by rosie_hair View Post
I didn't say that. We don't live in a black and white world. We live in a world that has a spectrum.

There were candidates who interviewed with my now boss who had much higher gpa than me. I must have done something right in my interview for him to hire me instead of the other candidates with stronger academic background. The other guy got hired by someone working in the corporate office. My boss told them that he wanted to hire me into his team so they hired me, but they chose the other guy for him.

What I'm saying is companies should find a better way at differentiating bad candidates from good ones other than gpa. It's the worst indicator, and people continue to use it because it's a no brainer.
I've only been out of school for 3 and 1/2 years, however, in those 3 and 1/2 years I have seen 3 people fired due to the lack of knowledge necessary to preform the job, and most of it was from a basic skill level they should have gained from HS, let alone missing it through college. I work in a very niche STEM position, although I am no engineer I work for an engineering company.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2014, 10:33 AM
 
112 posts, read 250,586 times
Reputation: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by jobaba View Post
It's like everybody wants to discount everything anybody else has done.

You have a 4.0? Means nothing in the real world.

You went to Harvard? Means nothing in the real world.

Awards & Merits and Scholarships? Means nothing in the real world.

Uh, I have been in school and I know the difference between a 4.0 and 2.0 student. Mainly it's being a nerd and studying all day, or doing bong rips until 4 AM. And you're investing a lot of $ into this person and you don't want to know that difference. Sounds smart to me.

So, nothing you've done in your first 22 years of life counts for anything? OK. I wish I had remembered that.
I think you're being sarcastic but it's true. Nobody cares about your education. You have two applicants, one went to Harvard and has a 4.0 grade point average and the other has work experience related to the job. They're going with the guy with previous work experience every time.

The longer you're out of school, the lower you place your education on your resume. It's skills and experience that employers are looking for. For most people, once you can read and write the rest of your education is a waste of time.

Social sciences, English, fine arts, this is all a waste of time and money. It won't help you get a job. I speak from experience.

Even the "useful" majors like accounting, law, medicine and the like are usually a waste of time. The percent of people working in the same field as what they studied five years after graduation is something crazy like 20%. There are law schools where 75% of the graduates can't find jobs in law.

Higher education is a big scam to separate people from their money and enslave generations of people with massive debt that they'll never pay off. Far fewer people should be going to college. It's a complete waste of time for the overwhelming majority of them.

I was fortunate to do an apprenticeship for a company and learned a trade. I got paid while I was apprenticing and worked for them afterwards. I can go anywhere in the world and do this job. I learned a valuable skill and this is what employers want. You studied hard, good for you, but frankly, employers don't care.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2014, 10:37 AM
 
7,388 posts, read 11,563,104 times
Reputation: 8188
Quote:
Originally Posted by rosie_hair View Post
I didn't say that. We don't live in a black and white world. We live in a world that has a spectrum.

There were candidates who interviewed with my now boss who had much higher gpa than me. I must have done something right in my interview for him to hire me instead of the other candidates with stronger academic background. The other guy got hired by someone working in the corporate office. My boss told them that he wanted to hire me into his team so they hired me, but they chose the other guy for him.

What I'm saying is companies should find a better way at differentiating bad candidates from good ones other than gpa. It's the worst indicator, and people continue to use it because it's a no brainer.
They do use other indicators. Engineering firms that I have seen used only typically 3.0 as a min cutoff.

So, if they were to follow your advice and do away with GPA as an indicator (that is what you suggested) then you'd throw yourself back into open competition with all of the completely horrible 2.0 students, many of whom couldn't even be bothered to COPY the homework because they didn't care enough about their grades.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2014, 10:56 AM
 
1,305 posts, read 1,319,780 times
Reputation: 1364
Quote:
Originally Posted by jobaba View Post
They do use other indicators. Engineering firms that I have seen used only typically 3.0 as a min cutoff.

So, if they were to follow your advice and do away with GPA as an indicator (that is what you suggested) then you'd throw yourself back into open competition with all of the completely horrible 2.0 students, many of whom couldn't even be bothered to COPY the homework because they didn't care enough about their grades.
Having a min cutoff is a terrible idea. If studies after studies and google (the corporation) have shown that gpa has no connection whatsoever to work performance, why have a min cutoff at all? It's a number that any simpleton can use. Finding a good potential candidate is a lot harder to do.

Let's forget gpa and work for a moment. Let's talk about rape and what clothing the rape victim wears. Do you or do you not agree that wearing "slutty" clothing or not has nothing to do with whether a victim is potentially a target or not? If I can show you that it doesn't matter, why keep raving on and on about how it's the victim's fault because she was "wearing slutty clothing"?

I know it's silly to point that out, but sometimes we need to get past tradition to make the world a better place to live. Persistently holding on to archaic world view and practices that don't have anything to do with reality does no good to anyone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2014, 10:56 AM
 
280 posts, read 286,193 times
Reputation: 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by aliss2 View Post
I have a question about putting your GPA on resume - is it a yay or nay when it's a 3.3/4.0? It was actually a 3.9 in the last two years but the first two years, I really didn't care and just partied

I have five years experience in the field, I don't know if that changes the answer or not.
It depends on the type of job you are applying to. What is your degree in and what jobs are you targeting?

You have five years of experience, five years ago. it is possible that your field has changed dramatically, and you are only qualified to target entry-level jobs. If that is the case, regardless of personal opinion, one factor most Fortune 500 companies use to sort entry-level candidates is GPA. In most cases the cut-off is 3.0 to 3.5, so list it.

If that is the case it will usually say so in the section under qualification. The further away from entry-level you get, the less likely GPA is a factor. Also yes if you are matched against someone with a high GPA but no experience, experience will win out, but there is no way for you to know who they will be comparing you to. If you are looking at entry-level roles it is likely you will be matched against a fresh grad, who also may have gained experience while in school, so the decision-maker will look for like comparisons, that is where GPA may come in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2014, 11:12 AM
 
241 posts, read 262,365 times
Reputation: 258
Quote:
Originally Posted by Legin View Post
I think you're being sarcastic but it's true. Nobody cares about your education. You have two applicants, one went to Harvard and has a 4.0 grade point average and the other has work experience related to the job. They're going with the guy with previous work experience every time.
Maybe in some fields but not all. Perfect example, a friend is having a terrible time trying to get back in to the legal field. She's worked for the SEC doing anti-trust work, she is an expert in the field and should be able to go where ever she wants. She can't get a sniff. When I did on campus interviews last year with very good grades, I had no experience and received 27 job offers out of 31 interviews. She would have taken any of the jobs I was offered. Also she said a few firms she interviewed with still asked for her transcripts. She graduated from law school in 2000.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2014, 11:28 AM
 
3,072 posts, read 4,280,563 times
Reputation: 6512
Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonAccountant View Post
It depends on the type of job you are applying to. What is your degree in and what jobs are you targeting?
I'm a civilian employee in police departments (radio, records, that kind of stuff). Most people don't even have degrees in this field (younger people do, older people don't) so it isn't an education-dependent field like teaching, engineering, or whatever. My degree is general studies (English, education, and criminal justice), because I was reimbursed by the city for taking those subjects
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2014, 11:28 AM
 
Location: MN
1,305 posts, read 1,409,761 times
Reputation: 1578
Quote:
Originally Posted by rosie_hair View Post
Companies that hire based on gpa are shallow and you probably wouldn't want to work for them. Studies have consistently shown over and over that there is absolutely no connection between gpa and work performance. Not even a little bit.

Companies that have policies of a minimum gpa before they even look at you don't know how many good potential employees they pass by every time they hire.

Google, for example, don't even look at your gpa anymore. And they are rated as the best company to work for.

As an example of how useless your gpa is when it comes to work performance, my company hired 2 of us for my current job. They had to fire the other guy because his work are riddled with mistakes and they had to hold his hand to do everything. And his gpa was closer to 4.0, way above mine. I've been checking people's work for archiving, and let me tell you his work are bad. Really really bad.
What I have experienced is quite different from this. My best guess for companies using GPA as a hiring qualifier is to weed out applicants with little to no experience. I was actually grilled on my GPA on why it wasn't "high enough." A lot of the companies where I live have asked for GPA. I have worked multiple jobs, dealt with unemployment and poor health, so I do explain why my grades were lower. My husband has more work experience in his field and he has looked at applications where they asked for your GPA and requested your college transcript, along with your high school transcript. It's absurd. He hasn't been in college for nearly 10 years, and they are still asking for that information.

The problem is probably based on the fact a lot of companies are using hiring qualifiers the same way they did back in the 1950's. I came across this interesting article:

Does a Higher GPA Make You A Better Employee?

Only to find it contradicted by this one:

Do Employers Really Care About Your College Grades? - Forbes

One commenter noted how grade inflation might be an issue but IME, earning an A is hard work. In my previous degree it was no easy feat-- I had to write a lot of essays, follow lots of writing rules and expectations for the course. I could easily get docked 25% for not writing the references in perfect APA style. Even now as a programming student, one can find their grade lowering by not following proper coding conventions even if "it runs."

At the end of the day I can understand why grades are taken into consideration when looking the entire picture. However, a lot of companies are expecting to see entry-level applicants with a 3.4 or higher so those with little to no experience might just need to earn high grades. A lot of companies consider a 3.4 mediocre.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2014, 11:47 AM
 
7,388 posts, read 11,563,104 times
Reputation: 8188
Quote:
Originally Posted by rosie_hair View Post

I know it's silly to point that out, but sometimes we need to get past tradition to make the world a better place to live. Persistently holding on to archaic world view and practices that don't have anything to do with reality does no good to anyone.
I actually think school is more fair than work.

Work performance is based on how much $ you can save an employer, how much $ you can bring into a company, and how much charisma you have. In that sense, I do agree that school skills don't necessarily transfer.

School performance is usually based on how hard you work and how much time you spend at the library. Why do you think they portray nerds as people who work hard and do well in school?

Your experience in college doesn't mirror mine at all.

Last edited by jobaba; 02-02-2014 at 11:57 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment > Job Search
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top