Maximizing Your Science GPA for Grad School: Tips and Strategies for Success

  • Thread starter Mentalist
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Gpa
In summary, the individual has a cumulative GPA of 2.8 and is only focused on science courses, not caring about general courses. They are hoping to get a high score on the pGRE and are considering applying for an MS program before applying for a PhD program. Some individuals on a grad school acceptance committee may view their attitude towards general courses and potential for self-motivation as concerning. The individual is seeking advice on how to improve their chances for grad school acceptance.
  • #1
Mentalist
Sum it all up:

Cumulative GPA: 2.8 (so far, I only take science courses seriously, anything else I don't care if I get a D, which has been most of my general courses. I should not have to be forced to take classes that I don't need and certainly will forget about 3 years later.)

Physics B.A. (3.8 GPA)

Chemistry Minor

Research: 2 year chemistry, about 9 months physics by the time I apply to grad schools.

Hopeful pGRE: I am hoping I get above the 85 percentile (what I scored on the sample).

With my GPA now, I am thinking of applying to an MS program in materials physics (I have a few engineering and computer science classes under my belt), hopefully get a great gGPA and apply to grad schools for a PhD.

I don't think any grad school would accept me with a 3.0 cGPA/3.8 mGPA and placed in 85 pGRE. I want to go to a top 15 not a mid-tier.

Would grad schools be more lenient seeing as I will only be 19 when applying? I graduated high school early and went straight to college.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Nobody will be lenient, why should they? Yes, it is impressive that you graduated early, but you are graduating with a 2.8. Given the information you have provided, if I was a professor on an admissions committee I would feel that you have a lot of potential but are not mature enough for graduate work. Again, this assumption is based on the information you provided.

The feeling of "who cares about this class" totally understandable, however it does not justify negligence. There may be times in graduate work where you will "not care"; negligence with this type of work will result in poor research.

On the positive side. If you have done extra curricular work do not forget to include that in your application. Also, when I applied to grad schools many of them made a distinction between cumulative and "major" GPA.
 
  • #3
Mentalist said:
so far, I only take science courses seriously, anything else I don't care if I get a D, which has been most of my general courses. I should not have to be forced to take classes that I don't need and certainly will forget about 3 years later.

I'm very curious on how an attitude like this looks like to potential grad schools. If I were to be in an acceptance committee, then this would be very unfavorable to you. Then again, I have never been on such committee, so I don't know how they think.
 
  • #4
The thing about a 3.0 is that many (most) schools use it as a magic cutoff. If your transcripts don't meet the cutoff, the registrar won't even send your application to the admissions committee. It doesn't matter that you did okay in your major courses, but bombed basket-weaving 101.

It's also probably worth adjusting your attitude a little towards general courses. Assuming you attend university in a "first world" country, no one forces you to take anything. You chose your program. In fact you probably paid a lot of money to enroll in that program. Also, you said you're 19. How do you what you won't need in 3 years?
 
  • #5
Mentalist said:
Cumulative GPA: 2.8 (so far, I only take science courses seriously, anything else I don't care if I get a D, which has been most of my general courses. I should not have to be forced to take classes that I don't need and certainly will forget about 3 years later.).

I would not vote to accept you. Harsh, perhaps, but that's how I see it. What this tells me is that if you aren't interested in something you will do a crappy job. Much of science is dull and boring, and what you have written makes your application look risky.
 
  • #6
micromass said:
I'm very curious on how an attitude like this looks like to potential grad schools. If I were to be in an acceptance committee, then this would be very unfavorable to you. Then again, I have never been on such committee, so I don't know how they think.

It's difficut to see an "attitude" on an application. But in general this would serve as a flag - at least for me. I would be concerned that the student would have trouble with self-motivation if a particular task did not fit his or her definition of what they "should" be doing. That's not to say I expect a student to simply accept everything I say as a supervisor as the ultimate truth and to dive right in. Hardly. But closed-mindedness is not a desirable trait.
 
  • #7
Vanadium 50 said:
I would not vote to accept you. Harsh, perhaps, but that's how I see it. What this tells me is that if you aren't interested in something you will do a crappy job. Much of science is dull and boring, and what you have written makes your application look risky.

An interviewer in industry would probably take the same view in my experience. You never end up hiring too few "prima donnas", despite your best efforts to weed them out.
 
  • #8
micromass said:
I'm very curious on how an attitude like this looks like to potential grad schools. If I were to be in an acceptance committee, then this would be very unfavorable to you. Then again, I have never been on such committee, so I don't know how they think.

I took most of my generals back when I was a freshman and sophomore. Of course, I will simply lie and say I couldn't keep up with everything and was taking 5 classes/semester (that is true).

please be objective. Also, for people that know those on committees could you give me some advice? There is not much I else I can do at this point, I can only get a 3.0, or try to get a higher pGRE which I am aiming for by the way on practice tests and studying. So any advice is welcomed here.

If you could give me a strict percentage, sort of like 45% chance top 20, 55% chance mid-tier, etc...

So, "future-tense" (keeping things constant)

3.0 cGPA
3.8 mGPA Physics
Minor Chemistry
2 years Chemistry research
1 year Physics research
85th+? percentile pGRE
19 years old

The reason I put the age in there is because I will mention that I did poorly because I was out of high school early and took more classes than I should have, so I was quite overwhelmed during those years. Now I know what I can handle and try to do great at any task I am given.
 
  • #9
I took most of my generals back when I was a freshman and sophomore. Of course, I will simply lie and say I couldn't keep up with everything and was taking 5 classes/semester (that is true).

Wrong attitude, bad attitude. I advise you think think very carefully about your decision. You are trying to convince a group PhDs, not kindergartners, that you are grad school worthy. If you think lying will get you ahead, think again. There are cases where it may, but one thing you will never acquire is a good reputation and respect. Even if you get accepted, they will know right away that this is your attitude. I can't tell you what to do or what will happen. I can assure you that it will catch up to you.
 
  • #10
You're asking the impossible. No one here can say you have a 55% chance to get into this type of school or not. From my experience, you don't have a good chance at any top 15 school simply because of your GPA. That's unfortunate. Sadly, the fact that you are young and made mistakes does nothing to help you. There isn't a special place in grad school for young kids who acted immaturely and learned. You are put against all other applicants, including those who are older with higher GPA's.

Your saving grace may be your research if it's 'interesting' enough.

With all that said, it isn't the end of the world to go to a mid-tier grad school for masters or PhD.
 
  • #11
Do you think if I go to a mid-tier for a masters and have great grades, research experience, etc..., if I then have a higher acceptance chance to a top 15 for PhD? Have you heard from anyone going that route? I know you said it's impossible to know, but I have been thinking about it for a while now. So a rough estimate would help as well.

Wrong attitude, bad attitude. I advise you think think very carefully about your decision. You are trying to convince a group PhDs, not kindergartners, that you are grad school worthy. If you think lying will get you ahead, think again. There are cases where it may, but one thing you will never acquire is a good reputation and respect. Even if you get accepted, they will know right away that this is your attitude. I can't tell you what to do or what will happen. I can assure you that it will catch up to you.

I just do not want to be held back by general courses, so I felt a white lie would not affect my ethics. I do love physics and my grades reflect it. I just don't have good general courses.

I did say I only take science courses/work seriously. I didn't really need biology, but I took it seriously and made out with an A. It's just non-science courses like history, psychology, ethics, that I did not care for. But those courses are behind me now.
 
  • #12
I can only give you personal stories. Here are two: First, I graduated from a small college with no graduate level courses (except in stats). I had a friend who was rather brilliant but couldn't get accepted into any top graduate school for a PhD because he didn't have much in regard to research and in advance classes. So he got his masters in mathematics at a well respected state level school, and then proceeded to do a PhD at Yale. Secondly, there is me, who did a masters in Biononsenses, and got accepted into some top 10 school for a PhD (but due to family obligation, I turned down.) So, yes, it's possible.
 
  • #13
Thanks, that is what I am thinking of doing now. It seems a bit wiser seeing that I do not want to apply to schools twice.

But, has your friend graduated with his PhD from Yale? Are you planning on trying to go for a PhD again after you are able to settle things out with your family?
 
  • #14
Honestly, I have no idea. He went off to do mathematics, I settled and started to raise a family. So we've grown out of touch. His facebook profile still says he attends Yale, so I assume he's working on it still. As for me, the answer is no, most likely not. I have a little girl and wife to support, living on bread crumbs again is nothing something I particularly want us to go through again.
 
  • #15
First, MarneMath is right - even if we had your application in front of us we could not predict how any committee would decide. He's also right that honesty is important in science - and IMO, a lie that benefits you by deceiving others is not a "white" lie. It's just a plain old lie.

That said, I think you need to be realistic. You aren't shooting for top-tier. You probably aren't even shooting for mid-tier.

There are three things that are considered and weighted heavily in the admissions process: test scores, grades and letters.

About twice as many people take the PGRE than enter grad school. So an 85% means you are in the top 30% of those admitted. This sounds more mid-tier than top tier. And historically, students tend to guess on the high side when guessing their scores.

Second, at 3.0 many schools won't even consider you. The school ranked at the bottom of the list of PhD programs requires the provost's permission to accept a student with less than a 3.0.

Finally, there are letters: we don't know what they will say, but do you really think they will say things like "mature, honest and hard-working"?
 
  • #16
Okay, so you're in this situation. You really want to get into graduate school, but you're stuck with a low overall GPA. Let's say you mature somewhat and realize that not caring about certain courses that you chose to take was a mistake. Here are some things to consider:

(1) Forget about this idea of tiers in graduate school. This is an artificial ranking that means nothing. Instead, you have to focus on specific programs and figure out the projects that you would be most interested in.

(2) Five courses per semester is a standard courseload at many universities. Complaining that you took too much on when you didn't is not going to win you any sympathy. In fact even if you took six or sever courses per semester, it's still not likely to win you any sympathy, because that would have been your own choice.

(3) If you really want to get in, apply, but if you're not successful, you may want to look at spending an additional semester or year taking undergraduate courses and upgrading to get your overall GPA up to a place where you'll be considered.
 
  • #17
You did what you did, now you face consequences. Judging from your thread about making a lab partner cry, you have more to think about than your gpa. Apply to a wide range of schools.
 
  • #18
I suggest working retail/fast food to mentally mature yourself. If you cannot even work retail or fast food what hope do you have of doing research? If you cannot even deal with high schoolers wanting a burger, how can you possibly deal with sophisticated professors? I believe that doing a year of work, then going to grad school, will be more beneficial to you in every way than trying to apply now.
 
  • #19
I just do not want to be held back by general courses, so I felt a white lie would not affect my ethics. I do love physics and my grades reflect it. I just don't have good general courses.

I did say I only take science courses/work seriously. I didn't really need biology, but I took it seriously and made out with an A. It's just non-science courses like history, psychology, ethics, that I did not care for. But those courses are behind me now.

The fact of the matter is that if you did put in a reasonable amount of time into those classes you would have done better over all, maybe at the expense of an A or 2 in your science classes. In a sense, your statement is like saying:
"Well I took two classes and got A's but when I took 4 I got two A's and two C's, but the C's don't count because they are two more classes than two."
Which is nothing more than an...excuse.

I knew a girl who had a similar mindset to yours in undergrad. She was very smart, really loved aircraft structures, but was very stubborn and sacrificed her elective classes resulting in a few semesters with bad GPAs. In fact, she actually wasted some time retaking them to get better grades. She didn't go to grad school but she got a good job in industry.

From a more positive standpoint, putting a reasonable amount of time in these classes may turn out to be enjoying. You may also learn a thing or two and improve your creativity - an essential problem solving skill.

It is very unfortunate that you have such a close minded attitude when you are very smart. From my experience, opening your mind will only improve your thinking ability.
 
  • #20
Not sure if this was said already but for some places (UW), the 3.0 GPA cutoff only applies to the most recent credits.
 
  • #21
@spamctor: I am only taking sciences courses now, so I have no more general courses. If I keep on the same streak, I should have a good 4 semesters of mostly A's and a few B's. Thank you for the information! I will look into it.

@Vanadium: I don't think my professors in the sciences would say I am lazy. In fact, I mentioned this before in another thread, my chemistry research professor says I am doing better than expected. I am also doing well in physics research, but I have only been doing that for about 2 months so far.

@chill_factor: I have been doing research.

Just because my attitude for general courses like history is one way does not mean that it is my attitude for things I am not particularly interested in. Some courses in physics I wasn't interested in, but the class was necessary and I viewed it as such. The biology course I did not necessarily need.

You guys are using fallacious reasoning and basically saying I will be a certain way in graduate school where I'd be doing mostly physics courses and nothing related to WWII politics or psychology 101. It is quite wrong to say I will be this and that because I have a "bad" attitude when it concerns the prior mentioned courses. That certainly is not the case.

But this thread can be locked, I have seen some good advice and will be using what MarneMath has said, going the MS route.
 
  • #22
Mentalist said:
Just because my attitude for general courses like history is one way does not mean that it is my attitude for things I am not particularly interested in. Some courses in physics I wasn't interested in, but the class was necessary and I viewed it as such. The biology course I did not necessarily need.

You guys are using fallacious reasoning and basically saying I will be a certain way in graduate school where I'd be doing mostly physics courses and nothing related to WWII politics or psychology 101. It is quite wrong to say I will be this and that because I have a "bad" attitude when it concerns the prior mentioned courses. That certainly is not the case.

Whether our reasoning is fallacious is irrelevant. We are just telling you what the grad schools might think of your application. Grad schools can only see your GPA transcript, so they will draw conclusions from that. Whether those conclusions are fallacious or not, that doesn't really matter.
 
  • #23
Possibly off topic, but if the view is that you can't even get into a grad school with a 2.8 GPA, what tiers might you find yourself in with a 3.5 (which is where I'm at presently, although with my current grades assuming no funny business on finals I should head north of that :))?
 
  • #24
Arsenic&Lace said:
Possibly off topic, but if the view is that you can't even get into a grad school with a 2.8 GPA, what tiers might you find yourself in with a 3.5 (which is where I'm at presently, although with my current grades assuming no funny business on finals I should head north of that :))?
The difference between < 3 and > 3 is night and day. Often, if not everywhere, a GPA less than 3 requires university approval (or something). Otherwise, one can't say much without knowing more than just your GPA. I had a friend get into berkeley with a 3.4 but with some spectacular research.
 
  • #25
Mentalist said:
@chill_factor: I have been doing research.

Just because my attitude for general courses like history is one way does not mean that it is my attitude for things I am not particularly interested in. Some courses in physics I wasn't interested in, but the class was necessary and I viewed it as such. The biology course I did not necessarily need.

You guys are using fallacious reasoning and basically saying I will be a certain way in graduate school where I'd be doing mostly physics courses and nothing related to WWII politics or psychology 101. It is quite wrong to say I will be this and that because I have a "bad" attitude when it concerns the prior mentioned courses. That certainly is not the case.

But this thread can be locked, I have seen some good advice and will be using what MarneMath has said, going the MS route.

doesn't matter what reasoning I'm using. A guy that thinks exactly the way I do might be on your admissions committee and then your chances of being admitted drop drastically. There might not be. But who knows? Only a single person needs to dislike you to block your way.

Here's what I think: if someone can't write about psychology 101 how are they going to convince someone that doesn't want to give them money, to give them money, when they're an unproven liability?
 
  • #26
Just because my attitude for general courses like history is one way does not mean that it is my attitude for things I am not particularly interested in. Some courses in physics I wasn't interested in, but the class was necessary and I viewed it as such. The biology course I did not necessarily need.

This isn't really directed at your Mentalist, but just anyone who happens to read this thread with a similar mindset and still has a chance to change that mindset.

A lot of students, in all reality, do not know at all what is necessary or not. Yes, there's a good chance that biology will never be used again in your entire life, but to totally disregard it for any ideas or useful information that it may have is completely asinine. I failed to mention that in my earlier post that I have an undergrad degree in Mathematics AND English. Keep in mind, I work in the biononsense field, so what degree do you think helps me more on a daily bases? It's the English degree. Unlike my peers, who double majored in Physics Math, Physics Bio, Math Bio, or any other science combo, I have real experience writing a grant proposal, technical papers, flyers (which I do quite a bit for some odd reason...), and reviews on projects.

I've basically made myself into this little niche position of knowing the technical detail and also knowing how to communicate this information properly. The thing is, during my English degree, I hated every minute of it, but my time in the Army taught me how importance writing is for everything, so I made an effort to just learn about it, and then I ended up with a degree in it.

Before my time in the Army though, I thought like you. Screw electives, screw the 'easy stuff' none of that matters, but it does. Due to all the poetry I know, I was able to make connection with my boss prior to getting this job and network my way in. Odd as it may sound, it's true. So with all that said, the more you know, the better off you'll be!
 
  • #27
Apparently Brown University has no *core* curriculum, except for a single writing class which I believe they recently introduced. You should consider applying there in the next life for all practical purposes.

BiP
 
  • #28
chill_factor said:
doesn't matter what reasoning I'm using. A guy that thinks exactly the way I do might be on your admissions committee and then your chances of being admitted drop drastically. There might not be. But who knows? Only a single person needs to dislike you to block your way.

Here's what I think: if someone can't write about psychology 101 how are they going to convince someone that doesn't want to give them money, to give them money, when they're an unproven liability?

So far I am an unproven liability and the best thing I can do after college is to work in the fast food industry. Any more advice or attributions you'd like to insult me with today?

@MarneMath: Yes, I do get that on a more reasonable level. I was thinking today about this particular topic and psychology-sociology and how understanding relationships and how we interact with one another might be of use for all future purposes. Or, for courses like history, instead of doing the weekly papers on what was happening during that time, I could have been more creative and looked at the physics of prior periods that we were studying. Or courses in music, I could have done papers on wave based vibrations, harmonics, etc..., basically connecting my major to every course and broadening my perspective of my field in light of different subjects.

I didn't think in that manner at the time, so I guess I wasted my own time and probably delayed my success. So, yes, looking back, I would more than likely conduct myself in a more reasonable fashion instead of just focusing on a linear path. However, I am not going to beat myself up over it and start regretting. But now, I am just trying to look for a bit of hope.
 

1. What is considered a good science GPA for grad school?

A good science GPA for grad school varies depending on the program and institution, but generally a GPA of 3.0 or higher is considered competitive. However, some highly competitive programs may require a GPA of 3.5 or above. It is important to research the specific requirements of the programs you are interested in to determine what is considered a good science GPA.

2. How can I improve my science GPA?

There are several ways to improve your science GPA, including retaking courses in which you earned a low grade, taking additional courses to increase your credit hours, and seeking extra help from professors or tutors. It is also important to stay organized and manage your time effectively to ensure you are able to perform well in your courses.

3. Does my overall GPA or science GPA matter more for grad school?

Both your overall GPA and science GPA are important for grad school admissions. However, your science GPA may hold more weight, especially for science-related programs. Admissions committees will also consider other factors such as your coursework, research experience, and letters of recommendation.

4. Can I still get into grad school if my science GPA is low?

While a low science GPA may make it more challenging to get into certain grad programs, it is still possible. You can offset a lower GPA by excelling in other areas such as research experience, strong letters of recommendation, and a well-written personal statement. It may also be helpful to retake courses or take additional courses to improve your science GPA.

5. Are there any strategies for maximizing my science GPA?

Yes, there are several strategies for maximizing your science GPA. These include staying organized, managing your time effectively, seeking extra help when needed, and taking advantage of resources such as tutoring or study groups. It is also important to prioritize your coursework and focus on understanding the material rather than just getting a good grade.

Similar threads

  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
26
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
11
Views
235
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
11
Views
970
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
2
Views
953
Replies
7
Views
686
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
3
Views
712
Back
Top