Is a perfect GPA necessary for success in industry?

  • Thread starter Math Is Hard
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Gpa
In summary, if you were in charge of admissions, you might be slightly biased against students with flawless grades, worrying how they might fare at the next level. However, grades are reliably and negatively correlated with achievement, so if you have a high, consistent GPA, you're in good shape.
  • #1
Math Is Hard
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
4,652
37
If you were in charge of admissions, wouldn't it be a little freaky to see transcripts with all "A"s and "A+"s for a student? I would wonder if that person had a "life" and if they might implode at the next level of coursework if things went less than perfectly.

I was a pretty uptight undergrad student, nothing but A+, A, or A-. I actually liked it when I got an A- in a course because I thought, "well, they will see I am not a robot", when my transcripts are reviewed.

I have no idea how admissions committees look at these things, but if I were on one, I might be slightly biased against students with flawless grades, worrying how they might fare at the next level. I guess that's what the essays sort out.

This is not a personal question, BTW. I've already been admitted to my program. Just general curiosity.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I think that the committees think a lot less than you give them credit for. There is not much to tell about someones personality based on their grades except that grades probably correlates with responsibility and personal drive.
 
  • #3
Isn't that the point of letters of rec?
 
  • #4
Agreed, you can't just make arbitrary and unsupported assumptions about people. Well, you can, but I guess anything goes then.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
Meh, seems unlikely adcoms would even think that hard about grades. Also research is more important than having a "life", right? :P
 
  • #6
Math Is Hard said:
If you were in charge of admissions, wouldn't it be a little freaky to see transcripts with all "A"s and "A+"s for a student? I would wonder if that person had a "life" and if they might implode at the next level of coursework if things went less than perfectly.

Or it could be that you went to a school with massive grade inflation like Harvard.
 
  • #7
Apparently I have heard some cases of employers turning down people with high cGPAs as those people might be sound technically and expert in their field, they do not have what is demanded by employers of today: communication skills, confidence, man-management and temperament
 
  • #8
That sounds silly. Why would a B student have better communications skills than an A student?
 
  • #9
FAlonso said:
Apparently I have heard some cases of employers turning down people with high cGPAs as those people might be sound technically and expert in their field, they do not have what is demanded by employers of today: communication skills, confidence, man-management and temperament

Vanadium 50 said:
That sounds silly. Why would a B student have better communications skills than an A student?

I agree with Vanadium.

Why would an employer use grades to determine communication skills? This is what interviews are for.
 
  • #10
GPA is not everything.

However, all else equal, higher GPA is always better than lower GPA.

All else is never equal though.
 
  • #11
Vanadium 50 said:
That sounds silly. Why would a B student have better communications skills than an A student?

An A student can easily cheat the system. I see it all the time.
 
  • #12
Also I've heard of perfect A students speaking of a pressure vector. High grades doesn't mean you know everything, it just means you know how to pass a test expertly.
 
  • #13
Also I've heard of perfect A students speaking of a pressure vector. High grades doesn't mean you know everything, it just means you know how to pass a test expertly.
Your username fits this... viscosity. Haha.

I have no idea how admissions committees look at these things, but if I were on one, I might be slightly biased against students with flawless grades, worrying how they might fare at the next level. I guess that's what the essays sort out.
Yeah. Grade inflation is a common problem, but as long as you have a high, consistent GPA...
 
  • #14
So you're arguing that grades are reliably and negatively correlated with achievement? Hmmm...
 
  • #15
If I were in admissions, I wouldn't shy away from students with all A's. It might be a sign that they weren't sufficiently challenged in their previous course-work, or maybe that they really buckled down and learned the material as well as the instructors demanded. Either way, they deserve a shot. If they go through some shock early on and start to melt down from increased demands, that can be addressed.

My friend and I both had a few B's and B+'s in HS but she and I tested above the top 99.5 percentile on our SATs. We were not the Valedictorian or Salutatorian of our class, either. Top honors went to my cousin, who was a really hard working young lady and was a perfectionist in school. Second place went to a nice lady who was in the business track. It's hard to compare typing, bookkeeping, stenography, etc, one-to-one with technical courses in the science track. Still, she earned the grades and earned the honor, and she and my cousin had to to write and present speeches at graduation. My friend and I dodged a bullet. I had to say a few words while collecting an award for participating in more extra-curricular activities than anybody else in my class but that was a piece of cake.
 
  • #16
This sounds stupid. I love math and sciences and I enjoy solving problems. This is my life. You have to have hobbies outside your expertise to have a so-called 'life' is the most stupid cliche.
 
  • #17
R.P.F. said:
This sounds stupid. I love math and sciences and I enjoy solving problems. This is my life. You have to have hobbies outside your expertise to have a so-called 'life' is the most stupid cliche.

Good point. Social norm. But does your statement imply that you would in a room for 18 hours 7 days a week?
 
  • #18
Vanadium 50 said:
That sounds silly. Why would a B student have better communications skills than an A student?

Because the B student spent time outside the classroom writing poetry.

I'll let others talk about graduate admissions committees, but I do know first hand that employers are a little worried about people with GPA's that are too high, because it suggests that they might focus too much on classes and not on things that aren't graded.

One other difference is that most managers are people that don't have perfect GPA's so that having perfect GPA's is not something that gets you much respect in industry.
 
  • #19
twofish-quant said:
Or it could be that you went to a school with massive grade inflation like Harvard.

I was a grad student at Yale, which I think has average grades about the same as Harvard. I taught undergraduate labs (to premeds), graded the work, and recommended final grades. Although the grades I recommended were very high, the thing was that most of these students really were very good students. In most cases, there was essentially nothing being taught in the course that they didn't master, and they basically never did anything major that was incorrect in their written work. The Ivy League isn't like it was back when Bush went to Yale. Admissions standards are extremely high.
 
  • #20
I'm not so sure there's a real difference between a 4.0 student and a 3.9 student.
 
  • #21
Vanadium 50 said:
So you're arguing that grades are reliably and negatively correlated with achievement? Hmmm...

It would be interesting to do a statistical study of people's undergraduate grades and outcomes after getting their Ph.D., but personally, I can tell you that I've had a much easier time in industry because of things that lowered my GPA in college.

I'd expect zero correlation, but it wouldn't surprise me if the correlation was negative.
 
  • #22
bcrowell said:
I was a grad student at Yale, which I think has average grades about the same as Harvard. I taught undergraduate labs (to premeds), graded the work, and recommended final grades. Although the grades I recommended were very high, the thing was that most of these students really were very good students. In most cases, there was essentially nothing being taught in the course that they didn't master, and they basically never did anything major that was incorrect in their written work.

I've had experience at both Harvard and UTexas Austin. The thing about UTexas Austin (at least when I was a TA there, I hope it has changed) was that you had very good students also, but there weren't enough upper class places for all of the people taking physics, so the lower division courses graded extremely harshly in order to weed out students, and the attrition rate was extremely high. Part of the way you did this was to set up the tests so that silly minor mistakes could kill you on the tests, and there were students that got "weeded out" at UTexas physics that I thought would have done just fine at MIT or Harvard.

One thing that the professors at MIT did which I thought was a great thing but which would get you screamed at in some places is that they generally put problems on the final exam that were not covered in class. The philosophy was that "life gives you problems that we didn't cover in lecture, and so will we." That sort of thinking (which I think is great) would get you in trouble at UTAustin and at least with the courses that I took at Harvard as well.

This insures that no one got anywhere near 100% on the tests, but then the final grades were scaled so that you ended up with reasonable GPA's. Also the way that tests at MIT were graded was pretty good. You got lots of points off if you missed the concept, but you got few points off if you "got it" but just did something stupid. The consequence of this is that you cannot machine grade tests, because you need someone that is pretty skilled to figure out what the student was doing. Hand grading is extremely time consuming, but people at MIT thought this was vital enough so that you had to hand grade the tests. Once you start machine grading tests, then what happens it that you end up playing a game of "gotcha."

Curiously machine grading is something that the University of Phoenix does not do, for the same reasons.

Something that I find interesting is that how you grade is part of the "hidden curriculum". There is a very deep and (I think wonderful) philosophical message in how MIT grades that makes it different from how Harvard grades. One thing that makes it really interesting is that it's "tacit knowledge." People are used to a given grading system and they assume that how the world works and they don't think very deeply into how that system works, and the "deep philosophy" that is embedded in the system.
 
Last edited:
  • #23
Also part of the reason I happen to believe that "grades aren't that important" is that I got that philosophy from some of my teachers both in high school and at MIT. The problem with that philosophy is that it got me into the meat grinder. Grading policy at MIT is something that people have screamed about since 1861, and the people that I was strongly influenced by were what I called "new school" people in the Office of Undergraduate Education (the names there are Benke, Paul Gray, and Margaret Macvicar) that had a very different philosophy than the "old school" people that ran the departments.

I was very strongly influenced by "new school" people but "old school" run the graduate admissions so the fact that I had relatively low GPA meant that I wasn't able to get into graduate schools that I wanted to. On the other hand because of that background, I think I've done better after I got my Ph.D. so if I had to talk to a younger me (which is what I'm doing now), then I'd give "new school" advice.
 
  • #24
Thanks for starting this thread MIH :)
bcrowell said:
The Ivy League isn't like it was back when Bush went to Yale. Admissions standards are extremely high.

:rofl:
 
  • #25
jwxie said:
Good point. Social norm. But does your statement imply that you would in a room for 18 hours 7 days a week?

Hmmm...I'd say 14 hours a day during school years. It is a lot but that's how I function.
 
  • #26
One other thing that causes problems is *defining* achievement. In a lot of places GPA *defines* achievement, so there is a 100% correlation between GPA and achievement.

The problem is that if you define achievement another way, then the correlation is different. Even the act of defining achievement in a way that is mathematically quantifiable restricts you.

For example, one thing that is important for my definition of achievement is "not being a jerk." How do you put a number to that?
 
  • #27
One other thing. I said that Harvard inflates grades. I didn't say that it was a bad thing. Personally, I think it's good that Harvard does that because it helps makes grades a bogus measurement.

Something that I would like to do one day is to teach a class, and tell everyone on the first day that they all get A's. They can leave the class, do nothing, and they will get an A+. Heck if they want, I'll give them an A++++++

Of course, everyone knows that they will all get A's which makes that A totally meaningless. Anyone that stays around and tries to earn an A that they get automatically are the people that I want to teach.
 
  • #28
Vanadium 50 said:
That sounds silly. Why would a B student have better communications skills than an A student?

The A student could just be a good test taker...

Also your question seems silly itself btw, I am more articulate and write better than most of my fellow students in my engineering classes but quite a few score higher than me in exams.
 
  • #29
lisab said:
I'm not so sure there's a real difference between a 4.0 student and a 3.9 student.

It's a slippery slope you slip, I can argue that your'e not so sure there's a big diff between 3.9 student and a 3.8 student... and we all know how this all ends in.
 
  • #30
twofish-quant said:
Because the B student spent time outside the classroom writing poetry.

Or went out binge-drinking. Or was in bed with mono. Or simply got unlucky with exam schedules, and had to take three big ones on the same day. One B can make the difference between a 3.9 and a 4.0, and is well within the bounds of the "**** just happens" factor. By extension, the suggestion that the 4.0 student is more likely to have better/worse communication skills than the 3.9 student is only slightly less absurd than the notion of 4.0 students being better/worse accordion players.
 
  • #31
twofish-quant said:
Because the B student spent time outside the classroom writing poetry.
See, now I think you're just being contrarian. Sure, maybe some B student did spend time outside the classroom writing poetry, but that doesn't imply that B students are better prepared for life (or whatever standard you're trying to measure them up to) than A students. It's great that it worked out so well for you, but now you're making it seems like by definition A students are worse than those with B's.
clope023 said:
The A student could just be a good test taker...

Also your question seems silly itself btw, I am more articulate and write better than most of my fellow students in my engineering classes but quite a few score higher than me in exams.
You haven't answered his question, though.

And really, some of you are now making it seem as if it's the admission committee's task to try and come up with as many "excuses" for those A students performing well as they can, and then when they do, experience that "gotcha!" moment and adamantly refuse to let a "good test taker" into their school. This is getting ridiculous.

What boggles my mind most, though, is the fact that all of you are or striving to be scientists. If these inferences and conclusions are based on logic employed in science, then slap me silly and call me Sandy.
 
  • #32
Leveret said:
Or went out binge-drinking. Or was in bed with mono. Or simply got unlucky with exam schedules, and had to take three big ones on the same day. One B can make the difference between a 3.9 and a 4.0, and is well within the bounds of the "**** just happens" factor. By extension, the suggestion that the 4.0 student is more likely to have better/worse communication skills than the 3.9 student is only slightly less absurd than the notion of 4.0 students being better/worse accordion players.
I happened to have mono and bronchichitis back-to-back and missed more that a months worth of class-work, but did my best to catch up and ended up with better than a B. Not bad for a challenging engineering school with a 5-year pulp and paper scholarship in the works.
 
  • #33
Let's see I got 100% in Calc II from last term even though I've made mistakes on the exams, but my professor handed out 100% to a few others who score well on it so that worries me because I feel that "100%s" tels them that it was a breeze course. So i think a 99% would've probably looked nicer
 
  • #34
flyingpig said:
Let's see I got 100% in Calc II from last term even though I've made mistakes on the exams, but my professor handed out 100% to a few others who score well on it so that worries me because I feel that "100%s" tels them that it was a breeze course. So i think a 99% would've probably looked nicer

But the percentage doesn't even show up on the transcript, does it? I haven't checked mine recently, but I could've sworn it only had letters, not percents...
 
  • #35
flyingpig said:
Let's see I got 100% in Calc II from last term even though I've made mistakes on the exams, but my professor handed out 100% to a few others who score well on it so that worries me because I feel that "100%s" tels them that it was a breeze course. So i think a 99% would've probably looked nicer

Even if the actual percentage did show up on your transcript (which, in concurrence with cjl, I have never heard of), it seems very unlikely that a grad school or possible employer would know how many other people got 100%. Not only would the other 100%-scorers have to apply to the same place at the same time, but whoever was reading the transcripts would have to somehow know that you took the class at the same time, with the same professor, and then notice how many of you got 100%. And even then, there would be no way of knowing whether it was an easy class, or if several excellent students had just happened to apply to the same place. All-in-all, there are too many farfetched "if"s to bother worrying about such a scenario.
 
<h2>1. Is a perfect GPA necessary for success in industry?</h2><p>No, a perfect GPA is not necessary for success in industry. While having a high GPA can be beneficial, it is not the only factor that determines success in the workforce. Employers also consider a candidate's experience, skills, and personal qualities.</p><h2>2. Will a low GPA prevent me from getting a job in industry?</h2><p>Having a low GPA may make it more difficult to secure a job in industry, but it is not impossible. Employers may also consider other factors such as relevant experience, internships, and extracurricular activities. It is important to showcase your strengths and skills in other areas to compensate for a lower GPA.</p><h2>3. How much does GPA matter in the hiring process for industry jobs?</h2><p>The importance of GPA in the hiring process varies depending on the industry and the specific company. Some industries may place a higher emphasis on academic performance, while others may prioritize practical skills and experience. It is important to research the company and industry you are interested in to understand their hiring criteria.</p><h2>4. Can a high GPA guarantee success in the industry?</h2><p>No, a high GPA does not guarantee success in the industry. While it may open some doors and make the job search easier, success in the workforce also depends on other factors such as networking, communication skills, and ability to adapt to new situations. A high GPA is just one aspect of a successful career.</p><h2>5. Are there any benefits to having a perfect GPA in the industry?</h2><p>Having a perfect GPA may demonstrate your dedication and hard work, which can be seen as a positive quality by employers. It may also open up opportunities for scholarships, internships, and graduate programs. However, it is not a determining factor for success in the industry and should not be the sole focus of a career.</p>

1. Is a perfect GPA necessary for success in industry?

No, a perfect GPA is not necessary for success in industry. While having a high GPA can be beneficial, it is not the only factor that determines success in the workforce. Employers also consider a candidate's experience, skills, and personal qualities.

2. Will a low GPA prevent me from getting a job in industry?

Having a low GPA may make it more difficult to secure a job in industry, but it is not impossible. Employers may also consider other factors such as relevant experience, internships, and extracurricular activities. It is important to showcase your strengths and skills in other areas to compensate for a lower GPA.

3. How much does GPA matter in the hiring process for industry jobs?

The importance of GPA in the hiring process varies depending on the industry and the specific company. Some industries may place a higher emphasis on academic performance, while others may prioritize practical skills and experience. It is important to research the company and industry you are interested in to understand their hiring criteria.

4. Can a high GPA guarantee success in the industry?

No, a high GPA does not guarantee success in the industry. While it may open some doors and make the job search easier, success in the workforce also depends on other factors such as networking, communication skills, and ability to adapt to new situations. A high GPA is just one aspect of a successful career.

5. Are there any benefits to having a perfect GPA in the industry?

Having a perfect GPA may demonstrate your dedication and hard work, which can be seen as a positive quality by employers. It may also open up opportunities for scholarships, internships, and graduate programs. However, it is not a determining factor for success in the industry and should not be the sole focus of a career.

Similar threads

  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • STEM Academic Advising
2
Replies
37
Views
6K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
18
Views
5K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
18
Views
10K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
3
Views
2K
Back
Top