Help for Senior Aerospace Engineering Student - Graduate School & Job Search

Click For Summary
A senior aerospace engineering student at the University of Illinois is struggling to find a job due to a 2.9 GPA and lack of internship experience. The current job market is challenging, with many companies prioritizing experienced candidates, making it difficult for new graduates to secure positions. Graduate schools like the University of Maryland typically require a minimum GPA of 3.2, and applying to graduate school without a solid job offer is discouraged. The discussion emphasizes the importance of improving academic performance to enhance job prospects and competitiveness for graduate programs. Overall, the student is advised to focus on raising their GPA and exploring smaller aerospace companies outside Illinois.
markt11
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hi,
I'm a senior in Aerospace Engineering at University of Illinois. I wasn't able to get an internship over the summer and am having a hard time finding a job.
I have a 2.9/4.00GPA and most companies won't even call me back for an interview. I've already had my resume reviewed by my the career building office.
I'm sure I can bring it up to above a 3 by the end of this semester but don't know what to do.

If I can't find a job, I might apply for graduate school and see if I can get accepted anywhere. Looking at http://grad-schools.usnews.rankings...te-schools/top-engineering-schools/aerospace", what kind of GPA is Princeton or Univ of Maryland looking for? What other aerospace engineering graduate schools are there for students with below average GPA?

Also, how do I find smaller aerospace companies? I keep applying for jobs at larger companies (Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Northrop Grumman) because I can't find smaller companies. Illinois only has a couple of aerospace companies. I don't mind moving away from IL. I'm even willing to do an internship over the next summer. I feel stuck and don't know what else to try.

Thanks
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm not going to lie, a 2.9 GPA is very low and you will have a hard time getting into a top graduate school with it.

The reason why you're not getting jobs is because the economy tanked. I've been doing some work with Cessna and the person on the phone told me they had to lay off a lot of people there. So right now is an absolutely horrible time to find a job, especially when they are going to want to hire back the people with experience they had to lay off over hiring someone that's green.

UMD requires a 3.2 minimum, but that doesn't mean you'll be competitive or get in with that GPA. I had a 3.96 back when I applied. There are ways around the low GPA if you do the professional masters and try to switch in, but then whoever picks you up as an advisor will require that you get straight A's to stay on since you are high risk to them.

I will say that if you're only getting a 2.9 as an undergrad, graduate school is going to eat you alive.

Going to grad school becuase you can't get a job is a very bad reason to go to grad school.
 
Last edited:
Agreed. When I was applying for co-ops, many companies typically required a 3.0 for just an interview, most preferred higher. Undergraduate study is tricky because there is a lot of distractions and temptations, but if you want a decent crack at a job or graduate school, you'll want to try and get it up to at least a 3.3.
 
Out of interest, how many hours outside of classes were you studying to achieve such a GPA, Cyrus? (4 is the maximum everywhere, correct?)
 
srvs said:
Out of interest, how many hours outside of classes were you studying to achieve such a GPA, Cyrus? (4 is the maximum everywhere, correct?)

The answer is: As many hours as you require. I.e., I am not you and you're not me. Your probably much smarter than me and can do it in half the time. It matters what's right for *you*.
 
Thread 'General principle of turbomachinery: true also for rocket turbopumps?'
A rule of thumb of aircraft engineers is every 10% increase in the power level engines are run at corresponds to a 50% decrease in engine lifetime. This is a general phenomenon of turbomachinery. Then it is likely it also holds for rocket turbopumps. Then quite key is the rule also holds in reverse, every decrease in power level by 10% can result in doubling the lifetime of the engine. Then by running the engine at 0.9^5 = 0.60 power level can result in 2^5 = 32 times longer lifetime. For...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 80 ·
3
Replies
80
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
4K