All of the above is GREAT advice (with the only caveat being that I don’t know anything about the Aussie education/teaching system).
I’d add: nose around for info about prospective grad schools for the lowdown on how important the GRE is and which categories they really care about. I put myself through study Hell and spent big tutoring $ only to find out that the school I got into could give a shit less about the GRE and, to a lesser degree, undergrad GPA. Basically, letters of rec from well/semi-known faculty were the key (and in the literature field this means known by twenty-two people).
I love teaching but really, really hate grading. I find it burdensome and often an obstacle to really learning, especially for really bright students who are hyper-focused on achieving perfect grades rather than taking creative risks.
I’m going to have to disagree with GPA being unimportant simply because the last few times I filled out a job application online, they always asked what your GPA was.
Thing is a GPA is a number that can read and be evaluated on. Computers cant evaluate experience, character, personality, or work ethic and companies human resources departments dont know much better.
And being how computers are used to judge applicants, not people, I do think its possible that a COMPUTER might give a person with a high GPA a better job recommendation.
So I think it could be an issue for a person with a low GPA. Anything over a 3.0 though should be no problem.
Thats true. When I was in college I remember some students dropping out of difficult classes or classes with teachers they thought they would have trouble with simply because they didnt think they could get an A and would mess up their GPA.
As I said, every job application I’ve ever filled out always asked for your GPA. Now that wasnt such a big deal back in the days of paper applications but now that computers sort thru them, its entirely possible for the computer to judge people on GPA scores.
Whats really crazy is when they asked what your grades were back in high school.
I’m sure you’re right that some employers and HR departments probably do, in fact weed people out by GPA. I’d be willing to bet, though, that the GPA cut-off in those cases is not 4.0 or 3.9 or something like that, which is what this thread is about.
No-one has said that GPA is completely unimportant. What people in this thread have been saying is that a GPA that drops a little below 4.0, due to one or two slightly lower grades, is not important enough to worry about.
The OP asked specifically about GPA and grad school entry, and the people in this thread who have been saying not to worry about a slight drop in GPA have been talking about the way that graduate school admissions work.
Apart from all that, though, your comment is right on point.
I wonder if the OP maintains that great GPA in math classes?
Math question 1: The mean of Column A equals the mean of Column B (to two decimal places). True or false?
A B
4.0 4.0
4.0 4.0
4.0 4.0
4.0 4.0
4.0 4.0
4.0 3.7
Just because you are asked for your GPA doesn’t mean it’s weighted heavily in decision making.
E.g., I reviewed a huge number of applicants to grad school over the years. GPA was only one of several “minimum” cut factors. Got a sub-3.0 GPA? You’re in the junk pile.
Once you make it to the smallish pile, then the folder is studied carefully in full. A GPA could be used as a tie-breaker between two students, but ties don’t happen in real life situations like this.
Since this was Computer Science, it pretty much didn’t matter to employers what your GPA was. If you got the degree, you’ll get hired. Top students get better job offers, of course. But employers use info from faculty a lot to judge who the top students are. Grade-grubbers often don’t get good rec.s from faculty.
BTW: I don’t recall ever seeing, letting alone caring, about the GPA of a faculty applicant.
Multiple posters, people with experience not only of applying to and entering MA and PhD programs, but also, in some cases, of actually teaching at universities and evaluating graduate school applications, have told you that this is not something you need to worry about.
Get over it.
Also, it’s not just your university that does things this way. Almost every university that uses the GPA system distinguishes between an A and an A-. And very few universities have an A+ grade available.
If there were no distinction between A and A-, then we could reduce the whole grading system to five grades: A, B, C, D, F. I’m not sure whether that would make my life, as a faculty member, easier or more difficult.
Well why didn’t you say so!
I know some folks who teach university-level Communications. One of the most important tests they give their grad school candidates is to hold a mirror up to their face. If the candidate fogs the mirror, he or she is admitted, usually on a full scholarship. If it’s a tie-breaker between two students, they move on the to walking-and-chewing-gum test.
It’s weird that you have/had a 4.0 GPA but haven’t talked to anyone or done the requisite research to realize that a 3.98 v. 4.0 is meaningless. This includes PhD programs, who are more likely to admit a student with a 3.9 and strong recommendations and research under their belt than a 4.0 student with nothing else to show. At my university, students with 3.8+ consistently get into top PhD programs in both STEM and non-STEM disciplines.
I also agree with other posters that this just seems like an unnecessary humblebrag.
Well as I’ve said I have no experience in academia but it sounds like in your situation its actually an informed human who makes the decision whereas in applying for a job with a company when they get thousands of applications, then its a computer which decides. Computers look for code words and numbers. Even human resource staff are clueless about what the job actually requires.
We ask for transcripts mainly to ensure candidates have taken the requisite grad courses to teach in their area. I glance at the GPA and would certainly question and most likely weed out sustained poor performance in school, but teaching experience and “fit” are more important in so many ways.
I’m at a community college, so YMMV. My doc is from U of California. Speaking of which: OP, make sure you’ve researched job opportunities and salary before committing to a graduate comm degree. If you’re considering teaching in higher ed you may be doomed to adjunct forever and ever; the job situation in English/lit/cultural studies/history is really dire – very few folks with terminal degrees in their fields will ever land a tenured position. We hire adjuncts with doctorates earned at Princeton, Yale, Harvard, Cornell, UPenn, and Oxford who can’t land a full-time teaching position. Not that having an Ivy degree makes one a better teacher-scholar, but it does speak to the lousy faculty market.
FWIW, my research was accepted for presentation at the conference that I mentioned in the OP, so I will be presenting there in a few weeks.
How will the fact that I, as an undergraduate, am presenting a paper to a conference be seen to grad school admissions officers (especially in light of my sub-perfect 3.98 GPA)?
Presenting the research paper will probably be a mark in your favor, depending on the nature of the conference. I’m not sure how it is in your field, but in mine, some conferences are very selective and only admit a certain number of presenters, while others basically allow anyone who applies to present a paper.
As for the presentation “in light of” your GPA, if you’d actually read and paid attention to any of the goddamn answers you’ve already been given in this thread, you would already know that your “sub-perfect” GPA will NOT FUCKING MATTER on your grad school applications.
All you’re doing now is humble-bragging, if that isn’t what you were already doing in the OP.
You won’t get in anywhere. The A- has ruined your chances. Even a letter of recommendation from the most recent Nobel Prize winner in Communications won’t get you funding now. It’s horribly unfair, because there’s no reason a lower grade should harm your GPA.
Feel better now that someone’s finally broke from the crowd and said that?
Just gave this lecture today (first day of design class). My background is Creative Director for major Ad Agencies. As I told my students (many working on their second degree): You are going into a field where no one cares what piece of paper or grade point you have.
I interviewed hundreds of media and design professionals. I hired pH.D.'s (a couple from Ivy League schools even!) and some great kids with an Associate’s degree from a tech school in the Midwest.
It was pure selfishness. I didn’t care about your resumé, I cared what you could DO. For me, for us, for our clients.
As for my boss (the owner), he wanted to know if you “could hit the ground running” (vs needing expensive training). And if you were “a team player” (vs “a Prima Donna”, a sure way to not get hired).
Being focussed on your grade point and frustrated with imperfection… might put you firmly in the Prima Donna category.
His only hope is to get an A+++ that you can only earn by correctly answering the question that that got cut off by the copying machine.
No it won’t hurt, but sounds like you need a Devil’s Advocate. Okay. Why do you say in the OP that you are the sole author on this presentation? The number of authors is neither a good or a bad thing, but I’d ask why your advisor doesn’t want their name on there.
Thought: do you need an advanced degree to do what you really want?
That “What you can DO” thing worked for me… no one cared that I had a BS in Biology from a minor college, and no training in being an Art Director whatsoever. But I worked on a fun portfolio of what I could do if I had a chance.
Always meant to go back and get a degree in the field, but I was learning much more on the job.
All that jawing I was doing was from the perspective of a Creative Director who’s now a community college instructor. Granted, it’s one of the most respected programs in the country, but they aren’t obsessed about your degree.
In the Graphic Design and Visual Communications programs, we have ZERO instructors with pH.D.'s, a few with MAs, and twenty or so with undergrad degrees. BUT half of all those degrees are, like mine, in “unrelated fields”. Oh, our Lead Teacher/Assoc. Dean has an AA.
So don’t kill yourself. This isn’t some big competition with yourself or others. You do not have to get the best degree from the best college. Figure out what you love, and find a way to do it.
No the computer doesn’t decide. All the computer will do is weed people out. If they filter out everyone who didn’t have a 4.0 GPA back in college then you don’t want to work there anyway, because they’re fucking crazy.
Nobody is weeding out resumes based on GPA, because that’s stupid. All they care about your academic record is that you graduated from such and such a place with such and such a degree, and that’s only if the job requirement specifies a particular degree.
Now, back to the OP. You know how some of the commenters here would worry about someone with a perfect 4.0? That the person would be too brittle? Unwilling to challenge themselves, unwilling to take risks, unable to accept the possibility of failure?
Based on how you’ve come across in this thread, that’s exactly you. You got an A- in one class, and you’ve gone into a spiral. But as all the academics have told you in this thread, much more important than your grades are your interactions with your professors. Can you get recommendations from them? What do they think of you? Do they think you’re obsessed with getting a good grade, or are you interested in learning? If you’re going into academia an ability to have a collegial relationship with your fellow academics is much more important than some outside metric of your performance.
Getting into a PhD program and completing it are highly depended on your relationship with the person who is going to sponsor you. It’s not something that can be achieved by performance of a task up to some objective standard metric. So you’ve got to stop thinking this way if you really intend to continue in academia.
