Question about Grad Studies.

[Balain]

It is a little ways off, but Since I have returned to University I was thinking trying to get into Grad Studies might be an idea for me. My understanding (from years ago) you needed a GPA of 3 (on a scale of 4) My GPA for courses in my major is 3.85. How ever my average includes grades from when I was 18 and dumb, I never study, etc. This has brought my overall average to something like 2.4. If I continue my trend I should keep bringing my average up to about a 3.

My question is If I do decide to try to get into Grad Studies, do they just look at my overall average, or will they take into account many of those courses were taken 20+ years ago and my current GPA is much better?

I know it more than likely changes from school to school but just wanted to see what the general case would be.

[WarKitty]

What major are you? Here in the states it's typically decided program-by-program, and there are more considerations than just your GPA on paper. Most likely only your most recent GPA would count.

[Don Julio Anejo]

There's a very good chance they won't look at anything past 5 (10) years ago. Also, think whether going to grad school will in any way increase your earning power. If it's something like an MBA, by all means, go for it. If it's liberal arts, you've never worked in them, don't have teaching credentials and have no intention of becoming a university prof (which usually entails a PhD and TA'ing for a number of years before you even get a chance), don't.

[noparlpf]

It is a little ways off, but Since I have returned to University I was thinking trying to get into Grad Studies might be an idea for me. My understanding (from years ago) you needed a GPA of 3 (on a scale of 4) My GPA for courses in my major is 3.85. How ever my average includes grades from when I was 18 and dumb, I never study, etc. This has brought my overall average to something like 2.4. If I continue my trend I should keep bringing my average up to about a 3.

My question is If I do decide to try to get into Grad Studies, do they just look at my overall average, or will they take into account many of those courses were taken 20+ years ago and my current GPA is much better?

I know it more than likely changes from school to school but just wanted to see what the general case would be.

Is it the same school you went to back then? If not, why do they even have your old grades? If so, why are they counting your old grades? That doesn't make much sense.

It probably varies from school to school, but I'm pretty sure my school's grad people look at your grades in your major and not so much at your grades in other classes, like mandatory general education requirements and whatnot. My school actually uses a "major GPA" for that. The Biochem advisor also told me that they'll tend to look at your individual classes more than what major you completed. But, if some of your old grades do count towards your major (like a C in say Bio 100 or something), depending on how your transcript displays that, they might not know. It might be worth pointing out somewhere in the application process that you went to school twenty years ago and didn't take it very seriously the first time through, and that your old grades are still showing up for whatever reason.

It's also worth considering whether grad school is the thing for you. What will it do for you? For example, my mother is back in grad school now to get a proper teaching degree because she's been teaching in private schools for ten years and wants more options.

[warty goblin]

There's a very good chance they won't look at anything past 5 (10) years ago. Also, think whether going to grad school will in any way increase your earning power. If it's something like an MBA, by all means, go for it. If it's liberal arts, you've never worked in them, don't have teaching credentials and have no intention of becoming a university prof (which usually entails a PhD and TA'ing for a number of years before you even get a chance), don't.

Actually at the moment, even if you want to teach humanities, don't. You'll spend five to eight years of your life working your ass off in poverty - if you're lucky enough to not be wracking up enormous debts at the same time. After that you'll fight like a starving wolf for one of the tiny number of decently paying tenure track positions that open up every year against hordes of equally qualified rivals, while surviving on minuscule wages as an adjunct professor. Where you will continue to work your ass off publishing a constant stream of papers so you can have a shot at those tenure track jobs.

And the best part is that you'll probably have a harder time getting a non-academic job than a lot of other people in the workforce.



Just don't do it.

[Balain]

I am going to the same school as 20 years ago. The reason they are still showing up is because they count towards my degree as options. They are courses I passed back then but barely. There were a couple of math courses also like that. Since they were required I wanted to take them over. The only way to do that was for them to remove the courses all together so it was like I never took them at all.

Normally your courses expire after 10 years so I figured I would have to start over. I found out that that is generally true, but it is up to each department to decide.

I in computer science and I know from working already that the grad studies isn't going to increase my earnings too much. I really do like being in academia though. The thought of trying to get a Phd and working in a university just sounds good to me. A friend had a prof that had something like 17 degrees. None of them honorary. He taught classes and kept taking other classes since he could take so many free each semester. Doing something like that just sounded assume to me.

[WarKitty]

A counterpoint: Yes, it's crazy from a financial perspective. But some of us are still happy doing it. There's more to life than money - if you're doing something you want to be doing it can be worth it. For all that I've been through with grad school, I don't regret being here, even knowing I could have a decent job and a stable place right now instead of barely-poverty wages and a lot of work.

It's your life. Sure, do the cost-benefit analysis, but realize that everyone has different costs and benefits. Me? I'm ok with money as long as I have a roof over my head and food on my table.

[noparlpf]

Just don't do it.

Most people who go in aiming to become teachers or professors aren't in it for the money, though. They do it because they love the subject and teaching it. People who go in aiming to become teachers and make money quickly change directions.


I am going to the same school as 20 years ago. The reason they are still showing up is because they count towards my degree as options. They are courses I passed back then but barely. There were a couple of math courses also like that. Since they were required I wanted to take them over. The only way to do that was for them to remove the courses all together so it was like I never took them at all.

Normally your courses expire after 10 years so I figured I would have to start over. I found out that that is generally true, but it is up to each department to decide.

I in computer science and I know from working already that the grad studies isn't going to increase my earnings too much. I really do like being in academia though. The thought of trying to get a Phd and working in a university just sounds good to me. A friend had a prof that had something like 17 degrees. None of them honorary. He taught classes and kept taking other classes since he could take so many free each semester. Doing something like that just sounded assume to me.

Hm. Well, when you apply, add a note that you took x, y, z classes ten or twenty years ago and point out that your GPA this time around would have been 3.8+ without those old classes.

[Eldan]

What level is Grad studies, exactly? Your Master's? Your PhD?

[snoopy13a]

What level is Grad studies, exactly? Your Master's? Your PhD?

In North America, we use "grad studies" and "grad school" are general terms to describe studies after earning one's undergraduate degree. So, it could be a master's or a doctoral program. More rarely it means a professional program, but normally people refer to graduate-level professional programs by their particular field (e.g., medical school, law school) instead of the generic "grad school."

[warty goblin]

Most people who go in aiming to become teachers or professors aren't in it for the money, though. They do it because they love the subject and teaching it. People who go in aiming to become teachers and make money quickly change directions.


The job market for humanities Ph.Ds is so bad at this point, that it's fairly likely you can't even get a teaching job. And if you do it's likely to be part time, pay crap, and have little to no room for advancement. And if you ever do want to do something crazy like climb out of debt, or get off food stamps (http://chronicle.com/article/From-Graduate-School-to/131795/") or buy a house, good luck finding a job that actually pays a living wage.

Oh, and teaching? Trust me, the love fades when staring down the mound of compound human failure that is the weekly grading pile. But at some point it's literally the only vaguely marketable skill you've got left, so welcome to the rest of your life.


As I said, just don't. There are easier ways to be p grindingly poor.

[Jay R]

For the few universities that I know about, here's the general rule:

If your GPA and/or GRE (or equivalent test scores) are high enough, they won't look at anything else; they will admit you.

If your GPA and/or GRE or equivalent test scores are low enough, they won't look at anything lese; they will reject you.

But for the remaining 80%, they will look at everything and make a judgment call.

[warty goblin]

One handy thing to do when applying to grad schools is find a ranking of programs in your field of interest, then apply to a spectrum of them. This way you'll probably get in somewhere and aren't left high and dry.

I suspect that the granularity of the rankings vastly exceeds their precision; so the difference between school n and school n + 1 is generally zilch. But if you toss in a top ten, a couple top twenties, etc, you're going to capture some meaningful differences.

Also, if CS programs do offer funding, I recommend ignoring any acceptance letter that doesn't come with an assistantship offer. The ones that don't offer you money are letting you know they don't actually want you that badly. Go where they want you.

[WarKitty]

For the few universities that I know about, here's the general rule:

If your GPA and/or GRE (or equivalent test scores) are high enough, they won't look at anything else; they will admit you.

If your GPA and/or GRE or equivalent test scores are low enough, they won't look at anything lese; they will reject you.

But for the remaining 80%, they will look at everything and make a judgment call.

Depending on the section of grad school, the first might not even be true. I know in my field a perfect GRE won't earn you more than a "huh that's cool."

[SaintRidley]

Actually at the moment, even if you want to teach humanities, don't. You'll spend five to eight years of your life working your ass off in poverty - if you're lucky enough to not be wracking up enormous debts at the same time. After that you'll fight like a starving wolf for one of the tiny number of decently paying tenure track positions that open up every year against hordes of equally qualified rivals, while surviving on minuscule wages as an adjunct professor. Where you will continue to work your ass off publishing a constant stream of papers so you can have a shot at those tenure track jobs.

And the best part is that you'll probably have a harder time getting a non-academic job than a lot of other people in the workforce.



Just don't do it.

Unless it's something you feel you just have to do. Couldn't shoo me away from my current PhD studies if you waved a boat full of money in my general direction, they're that important to me.

But yeah, if you aren't getting paid to go to grad school, it's probably not worth the time and expenditure, because it's just too expensive otherwise - and that goes for nearly every field.

[Don Julio Anejo]

Unless it's something you feel you just have to do. Couldn't shoo me away from my current PhD studies if you waved a boat full of money in my general direction, they're that important to me.
Depending on your field, this may entirely change when you can get a better job at Starbucks for $10/hour making fake lattes if only because hours are more stable, than a teaching job in your field. That's the problem with humanities. On the other hand, ignore everything I just said if your field is, say, biochem. Or, computer science, where some of the highest paid non-coders don't even have a degree, but rather lots of experience.

But yeah, if you aren't getting paid to go to grad school, it's probably not worth the time and expenditure, because it's just too expensive otherwise - and that goes for nearly every field.
Depends. If you get a PhD in biochemistry, for instance, your earning potential immediately doubles (with a BSc you're not looking at more than $50k a year with significant experience and $35k to start), if only because a PhD is a piece of paper that says you can design and carry out your own research instead of having to be babysat. On the other hand, you may have to move cross-country for each new job since by the time you get a PhD, you're going to be so specialized, there's maybe a few people doing that exact thing in each city you're in.

[snoopy13a]

Depends. If you get a PhD in biochemistry, for instance, your earning potential immediately doubles (with a BSc you're not looking at more than $50k a year with significant experience and $35k to start), if only because a PhD is a piece of paper that says you can design and carry out your own research instead of having to be babysat. On the other hand, you may have to move cross-country for each new job since by the time you get a PhD, you're going to be so specialized, there's maybe a few people doing that exact thing in each city you're in.

I don't know.

A biochemistry PhD probably has to do a post-doc before getting a job in academia or entering the private sector. I don't believe post-doc make much more than a grad student's stipend. Even if you get a tenure-track job in academia, it has the publish or perish aspect--especially in the sciences where obtaining research grants is so important. Private sector is also sink-or-swim.

I used to work in a NIH-grant supported laboratory. Anyway, some of people I'd call for customer support at the biochemistry companies were PhDs. To be frank, answering questions from a 22-year-old lab tech about some antibody was probably not what those people had in mind when they entered grad school.

[warty goblin]

I don't know.

A biochemistry PhD probably has to do a post-doc before getting a job in academia or entering the private sector. I don't believe post-doc make much more than a grad student's stipend. Even if you get a tenure-track job in academia, it has the publish or perish aspect--especially in the sciences where obtaining research grants is so important. Private sector is also sink-or-swim.

Sure, but what fields out there aren't sink or swim*? That's just how careers work. Grad school isn't the ticket to easy street. It's a hell of a lot of work, the jobs you get afterwards are at least as much work, and probably more. But it has the potential to be interesting work, and in fields where the market isn't so overcrowded it doesn't have to come with terrible jobs and insultingly bad pay.

*Below the Vice President level that is. At some point in major corporations people don't get fired, they just get paid a lot to not do anything anybody actually cares about.