gpa a factor after graduation?

[sibersmith]

Hey guys it's me again.

How big of a factor is GPA in getting a good aerospace job at a cool
company? The line "...Do good in school" is always given in advice
when I was growing up. To tell the truth I was holding a decent
3.3gpa untill I hit my math sequence at college. Now I have no more
'breeze' classes (history etc) to prop up my gpa and it's killing me.
I'm problobly around a 2.3 now.

This really bums me out. I went into Aerospace cause I wanted the job
of my dreams designing aircraft. Nobodys gona hire a medocree looser
that doesn't excell in math.

So how Important is a good GPA when looking for a job?

[Peter Stickney]

In article >,
(sibersmith) writes:
> Hey guys it's me again.
>
> How big of a factor is GPA in getting a good aerospace job at a cool
> company? The line "...Do good in school" is always given in advice
> when I was growing up. To tell the truth I was holding a decent
> 3.3gpa untill I hit my math sequence at college. Now I have no more
> 'breeze' classes (history etc) to prop up my gpa and it's killing me.
> I'm problobly around a 2.3 now.
>
> This really bums me out. I went into Aerospace cause I wanted the job
> of my dreams designing aircraft. Nobodys gona hire a medocree looser
> that doesn't excell in math.
>
> So how Important is a good GPA when looking for a job?

Well, having done both the Good GPA thing, and the Bad GPA thing, it's
always better to go for the Good GPA. But don't take that as a sign
of failure. You're young yet - it looks monstrous now, but, if you
can make the right decisions, it's a hiccup rather than a barrier.
It's all in how you handle it.

Think of it as a test of haw hard you want to follow that path.
You've got a wide range of options available to you - you can take
classes again, find tutoring sessions, ask for assistance, and
otherwise concentrate your efforts in areas where you need to get up
to speed. Are you committed to some sort of timetable for graduation?
Stretching things out a bit might help.
It can be done, it you're committed enough, and push hard enough.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

[Tarver Engineering]

"sibersmith" > wrote in message
...
> Hey guys it's me again.
>
> How big of a factor is GPA in getting a good aerospace job at a cool
> company? The line "...Do good in school" is always given in advice
> when I was growing up. To tell the truth I was holding a decent
> 3.3gpa untill I hit my math sequence at college. Now I have no more
> 'breeze' classes (history etc) to prop up my gpa and it's killing me.
> I'm problobly around a 2.3 now.
>
> This really bums me out. I went into Aerospace cause I wanted the job
> of my dreams designing aircraft. Nobodys gona hire a medocree looser
> that doesn't excell in math.
>
> So how Important is a good GPA when looking for a job?

If you had dragged down your gpa with general ed you might have some wiggle
room, but all those cs and ds in math and engineering courses probably mean
you should look outside engineering for a job.

[Tex Houston]

"sibersmith" > wrote in message
...
> This really bums me out. I went into Aerospace cause I wanted the job
> of my dreams designing aircraft. Nobodys gona hire a medocree looser
> that doesn't excell in math.
>
> So how Important is a good GPA when looking for a job?

If this is an example of your work you might put in some extra hours of
study in English. Just using a spellchecker would help.

This is not a criticism per se but is given to you to show that the whole
package is important. Peter's advice is very sound. That said, are you
planning to design military aircraft?

Tex Houston

[Ralph Savelsberg]

sibersmith wrote:

> Hey guys it's me again.
>
> How big of a factor is GPA in getting a good aerospace job at a cool
> company? The line "...Do good in school" is always given in advice
> when I was growing up. To tell the truth I was holding a decent
> 3.3gpa untill I hit my math sequence at college. Now I have no more
> 'breeze' classes (history etc) to prop up my gpa and it's killing me.
> I'm problobly around a 2.3 now.
>
> This really bums me out. I went into Aerospace cause I wanted the job
> of my dreams designing aircraft. Nobodys gona hire a medocree looser
> that doesn't excell in math.
>
> So how Important is a good GPA when looking for a job?
>

I don't know about the US practice when it comes to GPAs, but learning
to do math well isn't any different in the US than anywhere else.
Being good at math is not just a question of having a `knack' for it or
not. There is a lot you can do about your ability to comprehend and do
math by working really hard. Learning to do math at a high level simply
takes a lot of hard work (except for super geniuses, and there aren't
too many of those). Talk to people about the math problems you have
difficulty with. Spend a lot of time in the library. If your lecture
notes aren't clear enough, try to learn more about the problem by
looking at other textbooks. Prepare well _before_ you go to a lecture or
class, and of course practice, practice practice. There is no such thing
as doing too many exercises.

Regards,
Ralph Savelsberg

[Tarver Engineering]

"Tex Houston" > wrote in message
...
>
> "sibersmith" > wrote in message
> ...
> > This really bums me out. I went into Aerospace cause I wanted the job
> > of my dreams designing aircraft. Nobodys gona hire a medocree looser
> > that doesn't excell in math.
> >
> > So how Important is a good GPA when looking for a job?
>
> If this is an example of your work you might put in some extra hours of
> study in English. Just using a spellchecker would help.

Nope, the low math grades pretty well disqualify him from engineering.
There are plenty of places where he could make a good living with the 2.3,
however. The only thing that would help is if he is one of those "worked
through school". If family paid, or there were loans, forget engineering.

> This is not a criticism per se but is given to you to show that the whole
> package is important. Peter's advice is very sound. That said, are you
> planning to design military aircraft?

Peter has no clue at all.

[OXMORON1]

Who was it woh said..."The world is run by C students" or something to that
effect?

Oxmoron1

[Tarver Engineering]

"OXMORON1" > wrote in message
...
> Who was it woh said..."The world is run by C students" or something to
that
> effect?

C students that worked their way through school often lack the time to pull
good grades, but know how to work. The ability to work can cause an
employeer to soon forget about gpa.

[James Cho]

As important as High School GPA is in being accepted to colleges, from
what I've heard. A Career Services person here at ERAU said that an
LM guy in charge of hiring looks for at least a 3.0 GPA, and prefers
at least 3.3.

[Tarver Engineering]

"James Cho" > wrote in message
om...
> As important as High School GPA is in being accepted to colleges, from
> what I've heard. A Career Services person here at ERAU said that an
> LM guy in charge of hiring looks for at least a 3.0 GPA, and prefers
> at least 3.3.

That way LM gets all white collar type engineers, none of whom have ever
worked. This can be problematic in aerospace, as piloting is an inherently
blue collar activity. (ie operating equipment)

[Buzzer]

On 20 Nov 2003 23:05:00 -0800, (sibersmith)
wrote:

>Hey guys it's me again.
>
>How big of a factor is GPA in getting a good aerospace job at a cool
>company? The line "...Do good in school" is always given in advice
>when I was growing up. To tell the truth I was holding a decent
>3.3gpa untill I hit my math sequence at college. Now I have no more
>'breeze' classes (history etc) to prop up my gpa and it's killing me.
>I'm problobly around a 2.3 now.
>
>This really bums me out. I went into Aerospace cause I wanted the job
>of my dreams designing aircraft. Nobodys gona hire a medocree looser
>that doesn't excell in math.
>
>So how Important is a good GPA when looking for a job?

The truth hurts...
Don't bother filling out an application for Boeing. It will just go in
the recycle dumpster. You are down so low now even changing to a BA
will not help getting a job anywhere near aviation except as a guard
or working on the night cleanup crew - maybe.
How about an aviation tech school/line mechanic school or finish any
degree and go into the miitary? Or just jump in the military, Air
Force preferred, and get your head screwed on straight. In twenty
years I knew 5 people that made it from enlisted to officer. Well one
at least almost made officer. He turned down the commission because he
was already a SMSgt at 13 years and didn't want to start over at the
bottom again..

[Ed Rasimus]

On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 10:02:55 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
> wrote:

>
>"James Cho" > wrote in message
om...
>> As important as High School GPA is in being accepted to colleges, from
>> what I've heard. A Career Services person here at ERAU said that an
>> LM guy in charge of hiring looks for at least a 3.0 GPA, and prefers
>> at least 3.3.
>
>That way LM gets all white collar type engineers, none of whom have ever
>worked. This can be problematic in aerospace, as piloting is an inherently
>blue collar activity. (ie operating equipment)
>

There was an old saying in the military, "if the minimum weren't good
enough, it wouldn't be the minimum." I'll confess, reluctantly, to
graduating from college with a 2.01 GPA (2.00 required for
graduation.) All I needed was an undergrad degree to get a commission
and got to USAF pilot training. (That was when there were a lot of
requirements and a low number of qualified candidates--the situation
is reversed today.)

I'll add, however, that once given the opportunity to compete, then
job performance becomes a big factor. When I got the chance, unlikely
as it might have seemed based on my undergrad performance, to go to
graduate school, I got serious. 4.0 for first MS, 3.95 for second.

Pilots, despite what engineer Tarver says, are inherently systems
managers, not blue collar equipment operators. While I was at
Northrop, the ex-mil aviators on the payroll where definitely "white
collar". The engineers were more rumpled polyester double-knit, plaids
and stripes sort of Goodwill eclectic. Maybe it was because the SME
("Subject Matter Expert") category of employee got paid better than
the engineers.

Bottom line, however, is that when you come right out of college in a
competitive world, the recruiter has only limited info to base a
decision on. If there are a load of folks with no work experience,
qualified degrees, and not much more, then GPA is going to be
decisive. Higher will always be better than lower, even if that isn't
necesarily indictive of potential.

You've got to get hired first before you can demonstrate your
creativity, tenaciousness, management skill and dependability.

[WaltBJ]

Having been connected with airline training and selection in the past
- here goes. All the job applicants look alike. Clean, neat, dark
suit, sober ties, polished shoes, haircuts, mostly college grads, so
what is left? GPA is one of the distinguishing factors. Another factor
is 'desire to fly'. I recall one instance where two Ivy college grads
were rejected in favor of a comunity college (two year) grad simply
because the Ivy guys presented the attitude that they were doing the
compnay a favor in allowing themselves to be hired. OTH the 2-year kid
was like an eager puppy dog; he wanted to fly and exhibited the
willingness to take any flight anywhere any time in any conditions.
As for math - in my first attempt at college I never let homework take
precedence over sports and surfing . . . with predictable results.
Later on I discovered that if you ask questions and do the homework
college math is easy . . .Duh!
Walt BJ

[Tarver Engineering]

"Ed Rasimus" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 10:02:55 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"James Cho" > wrote in message
> om...
> >> As important as High School GPA is in being accepted to colleges, from
> >> what I've heard. A Career Services person here at ERAU said that an
> >> LM guy in charge of hiring looks for at least a 3.0 GPA, and prefers
> >> at least 3.3.
> >
> >That way LM gets all white collar type engineers, none of whom have ever
> >worked. This can be problematic in aerospace, as piloting is an
inherently
> >blue collar activity. (ie operating equipment)
> >
>
> There was an old saying in the military, "if the minimum weren't good
> enough, it wouldn't be the minimum." I'll confess, reluctantly, to
> graduating from college with a 2.01 GPA (2.00 required for
> graduation.) All I needed was an undergrad degree to get a commission
> and got to USAF pilot training. (That was when there were a lot of
> requirements and a low number of qualified candidates--the situation
> is reversed today.)
>
> I'll add, however, that once given the opportunity to compete, then
> job performance becomes a big factor. When I got the chance, unlikely
> as it might have seemed based on my undergrad performance, to go to
> graduate school, I got serious. 4.0 for first MS, 3.95 for second.
>
> Pilots, despite what engineer Tarver says, are inherently systems
> managers, not blue collar equipment operators.

In fact, under the law, pilots are equipment operators. An operator, as
legislated by the International Brotherhood of Operating Engineers.

>While I was at
> Northrop, the ex-mil aviators on the payroll where definitely "white
> collar".

A delusion only, as militry pilots are inherently blue collar and in the
times Ed pretends to recall were a majority physical education majors.
Definately neither educated as "white collar", or skilled as managers.

> The engineers were more rumpled polyester double-knit, plaids
> and stripes sort of Goodwill eclectic. Maybe it was because the SME
> ("Subject Matter Expert") category of employee got paid better than
> the engineers.

I go with levis and a Pendelton, most of the time.

As to the subject matter expert, the cocktail aviation circuit is pretty
well dead today. Although Keithie did comment to me on several ocasions
where Northrop, or the governemnt, had promoted a secretary to such a
position; based mostly on her ability to tie a knot in a cherry stem with
her tongue. The project manager for B-1 flight test was of that extraction.

[Ed Rasimus]

On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 11:40:56 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
> wrote:

>
>"Ed Rasimus" > wrote in message
...
>
>> There was an old saying in the military, "if the minimum weren't good
>> enough, it wouldn't be the minimum." I'll confess, reluctantly, to
>> graduating from college with a 2.01 GPA (2.00 required for
>> graduation.) All I needed was an undergrad degree to get a commission
>> and got to USAF pilot training. (That was when there were a lot of
>> requirements and a low number of qualified candidates--the situation
>> is reversed today.)
>>
>> I'll add, however, that once given the opportunity to compete, then
>> job performance becomes a big factor. When I got the chance, unlikely
>> as it might have seemed based on my undergrad performance, to go to
>> graduate school, I got serious. 4.0 for first MS, 3.95 for second.
>>
>> Pilots, despite what engineer Tarver says, are inherently systems
>> managers, not blue collar equipment operators.
>
>In fact, under the law, pilots are equipment operators. An operator, as
>legislated by the International Brotherhood of Operating Engineers.

I'm sorry, but neither military nor commercial aviators are members of
the IBOE. The membership may choose to call pilots whatever they wish,
but the IBOE doesn't make any "law" that describes nomeclature for
pilot skills.
>
>>While I was at
>> Northrop, the ex-mil aviators on the payroll where definitely "white
>> collar".
>
>A delusion only, as militry pilots are inherently blue collar and in the
>times Ed pretends to recall were a majority physical education majors.
>Definately neither educated as "white collar", or skilled as managers.

What the hell do you mean by "the times Ed pretends to recall"?

In the sixties, when I went to USAF pilot training and flew my first
combat tour, the "majority" of pilot candidates were graduates of
USAFA (fully one third of my training class came from AFA). All,
regardless of commission source were full four year college bachelor
degree, and most were engineering specialities.

In the seventies when I was directing the Air Training Command
Undergraduate Rated Assignments office, we kept stats on input,
success rates, causes of failures and output. More than 80% during
that decade were graduate engineers and nearly 30% already had
graduate degrees on UPT entry.

In the eighties when military pilot training input was drastically
reduced. By that time the engineering/physical science (that's not PE,
but phyics, chem, etc.) grads were approaching 100%. More candidates
than slots, means higher selectivity and arguably irrelevant selection
criteria.

Let me suggest that operating a $30 million dollar weapons system by
yourself, controlling not only the vehicle but the sensors,
communications, defensive systems, navigation, electronic
countermeasures, etc, all requiring total situational awareness and
split-second decision-making is indeed an exercise in management.
>
>> The engineers were more rumpled polyester double-knit, plaids
>> and stripes sort of Goodwill eclectic. Maybe it was because the SME
>> ("Subject Matter Expert") category of employee got paid better than
>> the engineers.
>
>I go with levis and a Pendelton, most of the time.
>
>As to the subject matter expert, the cocktail aviation circuit is pretty
>well dead today. Although Keithie did comment to me on several ocasions
>where Northrop, or the governemnt, had promoted a secretary to such a
>position; based mostly on her ability to tie a knot in a cherry stem with
>her tongue. The project manager for B-1 flight test was of that extraction.
>

Your final comment is ridiculous and irrelevant. The aerospace
industry is competitive and very capital intensive. Research expenses
and development costs place it well beyond "cocktail aviation
circuits".

SMEs are the link between the industry and the customer. That's the
place where requirements are developed and operational solutions are
defined.

You want to go back, John, and describe your qualifications again?

[Michael Furlan]

On 21 Nov 2003 17:19:40 GMT, (OXMORON1) wrote:

>Who was it woh said..."The world is run by C students" or something to that
>effect?

No, not anymore, that is the older, more stringent, pre-Bush standard.

[WDA]

I agree!

Forty-one years in aerospace has shown the need for really good mathematics
comprehension, including some math fields you may have to learn on your own
since you probably will never heard of them in undergrad school.

Good luck

WDA

end

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
...
>
> "sibersmith" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Hey guys it's me again.
> >
> > How big of a factor is GPA in getting a good aerospace job at a cool
> > company? The line "...Do good in school" is always given in advice
> > when I was growing up. To tell the truth I was holding a decent
> > 3.3gpa untill I hit my math sequence at college. Now I have no more
> > 'breeze' classes (history etc) to prop up my gpa and it's killing me.
> > I'm problobly around a 2.3 now.
> >
> > This really bums me out. I went into Aerospace cause I wanted the job
> > of my dreams designing aircraft. Nobodys gona hire a medocree looser
> > that doesn't excell in math.
> >
> > So how Important is a good GPA when looking for a job?
>
> If you had dragged down your gpa with general ed you might have some
wiggle
> room, but all those cs and ds in math and engineering courses probably
mean
> you should look outside engineering for a job.
>
>

[Tarver Engineering]

"Ed Rasimus" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 11:40:56 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Ed Rasimus" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >> There was an old saying in the military, "if the minimum weren't good
> >> enough, it wouldn't be the minimum." I'll confess, reluctantly, to
> >> graduating from college with a 2.01 GPA (2.00 required for
> >> graduation.) All I needed was an undergrad degree to get a commission
> >> and got to USAF pilot training. (That was when there were a lot of
> >> requirements and a low number of qualified candidates--the situation
> >> is reversed today.)
> >>
> >> I'll add, however, that once given the opportunity to compete, then
> >> job performance becomes a big factor. When I got the chance, unlikely
> >> as it might have seemed based on my undergrad performance, to go to
> >> graduate school, I got serious. 4.0 for first MS, 3.95 for second.
> >>
> >> Pilots, despite what engineer Tarver says, are inherently systems
> >> managers, not blue collar equipment operators.
> >
> >In fact, under the law, pilots are equipment operators. An operator, as
> >legislated by the International Brotherhood of Operating Engineers.
>
> I'm sorry, but neither military nor commercial aviators are members of
> the IBOE. The membership may choose to call pilots whatever they wish,
> but the IBOE doesn't make any "law" that describes nomeclature for
> pilot skills.

IBOE has been around for over 120 years and ahve done a very good job of
making sure operating equipment remains a blue collar activity, under the
law.

> >>While I was at
> >> Northrop, the ex-mil aviators on the payroll where definitely "white
> >> collar".
> >
> >A delusion only, as militry pilots are inherently blue collar and in the
> >times Ed pretends to recall were a majority physical education majors.
> >Definately neither educated as "white collar", or skilled as managers.
>
> What the hell do you mean by "the times Ed pretends to recall"?

If you truely remembered then you would also recall that most of your peers
would be junior highschool physical education instructors, were they not
pilots.

> In the sixties, when I went to USAF pilot training and flew my first
> combat tour, the "majority" of pilot candidates were graduates of
> USAFA (fully one third of my training class came from AFA). All,
> regardless of commission source were full four year college bachelor
> degree, and most were engineering specialities.

That seems to be quite a select group you were with, Ed.

> In the seventies when I was directing the Air Training Command
> Undergraduate Rated Assignments office, we kept stats on input,
> success rates, causes of failures and output. More than 80% during
> that decade were graduate engineers and nearly 30% already had
> graduate degrees on UPT entry.

Bull****, most pilots are not engineers. The only place here what you
writewas ever true was at the USAF flight test pilot school.

<snip of fantasy gone completely over the top>

[vincent p. norris]

>So how Important is a good GPA when looking for a job?

People who visit campuses to hire graduating seniors say they are very
interested in one's ability to speak and write well. My friends who
have worked in industry in scientific fields told me that young
engineers and scientists are judged by their reports. If the reports
are badly written, they make a poor impression.

So my advice to you is, learn to write better than you did when you
posted this query.

vince norris

[Paul F Austin]

"Tarver Engineering" wrote
>
> "Tex Houston" wrote
> >
> > "sibersmith" wrote
> > > This really bums me out. I went into Aerospace cause I wanted the job
> > > of my dreams designing aircraft. Nobodys gona hire a medocree looser
> > > that doesn't excell in math.
> > >
> > > So how Important is a good GPA when looking for a job?
> >
> > If this is an example of your work you might put in some extra hours of
> > study in English. Just using a spellchecker would help.
>
> Nope, the low math grades pretty well disqualify him from engineering.
> There are plenty of places where he could make a good living with the 2.3,
> however. The only thing that would help is if he is one of those "worked
> through school". If family paid, or there were loans, forget engineering.

GPA is a go-no go screen for many companies for new-grads. We won't review a
resume for a new-grad whose GPA is below 3.0. It's less important for people
with 2-5 years experience and GPWhat? after 5 years in industry.

Tarver is right that mathematics is critical. I interviewed a power supply
designer yesterday. He had 10 years experience as a technician, 12 years as
an engineer but he was 'way too weak analytically to do the work. Most
people who haven't done design don't realize that design-is-analysis.
Drawings only define-what-you will analyse. The analysis provides the
details of dimensions, component values and so on. Analysis proves that it
will work in all of the conditions contained within the customer's
requirements. All this is from an aerospace point of view. I've worked in
other industries where un-degreed engineers are common and virtually no
analysis was done. The practice in those places was to get the topology
right, breadboard or prototype the design and refine the design in hardware
to make it work. Not only can we not afford to work that way, doing so is
unacceptable because the breadboard and prototype testing can't possibly
cover the range of environments, component variations, workmanship and
process variations.

I was a blockhead at math when I flunked out of college in 1967. The stern
discipline of Hyman G Rickover's schools jerked my **** straight and when I
went back to school, I had the great good fortune to have a calculus
professor who was a great teacher, rather than a mumbling,
English-is-plainly-not-my-mother-tongue eccentric. Both those things were
necessary for me to acquire the skills I needed.

The ability to write clearly and precisely is also very important. Not only
does sloppy spelling and grammar prejudice your audience against what you
are trying to communicate, it also creates ambiguity about what you actually
said, which can be deadly.

That said, the anchor-man in my class went to work for HP as a sales
engineer. In the early modern era (1977) he made $100K the first year, about
6 times what_I_made that year.

[killfile]

"sibersmith" > wrote in message
...
> Hey guys it's me again.
>
> How big of a factor is GPA in getting a good aerospace job at a cool
> company? The line "...Do good in school" is always given in advice
> when I was growing up. To tell the truth I was holding a decent
> 3.3gpa untill I hit my math sequence at college. Now I have no more
> 'breeze' classes (history etc) to prop up my gpa and it's killing me.
> I'm problobly around a 2.3 now.
>
> This really bums me out. I went into Aerospace cause I wanted the job
> of my dreams designing aircraft. Nobodys gona hire a medocree looser
> that doesn't excell in math.
>
> So how Important is a good GPA when looking for a job?

Picture the scene: You are a recruiter for Boeing or Lockmart. In front of
you, you have a stack of 600 almost identical resumes, most of them using
the MS Word 'Resume' template. You have 5 positions to fill. Why would you
even bother with a 2.3GPA when the other 500 applications have a minimum
3.0? You can be as enthusiastic as you want, but with that number on, your
resume is going straight in the trash.

Frankly speaking, if you have a 2.3GPA you are not trying your hardest and
you know it. I suspect that, like me, you were one of the kids who coasted
through School on your native intelligence, and now the field has narrowed
you suddenly find that's not good enough. If you want your dream, pick your
ass up and start putting some serious work in instead of looking for
hand-holding on usenet.

Matt

[Les Matheson]

I heard a radio news piece the other day that company recruiters are asking
about SAT scores to applicants 5, 10 even 15 years after college.

Les

"killfile" > wrote in message
...
> "sibersmith" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Hey guys it's me again.
> >
> > How big of a factor is GPA in getting a good aerospace job at a cool
> > company? The line "...Do good in school" is always given in advice
> > when I was growing up. To tell the truth I was holding a decent
> > 3.3gpa untill I hit my math sequence at college. Now I have no more
> > 'breeze' classes (history etc) to prop up my gpa and it's killing me.
> > I'm problobly around a 2.3 now.
> >
> > This really bums me out. I went into Aerospace cause I wanted the job
> > of my dreams designing aircraft. Nobodys gona hire a medocree looser
> > that doesn't excell in math.
> >
> > So how Important is a good GPA when looking for a job?
>
> Picture the scene: You are a recruiter for Boeing or Lockmart. In front of
> you, you have a stack of 600 almost identical resumes, most of them using
> the MS Word 'Resume' template. You have 5 positions to fill. Why would you
> even bother with a 2.3GPA when the other 500 applications have a minimum
> 3.0? You can be as enthusiastic as you want, but with that number on, your
> resume is going straight in the trash.
>
> Frankly speaking, if you have a 2.3GPA you are not trying your hardest and
> you know it. I suspect that, like me, you were one of the kids who coasted
> through School on your native intelligence, and now the field has narrowed
> you suddenly find that's not good enough. If you want your dream, pick
your
> ass up and start putting some serious work in instead of looking for
> hand-holding on usenet.
>
> Matt
>
>

[Not Nice Anymore]

If you are poor in math (and probably science as well) pack it in now and
switch to another major.
As it's obvious that you can't spell either other fields may be just as
tough.
Your command of English is also rotten:
"...Do good in school" ??? ('well' not not 'good)
Nobodys gona hire a medocree looser that doesn't excell in math.

"sibersmith" > wrote in message
...
> Hey guys it's me again.
>
> How big of a factor is GPA in getting a good aerospace job at a cool
> company? The line "...Do good in school" is always given in advice
> when I was growing up. To tell the truth I was holding a decent
> 3.3gpa untill I hit my math sequence at college. Now I have no more
> 'breeze' classes (history etc) to prop up my gpa and it's killing me.
> I'm problobly around a 2.3 now.
>
> This really bums me out. I went into Aerospace cause I wanted the job
> of my dreams designing aircraft. ....dirty minds! all around me!

>
> So how Important is a good GPA when looking for a job?

[Not Nice Anymore]

Flying? He dreams of designing, not flying.

"WaltBJ" > wrote in message
om...
> Having been connected with airline training and selection in the past
> - here goes. All the job applicants look alike. Clean, neat, dark
> suit, sober ties, polished shoes, haircuts, mostly college grads, so
> what is left? GPA is one of the distinguishing factors. Another factor
> is 'desire to fly'. I recall one instance where two Ivy college grads
> were rejected in favor of a comunity college (two year) grad simply
> because the Ivy guys presented the attitude that they were doing the
> compnay a favor in allowing themselves to be hired. OTH the 2-year kid
> was like an eager puppy dog; he wanted to fly and exhibited the
> willingness to take any flight anywhere any time in any conditions.
> As for math - in my first attempt at college I never let homework take
> precedence over sports and surfing . . . with predictable results.
> Later on I discovered that if you ask questions and do the homework
> college math is easy . . .Duh!
> Walt BJ

[Not Nice Anymore]

Her's an oxymoron for you:
A 2.3 gpa engineer.

"OXMORON1" > wrote in message
...
> Who was it woh said..."The world is run by C students" or something to
that
> effect?
>
> Oxmoron1

[[email protected]]

"Not Nice Anymore" > wrote:

>If you are poor in math (and probably science as well) pack it in now and
>switch to another major.
>As it's obvious that you can't spell either other fields may be just as
>tough.
>Your command of English is also rotten:
> "...Do good in school" ??? ('well' not not 'good)
> Nobodys gona hire a medocree looser that doesn't excell in math.
>

The above post is pretty hilarious you know...

<snort><gasp><snicker><groan>

(...my poor ribs...)
--

-Gord.

[John R Weiss]

"sibersmith" > wrote...
>
> How big of a factor is GPA in getting a good aerospace job at a cool
> company? The line "...Do good in school" is always given in advice
> when I was growing up. To tell the truth I was holding a decent
> 3.3gpa untill I hit my math sequence at college. Now I have no more
> 'breeze' classes (history etc) to prop up my gpa and it's killing me.
> I'm problobly around a 2.3 now.
>
> This really bums me out. I went into Aerospace cause I wanted the job
> of my dreams designing aircraft. Nobodys gona hire a medocree looser
> that doesn't excell in math.

You will be competing against grads with good GPAs from good schools, good GPAs
from "mediocre" schools, and people with mediocre GPAs from both schools. If
you have the mediocre GPA from a "mediocre" school, you're probably going to be
at the bottom of the heap, unless you have something else going for you to
compensate.

Besides, I don't want "a medocree looser that doesn't excell in math" designing
any airplane that I fly!

[Ad absurdum per aspera]

> You're young yet

Some bits of further advice. Pick one or more, take them to heart,
and discard those that don't apply.


Take a few years, work for a living, join the service, whatever.
Older, returning students who come back ready to focus on something
they want are famous for doing better than barely-adults who go
galloping off in all directions. (Especially if one of those
directions is toward the nearest party. Nothing personal; I'm just
trying to cover all bases.)


When the right opportunity comes up, take a course or two at whatever
college or trade school suits your fancy and REALLY APPLY YOURSELF.
This does more than convey facts and skills. It builds confidence at
the school game (something you're doubtless sorely lacking just now,
having at best fought your coursework to an armed truce and at worst
gotten your butt kicked), and keeps you in practice at kicking your
friends out, turning off the game, and cracking the books.


Talk to the advisors at said institution about what tests you can take
to find out whether your problem was nothing more or less than an
inadequate foundation for college-level math and engineering. Some
friends who went the faculty route can and do just go ON and on and on
about how much time they spend teaching remedial high school -- maybe
you came in behind the curve and never caught up.


Don't let middle-class circumstance put the golden handcuffs on you.
You are a work in progress and can drive an old car and live in a
smaller place while saving money and building skills for the
completion. These days, holding onto that attitude through an
advanced degree (once you have a vision of what that degree should be
in, of course) has a lot to recommend it.


Said vision is important. All this may reinforce your desire to
become an aircraft designer and prepare yourself for that rather hard
major. Or maybe you'll discover that you're happier and better suited
for another profession or trade -- where is it written that at 18 you
know what you want to do? This may be in the aerospace field or not;
it may consist of pushing a mouse around a desk or not.

Maybe the reason for your poor performance was personal. Maybe it was
inadequate preparation. Or maybe it was your inner self recoiling at
the difference between what you imagined the profession to be about
and what it really is about. Well, the world needs aerospace
engineers, and also aerospace machinists, history teachers, chefs, the
good honest car mechanic everybody seems to have so much trouble
finding, veterinarians, and a thousand other things.

Just keep in mind that the result of your education thus far is a
setback and something you'll have to explain now and then for a while,
but it is not a disaster. Work hard and you'll probably find
yourself able to direct people's focus toward the things you excelled
in as a focused and disciplined adult, not the things you fumbled the
first few years out of high school.


And it'll be good practice in case you realize many years from now
that Act II (or III) of your adulthood calls for another rethinking
and/or another increment of formal education. Maybe "completion of a
work in progress" wasn't the right thing to say earlier -- "completion
of the present phase" is more like it; and the designers are
notorious for barging in unexpectedly with a new set of prints.


One man's opinions, worth what you paid if your connect time is cheap,
--Joe

[Tarver Engineering]

"Paul F Austin" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Tarver Engineering" wrote
> >
> > "Tex Houston" wrote
> > >
> > > "sibersmith" wrote
> > > > This really bums me out. I went into Aerospace cause I wanted the
job
> > > > of my dreams designing aircraft. Nobodys gona hire a medocree
looser
> > > > that doesn't excell in math.
> > > >
> > > > So how Important is a good GPA when looking for a job?
> > >
> > > If this is an example of your work you might put in some extra hours
of
> > > study in English. Just using a spellchecker would help.
> >
> > Nope, the low math grades pretty well disqualify him from engineering.
> > There are plenty of places where he could make a good living with the
2.3,
> > however. The only thing that would help is if he is one of those
"worked
> > through school". If family paid, or there were loans, forget
engineering.
>
> GPA is a go-no go screen for many companies for new-grads. We won't review
a
> resume for a new-grad whose GPA is below 3.0. It's less important for
people
> with 2-5 years experience and GPWhat? after 5 years in industry.

Many companies take into consideration the grading policies of the
university and the applicant's work history in determining wether to use the
3.0 hard floor. Comparing a student from a bell curve graded program to one
from a university where a "c' is the lowest grade possible requires some
additional leeway.

> Tarver is right that mathematics is critical. I interviewed a power supply
> designer yesterday. He had 10 years experience as a technician, 12 years
as
> an engineer but he was 'way too weak analytically to do the work. Most
> people who haven't done design don't realize that design-is-analysis.

Every real engineering problem involves an integral. Math becomes a way of
thinking for an engineer and without that a man/woman will never do any real
engineering. There are many in the wage slave class of engineers that never
learned the math, even though they earned high marks. The same "cram and
dump" study habbits that work for medical students tend to produce poor
engineers. These types tend to flee to management at their earliest
convenience.

> Drawings only define-what-you will analyse. The analysis provides the
> details of dimensions, component values and so on. Analysis proves that it
> will work in all of the conditions contained within the customer's
> requirements. All this is from an aerospace point of view. I've worked in
> other industries where un-degreed engineers are common and virtually no
> analysis was done.

Non-degreed engineers are common at BCAG, but those are drawn from the ranks
of technicians. It is a means through which some injured in the shop can
continue to have productive lives in the industry, as well.

> The practice in those places was to get the topology
> right, breadboard or prototype the design and refine the design in
hardware
> to make it work. Not only can we not afford to work that way, doing so is
> unacceptable because the breadboard and prototype testing can't possibly
> cover the range of environments, component variations, workmanship and
> process variations.

In my experiance there is no shame in going "roll b", for a new design, but
I will agree with you that a breadbord's performance has little relevence in
aerospace applications. An airplane is a rather nasty environment, from an
electrical perspective.

> I was a blockhead at math when I flunked out of college in 1967. The stern
> discipline of Hyman G Rickover's schools jerked my **** straight and when
I
> went back to school, I had the great good fortune to have a calculus
> professor who was a great teacher, rather than a mumbling,
> English-is-plainly-not-my-mother-tongue eccentric. Both those things were
> necessary for me to acquire the skills I needed.

Math has always been easy for me. I am a California "gifted child".

> The ability to write clearly and precisely is also very important. Not
only
> does sloppy spelling and grammar prejudice your audience against what you
> are trying to communicate, it also creates ambiguity about what you
actually
> said, which can be deadly.

Grammar is a source of ambiguity in design specification and theory of
operation type writting. Although, at some point a money pitch is usually
required to get anything done and there polish is necessary. Today there
are grammar and spelling bots included with word and even the illiterate can
come across as educated. Here at ram we have an example of such, without
his heavy use of homonymns, I would have never caught on to the bots.
Management is usually far less attuned to logical flow than a working
engineer, so it is probably unnecessary to even hide the bots.

With our latest TSOA applications, FAA lauded Skylight for our short and to
the point documentation. The way it has been explained to me, most
applicants will turn in a binder of fluff, that includes about one page of
aprovable data; times as many engineers as are on the project.

When I made up a means to procure parts seperate from the NSN system, I had
all of RPL's MIS group to create fluff for management. RL later replaced
the Mil-Spec component system with that work. So, in conclusion, fluff and
polish seem to work well when seeking funding and these days all of Federal
Electric lives off of it. ("the reliability people")

> That said, the anchor-man in my class went to work for HP as a sales
> engineer. In the early modern era (1977) he made $100K the first year,
about
> 6 times what_I_made that year.

Comercial pays a lot better than government work, but production becomes the
issue.