Originally Posted by
USMCFLYR
Agreed - but you slanted that question.
If we are comparing GPA's - those people ought to be asking themselves between two people with the wet commercials, and one has the 3.8 and the other a 2.2 then who is likely to get the nod?
Of course then there is the question if the 3.8 was in Art and the 2.2 in Aero Engineering. Will the aero guy even get a chance to explain his case or will the computer just slice him out of the pack? The number is the first thing they see and you often don't have the chance to fix a bad first impression.
I do agree that the GPA (if that is a factor in the hiring equation) should become less and less of a factor the longer the person as ben out of the academic world. REAL WORLD performance is much more important imo - but that takes time and opportunity.
USMCFLYR
You make a good point. There is a big difference in getting a 3.0 in math, engineering, or physics compared to a 3.0 in art or the many other easy fields of study. I would sure hope recruiters are smart enough to figure this out on their own though.