GPA Trend

[moto_za]

Hi,
Everyone says an upward trend is really important... So what if my gpa doesnt really show an upward trend and pretty much jumps around every semester. Anywhere from a 3.6, 3.26,3.8, and ending with about a 3.6 for the first two years. So my question what if you don't have an upward trend? Also, do upper division courses make up for bad grades in the prereqs? thanks a bunch.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Stolenspatulas]

Hi,
Everyone says an upward trend is really important... So what if my gpa doesnt really show an upward trend and pretty much jumps around every semester. Anywhere from a 3.6, 3.26,3.8, and ending with about a 3.6 for the first two years. So my question what if you don't have an upward trend? Also, do upper division courses make up for bad grades in the prereqs? thanks a bunch.

i think an upward trend is only very very important if you start of really badly... as in the range of 2.0 - 3.0. other than that i think floating around anywhere from a B - A average is solid enough.

 

[Hardbody]

i think an upward trend is only very very important if you start of really badly... as in the range of 2.0 - 3.0. other than that i think floating around anywhere from a B - A average is solid enough.

I sure hope you are right about that, because if you are, I really do have better than a snowballs chance in hell at one of my state (allo) schools!

 

[AZhopeful]

don't panic if you don't have an 'upward' trend. i think people often make a big deal out of this and make it seem more important than it is.

the upward trend thingy is a gift from adcoms who understand that people screw up their first year of college. it's more of a "we're not going to screw you over because of that one year" than it is a "we love students who botched their first year but got their stuff together by the end".

 

[solitude]

don't panic if you don't have an 'upward' trend. i think people often make a big deal out of this and make it seem more important than it is.

the upward trend thingy is a gift from adcoms who understand that people screw up their first year of college. it's more of a "we're not going to screw you over because of that one year" than it is a "we love students who botched their first year but got their stuff together by the end".

Exactly. They're never going to give the advantage to the guy with the upward trend if his GPA is lower than a guy who consistently did better every single term.

 

[caliMDkid]

untrue. i am on the adcom at my school.

we have given out many acceptances to ppl with lower total gpas than those with higher. also, i would say, depending where u are aiming of course, that if you are fluctuating, i wouldnt do so down to 3.0. I think many schools would consider this bad (ie, 2.0 being really bad). again, this totally depends on where u are aiming for.

 

[solitude]

untrue. i am on the adcom at my school.

we have given out many acceptances to ppl with lower total gpas than those with higher. also, i would say, depending where u are aiming of course, that if you are fluctuating, i wouldnt do so down to 3.0. I think many schools would consider this bad (ie, 2.0 being really bad). again, this totally depends on where u are aiming for.

Well surely you have given out many acceptances to people with lower GPAs than those with higher. Never in my post did I intimate that you always accept the applicant with the highest GPA, only that, ceteris paribus, an applicant with a grade trend but overall lower GPA won't get the nod over the applicant with a higher overall GPA.

 

[musiclink213]

This thread is making me, one of the upward trend people feel bad. I started out with a 3.2, and ended up with a 3.8 my final semester, which was also supposed to have been my most difficult one. But if your GPA is pretty consistent, I wouldn't sweat it. Just make sure you don;t have a downwards trend.

Also, do upper division courses make up for bad grades in the prereqs? thanks a bunch.

Upper division courses def. do help make up for lower grades in prereqs. I got a B+ both semesters of gen. chem, (not a bad grade, but there are plenty of people who do well in gen chem) and then got A's and A-'s in advanced inorganic and p.chem. One of my interviewers actually commented on this, saying that since I was able to do so well in teh more advanced classes, it showed maturity on my part, and lets them see even more that my freshman year really was just a fluke on my part, that I was learning how to study and adapting to the new environment, blah blah blah. Then, he asked how I got a B in tennis. Although he really didn;t care about my tennis grade, just thoguht it was funny.

 

[caliMDkid]

Well surely you have given out many acceptances to people with lower GPAs than those with higher. Never in my post did I intimate that you always accept the applicant with the highest GPA, only that, ceteris paribus, an applicant with a grade trend but overall lower GPA won't get the nod over the applicant with a higher overall GPA.

In the post I was refering you you said:

"They're NEVER going to give the advantage to the guy with....."

You must be republican.

Aside:
And I do not go to Loma Linda, I go to UC.

 

[DrGoofy]

so along the same lines... if you do extremely well on your upper level classes, does that make up for poor grades in the pre-req?

 

[deleted36260]

In the post I was refering you you said:

"They're NEVER going to give the advantage to the guy with....."

You must be republican.

Aside:
And I do not go to Loma Linda, I go to UC.

Wow, I'm glad you let me know where you adcom at so I won't make the mistake of applying there. While I understand that California as a whole is left leaning, I'd hate to be so harshly judged for my previous work with the Republican party (hrmm, and I thought holding leaderships positions was a good thing) because you are so immature and vindictive to actually use "Republican" as a pseudo-insult. Do politics really run your life that much? The world is that black and white?