Acceptances with Lower Undergrad GPAs?

[downtherabbithole]

Congrats to all those who have been accepted and good luck to those still waiting!

I know many of you are still wrapped up in hearing from schools this year, but as I've officially been shut out, I'm moving on!

I can now see the hundreds of things that I did wrong in my applications. But the one thing that I can't change might be the very thing hurting me the most--my low (let's say 3.4ish) GPA. I managed to somewhat redeem myself by receiving honors for my UK Masters dissertation, but that angry number is still there on my transcripts.

My question is: with average GPAs of 3.7 and higher, am I an automatic rejection? I know everything is very cumulative and it's about the overall package, but if anyone is in a similar boat, have you had a successful application?

Any insight or reason to be positive again would be greatly appreciated!

[marlowe]

My undergraduate GPA was lower than 3.4, and I earned a 'distinction' on my UK Masters same as you. I say you've got a great shot, as long as you focus on things like fit. I received a couple of top twenty offers.

[ComeBackZinc]

Grades can certainly be overcome, and they often are. The only sticky thing is that some universities or graduate schools have cut-offs below which you won't be considered for admission, so even if the department wants you, they can't take you. That's rare, though.

[downtherabbithole]

Thanks for sharing (and congrats!) marlowe and ComeBackZinc. Just needed some glimmer of hope to help me get kick-started again. I'm pretty sure the daunting prospect of going through the application process again was sadder than the rejections (which, to be fair, were not surprising).

[ComeBackZinc]

I don't know if this is at all in the cards for you, but some people have reported success in taking an continuing ed class or two after getting their BA and bringing their GPA up that way. It also might be worth emailing and asking the programs you applied to whether your grades were a significant detriment to your application. It might be useful.

[user_name]

i feel like i'm in that boat. three point four something, but good GREs. no good news yet

[ekant]

I have really high grades, but my GRE scores are low. I have a feeling that it unfortunately played a large part in my rejections thus far.

[veniente]

To say the whole thing is a crapshoot is be way too dismissive; obviously there are a ridiculous number of factors that are considered, but they can still be thought through. A lot depends on the schools to which you're applying; if you're looking at the *supposed* top 20, yes, most - not all - successful applicants probably have GPAs of 3.7+. But, as you note, there is a certain cumulative aspect to the application - they are looking at the 'package' you are providing and the 'fit'; the longer you manage to keep your package in that dwindling pile, the better. If you feel as though your GPA might not be ideal, there are a number of ways to counterweight this, for a 'top 20' they could include:

(I say somewhat authoritatively, but definitely shouldn't be read as such!!! How advisable any of this is is highly debatable, I am 1/12 after all.):

- you have an MA Pemberley! That's your most recent academic work, it should matter most, right? Emphasise it! Heck, even acknowledge that your GPA didn't meet the high expectations you have of yourself - or reflect the work you know, and have subsequently proven, that you can produce - but that you're on an upward trajectory and the MA has allowed you to focalise your interests and has been very beneficial & PhD-readying in terms of sustained and high level research/writing. etc etc. [subtext: You will peak in their program!]

- GREs - my weakness; in hindsight, I would definitely recommend studying hard for these and putting time into them. Scoring over the 95th percentile in verbal, the 75th in quant., say, (yeah, it doesn't matter, but prove you're a renaissance man [sic]), over 5.0 in writing, and over 700 in subject should definitely make you competitive. (An awesome subject score may alleviate some of their concerns about your competency in English if you have some poor grades from literature courses.)

- writing sample: make it amazing, get your profs to check it scrupulously to ensure that it would get a 100% A+; also, make sure it's related to the focus you're describing in your SOP, and, if possible, related implicitly to the interests of certain POIs in the department.

- LORs: make sure they know your work and will speak highly of your capabilities. Maybe they don't have to be 'names' or 'rockstars', mine were assistant professors (or lower), totally unknown in their fields.

- research experience / teaching experience / publications / conference presentations / scholarships / interesting & ideally relevant, or at least personality-shaping, extracurricular activity and/or community stuff - all look good, I imagine.

- (in an ideal world) know another language, one related to your academic interests. Who knows? It's about distinguishing yourself, right - they have you and then they have some other girl whose app. package looks exactly like yours, but you speak French & German...

- POIs - I can't say, didn't contact them. However, I'd suggest researching the department, finding professors you like and getting in touch (see other threads for what to say, etiquette etc); although it might not make a difference, by all accounts it can't hurt.

- SOP - I really don't know. I just thought, 'Fuck it, this is who I am, do you want me?' and sent the same one everywhere (replacing POIs namedropped and university name, obviously). I couldn't be screwed with tailoring fit - and find the idea kind of strange to begin with - so just looked at each faculty for people I'd conceivably like to work with and who had interests as related to mine as possible and dropped their names in. If you can set yourself up as a box-able person - the 18th century-ist, the modernist, the theory girl - it might be helpful. I found out way later that there's the 3 F's (fit, focus, future, I think) which are allegedly important, although if everyone's doing the 3 F's I'm sure it makes for dull reading pretty quickly. Whatever you do, get other people to read it, especially professors and fellow grad school applicants.

My 2 cents. All the best!!

[anxious_aspirant]

I can't attest to any real insight into this from an admissions perspective, but if you're like me, I think we scholastic types tend to hone in on the weak points of our applications and get down on ourselves for them. My situation is kind of the opposite of yours; I have near 4.0 for undergrad and a 4.0 for a (non-English) MA, high GRES (discounting quantitative) - and yet the non-English thing is the piece on which I constantly fixate as the reason programs rejected me. In truth, I think we're all victims of the numbers game, and in reality the few weak points - undergrad GPA, that one GRE score, etc - are less influential than most think they are. If I were adcomm (how many times those four words have popped into my head recently...), I think I'd care way more about qualitative data (LORs, SOP, writing sample), since those really are what shows whether or not you can handle graduate-level scholarship.

Anyways, a 3.4 isn't a bad GPA. I don't think it would raise major concerns about academic commitment if all those other pieces were top-notch. Also, your MA already attests to your graduate competency. To echo arrivant, your prospective programs will hopefully love you for that.

Positivity, folks...we all need it! And if you find extra, pass it along

[generic31290]

Hi,

My undergrad GPA was 3.08. Major GPA (English) was even lower.

But my masters GPA is 4.0. So far I'm in at one top 20 program and a few others.

[AhabsAdmissionLetter]

I would hope that schools that post that they're looking for a general undergrad GPA would be willing to listen to an explanation, or intuit one of it's been a 5-10 years since coursework. I had a horrible semester once (long story) and failed without withdrawing, which left me with an unrecoverable GPA. I did a GPA recalc and it indicated that 4 courses of Es would take 50 courses of As to overcome for a senior. So, I have a undergrad below a 3 and a grad of 3.95, and I do not know how it will be construed.

The other problem is when they say they're looking for an undergrad GPA in English courses. As a French major, I do not know how seriously they take that stance.

[sevenblueducks]

I can't offer too much insight regarding undergrad GPA's, but I've also been shut out as of today and am refusing to feel defeated. I'm opting to view this next year as time to strengthen myself as a candidate in ways that will make up for what I'm thinking of as my weaknesses, namely my relatively recent interest in English (became a major last year), lack of an M.A., and subject test score in the low 600's -- probably all making my breadth and depth of knowledge as well as my commitment seem questionable. As long as you have a good plan for the next year, it seems like you can re-apply as a stronger, more knowledgeable, more determined candidate. Best of luck and well wishes.

[obrera]

I have a lower GPA (3.3) and I was just accepted to an MA program. Also, I wasn't required to write GREs or anything, so I had nothing to really make up for it except CV content and good letters. But that just goes to show that they really do look at the whole application.

[downtherabbithole]

Wow. A lot of great advice and support on these boards. Thanks! So glad I found gradcafe *after* submitting this year. Ah, well. One big learning process.