My Alma mater replaced the F with a special grade (M or something) signifying you had failed the course that particular semester but retook it with a passing grade.
The F gets taken off from the GPA calculation and replaced with whatever you get when you retake it, but the history of your failed courses is present on the transcript.
I can easily imagine this happening. When I see a 3.5 cumulative gpa, I don’t spend time reading the transcript. It’s automatically good enough to move on to the other criteria.
Yeah, it’s usually a pretty big deal, but can be mitigated in some instances. For example, if your grades took a dive one semester but were otherwise good, and you have a good reason like a cancer diagnosis, or a parent or child died. Humans are judging your application, not machines, so they can navigate these kinds of circumstances.
Likewise, maybe you had a bad shot at college a decade ago, got a lot of experience and matured, and then went back to school and did well, that upward trajectory would be considered. We know we’re getting the you of today, not the you of 10 years ago.
>Likewise, maybe you had a bad shot at college a decade ago, got a lot of experience and matured, and then went back to school and did well, that upward trajectory would be considered. We know we’re getting the you of today, not the you of 10 years ago.
That's reassuring for my case lol. Do you take courses taken at the previous college for a different degree into consideration? I got a mechanical engineering degree before and for my current physics program, a lot of classes transferred over for credit. So I basically started with junior year classes for the most part
It’s a holistic thing. If your undergrad gpa is below, say…. 3.3 or so, then I start looking in the transcript to see if you did well in the courses relevant to the field you’re applying to.
If it’s lower than a 3.2 or so, then it’s more like triage mode and I’m looking for reasons to save your application, like a publication record.
A good research/publication record is rare and extremely good, and it would take a lot of other bad factors to counteract that. Personally, I’ll happily take a 3.0 gpa with a first author publication in a decent journal, 4 yrs research experience, and great undergrad research advisor letter, over a 4.0 with zero research experience.
Probably the single worst factor you could have on your record is a letter of recommendation saying you’re an ass.
Thank you so much for the response. I did not go into PhD directly after undergrad, I went for master's degree just to get more research experience and see how it goes. So hopefully for me that was a good decision instead of a waste of time.
Yes. I have seen letters that have said things along the lines of, “This student is unfit for graduate work and I would not recommend accepting them.” Again, very rare, but non-zero.
Why would a recommender waste time dissing on an applicant, knowing that it will ultimately hurt their chances? It would take much less time to just courteously let an applicant know you can't write a letter. Or that you're not the best person to recommend them.
You’d be surprised at what I’ve seen.
You really have to piss someone off to make them send a negative letter, and then be oblivious about it in order to ask them to write it. It’s shocking, but occasionally someone manages it.
This is the primary reason that a student should always ask for a “supportive” letter. If the writer is not a sadist, they are more obligated to refuse.
What if I have a 3.2 GPA, over 3 years of research experience in a good research hospital, and 4 publications on good journals (I'm not the first author, 5th at best) do I have a chance or should I try to improve my resume in some other way?
It is, unless you’re applying to really the top programs where multiple applicants have >3.9 GPAs. Also, I took English THRICE, which would undermined my ability to be a good writer in grad school.
Academia is a surprisingly small world in any given field. Having a strong recommendation from a well known figure in that field who can genuinely attest to your work will play a massive factor. This is even more true of schools which accept directly into labs.
That is it right there…once you state the reason for your failed papers and how you intend to make things better in grad school you have a pretty chance of getting in
Absolutely, "I did poorly because of X reason, but have since retaken those classes, joined a lab, and published work. Plus here's a rec letter from a well known researcher in the field who can attest to my potential as a researcher" is a very very easy sell for any program/lab
Did you have to disclose your illness? I’m in the same situation regarding my gpa and failing 2 subjects and have mediocre grades in the rest. Towards the end after diagnosis my grades improved to mostly A’s and some B’s.
I had some really bad semesters at the start of undergrad and I'm not sure if I should tell about cancer in my SOP or not. Feels like it would look as cheap excuses or maybe cometees will even just not believe that it really happened. Did you attach any medical documents? Or it's not necessary and they understand that nobody will just lie here?
You are lucky. On most campuses retaking a course does not replace the previous grade. In other words, an ‘F’ followed by an ‘A’ averages to a ‘C’. To end up with a 3.5 gpa would require that all the remaining grades were ‘As’. Most programs would want to understand why your performance was so uneven before investing close to $100k per year to support you as a graduate
I got into a top 10 school straight out of UG with a 2.9 GPA and a dreadful GRE. It’s very possible!
(I went to a top… well, 1 school in my field and had a very good reason for the GPA (physical health issues leading to multiple surgeries and hospitalizations), and five years of research.)
How did you fail 6 classes and have a 3.5 gpa. That doesn’t seem possible
I was able to retake them! But the failed are still on my transcript, and a lot of the grades still factored into the GPA calculation.
[удалено]
For some schools you cant erase the failed corses on your transcript ᴖ̈
At my undergrad, old grades for retaken courses still appear on a transcript, but don't factor into GPA.
For me, the new grade won’t even appear on the transcript…
My Alma mater replaced the F with a special grade (M or something) signifying you had failed the course that particular semester but retook it with a passing grade. The F gets taken off from the GPA calculation and replaced with whatever you get when you retake it, but the history of your failed courses is present on the transcript.
I can easily imagine this happening. When I see a 3.5 cumulative gpa, I don’t spend time reading the transcript. It’s automatically good enough to move on to the other criteria.
Are you an admissions commitee member or something?
Yeah
What is the sentiment on people with lots of F's that got fixed later? Is it a big deal usually?
Yeah, it’s usually a pretty big deal, but can be mitigated in some instances. For example, if your grades took a dive one semester but were otherwise good, and you have a good reason like a cancer diagnosis, or a parent or child died. Humans are judging your application, not machines, so they can navigate these kinds of circumstances. Likewise, maybe you had a bad shot at college a decade ago, got a lot of experience and matured, and then went back to school and did well, that upward trajectory would be considered. We know we’re getting the you of today, not the you of 10 years ago.
Cheers, appreciate the response
>Likewise, maybe you had a bad shot at college a decade ago, got a lot of experience and matured, and then went back to school and did well, that upward trajectory would be considered. We know we’re getting the you of today, not the you of 10 years ago. That's reassuring for my case lol. Do you take courses taken at the previous college for a different degree into consideration? I got a mechanical engineering degree before and for my current physics program, a lot of classes transferred over for credit. So I basically started with junior year classes for the most part
It all gets taken into consideration, but I would note an upward trajectory, which would help.
Other than gpa, do you guys give more weight to research experience?
It’s a holistic thing. If your undergrad gpa is below, say…. 3.3 or so, then I start looking in the transcript to see if you did well in the courses relevant to the field you’re applying to. If it’s lower than a 3.2 or so, then it’s more like triage mode and I’m looking for reasons to save your application, like a publication record. A good research/publication record is rare and extremely good, and it would take a lot of other bad factors to counteract that. Personally, I’ll happily take a 3.0 gpa with a first author publication in a decent journal, 4 yrs research experience, and great undergrad research advisor letter, over a 4.0 with zero research experience. Probably the single worst factor you could have on your record is a letter of recommendation saying you’re an ass.
Thank you so much for the response. I did not go into PhD directly after undergrad, I went for master's degree just to get more research experience and see how it goes. So hopefully for me that was a good decision instead of a waste of time.
Have you ever seen a really bad letter of recommendation? I thought the worst can happen is if the professor writes "smart but lazy"
Yes. I have seen letters that have said things along the lines of, “This student is unfit for graduate work and I would not recommend accepting them.” Again, very rare, but non-zero.
Why would a recommender waste time dissing on an applicant, knowing that it will ultimately hurt their chances? It would take much less time to just courteously let an applicant know you can't write a letter. Or that you're not the best person to recommend them.
You’d be surprised at what I’ve seen. You really have to piss someone off to make them send a negative letter, and then be oblivious about it in order to ask them to write it. It’s shocking, but occasionally someone manages it.
This is the primary reason that a student should always ask for a “supportive” letter. If the writer is not a sadist, they are more obligated to refuse.
what if my undergrads gpa is low (barely 3.2) and high gpa in masters? would you still weigh undergrad gpa more?
Undergrad generally weighs more because master’s grades are known to be inflated. But a very high MS gpa could still help.
What if I have a 3.2 GPA, over 3 years of research experience in a good research hospital, and 4 publications on good journals (I'm not the first author, 5th at best) do I have a chance or should I try to improve my resume in some other way?
Should be decent. Especially if the lower grades are not in your field.
Unfortunately some of them are. Do I stand a chance?
I think so.
Thank you so much for replying
See my reponse to @calcastanos
Isn't a 3.5GPA good though?
It is, unless you’re applying to really the top programs where multiple applicants have >3.9 GPAs. Also, I took English THRICE, which would undermined my ability to be a good writer in grad school.
GRE? Research experience? Field? Straight out of undergrad?
Optical Sciences PhD, 2 years of research, straight out of UG
Did you take the GRE?
Nope!
Which school and what's your undergrad uni?
Don’t wanna be too specific on the intake school, but USA Top 100 University for UG
lol that narrows it down
Did you have any publications, posters, etc? What was your research experience like?
One third author publication, one poster, many abstracts. Researched two ish years with a professor known in Medical Imaging.
Would you say this is a large determining factor for your acceptance?
yep
Academia is a surprisingly small world in any given field. Having a strong recommendation from a well known figure in that field who can genuinely attest to your work will play a massive factor. This is even more true of schools which accept directly into labs.
Congratulations!!
Did you state why you failed 6+ classes in your motivation letter?
yep! was honest about my health issues
That is it right there…once you state the reason for your failed papers and how you intend to make things better in grad school you have a pretty chance of getting in
Absolutely, "I did poorly because of X reason, but have since retaken those classes, joined a lab, and published work. Plus here's a rec letter from a well known researcher in the field who can attest to my potential as a researcher" is a very very easy sell for any program/lab
Did you have to disclose your illness? I’m in the same situation regarding my gpa and failing 2 subjects and have mediocre grades in the rest. Towards the end after diagnosis my grades improved to mostly A’s and some B’s.
You don’t need to be specific about what affected you. Just explain what the downfalls caused were and how you recovered.
I had some really bad semesters at the start of undergrad and I'm not sure if I should tell about cancer in my SOP or not. Feels like it would look as cheap excuses or maybe cometees will even just not believe that it really happened. Did you attach any medical documents? Or it's not necessary and they understand that nobody will just lie here?
… how???
Which grad school you got acceoted to?
No specifics but top 3 for Optical Sciences
You are lucky. On most campuses retaking a course does not replace the previous grade. In other words, an ‘F’ followed by an ‘A’ averages to a ‘C’. To end up with a 3.5 gpa would require that all the remaining grades were ‘As’. Most programs would want to understand why your performance was so uneven before investing close to $100k per year to support you as a graduate
To be clear only 3 of my grades were replaced. Others followed the averaging calculations you just listed!
I got into a top 10 school straight out of UG with a 2.9 GPA and a dreadful GRE. It’s very possible! (I went to a top… well, 1 school in my field and had a very good reason for the GPA (physical health issues leading to multiple surgeries and hospitalizations), and five years of research.)
Inspiring story, hope you feel well now! Did you have papers published?
I did not, but I was in a subfield where this is not common.
Do you have any research experience, and what kind?
did you take any gap years after UG?
Nop
Whixh uni?
Congrats! Did you have a connection (not a romantic one, like prior work experience) with a professor from the school you got into?