I don't believe they will eliminate you solely on your GPA, but your application may end up in the maybe pile (because of GPA). Now considering this will probably be another year with scores of applicants trying to return to school, there will be just that many more people with the 3.00 GPA that is required, and when schools have their choice, they will choose: best portfolio, highest gpa, gre scores etc. I would still apply to these schools, but I would also look for a backup school that better fits your situation. Remeber the portfolio is the most important aspect of your application. Good Luck!

some schools don't care as much as others - so you should talk to them and ask them how to deal with it. sometimes they ask for a separate letter - sometimes they want it included in the statement - find out. They'll always say "we look at the entire application," but don't believe it - push to find out other ways to get past your GPA.

It also really helps if you have someone within the program pulling for you, though... it's incredibly risky to go around bugging profs, but if you are confident in your abilities and why you deserve a place in the program, then go make your case in person. If they know who you are and you made a good impression, then they'll definitely look out for your application. Again, this is very risky, and unless you are completely on top of your game, could completely backfire (especially if you seem desperate).

good luck!

I heard this from somebody...

When applying to schools, if you have a "bomb" (like a crappy GPA) in your application packet, have a recommender "defuse the bomb"

So if your GPA is due to a lack of interest early in school, but you've recently turned around, have a recommender take note of this crappy GPA, so that the admission committee understands the reason for it...and can make an appropriate (and ideally, in-your-favor) decision.

I'd probably take a year off and improve that GPA. Most schools don't really care about your GRE score (that I know of).

How'd you let that get so bad? Also, make sure you are looking at your GPA for your major, not the cumulative GPA.

to trace: thank you for your reply. the problem is that i have already gradauted from school,so there is like no way i can improve on it any more. the grade printed on my transcript is the CGPA,my core GPA should be higher but the school usually won't give a separate transcript for the core GPA ( btw,I am an international applicant,so things might be a little different from the schools in the states ).

I am an electrical engineering major,but it takes me a while to realize that I am really not a science person and I took very little pleasure studying stuff like electrical cuicuits, the profs in our department are quite severe on grading,my ranking in the class is okay, probably 20/48, not as crappy as my GPA.. I am just wondering why schools think my grade for EE is going to matter that much with my ability in design...Sorry..that i am really hopeless now on this application thing..almost all the good schools has a cut-off grade for GPA..

Maybe you should have spent a bit more time on some of your projects/courses WHILE you could have done something about your GPA. What does that come out to? Averaging C's or C+'s with a couple B's in there?

Proper planning my friend. Did you not think far enough ahead or what?

I knew people in my program who had under a 3.0. Some of them were admitted on a "provisional" basis. They had to maintain a 3.0 the first year and then were golden. It was pretty easy for them too. and no one knows you're on provisional acceptance unless you tell them. It's no big deal!

I wouldnt sweat it dude. Just send in a kick-ass portfolio. Search the threads and see the folios people have done in the past. Many people here can give you some very useful advice.

OTF, yeah proper planning usually works out...yeah i mean, what were you thinking in first year, you certainly weren't thinking about grad school...especially because as an EE major all those studio classes probably cramped your style...

the way to grad school, i would think as a non traditional major, would be gre's, a kicking portfolio, and go to one of the programs offered by some of the grad schools for people in your situation; harvard offers one, i think sci-arc does as well...

^ yes SCI_Arc does offer a program, it's called Making and Meaning. There was a discussion about it a month or so ago on here but it quickly turned into a SCI_Arc is crap/SCI_Arc is awesome debate so take it with a grain of salt.

GPA and GRE score importance really varies on the school you are applying to. Rice, for an example, places a lot of weight on GRE scores. My understanding, at least of the UC system, is that they take your GRE and GPA and combine them and if they don't meet a minimum threshold, you don't make the priority cut to the next round. But as people have mentioned, if you can find a more personal way in, like an instructor from said school that knows people there and can make a personal recommendation, that goes a long way. I actually eliminated schools off my application list because I wasn't sure I would make the cut (with a 3.48 GPA and 1250 GRE). It helps to just really focus on those schools you are most interested in going to and contact the admissions office directly. Generally admissions offices are pretty helpful if you ask them direct and detailed questions.

Something you might want to consider in parallel with this is the longevity of the school. I say this in regards to the UC system that is really suffering from budget cutbacks. I don't think UCLA and USC will cease to exist but I would be cautious that facilities and support would potentially be non-existent and yet you be paying increased tuition.

Best of luck.

I think you'll have a chance of getting in somewhere if you have a good portfolio. What you need to do is take your situation and turn it around to your advantage ... you could explain your GPA in your essay if you turned it into a tale of how you struggled through a scientific field before discovering that art (the more artistic field of architecture) was your true calling.

.._. .._ _._. _._,
I'm pretty sure USC is not a part of the UC system as they are a private institution. So I wouldn't think that they are suffering as much from budget cuts as would a public institution.

i attended the ucla m. arch program open house in 2007 and in 2008. 2008 was especially book since greg lynn had a symposium on the same night and i was able to cop a signed copy of his latest book.

anyway, here is the deal according to professors from ucla. the 3.0 minimum gpa is enforced by the university and not the department. with that being said, they informed us that they red flag an application from a prospective student with less than the 3.0 gpa requirement. while this does seem like a hurdle, they did also say that they have admitted students with less than a 3.0 gpa in the past. the most important component is the portfolio.

my understanding is, and this is pretty much across the board, an amazing portfolio more than makes up for a terrible gpa. however, the opposite is not true.

so, my advice would be to still apply to the schools you are really interested in attending even though they may have requirements you do not necessarily meet. make your portfolio strong as possible, and you just never know!

Just make sure you have an absolutely amazing portfolio! Personally, I'd be shocked if any top schools admitted anyone with that low of a gpa (sorry), simply because there are so many applicants that will have high gpas.


My question: why now? Obviously you are somewhat intelligent if #1 you got a 1350 on your gre (which doesn't really matter much anymore) and #2 you are asking?

If I were reviewing things that would be my question. A 2.8 is pretty low, so I'd expect an explanation (assuming that the port stopped me in my tracks).

You will find somewhere, though, perhaps somewhere good if you have a quality portfolio. I wouldn't focus much on schools that say they'll eliminate lower than a 3, unless you feel you have an advantage or maybe just submit to one, but focus on places that you have a chance, research, etc.

that GPA won't mean anything as long as your recs and portfolio are strong....don't worry about it

Psshh it is only 0.2 points lower. 2.8 is not that bad (2.4 here..) Like everybody said concentrate on your portfolio and get good recommendations. I believe the competition is currently high in graduate admissions due to the people trying to "ride it out by getting over educated" so if you can't get into the top school you can try it later like maybe a year later when the competition will be less(I'm assuming..)

It will not be a problem if you have good letters of rec, portfolio and essay. I had that same gpa (from an academically rigorous undergrad program. I mention this because they seem to weigh this factor, say, against a low gpa from a less rigorous undergrad program. ) and got in. And also sat on the admissions committee of a graduate program. It may, however, factor into how much money you may or may not get.

whoops- a 2.8 gpa is not going to take you out of the running. Just make sure your portfolio is great, your personal statement/ essay is great and you have strong recommendations that speak to your potential success at grad school. I had a 2.9 gpa out of undergrad-my first two years stinked it up...ended up changing my major end of sophmore year, and the grades got a lot better, but those first two years brought my overall gpa down. You may want to write a small note to go with your transcripts commenting on why some grades were bad.
even with my gpa, i was able to get in to a top ranked grad school. in order of what they usually look at for admissions: portfolio, personal essay, letters of rec, gpa/gre.
so apply where you think you will fit in, get to study what you are interested in, and where you think you will succeed. we can't go back and change the past...we can only look to how we can change our future.

I've got a question about Berkeley. They ask for you to fill out a excel-based GPA sheet that calculates based your last two years, but they say they want all transcripts as well. I've got a college transcript that shows a 1.7 for my first two years and a 3.9 for my last two (these two years include 95% of my work towards my degrees as well). Can anyone give me some insight as to how they'll look at that?

did you change majors or did something significant happen? If so, you can provide a brief explanation, but most will look at the last 2-3 years of your transcript, mostly the grades in your major. but with the 1.7-since it is really low, i would provide a brief explanation.

Thanks tinydancer.

I thought they only counted the gpa that was attributed to your major? Could be wrong, but that's what I recall.