3
Contributors
2
Replies
4
Views
5 Years
Discussion Span
Last Post by Rashakil Fol
0

3.7 to 4 ( may scale vary at your institute) or exactly 4 would be a milestone achivement

2

(That depends on your competition.)

Your degree and GPA don't matter. You have to not suck at programming.

The only purpose your degree or GPA matters in this game is for the purpose of getting a company that might like to hire you to give you a phone screen. (It also functions as a signaling mechanism that may affect how much money they offer you for your starting salary.) (Also there is the learning that happens, which makes you a better programmer.)

What really matters is evidence that you don't suck at programming. For example, projects (in your free time) that you have written for fun (or allegedly for fun) will put you ahead. That'll mark you as a non-retarded actual programmer, not just somebody who takes tests and copies off of his groupmates on projects. This means there's less of a chance that you suck at programming, before you get interviewed (because there's actual code you've written that we can see) and after you get interviewed (because there's evidence that you can actually do real things and not just contrived interview problems).

Basically, as your GPA crosses a certain threshold, you go from being high-probability of being retarded to low-probability of being retarded. This range probably goes from 3.2-3.6 and it depends on the school, and the reason there's a range is because factors whether the student was working while in school and how much they cared can skew the outcome. Even the most lazy of smart people can't get below a 3.2, if they show up for exams and do homework assignments. Generally speaking a 3.6-4.0 is still something that somebody stupid but hardworking can get, with 3.6-3.9 plausible for smart lazy people. A 4.0 is what you'll get if you're smart and actually care to get good grades. Somebody with a 3.6 who can pass the interview process has just as much likelihood of being a good programmer at that point, though -- it's more about willingness to deal with boring bullshit at that point than intelligence. (Lack of willingness to put effort into perfecting your work on some silly assignment does not imply lack of willingness to do boring work that actually matters, it turns out.) Below a 3.6 is where you really want evidence that they can actually code before bothering to interview them, because it means B's and below are more than just exceptions to their string of A's.

Votes + Comments
YOu are correct
well said sir!
This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.