next »

[newbie]

Imagine a student who graduated with a 2.8 GPA. Her low grades are mostly from her science classes (organic chemistry, for instance).

She is interested in graduate school in order to be a dietician, and her background degree is relevant. However, she is very concerned her low grades will hold her back. What could a student like her do to make up for those low grades?

And in general, are students with poor undergraduate records considered for graduate course work in your field? What helps them earn their edge?

[t_r_b]

I don't know much about graduate training in dietetics, but I'd imagine the science prereqs are pretty important. I'd advise her to contact the graduate programs she's interested in, let them know about her situation, and ask for their advice.

In general, if you've done badly grade-wise as an undergrad, graduate programs will not be sympathetic. Some are no doubt more willing than others to cut applicants slack, and if it's a revenue-raising program (as I imagine a pre-professional program in diatetics would be), then they may not care at all as long as you pay the tuition. More to the point, though, if you've done badly as an undergrad, why would you want to go to grad school at all? Especially in a field related to the courses you had the most trouble with?

[infopri]

I had a similar GPA as an undergrad.  What got me into grad school was the decade I spent working after getting my bachelor's degree.  My 10+ years of professional experience--especially the full complement of recommendation letters that came out of it--demonstrated to the admissions committee that I'd finally grown up and learned how to get things done and how to do them well.  When I went for my grad-school admissions interviews, no one even mentioned my undergrad GPA.

[newbie]

That's good to hear, infopri.

the_raised_bar, according to my reading as well as my relative's, a lot of RDs don't actually use their biochemistry knowledge on the job. Typical graduate program coursework (from what I can tell) involves classes in health, nutrition, and SOME chemistry (e.g., metabolism), but not to the same degree as in undergraduate training. So at least for my relative, that's relevant.

Why would anyone want to go into graduate school if you did poorly as an undergraduate? It depends on why they did poorly, doesn't it?

[miss_m]

I can't speak for dietitians, but departments in my humanities field often house master's programs with a more arts and "practitioner" emphasis that are separate from research-focused/scholarly programs--even when just MAs.  I once had a colleague who went to bat for a student in this situation applying for the arts/practitioner program, attempting to argue that the low GPA was from tangentially related coursework. This student was admitted to the program primarily because of professional experience that made up for the low GPA. However, no funding was offered--even though the program funded almost all students in that program at least in part.  The student in question knew that, was offended at being denied funding, and never came to the program.  I don't know what happened to hu later, and many of us had wanted to see how hu would handle the coursework--sort of like a test case--for future admissions decisions.

I don't know if this helps your student (real or imagined), but the arguments against the student and the low GPA were mostly about hu's ability to meet expectations in the more research-oriented courses required for the degree.  (Grads had to keep a 3.0 or leave.) Hu's supporters argued that the professional experience had given the candidate the ability to understand the real-world application of the material that many of our other students lacked and that the low GPA did not reflect hu's ability in this field specifically.  No scholarly writing sample was required, and the program didn't have a required GPA for apps.  However, if this one faculty member hadn't wanted that student, I am sure we would have passed right over hu in the pile.

[octoprof]

I don't know anything about that particular field. I imagine the level of competition might impact whether the student is likely to get into grad school. I had a similar undergrad GPA (mostly due to overloads and trying to finish in 3 years).  However, I countered that with very good GMAT scores and was accepted into a masters program (same major), where my GPA was very high.  I had no trouble going on to a PhD program.  Your mileage may vary, of course.

[happycamper]

A lot depends on the competitiveness of the specific program(s) that the student is applying to.  Some programs might allow a student to counterbalance a not-so-hot GPA with stellar GRE scores or scads of relevant internship/hands-on experience in the field. 

I also think that it depends on how the 2.8 GPA came to be.  I think that it would be one thing if a student struggled in his/her first year or two, but turned things around at the end (but the GPA just couldn't quite recover).  It's another if the student just struggled in his/her coursework all along - especially if it continued into upper-level coursework that's relevant to the graduate program.

I'd recommend that the student start doing some serious research on specific programs, including asking for their stats on applicants vs. matriculants (# applied vs. # accepted vs. # enrolled, GPA, GRE scores, etc.).

[juniper]

Maybe she could consider enrolling in a post-bac (post-baccalaureate) program and re-taking some of the science courses?

[dr_prephd]

I had a 2.9 as an undergrad, from realizing I was going to fail physics and statistics after the drop deadline. Neither class was in my major, so I survived. Then I went to work for a few years before applying for my master's program, and got a 4.0. Now I'm in a top-20 doctoral program in my field. I'd say the low undergrad. GPA wasn't much of a factor for me. I had good recs, a super GPA in my major, and real life experience. YMMV.

[imawakenow]

I don't know anything about that particular field. I imagine the level of competition might impact whether the student is likely to get into grad school. I had a similar undergrad GPA (mostly due to overloads and trying to finish in 3 years).  However, I countered that with very good GMAT scores and was accepted into a masters program (same major), where my GPA was very high.  I had no trouble going on to a PhD program.  Your mileage may vary, of course.

Actually, that was pretty much my mileage exactly.

I drifted as an undergraduate, took a number of years off working before deciding to go to graduate school (well, it was more complicated than that). I did very well on the GREs and was accepted into a moderately selective M.A. program. I did very well and then applied to Ph.D. programs. I was accepted into everyone I applied to except one--that, interestingly enough, specifically mentioned my low undergraduate GPA.

Nevertheless, I'm happy in my top-10 program.

A couple of things that I believe helped: 1) Enough time had elapsed between undergraduate and M.A. so that I could make the argument that I had "grown up." 2) Even though my M.A. program wasn't that selective, it had a fairly good record of sending on graduates to Ph.D. programs. The DGS should be able to address that.

Oh, I think the post-baccalaureate option or even a second major may work just as well.

[acrimone]

Max your standardized tests and submit stellar letters of recommendation.

If their GPA really doesn't reflect their ability, then the tests and letters shouldn't be a problem.  If they can't do those things, the GPA probably does reflect their ability and they probably don't belong in grad school anyway.

[t_r_b]

the_raised_bar, according to my reading as well as my relative's, a lot of RDs don't actually use their biochemistry knowledge on the job.

I have no doubt that this is the case. I suspect it is equally true of most MDs. And yet medical schools are still rather particular about these science prerequisites. I suspect dietitian schools also care about them (probably not as much as med schools, but they still care). If your friend wanted an MFA in creative writing, the organic chemistry grade would be less of a concern.

I agree with what everyone else has said about how you can balance a weakness in an application with strength in other areas, but I really want to stress the value of contacting the programs themselves and asking them directly about the situation. If nothing else, you'll get a sense of which ones are more likely to overlook the low GPA in light of other qualifications, and that could save your friend an application fee or two.

One other thing: a good friend of mine is a dietitian (recently completed her internship), and I've learned a lot from her about the culture of the field. Granted, every profession has its share of nutcases, and academia probably has more than most, but everything I've heard about nutrition and dietetics suggests that they win first prize in the greatest proportion of dysfunctional personalities department. Of course, if this is true it underscores our society's need for more sane and well-adjusted people to enter this field. On the other hand, it means that your friend may have to brace herself for more than her share of difficult teachers and co-workers. Just my $0.02, take it for what it's worth.

[infopri]

One other thing: a good friend of mine is a dietitian (recently completed her internship), and I've learned a lot from her about the culture of the field. Granted, every profession has its share of nutcases, and academia probably has more than most, but everything I've heard about nutrition and dietetics suggests that they win first prize in the greatest proportion of dysfunctional personalities department. Of course, if this is true it underscores our society's need for more sane and well-adjusted people to enter this field. On the other hand, it means that your friend may have to brace herself for more than her share of difficult teachers and co-workers. Just my $0.02, take it for what it's worth.

Just to offer a different perspective:

One of my closest friends (25+ years) and one of her closest friends (whom I've also known for 25+ years) are both clinical dietitians who earned their master's degrees at our local university.  The college in which the program was offered was so weak that it was eventually eliminated, but its strongest programs--including the one in nutrition and dietetics--were retained and incorporated into another college.

Both of these women are among the most grounded people I know, both professionally and in their personal lives.  Their stories about grad school do not suggest any kind of unusual dysfunction (just the usual variety), and they both clearly learned what they went there to learn.  Moreover, in 25+ years of work-related anecdotes, I've heard nothing to indicate that their colleagues are particularly screwed up.  So, the_raised_bar, the stories you heard from your friend may be limited to that one department on that one campus.  I don't think it's an occupational hazard of the field.

So there you go, newbie.  Now you have $0.04 to consider.

[t_r_b]

So, the_raised_bar, the stories you heard from your friend may be limited to that one department on that one campus.  I don't think it's an occupational hazard of the field.

To be precise, the stories are limited to one department on one campus, plus a dozen or so clinical settings through which my friend rotated during an internship in another part of the country, completely unconnected to the original department.

I freely admit that I may have overvalued this input at $0.02. In any case, I encourage OP's friend to ask around and figure out if the culture of the field is right for her (if she hasn't already).

[infopri]

I freely admit that I may have overvalued this input at $0.02. In any case, I encourage OP's friend to ask around and figure out if the culture of the field is right for her (if she hasn't already).

Nah, it's just good to collect a few dollars' worth of these anecdotes.  :)

And yes, I agree that the OP's friend should ask around--a lot.