Originally posted by Apu Nahasapeemapetil:
Originally posted by Pre98:

Pure arrogance. edit: on the recruiters part.



What Pre98 said is true. Hiring criterias should be based on knowledge, skills and abilities + intelligence. Higher GPA scores have a correlation to the intelligence of the person regardless of where he/she earns it.



Keyword there is "should".

Fact of the matter is that a given position will likely have dozens, if not hundreds, and in many cases thousands of applicants. The pool has to be limited to who will actually get in the door to be interviewed and that's gonna be done based on what is on that piece of paper not how intelligent of a person you come across as if given the chance to talk to the interviewer.

The best person for the job "should" be the one that gets it. Fact is that probably never happens. Whether it be because the "best person" who applied has an degree from University of Phoenix and never got an interview, because the "best person" has a degree from a brick & mortar but it wasn't as 'pretigious' as some other applicants and got shoved out of the pool, or something as trivial as the "best person" having some bad garlic breath that day and didn't even manage to get past the initial HR interview.

Stupid crap always pulls out better candidates. It's just the way it works. You'll do yourself a favor by avoiding one of those 'stupid' things and going to an actual brick and mortar school for your degree. Not because it's necessarily a better education, but because it's one less reason for your resume to never even get past some HR person tasked with reducing the 500 applicants down to a pool of 10 interviews.

2003 Mazda6s 3.0L MTX Webpage 2004 Mazda3s 2.3L ATX