On Resume GPA

I don't think so.. I was told by people who are already hired to round up to the first decimal as long as the 2nd is 5 or higher. i.e. 3.45 -> 3.5; 3.65->3.7, etc..

a 3.69 to a 3.7 is fine, but a 3.69 is more eye catching, think about it.

i'd round it up. you won't get dinged and i personally think a 3.7 looks better than a 3.69 on a resume.

I'd go with 3.69. A: It gives more detail and B: The interviewer is going to interpret a 3.7 as a 3.65 - 3.70 (people never round down). I also think it displays a level of honesty to include two decimals as opposed to one. Of course, this has been debated 100 times. Do whichever you like.

the interviewer could also interpret it as 3.65-3.74 I'd round up.

not to hijack:

my cumulative is 3.54, major is 3.57

should i put major as 3.6, and cum as 3.5

OR

just put 3.54?

I have seen a lot of resumes with both major GPA and cumulative. This can come back to bite you though. One guy had a 4.0 major and 3.5 cumulative. To me that said his first two years of college he had a 3.0 and last 2 years has a 4.0. I would have trouble hiring someone who has a 3.0 average in basic history, science, and english.

I've always heard to round up but at the end of the day, CompBanker is right, just do whichever helps you sleep better at night.

When I see a high major GPA and low cumulative, I quickly jump to look at the transcript to see what courses brought the cumulative down. Then I ask why they did so poorly in those courses. You'd be surprised how many guys did poorly in intro to finance, accounting or econ. Probably more so because they were too busy partying in freshman year rather than an indication of their knowledge in these areas but still, does not look good for you.

I agree with CompBanker-- For your specific case, I'd go with the 3.69. 3.7 would be interpreted as 3.65-3.7, instead of 3.65-3.74, because in most cases, people wouldn't round a 3.74 down.

Sorry to hijack this-- what does it mean if an applicant only has major GPA's on his/her resume? (My friend who has a lower cumulative only put down her major and minor gpa's)

I've never seen anyone put a minor GPA on his/her resume. I doubt that's common.

what would they round the 3.74 to or the 3.71? 3.8? that wouldnt fly. most of my friend's resumes only listed one decimal...

Don't worry about decimals and stick to the big picture. Get past the GPA hurdle (my mental hurdle is 3.5) and you'll be good to go on the grade front.

Another thing that I did is include a "Program GPA" which is your combined GPA in your majors and minors. This is really only helpful if your minor GPA is higher, and also only if your minor is relevant. Ie - don't use this if your minor is History or anything...

If you have an irrelevant minor (i.e. like captk mentioned, History, or Music/Art..), is it beter to not include it at all, or would that make you look like a more well-rounded candidate?

Also-- for relevant courses: is it good or bad to include a few courses that's not Econ/Finance/Accounting/Math? (i.e. something really irrelevant but possibly makes you well rounded like.. Studio Art.)

Do not put studio art.

The point is to put "Relevant Coursework."

Haaaa the good old GPA question. I agree with what someone said above about putting your exact GPA, it shows integrity. I had a 3.59, left it as is.

Remember, you will always be a salesman, no matter how fancy your title is.

would putting a major gpa and no cumulative suffice? this is not for nyc bb, but regional + mm