<p>The low GPA is what deters a majority of students from entering engineering. Not a lot of people are willing to take C’s. Also, I used to think it was unfair that they tend to have it easier but think about it. We are not in competition with these people for jobs. No guy with a 3.9 GPA in a liberal arts degree is going to be gunning for your engineering job. It is apples to oranges. Also, it is EXPECTED that students maintain a high GPA in social sciences. My girlfriend is going to have a hard time getting into Harvard with a 3.9 (Psychology & Art) undergrad GPA for graduate school.</p>
<p>The work may seem easier to us, but it is really only because we have taken general education courses, not the actual upper-divison classes in their major. Theoretically if one did start off in the major we could have a super high GPA and have worked a lot less, but what’s it worth to us? The fact is that the degree is worth something to them. I would’ve gone into English if I hadn’t gone into math. Would I be happier at some place like UC Berkeley with a 4.0 GPA? Hell no. I’d take much more pride in getting through something I liked and found enjoyable. </p>
<p>Would it really make a difference to us if their majors were really hard? I would still think people would turn up their noses and still say “not as hard as engineering, math, physics, chemistry, etc.”. </p>
<p>So I don’t think it’s unfair. When I was taking a physics class at my CC this past spring there were two teachers: both had PhD’s, both were from UCLA, one was easy and one was hard. I was in the hard class (by my own choice) and it took 5x as much effort to get through my class than my friends who took the other professor, memorized the answers to problems, and passed with easy A’s (they all matriculated to UCLA, UC Berkeley, UCSD). </p>
<p>Now that is unfair.</p>
<p>Also, take into account the job market for these people. They may have higher GPA’s, but how are they going to get jobs when the job market is saturated with liberal arts majors? After all the hard work you put in engineering you can definitely get a job. The same can’t be said for these people. Even with the very highest GPA, they’ll still be evaluated alongside peers from more prestigious universities that have the same GPA and be tossed out accordingly. </p>
<p>I do honestly think that Cal Poly Pomona should up their standards for all colleges outside of Architecture, Engineering, Collins College, and Science. The problem is that Cal Poly Pomona I feel like does not advertise. During the summer I have seen so many Cal Poly SLO ads on this very website I’ve been annoyed. Also, just simply googling Cal Poly SLO they have clothes made by Nike and the like. I can barely find any merchandise on other websites beside Cal Poly Pomona’s official bookstore. Even there it is lacking. </p>
<p>I know that when they bumped up their admissions standards a few years ago that people were reluctant to come and they had to admit a bunch of unqualified people because they had trouble filling the spots. What’s more is that we are not a research university and don’t get huge endowments to afford resources like UC students. That’s what increases prestige - money and opportunities. Heavy advertising and a STRONG alumni network. If there are tons of successful alumni coming out of Cal Poly Pomona and heading off to prestigious universities, getting prestigious jobs, getting into acting, etc. the name will get out there.</p>
<p>So I feel like if Cal Poly Pomona doesn’t start revamping their admissions standards heavily this university will fall by the wayside and be stuck with the stigmatism that it is only second best (a red-headed stepchild to Cal Poly SLO), only a CSU, and accepts a heavy amount of idiots that should have matriculated elsewhere. Very high-caliber people won’t come to CPP unless it has the resources and reputation to back it up. </p>
<p>Unfortunately, it is very hard to do this I feel like in a time of economic crisis.</p>