An American seeking a graduate degree in the UK

For the most 'British' experience, you'd have to go to the old Universities, such as Cambridge, Oxford, Durham, in England and St Andrews and Glasgow in Scotland

I am seeing a lot of GPA talk. I was really hoping that was not going to be a factor. My GPA is around 2.5. I have a few summer classes that will bring that up plus a pretty easy senior year but I really could not imagine going above a 3.0 which cuts out most of the top schools that have been mentioned (beyond Leeds which is admittedly mid tier). What I do have going for me is the fact that I have had/currently have some great internships and I am getting a paper published next spring (although it will be in a different subject). Will this help my case? Or am I in deep trouble?

Another note: I do not mind going to a mid or even bottom tier school. The beauty of GIS is that most employers are more interested in your experience than your degree. Although going to a top tier school would be wonderful (and I will probably send at least a few applications), it is not the most important thing in the world. It is not like english, philosophy, or history in that the reputation of your department is a major factor. In 2006, there were 2 graduate programs in the US in geography. There are now approximately 162. I would imagine that it is similar in the UK. Even if reputation was a factor, none of these departments have been around long enough to really, truly, be able to say that they are head and shoulders above the rest. So, in conclusion, I am more interested in a school that I can realistically get into, I would rather be closer to a cultural center to get the most "British" experience, and reputation will probably be the next factor I look at, but only after considering the first two. Does this make sense to everyone?

I don't know about Canadian GPAs but for the US system, most unis have a 3.5 GPA as a 2:1 equivalent and 3.7 as a first. But it varies. Some will accept 3.4 as a 2:1, while some (but not all) top programs that ask for a first want a 3.85 GPA. The only definitive answer will be from the department you are applying to.

Hmm that sounds pretty strange to me. 3.7 GPA would correspond to about 90%, which is much higher than the usual threshold for a UK first (70%).

I had an average of 84%, which would be equivalent to about 3.4-3.5 US GPA, and was accepted for a MSc course that requires a first.

I guess the only explanation would be if the percentage distributions are very different between US and UK.

The percentage distributions are different. Sorry, I assumed you knew that already. Many unis have conversions on the pages for international students on their websites, it's easy enough for you to check. I'm not aware of any uni however that equates a 3.5 GPA to a first, as indicated above for most it is the minimum acceptable for a 2:1.

See here for an example of grade equivalency required , though as I noted above most take 3.7 as a first, this is more stringent:
http://mws.polis.cam.ac.uk/courses/graduates/prosmphilirpol.html

Hmm that sounds pretty strange to me. 3.7 GPA would correspond to about 90%, which is much higher than the usual threshold for a UK first (70%).

I had an average of 84%, which would be equivalent to about 3.4-3.5 US GPA, and was accepted for a MSc course that requires a first.

I guess the only explanation would be if the percentage distributions are very different between US and UK.

In my university

A = 4.0= >90%
B = 3.0=>80%
C = 2.0= >70%
D = 1.0= >60%
F = 0.0= <50%

So if you had say 2 courses worth 3 credits each and in course X you gain a 87% a 3.0 while in course Y you gain a 79% a 2.0. Your semester average is a 2.5

Other schools use different system where your 79% would be a C+ (2.3) and your 87% a B- ( 3.3) . Your semester average would then be a 2.8.

The last one I find to be a lot fairer. We do not get percentage averages or even bothered with those. Infact one time I had a 97% in my course, my professor incorrectly stated as a 91% , I let him know this, and he replied "well its still an A: and never changed this. I of course did not care. but if I had a 91% and it got incorrectly graded as a 89% then I damn sure would raise the roof. But if you were going to convert a 2.5 gpa to percentage using that scale you would have a 75% but this is never done in the US.

For UK universities, grading is pretty much set on a stone
First-Class Honours (First or 1st) (70% and above) (OPEN UNIVERSITY 85%+)
Upper Second-Class Honours (2:1, 2.i) (60-70%) (OPEN UNIVERSITY 70-85%)
Lower Second-Class Honours (2:2, 2.ii) (50-60%) (OPEN UNIVERSITY 55-70%)
Third-Class Honours (Third or 3rd) (40-50%) (OPEN UNIVERSITY 40-55%)

For postgraduate studies different UK universities have different equivalent for what equates a Upper Second-Class (which is a general requirement for MOST not ALL courses).

It usually ranges from a 2.75 to a 3.5, a huge range I know but its very bell shaped. a 3.0 requirement is more common than a 3.5 requirement. So never convert your percentages to degree classifications the admission council at the uni you are applying to would do that themselves.

I think a 2.75 should be considered a second class upper. I mean I read in an article that 70% of UK students obtain a second-class upper and above. That is pretty ridiculous. In my undergrad uni only about 30% would be able to gain a 3.0 and above. I also think they should pay more attention to the major gpa than cumulative gpa.

The only sensible way to compare grading systems is by class rank, IMO. If 30% of UK students get a first and 30% of US people have at least a 3.7 GPA, then 3.7 is roughly the border between 2:1 and 1st.

Still, how individual universities compare the two varies greatly for a ton of reasons. You should just ask if you need to know the exact conversion.

I am seeing a lot of GPA talk. I was really hoping that was not going to be a factor. My GPA is around 2.5. I have a few summer classes that will bring that up plus a pretty easy senior year but I really could not imagine going above a 3.0 which cuts out most of the top schools that have been mentioned (beyond Leeds which is admittedly mid tier). What I do have going for me is the fact that I have had/currently have some great internships and I am getting a paper published next spring (although it will be in a different subject). Will this help my case? Or am I in deep trouble?

Another note: I do not mind going to a mid or even bottom tier school. The beauty of GIS is that most employers are more interested in your experience than your degree. Although going to a top tier school would be wonderful (and I will probably send at least a few applications), it is not the most important thing in the world. It is not like english, philosophy, or history in that the reputation of your department is a major factor. In 2006, there were 2 graduate programs in the US in geography. There are now approximately 162. I would imagine that it is similar in the UK. Even if reputation was a factor, none of these departments have been around long enough to really, truly, be able to say that they are head and shoulders above the rest. So, in conclusion, I am more interested in a school that I can realistically get into, I would rather be closer to a cultural center to get the most "British" experience, and reputation will probably be the next factor I look at, but only after considering the first two. Does this make sense to everyone?