Robert Paquette of See Thru Edu has an interesting new post that explores the value of a college education through the eyes of employers.

Employer: “Many of the ‘best universities’ produce the worst employees.”

Middle American parents, hardest hit by higher education’s inflation, comparing Penn with Penn State, might want to know how prospective employers of their sons and daughters evaluate transcripts and whether they assess them in real or nominal terms.

To find out, I sent an inquiry to about a dozen very successful persons who have been hiring over the years in the fields of manufacturing, finance, construction, and philanthropy. I asked them two questions: What do you look for in making a new hire? How much weight do you put on the college transcript? In not one case did my responders express confidence in what might be called the nominal value of the transcript. They recognize the bloat. A product of an open curriculum, someone who has achieved a sterling grade point average by gravitating toward soft “studies” programs, while avoiding foundational courses in math and science or history and economics, will, simply put, raise a red flag in the job interview.

My respondents put more faith in standardized test scores, which may be administered by others or, increasingly, by their own firms. One dear friend of the Alexander Hamilton Institute, a successful entrepreneur now in his seniority, recalled that in his “hiring days,” not once did he ask for GPA. He wanted to know what, if anything, the applicant had done during his life to overcome adversity. “The true test of a person’s value is not their résumé or performance in school. It is totally their personal value system and character.”

Another respondent, a very successful lawyer and businessman, as well as the beneficiary of a traditional liberal arts education, admitted that he looked at the applicant’s transcript but not necessarily at the GPA. He wanted to know if the graduate had attended “what used to be [called] the standard courses in college (i.e., English, history, math, economics, government, etc.) . . . When I see a resume with a lot of non-standard courses, I am not impressed, and I ask why these more standard courses weren’t available at the college (as if I assumed they would take them if they were offered!) and the explanations I get are amazing and always unacceptable.”

One respondent, an incredible Horatio Alger story, born in poverty in a tough town in the northern tip of the Appalachian Mountains, now presides over a diversified empire of operations that includes one of the largest construction firms of its kind east of the Mississippi River. He too emphasized the character of an applicant in the search for new hires. He put “[z]ero weight on college transcripts!” In fact, if anything, he considered high-school transcripts a better measure of “raw intelligence” for much of what “you are really going to be in life is well intact by age 18.” To be sure, he wanted someone “bright,” but without the baggage of “entitlement,” someone who “cries out” that he or she is willing to “work hard to get ahead in life.” He did not care where the applicant went to college.

“Many of the ’best universities,’ he added, “produce the worst employees.” The CEO of a prominent educational non-profit responded similarly. “Folks I know rely on interviews to make sound hires. Grades are only one piece of the puzzle. Can’t think of one business that spends time looking at transcripts. In my experience, performance on the LSAT is the determining factor for law school acceptance. Law firms will look more closely at class rank than grades. . . . Our scholarship program does require scores, and it helps a great deal to vet the ‘grade inflation’ at the high school level and the quality of the school.”