It's a lot easier to determine if you are capable from "my GPA is x" rather than having someone sit down and write code for a few hours and doing a code review.
Everyone does code review or whiteboards now in industry at least - it's not as if you're offered a residency or job after you get a degree unless it's a pretty good degree with some actual interviewing.
What part is the sunk cost? Interviewing applicants takes time out of a lot of peoples' busy days. They don't have to spend that time if the company doesn't bring the applicant in for an interview.
That's obvious enough. Any recruiting funnel will have a criteria of requirements that the prospect needs to fulfill.
Then they're brought in for a technical interview. There's no escaping that. You don't give automatically give them a job because they listed a 4.0 GPA on their CV and were nice on the phone.
Ugh, plenty of people are not motivated by school, but manage to pass it with decent grades. I'd personally stay away from "talent" who can work just on the assignments they have genuine deep interest in.
I've never seen "GPA" as a requirement on an application before. Listing your GPA on your CV might help if its a good one, but I haven't seen data to support that.
It's a lot easier to determine if you are capable from "my GPA is x" rather than having someone sit down and write code for a few hours and doing a code review.