midnight

At least one person here has challenged her AW score and won--ETS changed the AW score from a 4.0 to a 5.0, I believe. However, your programs may not give much credence to the AW in general. If you provide a strong SOP along with strong LORs, a CV that shows your professional writing experience, and your high verbal score, I honestly can't see many schools placing too much emphasis on lackluster ETS essays that were scored in a rote manner.

From everything I've gathered here and elsewhere, top 10 schools look for perfect or near-perfect quant scores from STEM applicants. Your application sounds strong, but you should practice a ton of GRE-specific problems, familiarize yourself with test tricks, and retake.

Cody, which programs in particular are you considering? Your quant will be problematic for a top poli sci program, and your verbal will be problematic for a top history program. You should make a concentrated effort to review for the test and take it again.

Oh, and four years is a while, but it's not ancient history. I'm surprised she isn't willing to write an LOR for you. Can you send her old papers or any other reminders about the quality of your work?

I finally heard back from the prof I was waiting on shortly after I sent a quick reminder email. She apologized for taking so long to get back to me. WHEW. And octopussongs: Yeah, I feel like I took too much time off as well. I shouldn't have taken more than two years off, but I got sidetracked by some health and family issues. Better late than never!

It sounds like you're doing all that you can do, so try not to stress too much. Are you applying to some competitive and less competitive schools? As an aside, I used to work for the American College of Radiology (just as a paper-pusher, nothing important). Radiology is a fascinating field.

Well, first of all, I think you should aim to make your GRE score more than merely "serviceable," especially your quant score. You don't want anything else on your app to be detrimental. A skillfully written SOP and glowing LORs will go a very long way in a situation like yours. Emphasize that you're currently in a field that you love and that the opportunity for an MPH would mean so much for you personally and professionally. Definitely talk up your research work, experience, and philanthropy! Your SOP should be about your strengths and assets and no more than a quick explanation about your past issues. (I think any mentions of awards are more appropriate for your CV.) Honestly you sound like a good candidate, possibly even a great one. Experience, passion, and initiative go a long way in public health. Just strengthen what you can and present yourself in the best possible light. Don't dwell on the past. Focus on the future.

I think you're more than fine for Korbel: "Average GRE scores (including International students' scores) under the new scoring system are: 160 (verbal), 155 (quantitative) and 5.0 (analytical). The average scores under the old scoring system are: 600 (verbal), 600 (quantitative) and 5.0 (analytical). The average GPA for incoming Josef Korbel School students is 3.6/4.0." However, I do think you should retake for Tufts if you want a better shot.

Oh yeah, I think that two of the biggest AW flaws are the entirely artificial setting and arbitrary timeframe given for it. I majored in English and never had to write essays off the top of my head within 30 minutes. Some of my finals required essay responses, but I was responding to material that had been discussed during the semester, not brand-new information. Anyway, I decided to take the AW with a grain of salt and just made sure to write as much as I could in a standard essay format. I scored a 5.0 with very little preparation; I mostly made sure that I understood the main difference between the Issue and the Argument tasks since I have no doubt some people score 3.0 or lower by giving their personal opinions in the Argument essay instead of breaking down, questioning, and offering improvements for the argument.

Taking AW into consideration makes sense to me. I was surprised to learn that so many schools mostly disregard it. I mean, I don't think AW should be a be-all and end-all, and there are definite flaws in that portion of the GRE. However, effective written communication is important in any field, and it seems like many STEM students shy away from writing or only care about raw data even though writing is an essential part of the academic (and professional!) world. I think the large amount of science writing that appears in the GRE's reading comprehension passages indicates that those in the science field need to be capable writers.

Valkener: Just the standard Cracking the GRE 2013. But steer clear of PR's 1000-and-whatever practice questions books; apparently they're riddled with errors.

I personally think the latter since the A with the famous prof will speak for itself on your transcript. I think it would be different if you had an established relationship with the famous prof, but it sounds like the letter from him would be good but generic and not glowing. However, I'm not sure if the name alone would give you more notice in a sea of applicants. Hm, hopefully someone who knows a lot more than I do can weigh in.

Honestly 10 schools is not some outrageous amount. It seems within the realm of normal for applicants to apply to five to 10 schools since grad school admissions are incredibly competitive. It won't hurt to give the next prof a heads up, but I don't think most would be surprised by your application amount.

While I know it's disappointing and confusing that she won't write the letter, it's probably best not to pursue it further since she sounds unenthusiastic and has clearly stated she has no time (which I find particularly irksome because part of being a professor is writing LORs--time is a poor excuse unless a student asks for an LOR extremely close to the deadline). As darthvegan mentioned, perhaps she's giving you this excuse because she can't highly recommend you for whatever reason. A negative or lazy letter is incredibly detrimental to an app, so it's in your best interest to find someone else who is happy to write you a strong one.

As someone who really likes the PR book, I do agree with your assessment of it. It's definitely a book for people who need no more than a light to moderate review of math concepts as it focuses far more on being efficient and avoiding ETS traps, not on essential math concepts. I think that the PR plus a book like The Ultimate Math Refresher or Math for Standardized Tests is a good combination. As for the endurance aspect of the GRE, maybe I should try taking some Gu or another distance athlete supplement before sitting for the test or during a break this time. (I'm only half-joking!)

Dimbulb (haha, nice name): I highly suggest the PR review for test tactics. Clearly you know straightforward math if you're pursuing accounting, but PR helps you tackle the GRE itself.

I think average verbal scores in the 500s are rather common for many non-humanities programs (of course I can't remember if you're applying to a humanities program or not, so what I'm saying might be moot, haha). I scored 630v when I took the GRE last year, and that was the 89th percentile, I believe.

I like the Princeton Review book far better than Kaplan, and Barron's seems to be popular as well. I would definitely not rely on Kaplan as my sole source of review and practice. A lot of people here recommend Manhattan prep materials, but I have no personal experience with them--they sound thorough and comprehensive, though! The ETS also has a book that's good for practice since it's, well, from the people who bring you the GRE. And I've watched a few Magoosh videos on Youtube and liked them. However, I have no clue if they're worth $100+.

I'm sorry, but I couldn't disagree more. 12 to 14 hours a day? Maybe 12 to 14 hours for the entire week, but a day?! How is that even possible? Not to mention the burnout one would have before she even got to the testing center. Also vocabulary is truly not as important anymore. It was an important part of the last iteration of the test due to the antonym and analogy questions, but the new GRE is more about context and reading comprehension, not sheer recall of vocab words.

I'm going to assume that the equivalent of 700 quant would make you competitive for the ed programs (only an assumption--I could very well be wrong), but given the math component of those fields and the highly competitive nature of the schools in general, you should obviously aim for as high as possible. For a competitive pure econ program, I believe you need a very high quant score, nearly perfect.

paige, after a quick perusal of Berkeley's site, I think you should definitely apply! Berkeley seems highly interested in experienced and passionate people more than anything.

Cyberwulf, do you think that all of the other elements of an application can reasonably "make up for" (for lack of a better phrase) attending a less selective undergrad institution?

Happy birthday, ktwho! My advice (not great, but it is what it is): Review/practice as efficiently as you can with Princeton Review and Powerprep, retake the GRE, and don't skip any questions. Quite honestly it may be a waste of time to study for reading comprehension, especially if you need ample time to focus on your SOP. I find many of the passages to be rather straightforward or at least tolerable while the questions are willfully obtuse or bizarre. That's where Hail Mary guesswork might help you next time.

Yes, that's been my understanding of the professional programs as well; it's good to see it underlined here. I think my SOP does a good job of spelling out my professional aspirations, and it also demonstrates my (albeit limited) experience and personal interest in the field, so I hope that's enough to impress at least one school. And in the end all I can do is apply and try again if it doesn't work out, but I truly don't know what I'd do without resources like Grad Cafe and Applying to Grad on LJ!

Thanks, fuzzy. I really appreciate your response. This is where the grad school admissions game gets to me: I'm sure the instructor I had for media criticism could comment on any of my potentially relevant skills as I was definitely a standout in his class and a memorable student. However, doesn't that essentially boil down to "she did well in class"? The course was a standard lecture and discussion; there were no opportunities to make it more than that, really, even for the students in the major--but I don't wholly understand why that's so terrible from an adcom perspective? (And to be perfectly honest, the prof from my discipline whose reply I'm awaiting can really only say the same thing about me. I was an English lit major, and there wasn't much more to it than attend class, participate, write thoughtful papers, and do well on the final. And I did that in spades.) And, while this is a bit tangential, I think I may be confused as to what professional grad programs like SLP are looking for in out-of-field applicants. It seems like a catch-22.