awells27

My faculty advisor for my MA program got admitted to Harvard, Emory, Yale, and Princeton when he applied. He also reviews apps every year. So I consulted with him about what he looks for in reviewing SOPs. While I ended up getting admitted into a history program (due to POI), my other 7 apps were in religion. My opening paragraph was clear about what my desired emphasis was and what specific research areas were related to that field. I then made a case for how my MA degree prepared me in ancient languages, historiography, critical methods, and handling of both primary and secondary sources. I then zeroed in on my POI and why I wanted to work under them, citing the work they have done in my desired research emphasis and how there was a match in both content and methodology. I then mentioned a couple other professors in the program whose mentoring would also be valuable. I then finished with a statement about my career goals and how I hoped my PHD program would want to bridge gaps between the university and lay people, such that research could ultimately have a broader outreach. Then I had my faculty advisor revise it until he said it was acceptable. Remember, if you don't demonstrate a match between yourself and a POI in both content and methodology, they will likely trash your application. And obviously, if they ask for specific info on their website, give it to them. I found, however, that the basic format I did for UCLA, with slight variation, worked for every other application.

Kaplan is good for verbal and writing, but their math does not equal the difficulty of real GRE questions.

I just got funding at UCLA for ancient Jewish History and did my MA at Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, CA (where?). I did my bachelors at Kent State University in Ohio. The strength of my app, beyond divine intervention, was 3 professors who had published extensively writing my LORs, understanding of ancient languages, writing sample, SOP and high GPA. MA reputation is overrated. Your SOP, when applying for PHDs, must show a good knowledge of your POI and other faculty members, as well as a focus that matches their research interests. Your writing sample should demonstrate a command of the primary sources, secondary literature, and languages required for your branch of history. Take the MA that allows you to grow in your field. There should hopefully be two professors in your MA program, however, who have published enough to write you good LORs.

Magoosh - drop the 100 - Manhattan minus the TC/SE vol 7, Kaplan verbal only, and ETS book and Manhattan 5lb practice book after you have studied the previous 3. Read the Magoosh blogs also, as they have many more practice questions. Also, quizlet has tons of GRE vocabulary flashcards. I would learn the Magoosh 1000 and the Barons and Kaplin combined 1579 words.

UCLA has finalized the admissions process, as notifications should be official in the coming days. I have been admitted into ancient history concentration. Received email from POI yesterday. This is the first school to respond, and probably, as a funded offer, a no-brainer, as I would not have to relocate.

If my GRE scores were terrible, I would not apply widely this season. I would choose a few schools and see what comes of it, because 3-4 rejections, worst comes to worst, is better than 8-10. What are you applying for, a quant-oriented or verbal-oriented degree, or both? See if you get lucky tomorrow. If you do, awesome, if you don't, and you have time to prepare seriously for late November's test, by all means do it. I would have problems doing that right now as I am buried in my research submission and SOPs. Your score will likely not improve unless you devote some serious hours to practice.

This just shows how different the tests can be. In my exam, the second verbal and second math sections were significantly harder than the first sections. SO much harder that I started to despair, which was a mistake. Others who got past 160 on both sections said their was no considerable difference. That said, One cannot worry about the difficulty differences while taking the test. If you notice them, do not rejoice or despair. The general rule is that if you do well in round 1, round 2 will be harder, but the GRE is as flawed as any human endeavor. Study hard and hope to get lucky.

The tests are unequal. For instance, some tests have considerable amounts of coordinate geometry, while my test had merely one question in two sections. I was told there would be hardly any probability and combination questions, but I got 3 of each. My RCs were weighted toward scientific essays. My TCs had easy words with jumbled sentences. These are just some examples. I would guess that others who have taken the test would say there's were different results. That's probably why my practice tests varied so much, and my possible range was anywhere from 160-168 on verbal'155-164 on math.

You're expecting the GRE to make sense?

I found Manhattan practice tests to be harder than the real test in every area: Data interpretation, reading comprehension, SE, TC, and everything else. However, the people who work there told me they curve the scores on practice tests to reflect the lesser difficulty of the real test. The three Manhattan practice tests I took in verbal scored 163, 165, and 162. I got 164 on the real test, so they're projections were very accurate. So, they are harder, but they probably curved your score. How you did worse on Powerprep is hard to figure. The bottom line is that you should tighten up whatever parts of the verbal are affecting your scores.

This is one of ETS' quintessential absurd prompts. In other words, some time from now, however long that is, you'll be able to make connections between the past and "today." But the prompt did not establish the boundaries circumscribing "today," so it is already absurd. In some unspecified time period called "today," we still cannot reflect upon the present or assess it in comparison to the past. So, an example issue might be whether FDR's interventions in the economy could help teach us about the likely success of Obama's attempted interventions in the economy. The prompt might say that we need more time to assess the weight of Obama's policies. One arguing against would say that we can already assess the weight of Obama's policies. If I received this prompt, I might argue against the prompt but give one paragraph to when it sort of holds up.

I wrote 2 paragraphs on each side on my first essay question, explaining in intro that the position depended on certain contexts for it to be true or false. I scored a 6. If your essay is well written and organized, that should not hurt you. If the argument presented is absurd, then you might not take this approach. It probably depends on the grader also. I would spend more time praying for divine intervention on that count, since the more I read and talk to people, the less it seems that scores are reflecting knowledge as much as sheer luck. Given equal preparation, two people can have highly divergent scores.

I had much harder test than ETS practice tests. If I had had similar ones, I would have scored around 167/163. My verbal sections were inundated with scientific essays and absurd answer choices. THe practice tests were relatively easy. ETS = Evil.

I think the point about who's vetting your app is crucial. I talked to a History POI today and asked him, and he was not overly enthused about the GRE in general. In his particular emphasis, he and two other faculty members evaluate the apps and advise the larger adcomm accordingly. Barring extreme circumstances, their decisions carry significant weight in who gets into their emphasis. If you had a poli-sci adcomm of that nature, you'd be better off. On the other hand, professors in my masters program actually assign a numerical weight to the GRE scores as part of determining who gets admitted to the PHD program. Some profs take the GRE more seriously than others. With 5.5 on the AW, taking the test over is a difficult decision, since some profs consider the AW to a high degree and others virtually ignore it. I hate this test..

LOL 170 verbal. I'll gladly trade you my 164 verbal/160 math. My adcomms don't even look at math unless it's abysmal. If you get 5.5 or higher on AW you might be in the running for funding. I would think linguistics would be a heavily verbal field. This just goes to show how reckless an endeavor the GRE really is. I've heard these stories over and over again. I know someone who had the exact opposite. They needed a high verbal score, focused almost exclusively on that, and got 95th percentile math and average verbal. A 170 is worth keeping. Man I want that score.

I would not contact POIs about your GRE scores. POIs are so busy, and if you catch them at the wrong time, they might assume a questionable GRE score is a red flag. Better to contact profs who serve on adcomms at your current school. For your school you want to apply to, contact the admissions coordinator/chair for your degree program. I would ask about percentile averages rather than scores.

How long did you prepare, and did you deprive yourself of food and drink during practice tests like you must at GRE, and did you generally practice, unless reviewing, under timed conditions? And did you always write an essay during practice tests? If you did all these things, it's probably more a case of mental preparation or the fact that you were sick. It's hard to find the right balance between Magoosh and Kaplin. Magoosh and Manhattan practice test math tend to be harder than real GRE, while Kaplin is usually easier. I can't think of a resource that is on the mark. ETS provides relatively little practice material. Magoosh's math blogs are quite good. If I were taking the test a second time, I would read every one of their math blogs. They each have problems you can do under timed conditions with explanations.

Once again, I would contact admissions offices where you are applying. I myself would not feel comfortable with the math score, since it may show lack of effort. The adcomms will know or care nothing about being sick during the test. Some people can attest, however, that they have gained admittance with such a low math score. My math score was abysmal on the old GRE, and I got into 4 master's programs, but only one offered any funding. A note about Kaplin: It trains many formulas, which is good, but their practice sets and tests are not indicative of the real GRE. You must use magoosh or Manhattan to get the real deal questions.

Given the time constraints, those who struggle with these essays should be practicing an essay under timed conditions probably every other day. On test day, this should feel just like what a person has been doing for a number of weeks. I was also uncertain about format for the second section, so I kept it as standard as possible. I think the reason conforming to a proven format is good is because if your writing is average, showing an awareness of mechanics should net someone at least a 4. For those who write well, it reduces the problems inherent in OCD graders with inflated egos. Since this thread is for someone struggling with the AW, I'm hoping that everyone's suggestions will help improve their score above a 4.

Do the scores really take that long to deliver to schools? We usually receive our scores online within 2-3 weeks, or as quickly as 8 days.

To say something is not needed at all does not account for the variability of the graders. You were likely fortunate as to who graded your essay. On average, longer essays receive better grades. Of course, with more content on your issue essay you would have increased your likelihood of scoring a 6. Guidelines are for the purpose of maximizing the possibility of scoring high. Just because one person scores high with two body paragraphs does not imply that outcome for the majority.

I think the number one reason for scoring low on the AW, if one is a good writer, is not scrupulously following the guidelines. If one writes poorly, that is difficult to address within a month, but with adequate writing skills, people often still overlook crucial things on the essay that ETS is evasive about revealing. Analyze an Issue 1. Providing some sort of context in your intro to the analyze an issue. You cannot just state your opinion; you have to place your position within a larger context. 2. Supplying the basis of your argument in the intro" I contend x for reasons a, b, c, and d." 3. Connecting paragraphs smoothly. 4. Giving four body paragraphs that support your argument. Size matters in this essay. 5. Using nuance. Give some degree to which the ETS argument could be plausible. Or, two paragraphs where the argument is legit, and two where it is not. Depends on how absurd the argument is. 6. Providing implications for your argument in the conclusion. What does your position imply for the larger picture? People constantly ignore this in their conclusion, and they lose points. People ignore these details constantly when doing the AW. They are suggested in Barrons and Manhattan books. Manhattan I believe keeps stats on what types of essays received high scores. The second section on the argument is more basic. Find four assumptions which, if ending up implausible, will weaken the argument. List them in the intro. Expand each in the succeeding body paragraphs. If assumptions prove incorrect, what might be the result? Then mention periodically how each assumption, if turning out legit, will strengthen the argument. Don't just lambaste the argument. The conclusion is purely for summary, although you might mention how all arguments require extensive research in order to authenticate or invalidate them. Using approximately 3 GRE vocab words correctly in each essay also helps. 6.

Wow, I'm only applying to 8 so far. I should maybe up it to 10 and pray hard. All my app stuff is strong, but, well, . . . . .you get it. What degree did you apply for? Actually, each school is an independent probability, so upping the number is not really increasing our chances, but it definitely makes us feel more secure. I don't think I can handle more than 10; these SOPs are the hardest part. Every sentence is so critical. If you add the 5lb book and practice the questions under timed conditions. Manhattan is math strong, so you will need one more resource for verbal practice. With the amount of time you have left, I would just get Kaplin's verbal book; ignore the comments on Amazon; it's good enough. Generally practice under timed conditions.

I would stick to those scores. You may not do as well next time, as each test is different. It appears that the GRE is the least of your worries on your application.

Unfortunately, economics is a field that requires decent scores in both verbal and quantitative. If the GRE is giving you a problem, I would seriously be considering an extended preparation period and a Masters degree prior to any thought of PHD work. If you observe the GRE scores for economics PHD admits in upper tier schools, they are generally above 160 for Quant and verbal. As a masters student, your application deadlines are sometimes later and GRE scores not expected to be quite as high. 1. Magoosh (pay the 100 and deal with it). DO not get discouraged by their practice questions - they are deliberately difficult. 2. Manhattan - every book but the text completion and sentence equivalence. You can make up for this by using Kaplin's verbal book, which along with Magoosh is fine. Once you have done extensive work with Magoosh and Manhattan, the ETS prep book will seem a lot less daunting. Then you can see how well you fare on their practice tests in the book. 3. Manhattan's 5lb book of GRE problems, to be done after doing the individual books. 4. Kaplin's online verbal practice sets/their math sets are too easy. 5. After you drill basics, you MUST time your practice sets under GRE conditions (no coffee or donuts during practice). Get the caffeine in beforehand, as I did prior to the test. 6. Barrons book of 6 GRE practice tests if you still need more practice. Some people spend months and months preparing for this test.