DrFaustus666

Add to that, I overheard a fellow PhD applicant blithely say, "Well if I don't get into the schools I want, I'll just get my PhD online at University of Phoenix." Many people think that a Phoenix-PhD is the same as a top-10-brick-and-mortar-PhD.

[quote name=hello! ' timestamp='1292987461' post='172058] You say you really pushed yourself... Do you think that perhaps you were too anxious this time around? You know -- the Yerkes-Dodson law.

hat box

acorn squash

And I thought the only reason they took on grad students was to create a layer of insulation between themselves and the undergraduates. Silly me

Hi Cheshirey, As a person who already has both a BA and MA in music (performance: trombone) including a heavy undergraduate and graduate load of music theory and history coursework, I have to say, if I were on an admissions committee, you'd need to convince me that you have a solid background in music theory and history, as well as a strong plan for integrating your other knowledge and experience into your planned research. I would say you do NOT NECESSARILY need transcripts to back you up ... (though that would not hurt you, certainly!) ... But you would need, to impress me at least, the ability to discuss in detail: (1) the similarities and differences between traditional western "common practice" harmony and the use or non-use of harmony in music of non-western origin; (2) the relevance or non-relevance of traditional western methods of analysis (Rameau, Schönberg, Piston, Schenker, et. al.) for the kind of work you wish to do; and most importantly (3) a cogent and well-thought-out idea (Statement of Purpose) as to how you expect to approach and integrate your interdisciplinary research. I would be suspicious of dilletantism, and would want to quiz you in depth, to be sure that you can do more than "talk a good line." This is NOT NOT NOT meant in any way to discourage you. It's only an (incomplete and off-the-top-of-my-head) laundry list of pitfalls to avoid; questions for which you need good solid answers. Good luck! John

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/12/adam_wheeler.html

Wow, so many interesting stories, abilities, talents, quirks. I share some with several posters. I got my face bashed up in an auto accident when I was boy, but the surgeons were very good, nobody even notices the scars unless I point them out. I was a profesional musician (trombonist) for a several years, but never made enough money to support myself fully. I wanted to learn five foreign languages but only learned one well enough to converse in. But the thing that makes me (semi)unique on this forum is that I'm OLD. I'm 58 yrs old, and will soon turn 59. UGH.

Weil man Vielsilbigenwörtern schreiben kann, oder?

Also, for example, there may be 5 slots, 2 of which are funded and the other 3 are not funded. The AdComm may have "preferred" candidates for the 2 funded slots, and they won't announce anything (except to the "preferred" people, and if necessary, to other less preferred people) until those two slots are confirmed as acceptances.

Read? Write! Reed? Wright! Read? Right!

color television

color blindness

OMIGOD sorry solar activity -->solar eclipse

Cool pic! "Sharp cookie" is American slang for somebody who has quick intelligence and who cannot be fooled or duped.

sharp cookie

The ananogies, and especially the antonyms, are by far the most difficult in my opinion: at the highest levels of the verbal section of the current GRE computerized adaptive test, some of the analogies not only deal completely in very obscure words, but even refer to secondary meanings of those already-unfamiliar words. The reading fill-in-the-blank and read-a-passage questions are not very difficult by comparison. In fact, I personally think the biggest difficulty is time budgeting. If for example you use more than about 30 seconds for the analogies/antonyms, you won't have enough time to devote to those long passages. Whatever you decide, good luck!

I agree 100% with repatriate. I also know (sort-of) what you're going through, as one of my children (age 20) also has bipolar illness, as well as ADD and an eating disorder. The combination has made life very difficult for my bright and usually highly motivated child. You definitely need an advocate and/or mentor who knows your situation. Also, it's risky, but depending on what kind of person your academic advisor is, how well you trust him/her, how empathic he/she is---you might consider confiding--or not. Good luck and all best wishes! John

I have to say you're probably right: for mysef, I dislike the AW because it is hard to rationalize away a disappointing score. +1 point from me too.

Spozik Well said! (to anyone reading) For the record, I've managed decent AW scores twice (5.0 and 5.5) and above 700-V on three occasions. So my remarks here are not pouting about a bad score that I received; rather, they're critical of the AW in general, and specifically, I strongly question that it measures what it purports to measure.

I had the same thought about the red mark, which is indeed a thumbs down: I'm being too sensitive and ought to just chill. Certainly the writer who can produce a masterpiece faster is more valuable in the GRE's eyes. There are two problems though: the first problem is that the masterpiece can only take one very specific shape. The second, and far more troubling part, is that in academic work, there is almost never a 45-minute or 30-minute time limit. Students, even very gifted students, write research; professors hack up the research; the students re-write; the professors re-hack, ad infinitum and often enough, ad nauseum. So it's questionable, at least in my mind, if the AW score measures the kind of work that anyone (except journalists) do in the real world.

I'm really gunshy after somebody gave me a red-mark above, so I'll answer the question completely seriously, though it's quite possible you're kidding and a smart-aleck answer is what you're really inviting me to give. Mozart was a superb pianist (or more properly, Klavierist) from the age of about 7 until his untimely death at age 35. His 21 piano concerti were all written (to the best of my knowledge anyway) for himself as soloist. Also, in his day, pianists were routinely expected to improvise over what was known as a ground-bass--quite similarly to the practice of the vast majority of jazz musicians today. So, I don't know when chopsticks was composed or improvised, but I'm sure he could play it.

I studied classical music at a medium music school for years, played chamber music and in parttime professional orchestras, but am very much a dilletante when it comes to jazz. But I ABSOLUTELY AGREE with you that human eyes OUGHT to grace the AW write-ups. Also I'm 100% with you on the romantic notions of perception. And I knew you were messing with me, and I was messing with you back. If I thought I'd get a minus point from somebody, no idea from whom, for encouraging encouragement and discouraging discouragement I wouldn't have posted at all.

You forgot Charlie Parker and J.J. Johnson. Yes, you've got a point of course. But please don't forget that this forum is for people to help and support each other, one for all and all for one, etc. (Yeah I know it's sappy, but it's important!)

The verbal section of the new GRE will focus more on reading comprehension and less on pure vocabulary (no antonyms, no analogies). Whereas the quantitative section will be considerably more difficult, involving "fill-in-the-blank" questions as well as multiple choice. Since you have a strong quantitative score already and your verbal is what's worrying you, it might work to your advantage to wait for the new GRE.