Mechanician2015

Where are you applying? what are their stats? Their graduate admissions websites say anything about GRE-V or combined? Are you below a cutoff? How is your research fit at those programs? Do you have the extra USD$200, time and energy to retake? The answer(to your initial question) can be anything from "retake or the V will have you rejected" to "are you insane? you will be accepted 1 hour after you submit your application!" so...

This post fits better in either "Applications" or "Engineering" subforum. Also, beware of only applying to the "triple crown" of engineering( MIT, Stanford and UCB). Their admissions rates are in the border of single digits, so even with a stellar profile you might not get in.

What you want is to rescind your acceptance of program A. It can be done politely and professionally, you don't have to go into much details(no need to tell them that B accepted you and you prefer them, for instance). I don't understand, why would university A want to stop your visa process? I mean, if you rescind their offer, they won't issue the I-20 for you(University B would), but besides that, why would they do that? I assure you that university A has a waitlist, and as soon as you inform them, they will call someone from the waitlist to fill your place.

Prefefably in the format: Artist-Song. Here: Drudkh- The day will come.

Your updated profile looks very strong. You can finish that MSc, if done with a high GPA, it can compensate any issue in your UGPA. You have industry experience that is relevant to academia(at least partially). I don't know why you chose those schools , but I would rethink your target schools based on your(now very refined) research interests to maximize fit. Contact PI to see if they are taking students next year. Take some time to prepare and retake the GRE(it looks like you can improve a lot with just a bit of effort). Take your time with your SoP and try to show off your growth during this time. ( that's what I would do, anyways...)

April 29. No positions offered so far... Kind of already tasting the bitterness of my first professional and academic defeat. How did I get here and how do I get out?

Excellent point. I allow myself to point out that the average GRE-Q for Aerospace(the specific subject of the OP) at the top 10 is below the 90th percentile(the highest being Stanford, 165). They never publish a measure of dispersion, but with the amount of asians with Q=170(Indians, Iranians and Chinese in particular) I would say that either some people get in Stanford with a lot less than Q=165 or a lot of people get in with considerably less than that. Ironically, Upenn is well below the top 10 and has the highest in my field(mechanical engineering) with 167 average. @velua, you are right in this: someone with a low GPA(let's say due to lack of commitment and youth) has the chance to work hard to ace the GRE and catch the attention of AdComm. In that sense, Standarized tests represent an opportunity for otherwise disqualified applicants(due to low GPA).

Since I'm not a graduate student, I'd like to know to what extent this quote is true. Also: Quotes from here.

Gee, I don't think the OP imagined he would generate such a debate

35 minutes for 20 questions. 2 sections. My point is that the time factor is a major part of whatever the GRE measures. If you don't have the answer in 1:45, the best option is guess the answer and carry on. This is fundamentally different from what you do in, at least, engineering and physics, where you solve a huge and complex problem and rationalize about the plausibility and consistency of your answer, often times locating arithmetic errors. The time constrains of the GRE wouldn't allow this process, and place any skill of doing that on the trash bin. I think my criticism about your position is not so much about wether people should be able to do arithmetics(and algebra) without errors. The point is: doing it with such a time constrain is not that meaningful(IMHO). Take the verbal reasoning. The fact that you read slowly doesn't imply that you lack the capability of infering meaning and interpreting complex texts. A lot of people would still answer correctly if you gave them the time to finish a passage.

If the quant section of the GRE had 10 more minutes, I think 170 would be like the 70th percentile

Thanks for your suggestion. I wasn't sure about what Planetary science was until now. I will give it a thought( as I need to weight how much detracts the fact that I already have research experience in another area). Now I realize this... In retrospective, for STEM PhD's, I don't think a recommendation from industry is any worth. These same letters would have been strong for a MEng. And I do have a third PhD I worked with that could recommend me. I guess I did some of the most important research after actually applying Will do. Although I am having a hard time estimating good target schools.( Not everybody publishes admissions statistics, and just applying to "low ranks" is no guarantee".

I read the same statement and came to a different conclusion( either, a lot of STEM test-takers do the test without that 1-day preparation, or they are all so mediocre that they don't score what they should ... the second being a rather pretentious statement). I've taken graduate courses on PDE and Numerical analysis, and I am on the 80th percentile(161). I just dislike doing math "against the clock", or playing with numbers to get a blatant non-general solution(which is a winning strategy for the GRE, I've read).[ Or the GRE just gave me a reality check and I have a poor quant skill] Anyways, I think you are not getting the key point of the question. The Q-GRE is the most important. Unless you have an otherwise perfect application, you won't get in with Q=150 V=170. On the other hand, with Q=170 and V=150, your chances are decent. You are taking Q-GRE=166 for granted and concluding that V is more important. To the OP: As for 2013, according to US news, for aerospace engineering at Auburn University (that's what your profile says you are applying to) the average Q-GRE is 737. According to ETS, the equivalent is 157. Florida Tech is not shown on the ranking. I adhere to the belief that a perfect Q-GRE benefits your application marginally, but a very low Q-GRE can utterly destroy it.

It's all about competition. Quant is obviously the more important, but you can imagine that if 2 students have Q=170, but one has V=145 and the other V=160, the later has the advantage. Some schools have an AWA of 4.0 or greater for admission(yep, it's a rigid cut off, I've seen people with Q=170 rejected for low AWA). So I'd say: First quant, then AWA and then verbal. AWA and verbal are mainly cutoffs, so if you get, say 4.0 and 160, you should be fine.

I'm not sure if I'm following you. You started a MA recently in an English-speaking school. If that MA is more than 2 years, most schools would waive your TOEFL requirement, did you know? Even if your skills are the best, I wouldn't take it with zero preparation. There is a lot of skill in test-taking. Maybe you should take it when you have at least 1 week to prepare.

In general, PowerPrep is the best estimation(since it is basically a version of the same GRE you take). In my experience: Princetion Review and Manhattan prep underestimate both measures. Barron's overestimate's quant. No idea about Kaplan, but some experts claim that it's math is not as tough as the actual test. Let us know your results!

Come on! you got out of the waiting list, remove that signature! It sounds you are in some kind of waitlist. In the worst case scenario, you could accept your other choice and rescind it later if you are in your main choice... At least in theory...

I've read about TA offerings as late as 2 weeks before classes start. That being said, I do understand how complicated this is for you (I'm in a similar situation, but since I'm an international student, I pretty much have until next thursday to decide due to visa processes). It can happen, but I would have a plan B in place.

So long as you ask in a polite, professional manner, it is even encouraged by some programs(I've heard about the myth of department in the humanities that have specialized staff to give feedback to those who request it). In my case, I gave the 3 programs that rejected me about 3 weeks after notification. I asked them politely for feedback, expressing very clearly my agreement with their decision. Department (A) answered the day after: by policy we can not disclose what was discussed in the AdComm meeting. At (B ), the director of the program took the time(1 week after my inquiry, but that is comprehensible) to write a note letting me now that the main issue was funding and availability of my intended research area(I could tell, since they receive 120-160 applications every year and accept between 4 and 6 students). School © never replied... to think that they were my first choice... tl;dr: Ask politely, don't challenge their decision(since it's already made), but don't expect a lot of feedback since they are not actually forced to do it(Although after a $95 app fee I would say it's kind of a moral commitment... but they won't care).

I was recently reviewing some of the stats cited to build different "top graduate schools" rankings, and I realized that the link between a program's ranking and it's selectivity is not as direct as one might think. For instance, I was comparing Cornell(purported #8) with Duke( about #30) and their selectivity is very similar( 12% and 19% ). Aside from "research fit", this seems to coincide with anectodal evidence of people claiming to gain admission in "much better" or "better ranked" programs while being rejected by others. Any thoughts on this topic?

Basically, I got in 2 top 50, but none offers me funding. Any insight is appreciated ( regardless of experience ). Honesty is also encouraged( I believe myself mature enough to take criticism in a constructive way).

If you are applying for a MSc, Fulbright is always an option. As for a decision between WUSTL and Colorado, it depends what you want to do on the long run. Do you want to go on into research? Is your long term goal working in the industry? Maybe consulting? If academia, I would pick WashU, else, Colorado.

Oh man, I wish I had this amount of feedback in my post... 3 pages later and still the same?

I wonder, if you are from Taiwan, how is Ithaca "a little remote" as compared to Pittsburgh? O_o Why don't you check the placement statistics for each program?(I know Cornell post them) Maybe you will be able to notice that one program is more oriented to industry(your career goal). If CMU has a concentration in your intended area, I think that's the way to go.