gellert

Yes, it does! It said the same thing for me for the first 14 days, until my scores were posted.

It takes 10-14 days.

I wouldn't say the verbal score is arbitrary at all, but natsteel is right -- your scores are fine. And since it's a CAT, just be sure to spend a little extra time on the first few questions. I made anywhere between a 680 and an 800 on my verbal practice scores -- a range even larger than yours! -- and ended up getting 710 and 730 on the real thing (I took it twice). So in terms of the actual test, my score essentially stayed the same. A lot of your variance is likely due to flaws in the Kaplan exams. Powerpoint will be more like your actual score. My PP verbal scores were 710 and 800, which certainly included my true scores and since it looks like you got a 750 both times, I think a 710-750 is what you're looking at.

^^Emailing, because that gives you greater control over what you say, and more time to think about your choice of words. Just don't overthink it.

Wow, the new format looks great! I like it.

fresh meat

Took them on the 30th! They're not all that bad. I actually found I was really relaxed by the time I actually sat down at the computer and started going through the directions. My mind sort of went clear. I think a lot of the GREs depend on being able to not panic or overanalyze whether a question is easy or difficult.

It honestly sounds to me like you have nothing to worry about. Stop thinking about other people's stats and focus on your own -- which are great, by the way! You'll likely be above all cutoffs (and adcomms take your undergrad institution into account when looking at your GPA, which is fine for any school and fantastic for McGill), and with your experience + your current work in the lab in question, I seriously doubt there'll be an issue. Congratulations in advance!

Keep doing practice tests. Go back through and check out what it is you keep missing and make sure you review that. Make a paper with quickie formulas and facts to reference before you go to bed every night. Most importantly, don't study at all the day before or the day of the test, and no caffeine! Good luck.

You don't have to know precisely what you want to write your dissertation on while applying to Ph.D. programs. For one, your interests may change over the course of your training, and secondly the methodology you'll learn while in the program will help you form a better project than you could come up with just out of undergrad. Some professors like to know that you have an idea of what you'll eventually do your thesis on, whereas others prefer a completely blank slate. Generally it seems that something in the middle is typical -- you have an area that you'd like to research further (your "research interests") and possibly some methodology that intrigues you, but some flexibility regarding your final dissertation. A "cohort" is the term for the entering class of students. So everyone in your year is part of your cohort. When they say they're admitting 25 students and hoping for a cohort of 13, that just means they expect 12 of the students they accept to decline matriculation, for a final cohort size of 13.

Ahhh, missed the bit about the OP applying to MA/MPP programs. Clearly my RC is stellar. I take back my previous comment. You're golden.

How many actual years of research experience does that add up to? Your stats sound great with the exception of the GRE. Most places have GRE cutoffs of 1200. Obviously your other stellar stats could potentially make up for a less-than-great GRE score, but why have a flaw on your app if that flaw is easily rectifiable? Not to mention, having a higher GRE could increase your chances of getting funding down the line. I'd probably retake the GRE if I were you; it looks like it might be the only thing holding you back from an excellent application. (FWIW, I don't think undergrad school matters all THAT much. What matters more is the connections you made with professors while there and while doing your research, as well as the quality of the research experience you had. You said you have good, strong LORs. That will go miles for you. The only thing that could be iffy about a less well-known undergrad is that your LOR writers might not be as familiar to the adcoms, or they might not know how your GPA compares to students from other schools. Fortunately for you, with a 4.0 you don't have to worry about the GPA issue; clearly you would have done very well academically by anyone's standards. And a strong LOR from a professor a committee doesn't know is better than a weak letter from a famous adviser who met you once.)

For economics, I think your verbal is fine. But if you're a perfectionist and want to aim for a higher score (maybe an 800Q, even?), far be it from me to dissuade you. (I'm doing the same thing with a 710V 660Q in psychology.) From what I've heard (and what I've asked graduate departments at various schools), most places look at your highest composite, so it certainly couldn't hurt -- but only if you're willing to part with the cash.

Honestly, I want to know the same thing. Right now my working opinion is that if you majored in your field and have a high major GPA, it probably wouldn't matter for schools that "recommend" the subject test. Clearly you know your subject if you have a high GPA in your major. I think the subject test is possibly more relevant for students with less stellar major GPAs, or who majored in unrelated or only tangentially related fields. I'd welcome a second opinion from someone more in the know, though.

It could just mean that you got particularly difficult RC sections this time around, or a few words that you just didn't know. I wouldn't stress over it.

As far as good studying music goes, I've actually found that movie soundtracks help a lot. Right now I play a good bit of Inception, Harry Potter, LotR, and X-Men First Class whenever I need to concentrate. A lot of procrastination is emotional for me. If I can romanticize work to myself, I can get it done. That's where stupid, silly little songs like "Find Your Grail" from Spamalot or "Chip on My Shoulder" from Legally Blonde the Musical come in. Don't judge me.

I'm pretty sure it depends on the school as far as which score they accept (highest, most recent, combination, average of multiple scores), but your point still stands. I really can't decide. One of my PIs says my score is above cutoffs so it doesn't matter, and another says that since seeing two scores in the 700s has a positive psychological effect on adcomms, it would behoove me to take it again. I might take a few timed practice tests and see how my quant score does. If I can figure out how to pace myself, I figure as long as I don't get overly anxious on the second go, it couldn't hurt.

I just took the GRE this afternoon and got a pretty decent score of 1370 (710V, 660Q) but I'm wondering if I ought to retake it. Before you reassure me that my GRE score is perfectly fine, let me add the note that I actually ran out of time on the quant. I had five minutes left to answer ten questions, so the past seven I just answered randomly. Didn't even read the question, just clicked an answer. I'm already signed up to take it again on the 19th so I've already paid the money anyway (I was worried I'd bomb the first time). I'd love to bring my quant score up in particular. I was making 1420-1580 on all my practice tests, so I do feel like this score isn't up to my personal best given that I ran out of time. (Plus I'd only been studying for three weeks, so I feel I could improve with another two and a half.) However, it is above cutoffs for all the schools to which I'm applying. I know it's definitely not going to keep me out of anywhere, but if I'm capable of making a score that would make it easier for me to get fellowships, I'd like to. So tl;dr my score is fine, but I ran out of time so I know I can do better. Also, a 660Q is low for the programs I'm apping (clinical psychology Ph.D.). Plus I want money. Thoughts? (For reference: GPA 3.7 from a top public school, 4 years excellent research experience and LORs, honors thesis, etc.) Thanks in advance.

Excellent idea! Here's my link: http://db.tt/gEZAPC9

In the labs I work in, undergrads are put on a hierarchy of sorts. Most start out with data entry (a few exceptions being those of us recommended directly to the PI by a certain professor) and then work up to tasks requiring more responsibility, with the holy grail being an independent project honors thesis. I work primarily in a sublab of the main group and there's never more than 10 undergrads at once, which makes things a lot more manageable. I'm really fortunate that the grad student I work with takes care to teach us about the foundation of our research every lab meeting, and a lot of our honors theses are projects we came up with and designed ourselves instead of assigned ones. I know this isn't a typical format, and it's not even typical at my university, but I am extremely grateful that I've been able to have the opportunities I have to learn and grow as a researcher. I think it works pretty well, though -- starting people out at data entry or various other tasks of low responsibility, and then promoting them based on how long they've been in the lab, accumulated knowledge, and level of responsibility. That way the serious students get to have a fantastic lab experience, and those that are just there to pad their med school resumes can keep on doing data entry without you having to waste your time teaching people who don't want to listen. (Caveat: sometimes, of course, students aren't interested UNTIL they've had a chance to actually learn about something more in-depth, so I wouldn't write anyone off too quickly, but there are always those hopeless cases.)

Hello! I'm another 2012 applicant. I'm applying primarily to clinical psychology and cognitive affective or behavioral neuroscience programs, with one developmental psych program thrown in there. I have been in touch with my top choice POI over email for a few months, and actually had the pleasure of meeting him for drinks a few weeks ago. He's invited me to come and do some summer research in his lab, which is just thrilling beyond all words. I also have met another of my POIs as he's a good friend of one of my current PIs, though it was in a group setting so I doubt he'd remember me. Other than that, haven't sent out any emails yet. Emailing early seems like a risk -- either you make a good impression early and they remember you, or you email too early and they forget.

Most school webmail systems will allow you to change your settings to forward all mail sent to that box to a secondary address (e.g., your Gmail account). Typically what I do -- and what most grad students I know do -- is send the first email from the school account, then all subsequent emails from their Gmail account. Seems to work pretty well from what I can see, as long as your Gmail handle is your name or includes your name.

I'm very phobic of vomiting, but after spending four months in China (and undergoing an emergency appendectomy overseas) and seeing far too many drunk people vomiting in gutters, I think I'm over the part of my fear that entails other people throwing up. I even used a bathroom that had vomit in it! As far as the fear of myself vomiting -- well, still working on that, but I made it through appendicitis without ever getting sick, and honestly I now feel like there's no need to indulge in the sort of paranoia that I used to. What I've started to learn is that you can't sit around and wait for good things to happen to you, or for fears to vanish. You have to chase after the things you want and constantly challenge yourself. It's the only way to ever improve. Great thread idea, thanks!

This post was really inspiring. Thanks so much for sharing your story!