circumfession

I'm absolutely aware that plagarism is common, and some unscrupulous applicants (both internationally and within the US) attempt to pay for an SoP. That said, my advice stills stands, largely because English literature (and this might extend to other fields in the humanities) SoP's and writing samples are quite different than your "average" SoP. Simply put, there is a tiny, tiny handful of individuals who are actually capable of writing a good SoP for an English program, and most of those can only write it for their OWN research. You can't simply hire an SoP writer (professional or not) from the internet or your local university (especially aboard) and still expect decent results. It's difficult to explain the distinction, but our projects involve such specialized, esoteric knowledge that it's very difficult to understand without the background training, much less to inflect with one's own interest and communicate in sufficiently sophisticated/academic parlance, the nuances of our research. And an English SoP, more than any other, is always simultaneously also another writing sample. You can't even lay out "the facts" and ghostwrite an English SoP for someone else. It simply won't work. In short...one cannot successful hire an "SoP writer" to produce one for you...not if you actually want to be accepted into a program. (Even translation won't work. At this level, you simply cannot translate what you do not understand, and I sincerely doubt that the "professional" SoP writer will understand nuances of our work). The most that another individual can do is edit for spelling/grammar/writing style...and well, quite frankly, that hardly counts as unscrupulous practice, considering that we solicit the same from our colleagues. I also want to point out that the OP scored a 720 verbal, which is nearly the 99th percentile. Considering that that test involves reading comprehension in addition to vocab, I sincerely doubt that any ad-comm will still question his/her language skills with that sky-high score. Furthermore, if we really want to nitpick, unless the OP has a PMLA-published writing sample, an SoP written by James Joyce himself, 1600 GRE scores, a 4.0 and perhaps half a dozen conference presentations on top of it, there's always, ALWAYS room for improvement in every part of the application package. It's a matter of choosing what to devote one's resources to. As an English applicant, I can say with a great deal of confidence that the writing sample and SoP are far more important than ANY GRE score, and the AW score is by far the least important of the three. IF the OP wants to maximize his chances, s/he's far better off devoting the weeks and months to the writing sample (I spent half a year revising mine, and most of my successful colleagues put in a similar amount of effort) and SoP...which are extremely important, and absolutely critical for his/her chances. Putting all that effort into the AW score simply isn't worth it, especially since most ad-comms do not look at it.

I've been a successful applicant for English Ph.D programs twice, and was once a testprep tutor/teacher. I've heard that advice (that the AW is compared against the SoP) circulated frequently, and absolutely refused to pass it on to my English students. (Most testprep teachers have little real knowledge of the admissions process, unless it's for the specific field that they applied to. There's a lot of general "tidbits" that we are taught to "feed" to our students to make ourselves look more knowledgable. I'd be quite circumspect about such advice, unless you can verify it with your professors). While it's vaguely relevant for, say, the LSAT's, it really doesn't hold for humanities applications, and certainly not for English students. I absolutely would NOT recommend re-taking the exam just to boost your AW score. English Ph.D programs really do not care about the A.W score at all. I've never seen it discussed or used as a "cutting" score of any sort (the verbal and sometimes subject test scores are usually used precisely for this purpose). English ad-comms know perfectly well that our academic writing is absolutely NOTHING like the AW portion, and that score is a horrible indication of our writing skills. Your SoP and writing sample will give them a much better indication of whether or not you're proficient at the skills that actually count. Really do make sure that you pour a lot of time into those elements. The GRE is ultimately a very tiny part of the application package, and AW score is virtually ignored. Contrary to the other advice you've received, I think that fear of outside "doctoring" for the SoP and writing sample is highly unrealistic. A good English SoP is extremely research-specific...it's virtually impossible for someone outside of academia to have sufficient knowledge to write an SoP for another person. And quite frankly, as a graduate student...we DO pour as much effort into our papers (and proposals, abstracts, etc) that we once exerted on application materials, especially if we're pursuing publication. The only "real" difference is that as we become more proficient at it, we can attain the same (or better) results with less time.

Tomorrow, eh? Good luck, and let us know how it goes. I hope you're NOT studying right now. I used to tutor GRE (and LSAT, GMAT, etc) students, and the one piece that I REALLY wish they'd follow is to give themselves a break the day before the test. The GRE quant tends to reward those who are flexible, even "playful" with the concepts behind the problems. I have never been good at memorizing formulas and such (and consequently, was a poor math student until college, where math is taught more much conceptually). For ratios, word problems, and permutations, for example, I never bothered trying to memorize the formulas or rules to figure out which ones to apply (that confuses the heck out of me). Rather, I find it easier to intuit what concept(s) question is really asking me to play with, and construct an approach that fits that particular question. The math is plug-and-play only to a degree: what they REALLY want to know is whether or not you know the concepts well enough to tweak it to the particular problem. It's the "why" behind the formula, not simply the "what formula do I use" that is being tested. That said, if you score a 550/750, you'll still be in great shape. 1300 should certainly be high enough for funding purposes, and many humanities students with lower quant scores have gotten into excellent programs. RELAX!

Dudkin, I'm in English literature. I do understand how nerve-wrecking the GRE's can be. I took the test 3 times (basically, just to raise my verbal score by 10 points)...only to find out AFTER I got in that it wouldn't have made much of a difference. You might want to talk to your professors to see what they recommend, given your list of schools. Mine told me to aim to break 700 on verbal, but definitely re-take if I score below 650. They said nothing of quant or A.W, other than to take those portions seriously (because the total score is sometimes factored into funding decisions), but not worry or exert extra effort into studying. Strangely enough, I found studying for the quant section to be much easier, largely because there's far less pressure on pulling a good score. I might be an anomaly, but I would take breaks between studying for the verbal by going through a quant section. It helped to re-familiarize myself with the material, with really taxing my energy or time. Good luck! When are you taking your GRE's?

Again, please keep in mind that although my field isn't THAT different from yours, it is different. So I'm not sure that my knowledge would apply. From what I remember, few department websites actually posted quantitative GRE scores. Actually, not that many posted GRE scores (recommendations, averages, etc) in the first place, but when they actually do, they only discuss the verbal or sometimes the subject test (not relevant for you). For my field, at least, that's a pretty good hint that they don't give a damn about the quant, even though few if any website explicitly states this. Case in point, Berkeley English: http://english.berkeley.edu/graduate/#Admissions "there are no minimum GRE scores but those admitted score, on average, in the 700s (97%) in the Verbal test and 650 (88%) or higher in the Subject test." That's (as far as I know) the only mention of the GRE's at all, and it omits both AW and Quant. From what I know of Berkeley's admissions process, they really don't give a damn about the AW or Quant. (And I know of at least 4 applicants who were accepted with scores BELOW the verbal and subject tests posted). * I'm not actually sure that seeing "average scores" will make that much of a difference, because you don't actually know if the program cares about those numbers. I do know that English programs that do post average Quant scores (such as Duke) show gigantic variations from year to year. Remember how just small the sample size can be, especially if the numbers given are for matriculated students. One program that accepted me ended up enrolling only 6 students. Some of those 6 scored quite low on the quant, so had I accepted the program and had my score included in the average, my quant score (an 800) *might* have change the average considerably...BUT (and this is key) the program doesn't consider quant scores at all, and I doubt that the 800 actually helped me in any way. Unless you know that the numbers are considered, averages can be misleading. If this is keeping you up at night, you might want to call/email the programs and ask if they do consider the quant score. I don't know if they will tell you...some programs are very closed-mouthed around applicants (until you are accepted, of course), but it might be worth it for the potential peace of mind.

Is quant score for the entire graduate school, or for Russian Literature programs? Have you checked the websites of the program that you're applying to? I know that for English Literature, the quant score is not very important. It's taken into account (as part of the total score) when the school determines funding, but doesn't play a role (or plays only a very small one) during the admissions process. In short, check first to make sure that Russian Literature programs actually care about your quant score before investing a huge amount of time into studying that portion of the exam. While it might not be a bad idea to get the quant score above 600 (so your total score will top 1300, and keep you in the top funding pile), this shouldn't be a priority if R. Lit programs care as little about that score as my programs did.

Guaranteed funding is guaranteed funding. As long as you finish your degree within the 4-6 years that your contact stipulates, you'll be fine. It may be harder niceties such as conference funding, but that's another story altogether. As other posters have noted, it may be much harder to get in because your program might have cut spots, but that's another story altogether.

For the most competitive programs, the numbers might also be somewhat misleading because the sample size is so small, and there are so many factors that can affect the results. I know that Harvard English made far fewer offers this spring than usual, in part because far more students from the previous year accepted the offer than they had anticipated, so they cut the cohort size the next year to compensate. The acceptance rates--especially for those programs that matriculate fewer than 15 students a year--can vary widely, and can double or drop in half from year to year. Top English programs tend to accept anywhere between 2-10% of their applicants (2-5% is more common). In reality, however, many applicants at these top programs really don't have much of a chance to begin with. Rather than a pool of 500, a strong applicant is really competing with, say, perhaps 100 well qualified peers for 10-25 offers. And as others have noted, the situation is even more complicated since at some programs (some, not all!)you're actually competing for certain fields and/or topics. It's pretty absymal, but not *quite* as bad as it seems. "Fit," however, does make a huge difference. One ivy league English program did not accept *any* student who worked in either of two fields last year. Any applicant in those fields who paid close attention to the faculty list probably would not have applied in the first place, since this school was no longer a strong place for it, but a less observant student who was applying blindly to all the Ivy's wouldn't have stood a chance.

Quant: pretty close. I consistently scored between 790 and 800 on the practice tests, regardless of the testprep maker. I scored 800 on my first try, and 750 on the second try (when I basically rushed through the quant to get to the Verbal--the only score that counts for my field). Verbal: My practice tests overestimated my score, anywhere from between 20 points (Kaplan) to 70 (ETS, Barron's, most of the other testmakers). I averaged between 750 and 800 on practice tests, scored 690 and 730 on my two tries. My inclinations might be skewed because, ironically, quant is my strength, but only my verbal score counts. However, I thought that the quant is considerably easier on the actual exam than the practice tests, whereas the Verbal was considerably harder. In any case, when I took the test, I was sure that I had scored much lower on quant (I would estimated my score 50 points lower) and was dead certain that I had scored much higher on verbal (would have guessed 50 points higher).

JackieW is right. You should get it straight from the horse's mouth. However, I am curious...what company published the book that your friend was using? They must be REALLY out of touch to still make such claims 3 (I think it's 3) years after the GRE moved away from that format!

CM: yay! One brief note: if you're scoring consistently above 700 verbal, you might want to take the GRE's now, just to get them over with. You CAN retake if necessary, and while all scores do show up, in my experience, most of the English Ph.D programs that I looked at only consider the highest score. (Few actually post this information, but most of the schools that accepted me didn't even know that I had taken the exam more than once. For the schools that I was looking at, when the ad-comms receive the "package," they don't look at the actual score report from ETS, but rather the information is transcribed, so that only the highest score was visible). This is a long-winded way of reassuring you that yes, taking it more than once probably won't hurt you. The Lit GRE is an entirely different monster. While not every school require it, and even those who do require it do not always take it seriously, it actually does take a while to study for. If you have a year, consider taking the April exam rather than the October or November exams, so your lit GRE prep doesn't take time away from last minute SoP/writing sample/LoR-hunting tasks.

Charles, Forgive me if you've mentioned this elsewhere. What field are you in? I'm an English Ph.D student...and the verbal is really the only score that my programs will actually take into consideration. Even then--and I emphasize, this is for an ENGLISH program--700 is the highest bar that the most competitive programs (a handful of Ivy's) would like to see. If you were an applicant in my field (and this is probably true for most of the humanities), I'd tell you that aiming for a 750 is an absolute waste of your time, as long as your verbal score already breaks the 700 barrier (and even a score below 700 will not doom your chances at the top programs). The writing sample and SoP are about ten thousand times more important than the verbal score. If you have a full year to devote to this, spend it on the writing sample/SoP. THAT's what will get you into top schools...not the score. I do understand that you're trying to enhance your application. I'm just trying to tell you that aiming for a sky-high GRE score is probably the LEAST inefficient way of doing so, especially if your verbal score is already above a 700. I know of applicants who got into top programs (Ivy's, top ten, etc) with full funding who scored less than a 650, and whose GPA's weren't so hot. I also know of applicants who were turned down across the board with a perfect verbal score...AND a summa cum laude from an Ivy. If you're in the humanities, it's really the writing sample, LoR's, and SoP that will count...the numbers mean very little as long as you hit certain thresholds, and exceptions are frequently made for stellar candidates whose numbers are below the thresholds. *EDIT: I just re-read your post and saw that you are indeed in my field. Seriously...I'm not sure how to impress upon you just how unimportant the GRE score is, compared to the rest of your application. If you have a year, work on getting a publication and attend conferences....revise, revise, revise, revise that writing sample. Give yourself time and space to truly develop as a scholar and let that sophistication show in your SoP and writing sample. Learn a new language. DON'T focus on the GRE's. It's one thing if, say, you're struggling to break a 650...but it's insane to aim for a 750. I was accepted into ivys/top ten programs...with less than a 700, and I am by no means unique in that regard.

You're not in my field, so I won't attempt to answer Q.1. For Q.2, however...yes. Again, this is a different field, but I know of at least 3 or 4 applicants who got in nowhere the first time they applied, completed an MA program, and did very well the second round. ("very well" = top 3 programs in their field). In one case, the candidate in question had been rejected across the board twice, including from programs that were barely ranked in the top 100...only to be accepted to the top program in the country for his field on his third try, when he had an MA in hand. I should caution you, however, that it wasn't so much the MA itself that made a difference...as that he was able to use what he learned during his MA to make himself a much stronger candidate. Hence, the real question, I think...is your application stronger? Do you have a more sophisticated, better researched writing sample? Does your SoP show a clearer sense of purpose and direction (and not to mention fit!)? From my experience (applying with both a BA and an MA), the bar is considerably higher for MA applicants. You're expected to not only show potential, but also to begin to fulfill it. But then again, with a year and a half of graduate school under your belt by the time you apply, I think you'll be well on your way to meeting that higher bar. Good luck!

Hmmm. Minnesotan: is that comment genuinely meant to be helpful, or are you simply nitpicking my grammar? Let me point out the context of my advice: It looks as though I won't be retaking the GRE's any time soon.

Oops, what the above post is supposed to say that I hope MY second reply compliments my first. Apologies for the confusion. I haven't heard about the 600 verbal rules, but I can definitely imagine how a score below 600 (especially if accompanied by a lower quant score) might be problematic just in terms of securing funding. The GRE's a bitch in that respect...it rarely really helps, especially at top programs, but it can definitely waylay your application.

I hope that this compliments rather than contradicts my advice. I have seen plenty of exceptions to the 700 rule for the ivys/top ten. Both my partner and I got into top ten programs with a 690, and I know of at least 2 applicants last year who got into Princeton (and a few other Ivys) with a considerably lower scores. What I'm saying, I suppose, is that you should seriously consider your time and resources. It's the writing sample and SoP that will get you in. If you have any doubt that either of those are less than absolutely stellar, prioritize those over a GRE re-take. When I re-took my GRE's, my writing sample had already gone through 4 months worth of revisions, and I still had another 6 months to continue tinkering with it (I was finished with undergrad by that point). If you're still taking classes/writing a thesis, and you've yet to take the lit GRE, and assuming that your writing sample hasn't been edited to perfection...I'd say focus on those elements rather than throw another $160 at the GRE. Good luck!

What can help: 4.0 (one of your FSU peers, two years ago, got in everywhere and ended up in a top English Ph.D program). The research and the thesis (especially if it's very strong, and you use it as your writing sample) can definitely play in your favor. What has absolutely no effect: speech, debate, honor society. (Graduate programs really don't care about extra-circular activities...at all). 610 Quant, 4.5 Analytic. Seriously, few schools take the AW scores seriously. They understand that writing for a literature program is absolutely unlike the AW format. I wouldn't sweat this, and DEFINITELY wouldn't retake the test simply for the AW score. I know students with your score (or even lower) who had offers from the Ivy's. What might hurt: The verbal score. I scored a 650 the first time (and a maddeningly insane 800 quant)...and opted to retake it, so I can't say what my chances would have been like had I applied with that score. But many of the top programs do *prefer* (but have made many exceptions others) a 680 or 700 verbal. Those, from what I've seen, tend to be limited to the top 10 programs and the ivy's. Overall, the verbal score (which is really the only GRE score that counts, outside of the lit GRE) is a small factor in the admissions decision, but it is possible that it might make a difference at the highest ranked and most competitive programs. Every program looks at the GRE score slightly differently. Several programs (I can't name them, unfortunately and I have no idea if UW is among them) use it as a "cutting" score for the first step of the process: students with a certain GRE and/or GPA go in one pile to be read carefully, students who are borderline go into a middle pile to be skimmed, and students who are significantly below it go into "dump" pile (though there'll usually be one professor who sorts through that pile to rescue any especially promising applicants). In other words, the GRE can keep you out, but it won't get you in. 700 is generally considered a "safe" number for all schools...680 should suffice for all but the top 10 (and understand, those ranges are extremely approximate).

Cris, I'm currently in a Ph.D program that does not admit terminal MA students. However, my partner earned his MA at a graduate program that mixes MA and Ph.D students during the coursework phase. Without going into too-revealing details, he also felt intimidated by the intelligence and sophistication of his Ph.D peers, and wasn't sure that his work could compare. Applying for the Ph.D a year later, he wasn't sure that he'd be accepted into the Ph.D track at this program, much less more competitive Ph.D programs. While it's impossible to make definitive judgments, he got into one of the top Ph.D programs in the country--and one that's ranked over 40 places higher than his MA program. My point, I suppose, that the difference between Ph.D standards and MA standards might not be as vast as you might imagine. I hope you find that to be good news. That said...I'm sure that you know this already, but do make sure that you revise, revise, revise, and revise that paper. This probably varies from program to program, but I've found that the standards for an "A" paper are not always as high as the standards for an outstanding writing sample. You have nearly half a year...take advantage of that time. However, it might be a red flag that you mentioned your paper focuses on theory, which you're not particularly interested in. I don't think this will matter nearly as much if you're applying with a BA, but as an MA student, your writing sample should be pretty close to what you wish to work on for your dissertation (and your SoP should also be considerably more specific). Kerouac/less common writers: it really depends on what you want to focus on in graduate school. If Kerouac is important to you, than go for it--but also choose your schools according. To a large extent, I don't think it's the precise writer that makes a difference, as much as the approach that you take when writing about the writer. My paper picked a writer that's even less well known than Kerouac, and fared well enough...but *only* at programs that have faculty who are interested in that writer (or more specifically, in the movement surrounding that writer). Programs that were ranked 25 places *lower* than the school he will be attending turned him down for the Ph.D...largely, I think, because his interests are so unique. This is where "fit" comes in, and I think it's even more pressing when you have an MA already. Also, page requirements: Take this with a grain of salt, but many of the extremely successful candidates that I know of basically said "screw it" to the page limits. While I wouldn't recommend submitting a 25 page paper for a program that only wants to read 10...you probably can get away with playing with margins, font, spacing, etc. I was able to trim a 26 page paper down to 21 (which is "close enough" for a program that wants 20 pages) without cutting words. (That said, you should also go through the paper very careful, and rephrase, cut, rework every sentence. You might find that you can actually cut off 5-10% of the length without sacrificing ideas...and it generally makes for a cleaner, more concise paper).