orst11

Maybe the fact that this is thegradcafe makes a difference in scores we are seeing. I note this because I have heard some people elsewhere saying they thought aspects of it were harder than the old version. I also personally know people with ranges far below what I have seen posted here.

I think every person that I asked for recommendations has stated this, so it's a good tip. Like a lot of the posters, I think a lot this depends on your field. I am aiming for 6-7. I chose this based on what I can afford, the schools I would be willing to attend, and number of various other factors. One thing, I have read here and have had people tell me is you don't want to get to the end of the process regretting you hadn't applied to school x or school y. So as LifeAfterLiberalArts notes, options are good when you have to make a decision in April.

balderdash & DustSNK, Are you applying to different programs than you did than last admission cycle? Are you possibly adding more schools just to be sure this time around?

elliot wave

Okay, so the scores just have to be postmarked by Dec 1st for those deadlines. I have seen some schools say that there is a deadline of Dec 1 but also note that all materials have to be there within two weeks. Thanks for the responses.

1200 on the old scoring scale typically is the minimum for a lot of programs, of course there are exceptions. As far as fellowships are considered, scores typically do have to be a good amount above minimums or averages of incoming students, but this isn't the only way to secure funding. Think about that when applying. Unfortunately, with the revised GRE you can only take the test 5 times per calendar year, so you really would have to wait and this could possibly push you back on applying to some programs. I would advise you to check out the geography subforum for questions on programs, its under social sciences: http://forum.thegradcafe.com/forum/37-geography/ I also would advise to look at the IHOG subforum,

The only thing I can recall that I saw that mimicked the powerprep I took and my actual test was a few choices in the sentence completion section. They weren't the same question though. The concepts/format are the same, but really that's it.

Given that the revised scores don't come out into November 8th for the first group of test takers, I was wondering if this is limiting any of your searches and excluding programs who may have earlier deadlines? Scores do take time to send, so I was really wondering would it be a complete waste of time and money to even apply to programs with a Dec 1st or sooner deadline? I actually have asked ETS this question, but all they sent was scores typically take so many weeks to send. I am convinced they really just want my money and are somewhat avoiding my question.

full tank

Nope, there is no way of knowing, so if you are given an extra section you have to try just as hard. What I have tended to notice just by reading on here is that you typically are given an extra section on what you are having a harder time with.

If you read a number of places on the forum and elsewhere I think you will see that some programs don't even look at AW. Even when some programs say they would like to see a 4.5 other aspects of your application can counteract this. Take a look on the results page to see if anyone posted their stats for your desired programs, see if the programs publish stats for admitting students, and don't simply apply to tier one programs because even with good stats competition is rough. I think with a double-major in History and English you can easily prove you a good writer in a writing sample and often this is given just as much weight as the whole GRE.

Even on the low end that is almost 1400, I imagine even with the new scoring this will be as good as a 1400 prior to the changes. Your verbal score estimate is excellent whereas the score on your quant. can range from good to excellent.The range 120 pts for guant. was similar to the range the gave me 100 pts. I wouldn't worry too much about retaking the test it just won't make too much a difference since you already did well.

When I took the test there were questions about functions. I can remember just one asking what point wasn't included when graphing a given function. Overall, not really that difficult because it was multiple choice. As far as other graphs and other tables included in the test, there were a few usually with two or three questions on each given table or graph. Honestly, a lot of stuff they mention might be on the test or even on the powerprep I didn't see, whereas there was a few questions not on the powerprep that I did see. It really is almost a guessing game because there are only a limited amount of questions they do ask. Ultimately, I think that you do need to understand functions and graphing but not necessarily in its entirety for the test.

Typically, the answer is yes. Some grad schools will just look at the most recent scores, some will average them out, overall just some schools do through process differently. It really never hurts to ask.

I think not knowing the actual scores is better. I would be looking at too many schools and I wouldn't be able to add detail to my SOP. Plus, I already spent 4+ hours taking the test, I truthfully don't want to think about it for a long time, and I actually did fairly well on test if that tells you anything. Also, since you get to send the score to 4 programs I sent them to the programs that have the earliest deadline. I can worry about sending more scores in November to programs with later deadlines.

What I have tried to do is fill out the majority of the apps before hand. It is a tedious process of typing in the same stuff but I think I will save some time towards the end of the admission cycle. Plus it has given me a little more time to tailor other things such as my SOP or writing sample.

Yes, we have to wait until November for the actual scores. This does kind of sucks for people applying to anywhere with a deadline in December, which is probably everyone. Unfortunately, from what I was told by ETS is that we won't be given AW section scores until then as well. I guess they are taking their time even if there weren't too many changes in this section of the test.

The range for my quantitative section was 100 pts where my verbal range was 40 pts. So maybe not the best guide for scores but I guess it will hold me over until I get the actual scores.

Hopefully one of the older members, without an undergraduate background in poli sci will comment on this, but for the time being I will post a few things. First off, typically poli sci draws a number of candidates for admission from various fields in the social sciences and some in the humanities..Typically, economics majors bring strong quantitative skills to poli sci programs, so this is a plus I think for you. In the field of IPE, an economics background is especially useful, so I think you will be fine if you take that route. I did see you posted in the GRE section and you have superior GRE scores, so really you have as good a chance as any other top candidate. At top programs it really is about your research interests matching the faculties. Also, you mentioned you have done some research in political economy, I think I would make a note of this in your SOP.

I would say Powerprep was fairly accurate. I did slightly better on the verbal then the software estimated and slightly worse on the quantitative then Powerprep estimated. The overall estimated score on test day though was almost exactly what Powerprep estimated. I have multiple computers and installed it on two of them and therefore I took 2 different practice tests. That's the only thing I used for test prep simply because I couldn't afford anything else. I did have one of the AW sections graded and paid for that, so I am hoping that is fairly accurate as well. Overall, I guess I will know in November.

You get a tentative score range. Since they haven't figured out the percentiles yet they give them in the old format. I took the GRE on the 1st and it wasn't too bad. Good luck.

While I didn't use any, I know McGraw Hill, Kaplan, Princeton Review, Barrons, etc. all have books on the new GRE. Some of these just came out a few weeks ago. I really couldn't afford these though, but truthfully you could always stop in at a local bookstore or library to see if they have any. Most of these mimic the actual test and have a few practice tests included. As far as the AW section just look on ETS's website because they have a pool of topics.

ball gowns

secarey, First off you did do well on the AW section. I would first point that out. How was your verbal score in comparison to your quantitative scores? Given that you are applying for English lang. and lit. programs, you should also note that programs may not even concentrate on a lower quant. scores. I would mimic turkeyteacher's comments in saying that the situation will be familiar so the likely hood of getting doing better overall will be good. Secondly, I wanted to note that typically GRE's are a factor when it comes to fellowships and such. Thirdly, I read on the forum awhile back where a lot of top programs will use a certain score as cut offs, this is typically lower than there average GRE scores, so I wouldn't worry as much. If you impress in other areas you have as good of a chance than anyone else. Finally, I want to note that I was frightened of taking the GRE, and I think that is why I chose to simply take the revised test over the old one. I hate standardized tests. Truthfully, some aspects of the revised GRE are a lot easier. My personal strategy of test taking is always go in confident and thinking you can getting spectacular scores. The odds of doing poorly or letting other things be a factor will be less if you do this.

After looking at the pools i noticed both of my topics were listed in the pools, so I imagine they choose from the lists.