crater21

Just wrote the GRE today, and thankfully, it went well. I got 750-800(V) and 710-800(Q). It's a relief to be done (although, I do wish that quantitative range could have been higher). In terms of practice tests, I did Kaplan, Princeton Review, and 3 Manhattan Prep tests. Kaplan: 720-800(V) and 720-800(Q) PR: 161(V) and 157(Q) Manhattan: 760(V) and 650(Q) Manhattan 2: 680(V) and 690(Q) Manhattan 3: 710(V) and 650(Q) So, it does seem like I peaked right on test day, which is great. But, I got the feeling the test was easier compared to the Manhattan tests. Now, just worrying about how these will translate into percentiles, and the AW score!

And, of course, if you want to build up your GRE vocab, while fighting global hunger, check out www.freerice.com I'm literally addicted to this website!

So, basically, when you get accepted, they will send you a conditional offer. The offer will be conditional on two things: grades (if you're still studying) and finances. If you are a really super star student, they might give you an unconditional grade offer, but that happens less and less now. A friend of mine from Canada got into an MPhil (not the one you're going for) and his conditional offer was "final graduating average of 80%". However, keep in mind that the Political Thought MPhil is something of a flagship program, and requirements may be tougher. In terms of finances, they will want to see proof that you have enough money on hand to pay for University fees, College fees, and living expenses. You can send proof of having met these conditions as/when they are met. During the same time, you will be going through the Cambridge Trusts scholarship and bursary process (it's parallel, but completely separate). So, if you end up getting something from Cambridge Trusts, you can list that as part of your proof of finances. But, essentially, they cannot issue you a Visa Sponsor Letter, until they have both of these pieces.

It's not just Google Chrome. I used the recommended version of Internet Explorer, and I still got the problems that you mentioned. I must have lost at least 2 minutes of time because of slow loading (somehow the clock keeps going!), and one of the pictures in the quant section didn't load either.

Well, if you want to study Renaissance Political Thought and Intellectual History, there's no better place than Cambridge. I can definitely understand your concern about funding. But, there are a few options. You should apply for the Gates-Cambridge scholarship, which could offer you full or partial funding. There are also Rotary-type scholarships available, which might help. If you're thinking of Oxford, then also consider the Rhodes Scholarship. It sounds daunting, but you never know until you apply, right? In terms of grades, an upper second at Cambridge means high 60s, which sounds low, but is actually a very decent mark in that system. I don't know how it would translate in North American terms, but my guess would be that they would want to see at least 80%+ overall. If/when you apply, you should also have your referees address grades in their letters of reference (i.e., ask them to explain what 80% means or what 85% means in Canada). Good luck with your applications! If you have any questions about history at either Oxford or Cambridge, feel free to PM me.

Yeah, I think I will probably buy the Manhattan tests as well. But, I would recommend that you do the free test before you buy it, just so you have an idea of what it's like. The one thing you should be aware of is that it doesn't give you an experimental section (i.e. it only gives you two verbal and two quantitative sections). So, if you are trying to simulate the exact testing conditions, it won't be exactly the same. But, I still found it useful.

The new score range is definitely not proportional to the old score range (i.e, you can't assume that 1 new point = 1.5 old points). Based on some info that ETS has put out, it seems that for the Quantitative section, the Top 25% will be spread out over a 15 point range - i.e, between 155 and 170. In comparison, on the old test, the Top 25% for Quantitative was spread out between 720 and 800. I am not sure if we know enough to compare specific scores. But, I think you could say that if you get a range of 720 - 800, it will translate into a range of 155 - 170 on the new test (for Quantitative). It's a whole different ball game for Verbal because Verbal scores tend to be much lower. For Verbal, getting 720 on the old test puts you in the 98th percentile (as compared to 75th percentile for Quantitative for the same score). I don't know what that would translate into on the new scale. Disclaimer: All of the numbers that I'm citing come from these two sources. Take a look yourself because it's very possible that I'm mis-interpreting what they have said. http://www.ets.org/Media/Tests/GRE/pdf/14521_0ETSS036_supplement.pdf http://www.ets.org/s/gre/pdf/gre_guide.pdf

So, there are 4 Princeton practice tests? Is that correct? Are they all free? I have only been able to access one (but maybe I haven't explored the website properly). As for Manhattan, I have tried the free test, and I found it pretty helpful (I found it a bit harder than the Kaplan test, so it was good practice for me). I am definitely considering buying the 5 test package.

Thanks for this post! It's helpful to hear about someone's experience throughout the test. And, congrats on your scores! Those are really good scores. Any tips for the quantitative section? That is where I am still a little weak, and find myself constantly running out of time.

Good idea. My practice scores so far have been: Kaplan: 720 - 800 (Q), 720 - 800 (V) Princeton: 157 (Q), 161 (V) I haven't done Powerprep yet.

P.S. Did anyone else notice huge typographical errors on the Princeton Review test? One of the quantitative comparison questions lists the following equation: a + b + 1 = 3 So, I solved the question based on this. But, in the answers, the equation is given as ab + 1 = 3. Obviously, that made a difference as to whether you got the right or the wrong answer! I hope this doesn't happen in the actual test.

Just took the Princeton Review practice: Quant: 157 (29/40) Verbal: 161 (31/40) Kaplan, on the other hand, gave me: Quant: 720 - 800 (24/40) Verbal: 720 - 800 (34/40)

You are right, goldielocks. It will only get more stressful as the the deadlines get closer. Good luck everyone!

I think application anxiety is starting to get to me. I actually had a dream last night that one of my potential advisors emailed me to say that my writing sample was terrible and she hated it. It was so vivid that I kept thinking about it even after I had woken up! Needless to say, no such email has arrived...yet! lol, I think I need a vacation. Hope everyone's prep/applications are going well!

Thanks everyone for this really useful analysis! I too have been really frustrated not knowing how my practice tests will translate into percentiles. This begins to give us some picture of what might be in store.

Hi Waffle, From what I understand, ETS uses an algorithm to mark the paper-based tests, which takes into account the adaptive feature of the computer-based tests. I don't know how this works, but I think they are able to replicate the adaptive framework with the paper tests. I'm not sure if grad schools would even know whether your scores were paper-based or computer based. The only other difference I've heard is that if you take the computer test, you must wait at least 60 days before taking it again, whereas you can take the paper test as frequently as you want (although, the paper test is only offered a few times in the year, so the waiting period probably still amounts to the same). Good luck!

Hi - sorry, I hope I'm not worrying people unnecessarily, so my apologies in advance. But, the practice tests are also based on the new test, aren't they? So, if the scores are high, then they would be high on the practice tests as well. I took the practice test today, and I got a range of 720 - 800 on both sections. This was pretty much a shock to me because I can tell you that I am NOT a math person AT ALL. I'm a humanities student, who hasn't done math since high school. I also left about three or four questions blank on each of the quant sections because I ran out of time. So, yeah, this does nothing to allay my concerns about scores being unusually high. The only explanation I can think of is that when they translate these scores to the new scale (130 - 170), it is possible that a high score on the old range may translate into something lower on the new scale.

Yep, definitely. This is a great place to share ideas and experiences, so it would be good to post here what sort of responses we get.

Thanks! I've been debating with myself too about how to contact profs. I've heard different people do different things, so I don't know if there is a right way. My personal preference is not to send a copy of my work, just because they might not be receptive to unsolicited attachments. I was thinking of sending just a short email, and see what the response is. I was actually looking for more advice on this too, and I found the following threads really useful:

I was thinking of contacting profs starting in early September, just in case they are away for the summer (and also because I still need to do more research and reading). But, I know a few people who are contacting profs now and getting responses. So, it depends on your preference. I'm guessing most people will be contacting them between now and Sept-Oct. Good luck!!

Yep, those are all very valid points. I'm sure the experience of a few people is not representative. I was just thinking out loud because it struck me as a little surprising that almost everyone I talked to who's written the new test got very high score ranges. I know one person who got 980 combined on the old test. And, in the new test she got score ranges of 720 - 800 on both sections. That's almost a 500-point jump. Now, maybe she just studied really, really hard. I don't know. But, she herself was surprised, and didn't think she had done all that well, and had in fact left a few Quant questions blank. Anyway, I guess we will find out in November. My concern was basically that the percentiles are going to be really skewed. Even a really high score might not guarantee you a high percentile, which could potentially hurt you in admissions. That's what I'm worried about. I'm kicking myself for not taking it before the new format was introduced!

Hi Cliophile, Are you applying for Fall 2012 admissions? If so, then Nov-Dec might be a bit late. I don't know which schools you're applying to, but the ones that I'm going for all have application deadlines at the beginning of December (there's one in January). If that were the case, then I wouldn't think it would be a good idea to contact potential supervisors so close to the deadline. And you definitely don't want to contact them after the deadline has passed. If your programs have deadlines in January or beyond, then perhaps Nov-Dec might be okay. But, I'd still want to make contact earlier.

Several people I know who have taken the new GRE have reported unusually high score ranges (based on the old scoring range). They weren't even expecting to do that well, which makes me wonder if the new GRE percentiles are going to be skewed when they are released in November. It makes sense that scores are going to be higher. In the new format, people can go back and change answers, they can skip questions within a section, there is a calculator, etc. So, if scores are higher on average in the new GRE, does this mean that even a relatively high score could fall under a lower percentile? What if you end up doing well in terms of the score, but your percentile is low? Will it affect admissions? How will schools interpret the new scores? I'm just thinking out loud here, and could be totally wrong. But, if you have any thoughts about this, I'd be interested to hear them.

I'm finding Princeton Review's 1014 Practice questions pretty helpful. It breaks down the quantitative problems into types of problems (number properties, ratios, probability, algebra, etc, etc), which is useful because it tells you where you need more help.

Hi Seanish, With regards to language familiarity, I think the consensus seems to be that you need to have fairly proficient reading ability (i.e, proficient enough that you can read primary source materials). I'm not sure how many semesters that translates into, but I think if you indicate on your application that you have taken four semesters of a language, that should be enough to convince them that you have a solid grasp of it. In terms of universities that offer Middle Eastern history, I think the best way would be to think of historians whose work in Middle Eastern history you admire, and then Google them to see where they teach. Other than the ones listed on the AHA website, the one that comes to mind is Yale. They have a pretty solid Middle Eastern focus, led by Abbas Amanat Also, have you considered non-American universities? In the UK, Oxford/Cambridge and LSE have very good Middle Eastern history focuses. In Canada, University of Toronto and McGill are also quite good. Good luck with your application!