edgirl

My understanding is that, frankly, professional philosophers -- by which I mean those who are paid to profess in front of students -- at least at the better places, tend to be pretty skeptical of people who come in from other departments (Comp Lit, German, etc.) and give talks. My father, who teaches at a top Leiter department, is not particularly kind in his reviews of these talks, as he feels they generally either misuse or use superficially whatever philosophical constructs they're laying claim to. So based on that, and the comments of his friends and colleagues over the last 30 years, I would have to say that my guess is, if you want to end up in a philosophy department, you should really try to find one for your doctoral work. By all means, find a school that will let you take as many classes in your interest of field, but if your goal is a professorship in a philosophy department, I would stick with phil. (Of course, if you'd be happy to teach art history or poli sci or whatever, ignore all of this and go for it!) And I would also add that in philosophy, as in other grad areas, your advisor and LOR writers will ultimately likely be more important than the "rank" of the department, so the key is just to find the people doing what you want to do and doing it well, and then try your damndest to join them. My two cents, anyway, and admittedly I haven't followed my dad's career path, but I've spent a lot of time with profs and grad students over the years, so I just thought I'd throw this out there.

I think you missed my point, which was that reading complex tests is actually the best preparation there is. (It's also super random that you picked that one book out of the list to slam.) That doesn't imply that in the short term test prep isn't useful; obviously if you've got two months or whatever, you might as well just cram. But for people planning ahead, or, like the OP, hitting a test-prep wall, there's no substitute for actually immersing yourself in good reading. I particularly stand by this given the emphasis on passage understanding rather than standalone vocab (as on the old test, with analogies). But, to each his own, and best of luck to everyone finding his/her own ideal study system.

You can't go wrong with business casual. Always better to be overdressed for an interview than underdressed.

Mostly Kaplan and Princeton Review (books, not courses), with some Barron's thrown in -- but Barron's, for me at least, was more useful for getting lots of practice on particular topics than it was for practicing for the test. For test-like questions, I used Kaplan and PR, and then did the ETS practice tests a week or so before my actual exam.

I'm doing the master's program in QM at Penn GSE this year. It's a slightly weird mix of courses (e.g., regression/ANOVA, test construction, policy research), and depending on your stats/quant background it may well feel too introductory, although it is possible to replace core courses with higher-level ones if you've already taken equivalent classes. I think it's a better fit for people who have sort of broad education interests, are thinking about working as policy researchers or analysts, and want to be able to understand/do solid statistical analysis for such research. I think Columbia's programs are the most quantitatively rigorous and require the most quant background. But of course TC is expensive and offers kind of crappy financial aid. BC's ERME programs are also more straight quant, I think, than Penn's QM, though like Penn there is a broader focus on things like test construction rather than just a series of analysis courses. Feel free to PM me if you're thinking about Penn at all.

I've gone back twice, once five years after undergrad and once nine years later. Of course, everyone's situation is different (especially in terms of what degree you pursue and to what use you plan to put it), but I can certainly keep pace academically with my younger classmates -- or in some cases, outpace them because of my real-world experience.

Even if you don't need it, why not take the TOEFL if it might benefit you?

The percentiles reported on any score reported are representative of a band of recent test-takers. Thus, percentiles move around every time ETS adjusts that band by adding test-takers from a new year and dropping the oldest set of scores. And as the new GRE settles in and folks figure how to teach to it and study for it, it shouldn't surprise anyone that the percentiles are moving around quite a bit. So if you decide three years from now to apply to new programs, you should expect that your percentiles will have changed again. From ETS's website: Percentile Rank Each GRE test score is reported with a corresponding percentile rank. A percentile rank for a score indicates the percentage of examinees who took that test and received a lower score. Regardless of when the reported scores were earned, the percentile ranks for General Test and Subject Test scores are based on the scores of all examinees who tested within a recent time period. http://www.ets.org/gre/revised_general/scores/understand/

This is going to sound harsh, though I'm not trying to be cruel. I feel like you're asking because you want honest feedback, so here's mine: Your 130 is likely going to doom your applications. It's not that the English faculty will necessarily care (although, frankly, they might shrink from a score that low on any section). But universities tend to have minimum GRE requirements for graduate admissions, whether or not specific programs do, and 130 isn't going to cut it for these requirements at any reputable school. As far as the subject test goes: if it's not required, just don't submit it. If it is required, then you need to retake it. A 420 puts you in the 3rd percentile. That is not where you want to be, nor is it an acceptable number to share with schools that require this test. If I were you, I would invest in some high-quality test prep (think course, not book). You may be a brilliant writer, but your scores are in a place where admission committees aren't going to get that far into your application. I hope you are able to improve your scores and find a great fit institution for yourself. Good luck!

This isn't accurate anymore. The old GRE worked like this, but the new one is adaptive by section, not by question -- you can absolutely skip questions, either altogether or coming back to them later. So it's no longer essential to get the first few questions right, but it is key to do as well as you can on the first section of each type. (Not that anyone tries to do poorly, of course.)

Yeah, I think the issue here is that, for example, a roll of 1 6 isn't the same as a roll of 6 1 -- they add up to the same sum, of course, but visually they're a different arrangement, and what you're being asked is how many successful arrangements (sum of 6) there are out of all the possible arrangements (36). In the second problem, 2x3 is the same as 3x2 -- the outcomes aren't distinct -- and this is different from the first problem because you're being asked about possible products, not about the arrangement of factors that gets you to that product. That is, you're being asked about how many possible totals there are, not the ways you can get to the total. (I hope that makes sense!) So I don't think it's a mistake, and I hope that's helpful. I'm sure other folks will jump in if they disagree with me!

Really? I mean, you heard about this 5.5. requirement from departments directly? Because most schools care much less about AW and use other parts of your application (e.g., your writing sample) to judge writing ability.

If you take the computer-based test, you'll get official results in about 2 weeks. Can be as soon as 10 days.

I believe that in most engineering programs verbal isn't weighed as heavily. If you're nervous about asking professors/grad coordinators, at least try checking folks who shared their stats on the results forum here -- I imagine you'll find plenty of people with average verbal scores who were admitted to quant-heavy progams. As many people would no doubt add, the one caveat to this is that graduate schools as a whole tend to have GRE requirements you need to meet for admission and/or funding purposes, so that if your scores are too low -- even if a department doesn't care and wants to take you -- the school won't allow you in. You might want to check this more general question ("Are there GRE cutoffs for admission to the graduate school or for funding?") since it doesn't give away your scores and allows you to retake with your first scores hidden if you choose to.

You won't say which school for anonymity, but you list your current city as Ithaca, NY? That's a good one. More to the point: your quant score is certainly high enough for English programs. The verbal seems a little low to me (though, as is obvious from my signature, I'm an ed person, not an English one anymore), but the best people to answer this question for you are really your current professors. If the other parts of your application are indeed quite strong, I would think those scores would be just fine.

I don't think the GSE at Penn has a minimum score for aid purposes, because all of the decisions about admissions and scholarships are made by department. I believe they just want to see statements of purpose that really clearly articulate why you're applying for their program, how you see yourself as a good fit, and what you'll bring to GSE. Of course, you can also try contacting profs in the department early so that they recognize your name when your app comes up for review. If you do this, though, you should have a more substantive question than "Will I get a scholarship?" Try contacting folks whose research interests line up with yours, etc. I have one master's from Penn GSE and am getting a second this coming year, if that helps make my thoughts more convincing!

What the schools mean by saying they consider writing scores is that they look at all three section scores (V, Q, AW). They're telling you this because many grad programs discount the writing score fairly heavily or entirely -- so the schools want to make sure that you put your best foot forward on the writing section, rather than assuming the AW score won't make a difference to your application. Thus, they are definitely not saying you can skip the V and Q sections, only that they also want you to do your best on the AW prompts.

The issue is that scaled scores (those on the 130-170 scale) don't exactly correspond to raw scores. Generally speaking, the "average" tester does better on math than on verbal, so you have to get a higher raw score in order to get the same scaled score as you can earn in verbal with a lower raw score. Hence your raw scores are really close, but if you put your scores in the larger context of percentiles, your verbal score is stronger than your math score. Hope that makes sense! Khearts, we posted at the same time! It's not a curve exactly (because the scaled score changes from test to test). Easier to think about it as a percentile rank, I think.

Have you taken practice tests, or are you just doing problems/questions? If you haven't taken a practice test yet, try starting with the ETS Power Prep software to get a sense of what the actual test looks and feels like, and to get an estimated score that you can use to guide future studying. Beyond that, it sounds like you may have reached the point where you need outside help -- a formal classroom course, or an online program -- because you've hit the wall of what you can accomplish independently. You've invested a lot of time into memorizing vocab, but it's not paying off, and it doesn't sound like you have a backup study strategy. While others of us can tell you what worked for us, we can't predict what will work for you -- only someone who knows you and your testing style can help with that. It also sounds like your confidence is totally shot and you could use some cheerleading from someone besides your own inner voice. If I were you, I would look into nearby prep options, or online programs like Magoosh (haven't used it, but have seen good things said about it on these forums). Finally, make sure you're looking at the averages for accepted students at the schools you're interested in; maybe your scores are going to be fine, or maybe they need work, but I think it's always helpful to have a goal to shoot for.

Just as an FYI, there was some conversation about this on these boards when the announcement about the new Score Choice policy was made a couple months ago. And remember, although ETS is doing its best to encourage you to take the GRE over and over again, the cost of the GRE is rising to $175, and to use Score Choice you may have to wait until after your test date to send score reports -- at $25 per school -- if you don't want to send all or only the most recent results (i.e., if you actually want to take advantage of the service ...).

I think TheFez is right on. Your scores are low; the percentiles are really low, too. You might want to check with some of the programs you're thinking about applying to -- if you can get information about what average GRE scores look like for accepted students, you can work toward a tangible goal for your next set of scores, rather than just hoping to do "better." Good luck!

Totally -- great minds must think alike!

Well, one point here is that the test writers aren't looking only for grammatically correct sentences, they're looking for the two answer choices that, when selected, both complete the sentence to mean roughly the same thing. In the example you offer above, choices a and e are the only two choices that are synonymous. Answer choices b and c, on the other hand, while both grammatically correct, aren't synonyms -- "benign" in this context could best be defined as "favorable," while "inconsequential" doesn't imply effect in one direction or the other. So you've got to get past the idea of "Does this word make a sensical sentence?" and on to the question "Do these two words produce sentences that are basically equivalent in meaning?" Hope that helps!

It sounds like you're in good shape, then! I was just rereading my post and realized that I should have done some editing. What I should have said in regards to public schools: - As a Latin teacher, you could be hired by the DOE at any NYC public school that's looking for one - As a social studies teacher, your options would be a new DOE school (one fewer than four years old) or a charter school If you are interested in private school teaching, there are no certification requirements, and the Classics master's you're earning this year is a solid qualification for Latin teaching; you could also make a case for it being a qualification for social studies, of course, but that's up to individual schools. If you're interested in private school jobs, the National Association of Independent Schools keeps a job board on its website at www.nais.org. Sorry I didn't proofread more carefully earlier!

So, in terms of admissability, you'll be just fine for ed master's. Your academic background is strong, and your old GRE scores would do the trick; if they go up when you retake, so much the better. If your preference is to be in NYC, though, you should also be looking at the CUNY schools. In terms of getting initial certification, they are absolutely as good as TC or NYU, are significantly less expensive, and frankly may even be a little better tied into the DOE. Latin, remarkably enough, is one of the few areas that the DOE is looking for folks in, so another option might be to check out the NYC Teaching Fellows program and get into a classroom as an uncertified teacher (Teaching Fellows commit to several -- I think 3? Maybe 2? -- years and have the opportunity to earn certification as they go. It's an NYC version of Teach for America). As a social studies teacher, on the other hand, you'd be out of luck in the DOE -- they're not hiring external folks, unless you look only at new schools -- and would have to turn to charter schools. Not everyone loves charters, of course, so that's a personal decision. In terms of applying, the most important thing is just to talk about why you've become interested in pursuing a teaching career. Talk about what excites you about teaching and working with kids, experiences that you've had (don't downplay substitute experience, even if didn't feel "substantial" to you), etc. The other big question, of course, is what you're going to do about your Ph.D. program. You can't do two things at once, so I'm assuming you plan to drop out of the doctoral program. Can you be awarded a master's by your department so you have something to show for the time you've spent? Even if that meant spending another year there, it would likely be worthwhile -- and with a master's in Classics, you could also apply to teach Latin in private/independent schools (i.e., non-public schools; they are more interested in subject mastery than pedagogical qualifications). I realize I just threw a bunch at you. Hope it's helpful; let me know if anything I've said is unclear or nonsensical!