Shostakovich

i think overstudying could be a big problem for a lot of these standardized tests. these are designed to be "aptitude tests" so all you could really do is to learn the format of the tests, study strategies for attacking diff types of problems, and maybe memorize some vocab that appear frequently. personally for me the 5 Kaplan online exams that come with the prep book were the best indicators of my actual score. well actually i thought one of them was too hard but the other 4 were almost on par with what i actually got.

hi cyberwulf, do you know about the pre-doctoral accelerated track for columbia? from browsing their page it sounds like the program is for people who are fairly sure about pursuing a phd and is a lot harder to get into than the theory/methods track, is that true?

One thing to remember is that the scaled scores are a bit misleading. A 160Q might not seem "super high" but it actually equates to a 760 on the old scale, and a lot of Sciences/Engineering majors applying to decent programs in that field fall in that range so it could be a "super high" score in social sciences or humanities, for example. also a lot of practice tests dont do a great job of giving out accurate scores, from what I've seen the PowerPrep software by ETS and Kaplan's 5 online exams that come with purchasing the book have been closest to what I scored on the real thing. Also how long to study and how much you will improve varies greatly. I personally studied for about 2 months and ended up with about the same score that i was getting on like all of my practice tests as of like 1 week of studying for the exam and until i actually took the exam. but yeah i guess just make sure the practice scores are fairly accurate then work from there, from what i heard magoosh will help with the basics of just about every topic covered on the GRE and ETS/Kaplan do the best job of putting out material the most similar to the actual thing. Good luck!

166 is equivalent to an 800 on the old exam, and from what i've been hearing there is more of a cutoff to GRE scores (like if the cutoff is 160 for example it doesn't matter too much if u got a 162 or 168 just that you exceeded 160) than it being a scale of measurement of how qualified you are. i guess you can distinguish yourself by scoring a perfect but not sure if it'd help you that much. but then again, just speculating based on rumors... good luck

some schools are asking for major GPA on the application. is this just upper division courses that i've taken for my major or all the courses (including lower division) that i took for my major? thanks.

i agree it's not good to make the stipend one of the priorities in choosing a program, but it would be nice to have an adequate level of support knowing that you'll be spending at least a couple years having school as your fulltime thing. but then again the option of being able to obtain additional 10k or so in loans a year would negate any lack of support so no need to worry too much about it. on a side note, anyone familiar with the california school stipend levels? UCLA says they pay $14,800 a year for teaching assistantships, that seems substantially lower than the programs listed on this thread.

I thought Barron's 800 words list was very helpful, at least for me. I thought it did a great job of addressing words that were likely to appear on the GRE, many other lists have a lot of words that are just difficult, but that are probably not on the GRE too often. That said, I think there's sort of a plateau for everyone in the verbal section since it was designed to be an aptitude test. Of course aptitude can be improved I guess, but would be a formidable task requiring the right methodology and effort. Kinda reminds me of studying for the SAT back in high school. I'd be advised by all these sources telling me that reading classics is the way to go, which I'm sure it was, to find that it was kinda impossible for me to put in that much dedication and settled with a 600 something score and decided to major in the sciences. Good luck!

The Barrons 800 words list was very helpful for me, they got a little workbook w sentences and matching things that help you remember the words. I thought I recognized a lot of words from that list on my actual exam too. Good luck.

i also just took the actual GRE... I'd have to say that PowerPrep and Kaplan provide questions the closest to the authentic ones. Questions you see on those two sources will be the closest to actual GRE questions. If you get the Kaplan prep book which is like $15 on amazon you get access to a book test plus 5 more online exams. As to the reliability of their scores the first 3 exams were very close to my actual score (162V 170Q) while the 4th and 5th were substantially lower (maybe they're trying to sucker people into buying more services?) but anyway based on that I would guess your actual score would be something similar to the average of those PowerPrep and Kaplan tests. Sites like CATprep and 800score are decent extra practice sources if you need them, but not as authentic as the PowerPrep and Kaplan questions. Personally I'd advise against Princeton Review, they seemed to have some errors on their online practice exam, and the scoring seemed to be erratic as well. But that's just me, I've also heard from some people who thought PR was good.

i have heard of many cases where PhD students were accepted "without funding" but not sure if this could be the case for stats/biostats programs. biostats programs seem to be pretty well-funded.

so far on my list are UW, Berkeley, UCLA, USC, UC Davis, and maybe Stanford in the west coast. maybe a mix and match of phd and MS programs. not sure about which other programs yet, but most likely will just go off the program descriptions/rankings list. looks like that PhD program at UCSF has a MS requirement, so i guess it's off my radar for now.

ah thanks, makes a lot of sense. the stats i ran across for harvard may have been for their overall public health department which would include a lot of non-quantitative programs.

thanks for the reply cyberwulf, my degree is from an institution ranked around top 40 maybe a bit higher than 40 but not by much, i guess it changes every year. should be getting some decent recs, perhaps not too great, i've already spoken to my professors and they're more than willing to write good letters for me. since it seems like you're a faculty, and if you dont mind me asking how much more difficult do you think PhD admissions are compared to MS admissions? reason i'm asking is i want to leave the option to stay near home in california open so i was thinking about submitting MS apps for at least the california schools i'm applying to so i'd have a better shot at getting in. and do you know how helpful having a MS in biostats is in applying to PhD programs? thanks again for your input.

ah i was looking for this thread... seems like at least so far all the practice tests have been pretty consistent for me... been in the 159-163 range for verbal and 167-170 range for quant over 5-10 tests or so. have taken tests from kaplan, 800score, CATPrep, and the ETS one (but that was a long time ago and i forget what i got). the consensus seems to be that kaplan does the best job when it comes to getting closest to actual exam material, although there's some controversy as to whether they give the most accurate scores. haven't done the princeton review one yet but i'll let you guys know if there's a big discrepency somewhere.

first of all good luck w/ your admissions. i was also wondering whether MS or PhD would be better to apply to, but decided i'm most likely going to apply to MS programs since I've been out of school for awhile and have been working in a field that's not very related. Funded PhD programs sound nice in theory, but I'd imagine they're much tougher to get into, and looks like some top schools are reluctant to accept candidates without a MS into their PhD programs unless they are pretty much perfect candidates. Personally I have a good math background (with a major in math, ballpark 3.8~ major gpa 3.75~ overall) and most likely will get a solid GRE score, but i don't have much relevant research exp and like i said i've been out of the grind for awhile. as of now i'm leaning towards doing a MS at an in-state public school to save on cost, but will have to see what options i have to work with in spring next year.

Might be slightly off topic here but for those of you guys that have taken the GREs, how different were your scores on the real ones compared to the practice exams? I'd imagine math would be the most important indicator of judgment for Biostatistics admissions as far as GRE scores go, but I've been doing some research and in some Biostats programs located in the department of public health or school of medicine the avg verbal GREs seem to be pretty high also (but maybe not as high in quant). As a marker, Harvard which is consistently ranked in the top 5 released something like a 740Q/620V/4.5AW as the median score for 2011. For the 1-year accelerated pre-doctoral MS program at Columbia they recommend a 700+ in quant and 600+ in verbal for successful applicants. I guess those are stats from top programs so those avg scores will tend to drop as programs become less prestigious. But just a speculation, wish I knew...

thanks for all the advice everyone, really helps a lot

tried out working in a law firm for a bit, didn't really like it so started taking actuarial exams while i worked some accounting jobs (not for a big firm). haven't really been able to land a decent job to be honest, all the interviews i get around here seem to have hundreds of applicants.

Hi guys I've been out of school for over 3 years but planning to return to do a masters or phd in Statistics. Haven't really done much research, just know that I'll be applying this fall for programs starting next spring or fall. I heard grad admissions are very competitive nowadays, would be great if someone could share their experience applying to these programs as well as any advice. Some background info, #s slightly fudged up but not enough to make a diff. definitely applying to UCLA and USC for its location, not sure which other ones i'll go for... - 3.7 GPA from a top 40 undergrad - ~1300 GRE, 800Q, 500V - solid math background. multiple quarters of real analysis, linear/abstract algebra, topology, diff eq, numerical analysis, stats, graph theory, operations research, modeling. something like a 3.85 upper div GPA. - solid econ background, couple classes short of an econ minor but had to drop due to schedule problems. - three actuarial exams passed (for what it's worth) but no relevant experience. possibly will have 1 more passed around application time but in general weak work experience for having been out of school for so long - letter of recs prob won't be that strong as i'll have to bug profs who prob don't even remember me thanks!