2 Questions concerning the GRE

[vitad2]

For PhD programs (continental for me, but I'm not sure that matters), what should my GRE score goals be (both minimum and ideal for verbal and math)?

Also, what is more important the writing sample or the GRE scores? I am trying to decide how much time to dedicate to both. Currently my Verbal is a 161 and my math is a 162.

Thanks for the help!

[hector549]

2 hours ago, vitad2 said:

For PhD programs (continental for me, but I'm not sure that matters), what should my GRE score goals be (both minimum and ideal for verbal and math)?

Also, what is more important the writing sample or the GRE scores? I am trying to decide how much time to dedicate to both. Currently my Verbal is a 161 and my math is a 162.

Thanks for the help!

The writing sample is many orders of magnitude greater in importance than the GRE. Your quant score is perfectly fine. For verbal, I'd say anything over 160ish is probably fine (for optics reasons). Would it be better if it were a few points higher? Probably, but I wouldn't spend time studying to retake it, unless you have a lot of free time and the extra $$ lying around for the retake. Spend that time working on your sample.

Edited May 21, 2019 by hector549

[vitad2]

@hector549 Thanks for the help! I really appreciate it. Do you know what a good goal for the GRE would be if I wanted to feel more safe about it? Some stuff on the Leiter Reports forums scare me a little bit, but maybe that's just because they're almost 10 years old.

[hector549]

1 hour ago, vitad2 said:

@hector549 Thanks for the help! I really appreciate it. Do you know what a good goal for the GRE would be if I wanted to feel more safe about it? Some stuff on the Leiter Reports forums scare me a little bit, but maybe that's just because they're almost 10 years old.

It's hard to say precisely. Ask 10 people, and you'll get 10 different answers. I'd say thresholds you should try to hit would be: 50ish+ percentile for quant (which is about 153), unless you're aiming for some kind of logic-heavy program like CMU or the like, and 160+ verbal. It's not clear that anyone cares about the writing score, but I'd think it would be good to aim for 4.5.

Some programs publish their supposed average scores; for example, Notre Dame claims 94th percentile for verbal, 84th quant, and 87th writing. UCSD claims average scores are: 168V/160Q/5.1AWA.

I think it's tempting to be sucked into spending a lot of time/money working on the GRE because it gives you a quantitative score that is straightforward to interpret when other aspects of one's own application are harder to assess (How good is my WS really? Who knows what my letters contain?), but I think that this is largely a trap, as long as you're scoring above the thresholds I'm suggesting.

[HopOnMyCrates]

Someone developed a site that worked off of data from GradCafe that listed average GRE scores for different institutions/programs/years. Unfortunately I never bookmarked it, however somebody else may have a link. Suffice to say, many of those who were offered admission at PGR top 30 programs regularly scored correspondingly higher (165+). That being said, due to the high level of competition in admissions several people with such scores were also denied admission. Speaking personally, my scores were 159Q 162V 4.5W iirc and I was lucky enough to land in such a program (waitlisted at one other, fwiw), so you're likely on the right track, if not fine where you're at. Are your scores from an official test, or one of the practice ones? Additionally, if you have the funds, I don't think it would hurt to take the test twice (if you haven't already), especially if you've targeted weak spots and improved upon them in practice. I took the SAT twice in high school and did something like 180 points better the second go around, but with the GRE I only improved by about 3 points (1Q, 2V). YMMV

I was able to speak with a chair who said that his program specifically (other institutions may vary) used it as a preliminary quasi cut-off for how critically they'd look at applications: higher scores got put into a "make sure to give these people a good read" pile, while average-to-lower scores were left together. Part of the rationale was to identify top applicants early on in order to give them offers earlier than other schools, hoping that they bite. Every application, he assured me, certainly got read with some care. I might add, when I attended one institution's prospective students' event the professors with whom I spoke who also happened to be on the committee immediately remembered my WS or my LORs when I introduced myself. These things give you personality that the GRE simply can't convey, which is why the GRE holds a significantly lower (though still necessary) importance in the application. As Hector remarked above, so long as your scores are not alarmingly low there is no reason for a program to reject you if the rest of your application is competitively strong.

[vitad2]

@HopOnMyCrates My scores are from an official test. I could afford the test (tho I'd naturally prefer not to spend $200 when i don't have to). My bigger concern is the time that would have to go into studying again to raise my score. I think my writing sample needs a good deal of work and am currently trying to write a new one with less ambitious focus. I did get into Stony Brook and BC's Masters programs (I couldn't afford it so I decided to apply again next year and to apply to funded masters programs too), but I'm not sure if that means anything. So, yea, basically I'm just trying to decide what to prioritize. 

[Duns Eith]

1 hour ago, vitad2 said:

@HopOnMyCrates My scores are from an official test. I could afford the test (tho I'd naturally prefer not to spend $200 when i don't have to). My bigger concern is the time that would have to go into studying again to raise my score. I think my writing sample needs a good deal of work and am currently trying to write a new one with less ambitious focus. I did get into Stony Brook and BC's Masters programs (I couldn't afford it so I decided to apply again next year and to apply to funded masters programs too), but I'm not sure if that means anything. So, yea, basically I'm just trying to decide what to prioritize. 

Yes. Prioritize the sample. Send it to people who will tear it to shreds with critical feedback. Then fix all of the things they mention (even the minutia you don't care about), so it will emerge a brightly burning phoenix, about which the admission committee will carry on an oral tradition.

Edited May 23, 2019 by Duns Eith

[HopOnMyCrates]

On 5/23/2019 at 10:33 AM, vitad2 said:

@HopOnMyCrates My scores are from an official test. I could afford the test (tho I'd naturally prefer not to spend $200 when i don't have to). My bigger concern is the time that would have to go into studying again to raise my score. I think my writing sample needs a good deal of work and am currently trying to write a new one with less ambitious focus. I did get into Stony Brook and BC's Masters programs (I couldn't afford it so I decided to apply again next year and to apply to funded masters programs too), but I'm not sure if that means anything. So, yea, basically I'm just trying to decide what to prioritize. 

IMHO if I were you then I'd be content with GRE. Duns Eith is right about the sample, run that thing through the wringer.

[SmugSnugInARug]

I’m gonna just try to run a bit against the grain, if only because you mentioned BC and Continental programs.

The short version is this: I know for a fact that some members of continental program acceptance committees DO use the verbal GRE score in deciding whether your application goes to a single professor to read, or to every professor.

A high score doesn’t guarantee entry, but it can drastically increase your chances when you are being reviewed by several professors rather than one.

I have been specifically told by faculty who work in these committees that top verbal scores are absolutely important. Regardless of how indicative they actually are. The recommendation I received was to try to get a 167 or higher (depending on the year).