To retake or not to retake Subject test? That is the question!

[Branwen daughter of Llyr]

So I finally got my subject test scores back about a week ago.

Not a thrilling score - 630, but not too horrible, either (80th percentile). For someone who's been out of school for nearly 10 years, it's really not too terrible.

However, my two top choice schools (because of their program) are Harvard and UCLA - so I'm up against some big guns. Obviously, the subject test score won't hurt me when I'm applying to Southern Methodist - but Harvard requires a minimum of 650 (at least so they claim on their website). The question is - to retake the test in November (and study my ass off yet again, this time focusing heavily on criticism and american lit - my weaknesses) - or to just let it lie??

yes, yes, I know the SOP and writing sample are really what count. But I wouldn't want to not get accepted just because of the stupid subject GRE (a horrible, horrible test!!).

Advise welcome!

Branwen

[Gingermick]

I am not sure I qualify to answer your question, as I have not yet applied to graduate school, but I also got my scores back last week and I received a 640, 82 percentile. I will not be retaking. I also am several years out of undergrad, and studying for that test took a huge amount of time, time that I feel will be better spent writing and perfecting my SOP and writing sample and preparing 10 or so applications. I too lacked theory knowledge and American lit, and almost all the questions I left blank were those easy match the theorist to their book questions, but I don't think it's worth it to put in another 3 months of studying to raise my score 10 or 20 points. I am also looking at UCLA and Harvard, and while I know that a sub 650 score won't help us, I don't think it will hurt us either. I think that, like you said, the writing sample and SOP will be the determining factor for most schools, even Harvard and UCLA. If you can put the next three months towards a better writing sample I think it would serve your application better.

[soxpuppet]

I don't know anything about Harvard in particular, but it's important to note that many schools in practice implement policies re. "numbers" different from what they say on their website. I've even heard that a coupe of schools that list high average GRE scores or high cutoff numbers don't even look at the test except to confirm that you've taken it (and given ETS all your money).

A friend of mine, however, was told by her advisors that she should avoid applying to schools where she did not meet the minimum requirements (in this case, foreign language proficiency), even if that requirement was in an area that didn't seem central to the application.

So... for some schools these numbers are hard and fast rules, but others just have outdated/unrepresentative websites.

My uninformed opinion is that your score is respectable and my suspicion is that at most schools it will neither hurt nor help you. If you are worried about particular schools and their policies, if you have your heart set on a certain school and don't want to be disqualified on a minor issue of 20 pts. on the GRE, it's probably more efficient to send off a quick email and ask for a clarification of their policy than to take time away from work on your writing sample and SoP that may not even be necessary.

In any case, the GRE at this point should be a secondary concern. But if you get everything else into perfect shape this summer and find you have time to sit down and read some theory, I certainly wouldn't dissuade you from doing so. It's helpful to know, even for a Medievalist.

So I finally got my subject test scores back about a week ago.

Not a thrilling score - 630, but not too horrible, either (80th percentile). For someone who's been out of school for nearly 10 years, it's really not too terrible.

However, my two top choice schools (because of their program) are Harvard and UCLA - so I'm up against some big guns. Obviously, the subject test score won't hurt me when I'm applying to Southern Methodist - but Harvard requires a minimum of 650 (at least so they claim on their website). The question is - to retake the test in November (and study my ass off yet again, this time focusing heavily on criticism and american lit - my weaknesses) - or to just let it lie??

yes, yes, I know the SOP and writing sample are really what count. But I wouldn't want to not get accepted just because of the stupid subject GRE (a horrible, horrible test!!).

Advise welcome!

Branwen

[GK Chesterton]

I'll offer the differing opinion - if they have a bare minimum, and you're under the minimum, I would suggest that it's unwise to not try and improve that score as much as you can. If the question were of you scoring a 670 when the cutoff is 650, then perhaps it would be better to concentrate on your SOP (although I also don't think that's in any way obvious) - but when you're under it, it's probably best to at least meet the minimum requirements. You have like 6 months, right?

[diehtc0ke]

"High scores in the Verbal (700) and Subject tests (650, i.e., English and American literature) are positive additions to the applica­tion but are by no means the most important aspect of one’s candidacy."

I found this on the Graduate School's profile of the English Department. This was the only sentence I could find that gave any specifics on the scores they were looking for and I don't see it creating a score threshold in which anything lower won't even be considered. Based on this, I wouldn't bother retaking the test. You're close enough to a "high score" that it shouldn't be an issue if every other part of your application package is stellar.

Edited so I can wish you luck on your applications, Branwen.

Edited June 1, 2010 by diehtc0ke

[Branwen daughter of Llyr]

Thanks for the advice .

I was really, really hoping to hit the 700 mark, which is why I'm a bit befuddled about the whole thing. I really don't want to shell out another $160 and spend 4 months cramming for this test (although I don't mind reading theory - I'm currently browsing through Blackwell's). Aside from not really having the spare time to study, I would really like to focus my energies on getting my writing sample to shine like a polished diamond in the sun (and the SOP, of course). Between my summer grad seminar, 3 jobs, and Latin classes in the fall, I doubt I'll have that much spare time to significantly raise my score (i.e. to the 700 range).

Since I already aced the GRE Verbal (720), I'm wondering if the subject test is THAT significant (after all, it doesn't count for fellowships).

I sometimes have a sneaking suspicion that many websites post somewhat misleading info to discourage the faint at heart LOL.

*sigh*. I'll continue mulling this over, I'm sure.

dihtc0ke - thanks!

GK - I'm not sure if it's a "minimum requirement" or "recommendation". Most English departments I'm looking at are loathe to actually publish required scores - I do know that I'm in the numbers range for all the schools I'm interested in - but the subject test is on the "lower" end of the curve than my other numbers. However, since SOP and Writing Sample are really the important factors in the application, I'm hoping that 630 will be fine (although I still have that nagging little voice yelling at me that I should take the test again and ace it this time).

Sox - this is exactly what I suspected - that the policies are different from what they "state" on their website.

And I must say, I'm somewhat about the -1 I got for my original post. If I offended anyone, I apologize, but what on Earth was offensive about it?

[diehtc0ke]

And I must say, I'm somewhat about the -1 I got for my original post. If I offended anyone, I apologize, but what on Earth was offensive about it?

No clue but I +1'd for you. Personally, that test was so emotionally draining that I shut my phone off and slept the rest of the day away after I took it. Couldn't even fathom taking it again.

[soxpuppet]

I was really, really hoping to hit the 700 mark, which is why I'm a bit befuddled about the whole thing.

I was aiming for the same number, and came up slightly but solidly short of it. I had a similar impulse to retake, but honestly? none of the successful applicants I know (out of those who have actually told me their scores) beat that mark. And if what dietc0ke posted it what's written on Harvard's website, I'd say more solidly, don't retake. From what I remember of most websites, they tended to list things like "recommended scores" or "average scores of successful applicants." Your number shows that a) you have a solid knowledge of the canon, and that 80th %ile is not just against the general population, not just out of English majors, but specifically out of English majors angling for English lit graduate programs. These numbers are, I think, only ever used in making first cuts (and sometimes for determining funding, esp. from sources external to the department), and in my opinion, if the other "numbers" are high, it would be absurd for this to contribute negatively to your application in that respect.

Good luck! Go work on your writing sample!

[Riotbeard]

I can't comment on your program, but I know at least with history, some history programs are given numbers applicants have to meet by the grad school. My advisor told me the GRE score does matter, it's not of prime importance, but sometimes to get funding you have to reach certain benchmarks. It's not always up to the department, they have to meet the needs of larger institution, and larger institutions often like impressive stats. If it were me (and I just got funding on my second try this year), I would shore up every part of my application if I thought it might be a weakness.

[btheblueox]

I'm in a kind of similar position -- I scored just around where you did. FWIW, I'm going to retake, I think; I already applied once (the just-past admissions cycle), largely unsuccessfully, and since I'm giving it another go, I figured I'd try to improve on as many areas of the application as I can. I don't think that my subject GRE score kept me out of the schools that rejected me (there were bigger issues with my application than that), but I don't think it'll hurt to spend a couple months reading as much as I can and taking it from there. Why leave stones unturned, you know?

I think the thing that comforts me most, though, is that if I find I am unable to retake the test -- if I study even more and still feel uneasy, for example -- my score is already passable. So the most I'll lose with the route I'm taking is $130 (if I don't feel good about a week before taking the test, I've decided I'll cancel), and even though that's not peanuts for me, I'm going to be spending so much on the reapplying process anyway that I don't mind going for broke.

It all depends on how I'm doing anxiety-wise. The last time I took the test, I'd studied exhaustively -- read the Nortons, cooked up the flashcards, driven everyone around me insane muttering about iambs, etc. -- but when I got there, I spent a good portion of the testing time (I'm taking about 30 minutes) sitting there, frozen, unable to pick up a pencil. And it didn't get much better after that: some questions I just answered and moved on, but for others, I spent a lot of time staring and wondering if I actually knew what I knew I knew (oof, what a phrase): there was a poem on the test that I knew inside and out (I'd written about it in my undergrad thesis), and it took me a solid chunk of time to pick the answer that I knew was right (it was a "who wrote this" question). Honestly, I'm amazed I even made it out of there alive, and even more amazed that I made it out with a low-600-range score.

So that's my plan: read more, learn more, register for the test, then go from there. Like I said, worst comes to worst, I'll come out the other end having lost $130 and having read a bunch of things. Not too shabby. Maybe some similar approach might work for you?

(Ed. for typos.)

Edited June 3, 2010 by pinkbadger

[foppery]

I can't remember my exact score, but I know it was in the 99th percentile (high 700s, I believe), and I was rejected from Harvard, Yale, and UChicago. I say this not to boast or to discourage you, but to reassure you that the subject test is not the most important part of your application. Also, 80th percentile is great!

However, I'd disagree with you about programs overstating their minimum scores. If anything, wouldn't they want as many application fees as possible?<br style="text-shadow: none;">

[Branwen daughter of Llyr]

*sigh*

am now even more confused.

pinkbadger: I didn't black out during the test at all - worked solidly through the two hours and forty minutes of it. There was just a lot I didn't know. The April version of the test was absolute killer. Obviously it can't hurt to study for it again - it's just a question of time. I have a very limited amount of time - I'm taking an online grad seminar this summer, and starting Latin online in the fall, while working one full time job and two part-times, and I also am writing a new paper for my writing sample with the prof that is teaching the online seminar (and need to write quite a few SOPs for the application processes). With that limited time I'm not sure if I'll be able to raise my score in any significant way. Obviously, I'd ideally want to send out applications with two above 700 GRE's, a perfect writing sample, and a brilliant SOP - that's what it's all about, after all. I'm also after a not successful application round - I was rejected by the four schools I applied to.

The issue that appears to come up a lot on this board is the relative insignificance of the GRE scores in English grad departments. I know the General GRE is important for the fellowships (and I'm very happy with my score), the question is basically this - is 80th percentile too low to be considered at all by the top ten? Many of the successful applicants this year have stated time and time again that it was their SOP and writing samples that got them in, not the GRE scores. But on the other hand, I have this internal drive to take the test again and prove to myself that I CAN get to that yearned for 99th percentile - especially since I'm an older applicant and have been out of school for so long.

foppery: thanks . 80th percentile really isn't too horrible, I know. I also know I can do better if I really really apply myself to it. I just wish there were more sample tests out there - since the one released by ETS has almost nothing in common with the test I took (which included almost NO canonical works at all!).

Riot - my general GRE (which I know matters for benchmark and fellowships) is beyond fine. I'm just wondering about the subject test. Which isn't even required by some schools.

GAAAH.

I swear, it would have been an easier call if I got a really low score.

[strokeofmidnight]

*sigh*

The issue that appears to come up a lot on this board is the relative insignificance of the GRE scores in English grad departments. I know the General GRE is important for the fellowships (and I'm very happy with my score), the question is basically this - is 80th percentile too low to be considered at all by the top ten? Many of the successful applicants this year have stated time and time again that it was their SOP and writing samples that got them in, not the GRE scores. But on the other hand, I have this internal drive to take the test again and prove to myself that I CAN get to that yearned for 99th percentile - especially since I'm an older applicant and have been out of school for so long.

I think you've answered your own question. Reading over this, it seems that re-taking is more about proving your abilities to yourself, rather than meeting the "thresholds" (which are largely fictional) from certain programs. I can absolutely understand the desire to do so, but at the risk of being overly bold, I think to do so for these reasons would be to subscribe to the GRE's insane (and utterly false) logic: that there's some sort of definite correlation between your score and your skills as a scholar. There are too many *other* issues that will bruise your ego in this grueling process for you to waste your time and energy on this one. I can all but promise you that a 660 will *not* hurt you. [i can't even begin to explain just how little weight will be given to this score]. This is a test that (potentially) takes a very long time to study and re-study. (I needed 6 months of studying "full-time"...which is about 30-40 hours a week for me, on top of two full-time jobs and working on my writing sample. Totally. Not. Worth. It).

It's also worth noting: in the past few years, there was often an "easy" test and a "hard" test. (I took both the November and October tests two years...one was significantly harder than the other. I've heard similar things about the two fall exams last year). It's entirely possible that even with tons of extra studying, your score might drop should this pattern hold, and you come across the "hard" test and a particularly unfortunate set of questions.

You have enough on your plate already...and frankly, absolutely no need to prove your trivia knowledge of English Literature to anyone, much less to the scantron machine at GRE headquarters.

[strokeofmidnight]

I can't remember my exact score, but I know it was in the 99th percentile (high 700s, I believe), and I was rejected from Harvard, Yale, and UChicago. I say this not to boast or to discourage you, but to reassure you that the subject test is not the most important part of your application. Also, 80th percentile is great!

However, I'd disagree with you about programs overstating their minimum scores. If anything, wouldn't they want as many application fees as possible?<br style="text-shadow: none;">

I don't think it's a matter of overstating, as much as...

1. Many programs don't update their websites nearly enough. One program that does post GRE scores...doesn't actually use the scores in determining admissions anymore..AT ALL. But I'm fairly sure that the semi-ambiguous language on their website is enough to scare away potential applicants who happen to have lower numbers.

2. The term that's being batted around is "minimal scores." While some programs do give some sort of a score (Harvard, Berkeley, UCI, Duke comes to mind-there are others), none of the ones that I encountered specified that these are minimum scores. I think that applicants (very understandably) tends to misread the information posted, to see it as "must get this or else" number rather than (usually) a ballpark figure. If anything, there are repeated evidence to the contrary...I know of 2 or 3 applicants every year (and I certainly don't keep track of everyone's GRE scores) who scores well belowed the published numbers, but were accepted--and even wooed--by these programs. I scored below the "recommended minimums" at several programs--and was accepted with their highest funding package.

I think if a program actually came out and stated their minimum scores, one should pay careful attention. But this rarely seems to be the case.

[diehtc0ke]

2. The term that's being batted around is "minimal scores." While some programs do give some sort of a score (Harvard, Berkeley, UCI, Duke comes to mind-there are others), none of the ones that I encountered specified that these are minimum scores. I think that applicants (very understandably) tends to misread the information posted, to see it as "must get this or else" number rather than (usually) a ballpark figure. If anything, there are repeated evidence to the contrary...I know of 2 or 3 applicants every year (and I certainly don't keep track of everyone's GRE scores) who scores well belowed the published numbers, but were accepted--and even wooed--by these programs. I scored below the "recommended minimums" at several programs--and was accepted with their highest funding package.

I think if a program actually came out and stated their minimum scores, one should pay careful attention. But this rarely seems to be the case.

I'd like to pop in again to serve as one of those 2 or 3 applicants. I'm not ashamed (anymore lol) to say that I scored in the 55th percentile on that ridiculous standardized test. The website of one of the (top 30) schools I was accepted to says: "Scores on the GRE should exceed 600 on the Verbal, Analytical and Subject tests." My score on the subject test (and the analytical portion of the GRE, for that matter) fell rather solidly short of this "cut-off" but I was accepted and received a competitive Graduate School-wide fellowship based solely on my writing sample. The DGS had to nominate me for the fellowship and, for reasons I won't discuss here, when I got there for the visitation weekend she told me about her letter of recommendation and why I was nominated. Now, I'm not going to that school and the department I'm entering in the fall is known for not using the subject test's scores when considering an applicant for admission (which, I'm not going to lie, has made me wonder whether they would have accepted me if they did) so maybe I'm not the best example. But, I wanted to put this out there just in case there were others who were considering retaking the subject test.

[Pamphilia]

Just to reiterate what others are saying here--

Many people have come out and shown how having lowerish scores hasn't precluded them from getting into tip top programs, and I can tell you first hand that stellar scores won't get you in, either. I had decent success with this round of applications and got into some very respectable programs, but even with scores on both the Lit and General tests that were (if I do say so myself) pretty badass,* I was rejected from programs like Stanford, Michigan, UCLA, Duke, etc. I can't tell you the extent to which my scores really made a difference in my applications except in one case where I was told that my Verbal/Math combined score helped me win a Grad School-wide fellowship (as far as I know those scores didn't play much into the fact of my actual admission or my department-wide fellowship award for this particular program). The point is that low scores won't keep you out and high scores won't get you in. As such, the subject score doesn't count for much and doesn't indicate anything specific about your ability to do grad-level work OR your chances for admission.

That said, Branwen, I toooootally sympathize with your desire to make every aspect of your application as strong as possible. But your score is very respectable! I think it's enough to put you in range even for the tippy top programs to which you're applying, as long as your writing sample and SOP are competitive. As others have said and as I know you are already aware, the writing sample and SOP deserve and require more of your attention than anything else. I'd recommend that instead of worrying about your subject score, you put it out of your mind for now and work on your Latin and other languages,** your grad seminar, and the more important parts of your application. The way I see it, the subject test should NOT require six months of studying; it requires about a month of intensive cramming, given that it tests "cocktail party" knowledge more than in-depth understanding. So, if you really want to re-take it, go for the November test and don't worry about if for now. But again, your score is perfectly respectable and the other aspects of your app demand far more attention and time.

* PM me if you'd like specifics; I'd prefer not to discuss my exact scores here.

** I think applicants--particularly early modern/medieval applicants, and including myself--often underestimate the important of language training! As I understand it, this played a biiig factor in my applications, in both good and bad ways. Some programs told me directly that they were very happy with the fact that I was beginning to pursue my third relevant language and that it helped with my admission, while others suggested that my lack of relevant languages (I used to be very proficient in a second language but haven't studied if for years, and I only have two semesters of my third) was a real detriment.

Edited June 4, 2010 by Pamphilia

[Branwen daughter of Llyr]

Just to reiterate what others are saying here--

That said, Branwen, I toooootally sympathize with your desire to make every aspect of your application as strong as possible. But your score is very respectable! I think it's enough to put you in range even for the tippy top programs to which you're applying, as long as your writing sample and SOP are competitive. As others have said and as I know you are already aware, the writing sample and SOP deserve and require more of your attention than anything else. I'd recommend that instead of worrying about your subject score, you put it out of your mind for now and work on your Latin and other languages,** your grad seminar, and the more important parts of your application. The way I see it, the subject test should NOT require six months of studying; it requires about a month of intensive cramming, given that it tests "cocktail party" knowledge more than in-depth understanding. So, if you really want to re-take it, go for the November test and don't worry about if for now. But again, your score is perfectly respectable and the other aspects of your app demand far more attention and time.

** I think applicants (particularly early modern/medieval applicants), including me, underestimate the important of language training! As I understand it, this played a biiig factor in my applications, in both good and bad ways. Some programs told me directly that they were very happy with the fact that I was beginning to pursue my third relevant language and that it helped with my admission, while others suggested that my lack of relevant languages (I used to be very proficient in a second language but haven't studied if for years, and I only have two semesters of my third) was a real detriment.

First, thanks for your encouraging post .

Second, what you say about the languages is something I've completely understood during the past app year - one of the reasons I'm trying to get a year of Latin in before grad is exactly that - although I'm bilingual in English/Hebrew, Hebrew isn't particularly helpful for medieval lit studies (unless going for medieval Jewish writing, which I'm not LOL). I do have a year of French under my belt, and I'm thinking of taking it parallel to Latin this year as well - luckily, I have the basics, so I would probably be able to jump straight in to 3rd semester college level French. I'm not quite sure I should take both languages concurrently - but since I'm hoping that Welsh to be my third language (both UCLA and Harvard offer graduate level Welsh, which is why I'm so gung ho about their programs - getting to read The Mabinogi in the original is a HUGE part of it), I'm thinking that I should at least have a head start with French and Latin before I start grad school, right?

I think that I will take your advice and put the subject test out of my mind for now. I'll continue reading my Blackwell for criticism (I need some of it anyhow to focus on a critical approach for my writing sample on Gawain and the Green Knight), and if I feel that I'm up for it around September, and that I have time, I'll register for the November test. You're right - my time is best spent tailoring my SOP's to fit Harvard and UCLA, as well as the other schools I'm applying to (the short list is yet undecided) and working on my research paper.

Thanks again!

[Pamphilia]

First, thanks for your encouraging post .

Second, what you say about the languages is something I've completely understood during the past app year - one of the reasons I'm trying to get a year of Latin in before grad is exactly that - although I'm bilingual in English/Hebrew, Hebrew isn't particularly helpful for medieval lit studies (unless going for medieval Jewish writing, which I'm not LOL). I do have a year of French under my belt, and I'm thinking of taking it parallel to Latin this year as well - luckily, I have the basics, so I would probably be able to jump straight in to 3rd semester college level French. I'm not quite sure I should take both languages concurrently - but since I'm hoping that Welsh to be my third language (both UCLA and Harvard offer graduate level Welsh, which is why I'm so gung ho about their programs - getting to read The Mabinogi in the original is a HUGE part of it), I'm thinking that I should at least have a head start with French and Latin before I start grad school, right?

I think that I will take your advice and put the subject test out of my mind for now. I'll continue reading my Blackwell for criticism (I need some of it anyhow to focus on a critical approach for my writing sample on Gawain and the Green Knight), and if I feel that I'm up for it around September, and that I have time, I'll register for the November test. You're right - my time is best spent tailoring my SOP's to fit Harvard and UCLA, as well as the other schools I'm applying to (the short list is yet undecided) and working on my research paper.

Thanks again!

Right on! Go forth and kick ass.

[VictorianTess]

A couple of observations that you may or may not find helpful. First, keep in mind that 80th percentile isn't equivalent to a B, it's actually very high. You're being ranked against everyone else who's trying to get into an English grad program, and that's where you fall (at least as far as English trivia). Second, I read somewhere (I think ETS?) that most people do not improve upon their initial score. I thought that they were full of it, so I retook it and got a much lower percentile the second time.

Best of luck!

[Branwen daughter of Llyr]

A couple of observations that you may or may not find helpful. First, keep in mind that 80th percentile isn't equivalent to a B, it's actually very high. You're being ranked against everyone else who's trying to get into an English grad program, and that's where you fall (at least as far as English trivia). Second, I read somewhere (I think ETS?) that most people do not improve upon their initial score. I thought that they were full of it, so I retook it and got a much lower percentile the second time.

Best of luck!

Thanks Tess

I know 80th percentile is a respectable score, it's just not as high as I hoped. I did raise my GRE verbal from 600 to 720 in two months, so I know I could raise the subject score - I just don't see how I'll have the time to study to raise it significantly with everything else that's going on. Hopefully programs like Harvard and Yale will be somewhat lenient regarding the subject test score, since I aced the verbal (and have a very good overall general GRE score, qualifying me for fellowships and awards and such), and since I'm hoping to really nail my SOP and writing sample.

As I stated before, I'm putting the subject test aside for now - if I see in September that I have enough time and energy, I may cram for it. I may also decide to let it lie at 630 (which is really only 20 points lower than the "high scores" recommended by Harvard). Northwestern, another of my top choices, doesn't even require it, I think.

I've also finally found an academic use for my Hebrew - so it turns out I have a head start on languages! (surprisingly).