Subject Test

[Alette]

This has the potential to be a very dumb question - humor me.

As I'm gearing up for the application season rush, I've been browsing the archives here and I noticed something. A lot of people have expressed worry over GRE subject scores of about 540-550 (or thereabouts).

I took the GRE subject test 3 years ago. My score was 520; the website says that I'm in the 39% percentile. My question is: is this still accurate? Does your percentile change/is the report on the ETS old and inaccurate? It seems like a big jump from a 520/39% to a 540/48% (for instance) because it's only a 20 point difference. Or is it simply that many people end up somewhere in the low to mid 500s?

Although I'm also forgetting how it's scored. The person who got a 540 answered (perhaps) 20 more questions correctly than I, correct?

I'm looking for a way out of taking this test again, although I know I'll end up sitting it anyway. Gah!

[diehtc0ke]

This has the potential to be a very dumb question - humor me.

As I'm gearing up for the application season rush, I've been browsing the archives here and I noticed something. A lot of people have expressed worry over GRE subject scores of about 540-550 (or thereabouts).

I took the GRE subject test 3 years ago. My score was 520; the website says that I'm in the 39% percentile. My question is: is this still accurate? Does your percentile change/is the report on the ETS old and inaccurate? It seems like a big jump from a 520/39% to a 540/48% (for instance) because it's only a 20 point difference. Or is it simply that many people end up somewhere in the low to mid 500s?

Although I'm also forgetting how it's scored. The person who got a 540 answered (perhaps) 20 more questions correctly than I, correct?

I'm looking for a way out of taking this test again, although I know I'll end up sitting it anyway. Gah!

I believe that if the percentile score changes (and it does somewhat over time), the GRE website reflects the updated scores. I checked my scores recently and I noticed that the percentiles had changed slightly from when I applied last fall. I took the GRE two years ago and the subject test about a year ago.

I'm not quite sure how the test is scored (to be frank, I didn't study all that much for the test and ended up scoring in the mid 500s as well) but I don't think it could possibly be on a point per question scale. Most around would probably say anything around 650 is a pretty safe score whereas anything below 600 is somewhat of a gamble. Clearly your score won't get you into any programs but some might use it as a cutoff for consideration and still others might say they take the score into account and disregard it when it comes to actually evaluating packages. I was unhappy with my score but didn't have the opportunity to take it again (I registered for the October test and didn't get the scores until after the deadline for registering for the November which is how they designed it I imagine) and yet I was accepted to schools that claimed 600 as a minimum score. With that being said, had I been able to register for the November test I surely would have.

[foppery]

Since the GRE subject tests are scored on a 200-990 scale, but a score of 990 (or, frankly, anything above 800) is unheard of, the percentage system is always a bit weird...<br style="text-shadow: none;">

[bigdgp]

Alette, I know that percentiles on most GRE sections changed significantly after the economic downturn. When people's small business startups went under, they decided to go back to school. This meant a lot more people who were just kind of interested in further graduate study took the GRE, which, in turn, added a significant number of scores on the lower to middle side of the bell curve. I think the impact was more significant on the general test, but I'm sure this must have had at least some effect on the subject test as well. I do know that 20 points on the test does not translate to 20 correctly answered questions, it is more like 5-10.

Foppery, I have never heard of the test score going up to 990. From what I understand, all aspects of the GRE other than the AW are given a score out of 800.

[medicine]

The GRE general scores, at least, do change over time-- which is very strange. Apparently, my 5.0 writing was 71st percentile four years ago, but is, as of today, all the way up to the 84th percentile. That suggests that people are performing less well on the test, which would suggest that your percentile is likely to rise over time.

That said, however, you might actually do better on the subject test this year, simply because it seems to have changed dramatically, I think beginning with last fall's tests. Everything I had ever been told -- all message boards, all prep books, all the materials from ETS -- implied a test heavily geared toward knowledge of dates, periods, authors, and titles: a kind of trivia test. The test I took last October, however, had almost none of that. Instead, it seemed mostly to consist of one difficult passage after another (difficult either bc it was avant-garde modernist or bc it was old- think Keats and older), with a set of 5-8 questions on each passage. Usually, all but one could be answered if you were a good reader: if you could spot the antecedent of "he" in line 7, or if you could untangle the subject and verb from a winding miltonic sentence. Among all the Spenser/Milton/Gray/Wordsworth, however, were single questions on "literary theory," which mostly meant matching theoretical catchwords to theorist (e.g., discourse-> Foucault, or aporia->Derrida, interpretive community-> Fish).

All in all, the passages seemed to test one skill of literary study-- the ability to sort through complicated language-- fairly well.

So if you happen to be an "early lit" kind of person (like myself- I was lucky), you're going to do well on this newer subject test.

Did anyone else take the Nov. or April subject tests? If so, were those tests like the one I just described, or were they more like the old-style trivia test?

Edited September 14, 2010 by medicine

[Pamphilia]

I have never heard of the test score going up to 990. From what I understand, all aspects of the GRE other than the AW are given a score out of 800.

I know that some of the subject tests are scored out of numbers more or less than 800. The lit test, meanwhile, is out of 800.

[stormydown]

The GRE general scores, at least, do change over time-- which is very strange. Apparently, my 5.0 writing was 71st percentile four years ago, but is, as of today, all the way up to the 84th percentile. That suggests that people are performing less well on the test, which would suggest that your percentile is likely to rise over time.

That said, however, you might actually do better on the subject test this year, simply because it seems to have changed dramatically, I think beginning with last fall's tests. Everything I had ever been told -- all message boards, all prep books, all the materials from ETS -- implied a test heavily geared toward knowledge of dates, periods, authors, and titles: a kind of trivia test. The test I took last October, however, had almost none of that. Instead, it seemed mostly to consist of one difficult passage after another (difficult either bc it was avant-garde modernist or bc it was old- think Keats and older), with a set of 5-8 questions on each passage. Usually, all but one could be answered if you were a good reader: if you could spot the antecedent of "he" in line 7, or if you could untangle the subject and verb from a winding miltonic sentence. Among all the Spenser/Milton/Gray/Wordsworth, however, were single questions on "literary theory," which mostly meant matching theoretical catchwords to theorist (e.g., discourse-> Foucault, or aporia->Derrida, interpretive community-> Fish).

All in all, the passages seemed to test one skill of literary study-- the ability to sort through complicated language-- fairly well.

So if you happen to be an "early lit" kind of person (like myself- I was lucky), you're going to do well on this newer subject test.

Did anyone else take the Nov. or April subject tests? If so, were those tests like the one I just described, or were they more like the old-style trivia test?

I took the exam in November and I think I had a more old-style test. It had the Milton passages and the lit theory guys and the passages and stuff, but I had a lot of random trivia questions -- here are a bunch of characters from an obscure play from 1713, who wrote it? Here's a passage in Old English, what's it about? I had a number of "translation" questions, actually, with Old and Middle English. Fuck that, who the hell can actually read Old English after being an undergrad? All I can recognize is the first couple lines of Beowulf. One of the sections had me read a Middle English passage and then figure out what Canterbury Tale it was most thematically like. Middle English is way more decipherable, but still. It's the principle of the thing. Luckily there was a bunch of poetry on the test, which is my thing, so I scraped a 640 and went on my way.

Also, one of the last passages in the thing mentioned James Brown (yes, the singer) and there was actually a question: "Who is James Brown?" And the obvious answer was the correct one. I was practically banging my head against the desk at that point and it was unbelievably funny to me. All the professors I told about it later just rolled their eyes.

Edited September 14, 2010 by stormydown

[Alette]

The GRE general scores, at least, do change over time-- which is very strange. Apparently, my 5.0 writing was 71st percentile four years ago, but is, as of today, all the way up to the 84th percentile. That suggests that people are performing less well on the test, which would suggest that your percentile is likely to rise over time.

That said, however, you might actually do better on the subject test this year, simply because it seems to have changed dramatically, I think beginning with last fall's tests.

I believe the same thing happened with my analytic score as well (I took the GRE 3 years ago). I remember not being too enthused when I received my score, but now my 5.0 doesn't seem too shabby. I guess the influx of test takers (and thus competition for funding) is actually a good thing. (Although I'm still aiming for a higher score!)

As for the subject test, I'm not an early lit person, or anything of the sort - what I study is not on the exam. But I'm now very glad I took that Literary Theory class in undergrad! Do they ask about feminist theory, or anything of the like? Or is it just the "greats" - Freud, Lacan, Derrida, Barthes, etc.?

Alette, I know that percentiles on most GRE sections changed significantly after the economic downturn. When people's small business startups went under, they decided to go back to school. This meant a lot more people who were just kind of interested in further graduate study took the GRE, which, in turn, added a significant number of scores on the lower to middle side of the bell curve. I think the impact was more significant on the general test, but I'm sure this must have had at least some effect on the subject test as well. I do know that 20 points on the test does not translate to 20 correctly answered questions, it is more like 5-10.

And it's good this goes for the subject test, too! I hope I'll do better anyway, considering that those scores were from 3 years ago, with barely a year and a half of college English under my belt, but I'll take a rush of people lowering the average any day

Edited September 14, 2010 by Alette

[BelleOfKilronen]

Unfortunately, the percentile ranking that you receive at the time you get your scores is the one that stays with your test, and any official score reports that ETS sends will reflect the percentile ranking that you originally received. As bigdbp mentioned, pools of test-takers change for all sorts of reasons, and the percentile ranking they give you on your score report is configured in relation to whatever test-taker pool you were in when you took the exam.

Though, all that being said, more and more departments--and good ones at that--are questioning whether the subject test even provides valuable information during the admissions process, so I'm not sure there are many instances during which a retake (and all the time that would go into studying for one) would be worthwhile. Save the $100+ bucks and use it on ... well, anything else, really. Stupid ETS.

[Alette]

Unfortunately, the percentile ranking that you receive at the time you get your scores is the one that stays with your test, and any official score reports that ETS sends will reflect the percentile ranking that you originally received. As bigdbp mentioned, pools of test-takers change for all sorts of reasons, and the percentile ranking they give you on your score report is configured in relation to whatever test-taker pool you were in when you took the exam.

This is just too strange! Well, I am retaking both the GRE general and subject tests, so I'm not banking on my "new" percentile rankings. I feel the entire scoring process is simply too vague and mysterious - and is one (of many) good reasons why the ETS should not have a monopoly on graduate entrance exams!

Though, all that being said, more and more departments--and good ones at that--are questioning whether the subject test even provides valuable information during the admissions process, so I'm not sure there are many instances during which a retake (and all the time that would go into studying for one) would be worthwhile. Save the $100+ bucks and use it on ... well, anything else, really.

3 of my 7 schools require it and two or three strongly recommend it. It's not an option to rely on my past score. Additionally, I have an MA, and I know that adcomms will expect more out of my application, scores included, because of that (as they should). I think the main reason why schools still require the lit test might be to see how many hoops you're able and willing to jump through, and how well you handle it. Because that, of course, is part of grad school life.

Plus, I want to do it for me. Like I said, I only had a year and a half of college English at the time I first took it (due to a transfer and other odd events). Now I have a Master's. I want to see how much I've progressed. And taking the test itself wasn't awful (even if the score was!).

Stupid ETS.

Hear hear!

Edited September 15, 2010 by Alette

[augustquail]

I took the exam in November and I think I had a more old-style test. It had the Milton passages and the lit theory guys and the passages and stuff, but I had a lot of random trivia questions -- here are a bunch of characters from an obscure play from 1713, who wrote it? Here's a passage in Old English, what's it about? I had a number of "translation" questions, actually, with Old and Middle English. Fuck that, who the hell can actually read Old English after being an undergrad? All I can recognize is the first couple lines of Beowulf. One of the sections had me read a Middle English passage and then figure out what Canterbury Tale it was most thematically like. Middle English is way more decipherable, but still. It's the principle of the thing. Luckily there was a bunch of poetry on the test, which is my thing, so I scraped a 640 and went on my way.

Also, one of the last passages in the thing mentioned James Brown (yes, the singer) and there was actually a question: "Who is James Brown?" And the obvious answer was the correct one. I was practically banging my head against the desk at that point and it was unbelievably funny to me. All the professors I told about it later just rolled their eyes.

I do not understand how they can rationalize asking old english translation questions. Am I right when I say that Old English is a language that must be studied in order to be understood, like german or french? And who learns old English in undergrad, unless you are doing some kind of medievalist honors thesis? ETS folks are a bunch of bastards.

[stormydown]

I do not understand how they can rationalize asking old english translation questions. Am I right when I say that Old English is a language that must be studied in order to be understood, like german or french? And who learns old English in undergrad, unless you are doing some kind of medievalist honors thesis? ETS folks are a bunch of bastards.

Yup. I read Beowulf in 3 or 4 different courses and learned the ins and outs of the spread/development of the English language, so I figured that would be enough to make me prepared for any Old English questions I might run into. How wrong I was.

[Branwen daughter of Llyr]

I do not understand how they can rationalize asking old english translation questions. Am I right when I say that Old English is a language that must be studied in order to be understood, like german or french? And who learns old English in undergrad, unless you are doing some kind of medievalist honors thesis? ETS folks are a bunch of bastards.

I don't think there are old English translation questions. There ARE middle English translation questions, but not many - maybe 2-3 in the entire test (of 230 questions). Personally, as a medievalist, I would ask how they expect us to identify some obscure contemporary poet and to be able to distinguish between two similar critical theories that use nearly identical jargon in the same question (and yes, I had one like that in April).

No one is expected to know and answer the entire test. It's quite possible to get an 800 on this test without answering every question. It's just a very wide scope. So while I had loads of trouble with 20th century literature, critical theory, and African-American lit, I had no problem with most things from before 1900, loved the middle English questions, and jumped straight in to the Spencer/Milton/Shakespeare (i.e. Dead White Men) stuff.

But yes, ETS ARE a bunch of bastards. That has been firmly established (I even tell my GRE students that!)

[wreckofthehope]

I'm not sure you can call reading Middle English "translating" - it's just a slightly older version of the same language we're using now. Anglo Saxon... perhaps, but yeah - I haven't seen any questions that ask you to read Anglo Saxon (although I DID study it in undergrad').

All in all it's a fairly ridiculous test - we're all going to have areas we're weak on, mine is pretty much all American lit' outside the big C19th hitters and some Modern drama... but, the reason so few people score very highly on this test is surely just this reason - we're all equally handicapped by lack of knowledge in one area... lacking the medieval preparation is probably not that bad in the grand scheme of things as there are relatively few questions on the period it seems....

[Alette]

... but, the reason so few people score very highly on this test is surely just this reason - we're all equally handicapped by lack of knowledge in one area...

And I wouldn't worry about the impossibility of reaching a perfect score - I know someone who did get a perfect score on the subject test, but s/he was rejected from every school applied to, save some unfunded MA programs. Unfortunately this reassuring story is told at her/his expense, but there it is. A perfect score is not a free pass through admissions.

Edited September 20, 2010 by Alette

[RosemaryJuniper]

I'll third the comments about medieval works on the subject test: yes, there is some Middle English on there that's more difficult than the Canterbury Tales, which is what I think most non-medievalists associate with Middle English, but no Old English. Also, an awful lot of theoretical works which I've never read (grrr).

[poco_puffs]

When I took mine a year ago, I distinctly remember a small series of questions about an Old English passage (and not Beowulf) that required us to identify at least a few words in order to answer them. Something along the lines of "Read these six lines. Okay, what is the topic of this stanza? What is it saying about X? In which lines does the poet comment on Y?" It wasn't a full job of translation, but you had to be somewhat familiar with either the specific poem or the language in general.

Another thing to consider is there are multiple subject tests that go out each round-- you can't be guaranteed to be taking the same one as your buddy. Mine was heavy on biblical references, theory, and 20th century lit/drama. Other people that round had tests that were heavier on Shakespeare and 19th century lit. Sometimes you'll get a test that has 8 questions on Milton, and sometimes you'll get a test that has 2 questions on Milton.

[stormydown]

When I took mine a year ago, I distinctly remember a small series of questions about an Old English passage (and not Beowulf) that required us to identify at least a few words in order to answer them. Something along the lines of "Read these six lines. Okay, what is the topic of this stanza? What is it saying about X? In which lines does the poet comment on Y?" It wasn't a full job of translation, but you had to be somewhat familiar with either the specific poem or the language in general.

This. I was maybe hasty in using the word "translation" when describing my test, but I definitely had an Old English section on mine.

[Medievalmaniac]

I've done a comparison of the five sample exams I have managed to dig up, as well as the personal comments of everyone I know who has taken the subject test in English. Here's the break down, from what I can gather:

The average score on the subject test for students I know who are currently enrolled in graduate programs in English was the high 500s and low 600s. Most of them scored between 580 and 620.

The most wrongly-answered questions seem to be those that deal with the 17th and 18th century literatures, and of these especially drama and the novels. Second most wrongly-answered questions are the theory-driven ones and those dealing with English philosophers.

The most often-quoted poems seem to be (in no particular order of appearance): Canterbury Tales, Elegy in a Churchyard, Ode to a Grecian Urn, Paradise Lost. The most frequently seen poets include Chaucer, Milton, Dryden, Pope, Grey, Keats, Tennyson, Shelley, Wordsworth, Byron, Pound, Wheatley, Eliot, Dubois, Sidney, Spenser, Herrick, Marvell - and they are often referred to as answers to questions about other writers' works which feature them as examples to illustrate points.

These WILL be on the exam: Virginia Woolf - To the Lighthouse and Mrs. Dalloway(look for Mrs. Ramsay or Clarissa). The Canterbury Tales, in some fashion(look for descriptions of people in Middle English). Elegy in a Churchyard, in some fashion. If it's in Old English, and you don't see any mention of Beowulf, Grendel, Hygelac, Grendel's Mother, or a dragon, then it's from Caedmon's Hymn. These titles were featured on each of the exams I looked over.

Apparently, ETS is hugely fond of mock epics and alexandrines, because these also featured on every one of the exams I have looked at.

Anybody have anything else? Let's make this thread a repository of everything we can get our hands on to help eachother get through this!!

Edited September 23, 2010 by Medievalmaniac

[wreckofthehope]

I've done a comparison of the five sample exams I have managed to dig up, as well as the personal comments of everyone I know who has taken the subject test in English. Here's the break down, from what I can gather:

The average score on the subject test for students I know who are currently enrolled in graduate programs in English was the high 500s and low 600s. Most of them scored between 580 and 620.

The most wrongly-answered questions seem to be those that deal with the 17th and 18th century literatures, and of these especially drama and the novels. Second most wrongly-answered questions are the theory-driven ones and those dealing with English philosophers.

The most often-quoted poems seem to be (in no particular order of appearance): Canterbury Tales, Elegy in a Churchyard, Ode to a Grecian Urn, Paradise Lost. The most frequently seen poets include Chaucer, Milton, Dryden, Pope, Grey, Keats, Tennyson, Shelley, Wordsworth, Byron, Pound, Wheatley, Eliot, Dubois, Sidney, Spenser, Herrick, Marvell - and they are often referred to as answers to questions about other writers' works which feature them as examples to illustrate points.

These WILL be on the exam: Virginia Woolf - To the Lighthouse and Mrs. Dalloway(look for Mrs. Ramsay or Clarissa). The Canterbury Tales, in some fashion(look for descriptions of people in Middle English). Elegy in a Churchyard, in some fashion. If it's in Old English, and you don't see any mention of Beowulf, Grendel, Hygelac, Grendel's Mother, or a dragon, then it's from Caedmon's Hymn. These titles were featured on each of the exams I looked over.

Apparently, ETS is hugely fond of mock epics and alexandrines, because these also featured on every one of the exams I have looked at.

Anybody have anything else? Let's make this thread a repository of everything we can get our hands on to help eachother get through this!!

Why all the love for the godawful Herrick?!

And excuse my idiocy but who are Dubois and Wheatley?... the kind of people you learn about in intro' to American lit' courses I assume (damn you, ENGLISH literature undergrad' - we literally only studied British Literature... with James and Eliot co-opted of course)

[Branwen daughter of Llyr]

I've done a comparison of the five sample exams I have managed to dig up, as well as the personal comments of everyone I know who has taken the subject test in English. Here's the break down, from what I can gather:

The average score on the subject test for students I know who are currently enrolled in graduate programs in English was the high 500s and low 600s. Most of them scored between 580 and 620.

The most wrongly-answered questions seem to be those that deal with the 17th and 18th century literatures, and of these especially drama and the novels. Second most wrongly-answered questions are the theory-driven ones and those dealing with English philosophers.

this is actually encouraging. It means my 630 really isn't too horrible!!!

[diehtc0ke]

Why all the love for the godawful Herrick?!

And excuse my idiocy but who are Dubois and Wheatley?... the kind of people you learn about in intro' to American lit' courses I assume (damn you, ENGLISH literature undergrad' - we literally only studied British Literature... with James and Eliot co-opted of course)

W. E. B. Du Bois and Phillis Wheatley? Two really important African-American writers (the former from the late 19th/early 20th c. and the latter from the 18th c.)? Du Bois wrote The Souls of Black Folk (of course, he wrote other things but that's probably all the Lit GRE will care about) and Wheatley was a poet (my favorite of hers is her elegy to a Mr. Whitfield...or Whitefield...one of them). This made me sad.

[augustquail]

Why all the love for the godawful Herrick?!

And excuse my idiocy but who are Dubois and Wheatley?... the kind of people you learn about in intro' to American lit' courses I assume (damn you, ENGLISH literature undergrad' - we literally only studied British Literature... with James and Eliot co-opted of course)

W.E.B DuBois and Phillis Wheatley. Yup-Americans. DuBois wrote poetry but is mostly known for "The Souls of Black Folk" and "The Souls of White Folk." He is awesome.

Wheately was a slave and wrote poetry, that's all I know. I haven't actually read anything by her (yet!)

[augustquail]

W. E. B. Du Bois and Phillis Wheatley? Two really important African-American writers (the former from the late 19th/early 20th c. and the latter from the 18th c.)? Du Bois wrote The Souls of Black Folk (of course, he wrote other things but that's probably all the Lit GRE will care about) and Wheatley was a poet (my favorite of hers is her elegy to a Mr. Whitfield...or Whitefield...one of them). This made me sad.

I guess my post up there is a little redundant...I competely didn't see yours! It's strange to me too to see that someone doesn't know them; then again, I'm an Americanist.

I read the souls of black folk for an undergrad class and then again for a grad class; but for the grad class I had to buy his complete works, and wow, the man was prolific! Have you ever read his kind of marxist stuff? It's amazing.

Edited September 24, 2010 by augustquail

[diehtc0ke]

I guess my post up there is a little redundant...I competely didn't see yours! It's strange to me too to see that someone doesn't know them; then again, I'm an Americanist.

I read the souls of black folk for an undergrad class and then again for a grad class; but for the grad class I had to buy his complete works, and wow, the man was prolific! Have you ever read his kind of marxist stuff? It's amazing.

I've actually only read The Souls of Black Folk but mostly because though I'm a 20th c. person now focused on Af-Am Lit I was a romanticist up until senior year. I may be in grad school but I still have a ton of catching up to do. I'll have to check that out because it sounds really interesting and the man's a genius.

Plus, your post was more thorough--I probably shouldn't assume that if someone doesn't know Phillis that they'll know she was a lettered slave.

Edited September 24, 2010 by diehtc0ke