Seeking advice from those of you who have been accepted. . .

[ngower81]

Okay, so I apologize in advance for adding another "what are my chances" post when the site seems overwhelmed with them already. My question isn't technically the classic "rate my chances" anyway.

I'm directing this specifically to people who have been accepted to PhD programs in the humanities (English, specifically). Have any of you been accepted to a mid-level programs with a GRE verbal score sub 650?

By mid-level, I am talking anywhere between 10 and 40 best programs for English; programs like Vanderbilt, WashU, Duke, Virginia, Iowa, etc.

I just took my GRE general test and scored a 640 (91%) on the verbal. I feel like the rest of my profile is great (4.0 undergrad GPA, MFA in writing with discursive evaluation, great references, great samples, and really great profs who are willing to look over my SOP when it is ready), but I'm worried that the verbal score is really going to hurt my chances.

I know the traditional answer is "each program will take into consideration your entire profile, and writing samples, LOR's, and SOP are the most important factors." But what I am looking for are responses from people who have been admitted to mid-top programs with around a 640 verbal.

Are any of you out there? Where did you get in? Where did you get rejected?

[Minnesotan]

I know that about half of the lucky buggers at WGI who got in everywhere they applied were sporting horrid GRE Verbal scores, and these were not just mid-range top ~50-75 programs, either. I know one went with Berkeley, another with Harvard, and I'm thinking Yale or Brown, too. Anyway, it appears they will overlook a <700 verbal score, if your fit, statement, and sample are in good order.

Nonetheless, I would strongly suggest you apply to programs based on fit, not on prestige or other trivial qualities. The most successful applicants this year were good fits with the places they applied, regardless of the level of prestige.

No matter where you earn your PhD, it's going to be the quality of your scholarship that earns you your reputation.

[ngower81]

Nonetheless, I would strongly suggest you apply to programs based on fit, not on prestige or other trivial qualities. The most successful applicants this year were good fits with the places they applied, regardless of the level of prestige.

No matter where you earn your PhD, it's going to be the quality of your scholarship that earns you your reputation.

Thanks for the help, Minnesotan. I am aware that school ranking doesn't equate to being a good program specifically for my interests, and that my reputation will not ultimately depend on the school where I earn my PhD. The reason I am most concerned with applying to schools that are ranked higher is that the higher ranked schools (at least the private institutions) are more inclined (read: able) to give higher stipends.

And when you have a family to support while you're spending 5 years earning a PhD, the amount of the funding is anything but a trivial quality. I am sure there are schools sub 50-60 that offer good funding, but I don't know of any that offer a stipend 15,000 plus for PhD in the humanities. Do you know of any such schools?

What about the rest of you? I'm still looking for people who had a similar verbal score (640, 91%) who were admitted into top-mid programs.

I guess I am just wrestling with the idea of re-taking the GRE. I really feel like I could do significantly better on the verbal section . . . .

[rising_star]

Thanks for the help, Minnesotan. I am aware that school ranking doesn't equate to being a good program specifically for my interests, and that my reputation will not ultimately depend on the school where I earn my PhD. The reason I am most concerned with applying to schools that are ranked higher is that the higher ranked schools (at least the private institutions) are more inclined (read: able) to give higher stipends.

And when you have a family to support while you're spending 5 years earning a PhD, the amount of the funding is anything but a trivial quality. I am sure there are schools sub 50-60 that offer good funding, but I don't know of any that offer a stipend 15,000 plus for PhD in the humanities. Do you know of any such schools?

Sure plenty of the big name schools pay more but that's because they're in areas with a higher cost of living. Princeton pays about $25K, if memory serves. But renting a room in a house in Princeton? At least $850/mth plus utilities. Univ of Georgia pays about $16K. Cost of renting a 2 bedroom apartment? $600 and water + power will run you under $60/mth and that's with a washer/dryer in your apartment. I don't know about you but sometimes the lower stipend can actually go further. Not to mention that a lot of those schools with top rankings have reputations for being nasty places to be as a grad student.

There are plenty of schools that offer a stipend of $15K or more for a PhD in the humanities. In fact, most of the flagship state universities do. It's just a matter of looking.

As Minnesotan said, if you apply to schools where you aren't a good fit, you're just wasting money. If you apply to all top 10 schools, you're probably wasting money. And really, you probably can't support a family on $15K anywhere. Is your partner going to work? Then consider where your partner might want to move/be able to find gainful employment.

[BlueGrassBob]

Why not take them again? You have plenty of time to do so, and the GRE verbal is pretty much a vocabulary test--something that I feel anyone hoping to study Lit. at an advanced level is capable of doing very well on. If you schedule a test for September or October, you could pick away at it and probably improve your score significantly. I was accepted as a doctoral student at the type of mid-level program you described, but I had a 740 verbal (99% [i was never quite sure why a 740 was 99% rather than 98 or 97, but I wasn't going to complain]). There were certain weaknesses in my application (language skills, luke-warm undergrad GPA with no MA) that probably kept me out of higher ranked programs, but they weren't things I could change at the last minute. You're able to give the GRE another shot; I couldn't go back and bump up my GPA. I guess my question is that since the rest of your application seems pretty strong, why would you be OK with having something that could be perceived as a weakness on there? You mentioned that you think you could do much better, so where's the downside? Yeah, you'll have to pony up for another testing fee and set aside time to study, but it's really a drop in the bucket when you add it to the rest of the application costs.

Either way, good luck! and try not to stress too much about any of it.

[Minnesotan]

One thing to consider, though: if you're not going to increase your verbal score by 50-100 points, don't retake it. It could actually make you look like a worse candidate if you retake the test and demonstrate no, or only a slight, improvement.

[ngower81]

One thing to consider, though: if you're not going to increase your verbal score by 50-100 points, don't retake it. It could actually make you look like a worse candidate if you retake the test and demonstrate no, or only a slight, improvement.

Good point, Minnesotan . . . one that I have considered. That is pretty much the only thing that gives me hesitation. After mulling it over and seeking advice from some people I really respect, though, I think I am going to retake the GRE. I feel confident that I can score in the 720-750 range on the verbal. I have taken multiple versions of practice tests and average around a 730, and I scored a 770 and 720 respectively on both of the ETS powerprep practice tests. I know practice tests aren't always indicative of actual scores, but I rarely (if ever) scored below a 680.

The thing that gets me the most (and trust me, I'm not blaming the system . . . I understand that the GRE is necessary and important as an objective comparison between canidates) is that when I took the GRE, I had two verbal sections . . . one, of course, was not scored and was used by ETS for research. When I finished the test, I knew I was going to be really happy with my verbal score, or really dissapointed depending on which section was scored. I know my 640 belies the fact, but I have studied my butt off on vocabulary, and I feel that even if I went in and took another test cold that I would score higher than a 640.

I am not going to do that, of course. I am going to study, study, study more vocabulary. Thanks for your help everyone.

One more thing . . . anyone have some good advice on reducing test anxiety? I can't shake the fact that I felt extremely nervous when I took the test, which could have hurt my score as well.

[anese]

I wish I had some advice for you...I had the same problem when I took it to the point where I had the pleasure of a nasty case of IBS--one of the reasons I'm so sure my score wasn't what it could have been. I spent most of the test rushing through and in pain... :oops:

[engguy]

Wait-- weren't you the person who asked about scores a few weeks ago? I think you should take it again. Study your ass off on the vocab and, as I mentioned previously, get it to where you can roll through five or six verbal sections in a row without missing more than 1 or 2 each. This will reduce anxiety and give you confidence going in. I scored 790 verbal and felt the opposite of you before pressing the "view score" button -- I thought I was toast. A friend of mine scored 590, had no time to re-take, and had a really tough time with admissions (but did finally get in off the waitlist at one of his top choices). I say the anxiety of not hitting 700+ and watching your application fees go down the drain (my friend wasted $1000 or more) trumps the anxiety of retaking the test.

As for stipends, I got 22k/ four years guaranteed at a big state school. In a part of the country that's not too expensive (knock wood / pray it stays that way!). And I, too, have a family, so that was a big deal to me. Take a good hard look at program web sites to see what kind of funding's possible. Then do a comparison to find out what the relative cost of living is, etc.

http://www.bestplaces.net/

Also, take a look at private schools. Many of them are not highly ranked simply because they're smaller, but they have very generous funding and are fairly well respected. I could give you some suggestions for English lit if you pm me.

Good luck :!:

[Minnesotan]

One more thing . . . anyone have some good advice on reducing test anxiety? I can't shake the fact that I felt extremely nervous when I took the test, which could have hurt my score as well.

I might not, but Epicurus certainly does.

[lauras]

When I took the bar exam, I quit drinking caffeine completely for a month before the test. I also took sleeping pills the night before the test, but left plenty of time for the grogginess to wear off (went to bed at 6pm and woke up at 4am).

Being rested and de-caffeinated helps. The bar was 2 days, 7 hours a day. The GRE is not that bad.

[demondeac]

One more thing . . . anyone have some good advice on reducing test anxiety? I can't shake the fact that I felt extremely nervous when I took the test, which could have hurt my score as well.

For test anxiety, talk to your doc about prescribing you a beta blocker like propranolol...it suppresses your sympathetic nervous system (i.e. fight or flight). I think it's on Walmart's $4 list. It may sound like overkill, but it may help you focus on doing your absolute best. And rather than taking sleeping pills the night before, just take a good old fashioned benadryl. And for legal purposes, always clear any medication with licensed physician before hand...I am not a doctor.

[KenAnderson]

I am apply to Stanford, Berkley, UCLA, UCSB, UC Irvine, UC San Diego and UW this fall, some advice?

What were your GRE tests scores?

I take the GRE lit test this October 10th and the general on 10-27.

I have been working on my theory paper and SOP everyday!

I have 4 letters from my English Professors.

My Junior and Senoir year GPA is 3.7 and my literature courses is 3.8

I have had some poetry published and articles and plan to include a Vitae.

Any suggestions??? Would love some feeback on the Lit GRE test. What areas to really focus on, etc!

Reading Norton and have Princeton and ETS practice exams: Advice???

THANK YOU!!!!

~ Ken Anderson

inkadinka@msn.com

cell: 503-269-2615

[circumfession]

Since you've received a lot of good answers about re-taking the test, I'll respond to your original question.

It really, really depends on the program that you're applying to. Some schools (yes, even the very tip-top ones) don't give a damn about the test scores, even when their application websites suggest otherwise. At one of "those" schools, you can get in with a 500, for all that they care, as long as your SoP and writing sample fits the bill. Others use the GRE verbal (sometimes alongside your GPA) as a sliding scale for the first cut. It's almost never an absolute cut (say, if you're below a 700, you're definitely out), but the combination of your GRE and GPA helps the ad-comm sort you into the appropriate pile for the second read. Schools that handle the initial sort based on numbers usually follow some version of this procedure: applicants with a certain score (usually 600, 650 680, or 700 depending on the program) will go to the "will read" pile, applicants just below might go into a second pile to be skimmed, and those who are really off might go into the "ditch" pile...but even then, an ad-comm might "rescue" an application with a promising sample or SoP. The problem is, it's hard to say exactly which schools follow what procedure, so to be safe, you might want to aim for 680 to be safe. Still...it's the writing that matters. Several individuals (even on this board) have gotten into tip-top schools with lower test scores, but insanely strong SoP's and writing samples.

As a member of that "lucky bastard wgi cohort" from 2 years ago, I do want to put in my two cents on this: some of us had "lower" [below 700] test scores, but they were hardly "awful." Mine--at 690--was one of the lowest, and that still landed me in the 97th percentile).

***

Ken Anderson:

Without seeing your writing sample and your statement of purpose, I have absolutely no idea. The numbers can (sometimes) keep you out, but it's always, always, always the writing (and fit) that'll get you in. However, I might be able to offer some general (if unhappy) commentary on your field.

It's very tough being a theorist (and/or a modernist) English applicant. It's a bloated field, and one of the toughest to break. Apply widely (but carefully, with a close eye on how the specific faculty fits your specific project), and solicit all the feedback that you can--specially from professors/peers outside of your field. You can't count on having a fellow theorist reading your application at every program (this will vary based on the program's exact admissions procedure), and so you'll want to make sure that your writing is intelligible and interesting to those who have little or no theoretical inclinations.

As for the GRE scores...look, this simply won't be very helpful. I know of applicants who got into top programs (Berkeley, Princeton, etc) with barely a 600 verbal. I also know of applicants with a perfect 800 who was turned down from every program. While the GRE's are not to be ignored, it's a tiny part of the application, and hardly predictive of your success. Aim for the 700 (since it's the "highest" bar that I'm aware of...when a bar is used at all), but know that many applicants have succeeded with far lower scores.

[young werther]

The DGS at a flagship state univ. told me his department doesn't even look at GRE scores for determining acceptance (specifically he said "we're not looking for idiots-savants who can score 800s"), but that they are used by the university at large to determine the funding level received if admitted. Also, quite suprisingly, he said that it was the aggregate score that determined one's funding category, rather than just the verbal score. For example, a score above 1500 placed one at the higest level of funding, a 1350 the next, and so forth. This department is notorious for its liberality regarding test scores (lit gre is not required and not even looked at if submitted), so YMMV in terms of the GRE's use an admission's yardstick, however it is very interesting that the quantitative score came into the equation re. funding. I think at some schools--mainly larger state universities--department's themselves are not really given control of funding allocation, and the university at large sees combined GRE scores as an IQ surrogate and a valid and predictive metric for future success. It can't hurt to do well on this pesky exam, but I don't think a less than stellar score will get you dinged.