I need an honest opinion

[wumblebee]

Hi,

I'm a rising senior who is hoping to apply to doctoral programs in History this fall. I took the old GRE in July and just got the full score report: 710V (98%), 690Q (68%), and...a whopping 4 (45%) on the analytic writing section. What can I say? I choked...bad. So, I need an honest opinion whether the AWA score is too low for good phd programs in History, or if the other aspects of my application package will be enough to offset this noticeable blemish.

In short,

I am a double major in History (3.95) and English Lit (4.00). My overall GPA is 3.89. I am currently enrolled in two honors programs and will probably receive departmental honors in History. I just recently joined Phi Beta Kappa, although I don't really know if that's worth anything. My extracurriculars are solid, at least in my opinion. As for work experience, I know that I'll be going up against people who have worked for years in reputable companies and organizations, but I have done a couple of internships in law firms and publishing agencies. I am also completing a research assistantship at the Roosevelt House Public Policy Institute. As for SoPs, rec letters, and writing samples, obviously I'll do the best that I can.

I'm sorry if this kind of posts has been done to death in the past, but after getting my AWA score I'm seriously beginning to doubt whether I'm a viable candidate for first-to-second tier programs. Any thoughts would be appreciated.

[orst11]

If you read a number of places on the forum and elsewhere I think you will see that some programs don't even look at AW. Even when some programs say they would like to see a 4.5 other aspects of your application can counteract this.

Take a look on the results page to see if anyone posted their stats for your desired programs, see if the programs publish stats for admitting students, and don't simply apply to tier one programs because even with good stats competition is rough.

I think with a double-major in History and English you can easily prove you a good writer in a writing sample and often this is given just as much weight as the whole GRE.

[Sigaba]

Hi,

I'm a rising senior who is hoping to apply to doctoral programs in History this fall. I took the old GRE in July and just got the full score report: 710V (98%), 690Q (68%), and...a whopping 4 (45%) on the analytic writing section. What can I say? I choked...bad. So, I need an honest opinion whether the AWA score is too low for good phd programs in History, or if the other aspects of my application package will be enough to offset this noticeable blemish.

In short,

I am a double major in History (3.95) and English Lit (4.00). My overall GPA is 3.89. I am currently enrolled in two honors programs and will probably receive departmental honors in History. I just recently joined Phi Beta Kappa, although I don't really know if that's worth anything. My extracurriculars are solid, at least in my opinion. As for work experience, I know that I'll be going up against people who have worked for years in reputable companies and organizations, but I have done a couple of internships in law firms and publishing agencies. I am also completing a research assistantship at the Roosevelt House Public Policy Institute. As for SoPs, rec letters, and writing samples, obviously I'll do the best that I can.

I'm sorry if this kind of posts has been done to death in the past, but after getting my AWA score I'm seriously beginning to doubt whether I'm a viable candidate for first-to-second tier programs. Any thoughts would be appreciated.

MOO, your interests may best be served by re-examining your priorities. The blemish may not be your test scores or your GPA but your attitude towards the study history.

Why do you want to attend a "first or second tier" graduate program? Is your desire based upon research on the specializations of those top departments and how you might contribute? Or are you just saying that, because you consider yourself a top student, you should go to a top program and the steps you've taken thus far about punching your ticket?

You provide a lot of numbers as indicators of what you've done but you've not offered much information about what you know about history, or your interests, or how you see yourself making solid contributions in a graduate program. Keep in mind that numbers alone--especially one's undergraduate GPA--do not gain one entry into graduate history programs. You have peers on this BB who may not have numbers equal to you but they clearly demonstrate that they bring qualities to the table that make them more credible candidates for admission.

@Aaron McDevitt. In the short time between now and the time you begin your work at Stanford, you might do well to spend time contemplating your profound insecurity. Your overwhelming need to be the cynosure is not equaled by your ability to sustain the attention you obviously crave. My $0.02.

[wumblebee]

MOO, your interests may best be served by re-examining your priorities. The blemish may not be your test scores or your GPA but your attitude towards the study history.

Why do you want to attend a "first or second tier" graduate program? Is your desire based upon research on the specializations of those top departments and how you might contribute? Or are you just saying that, because you consider yourself a top student, you should go to a top program and the steps you've taken thus far about punching your ticket?

You provide a lot of numbers as indicators of what you've done but you've not offered much information about what you know about history, or your interests, or how you see yourself making solid contributions in a graduate program. Keep in mind that numbers alone--especially one's undergraduate GPA--do not gain one entry into graduate history programs. You have peers on this BB who may not have numbers equal to you but they clearly demonstrate that they bring qualities to the table that make them more credible candidates for admission.

@Aaron McDevitt. In the short time between now and the time you begin your work at Stanford, you might do well to spend time contemplating your profound insecurity. Your overwhelming need to be the cynosure is not equaled by your ability to sustain the attention you obviously crave. My $0.02.

Yeah, I think you're reading something in my post that isn't there. If I want to discuss my interests in history, I will go to a relevant forum on this site, which I already have done. But I don't know if you've noticed this, but this is a section that is strictly devoted to GRE's and other standardized tests, so I think it's completely appropriate that I should post something that is strictly figure-related. In short, think before you jump down somebody's throat.

[Sigaba]

Yeah, I think you're reading something in my post that isn't there. If I want to discuss my interests in history, I will go to a relevant forum on this site, which I already have done. But I don't know if you've noticed this, but this is a section that is strictly devoted to GRE's and other standardized tests, so I think it's completely appropriate that I should post something that is strictly figure-related. In short, think before you jump down somebody's throat.

WB--

I responded to your invitation for feedback as you wrote it.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

[ZeeMore21]

I am not quite sure that someone could accurately gauge whether or not you are qualified for a top-tier program based solely on GPAs, GREs, and extra-curricular activities. Obviously your numbers are great, so you don't really have to stress about this aspect of your application. I also wouldn't stress about your writing score. I would say that you should put your effort into creating the best personal statement and writing sample you possibly can...in general, it is these two documents that will make or break your admissions into a doctoral program.

[ThePoorHangedFool]

I agree with ZeeMore21's advice, and also wonder how much importance an admissions committee for a program in History would place on GRE scores in the first place. The content tested in the GRE is, obviously, more relevant to some fields than others; thus, its weight in each overall application a program receives will by nature vary depending on its relationship with GRE concepts.

It would seem that the GRE's lack of historical questions--aside from contextual information that can be used during the Verbal portions that consist of reading comprehension-esque-structured questions--would suggest its comparative irrelevance to the faculty of and adcom for a grad program in History versus, say, one in English or Math Education.

I might be flatly wrong in assuming this. I can only make educated guesses at this stage; one pretty unanimously-accepted opinion is that even a perfect GRE score won't get someone into a grad program, let alone a "top-tier" one, if it's accompanied by SoPs/LoRs/transcripts/all or any of the above that are less than stellar. Nonetheless, such high scores certainly won't hurt your application, so feel relieved that you can put one aspect of this process behind you and spend time on the more important components.

[sollee]

Take a look on the results page to see if anyone posted their stats for your desired programs, see if the programs publish stats for admitting students, and don't simply apply to tier one programs because even with good stats competition is rough.

I'm sorry to even have to ask, but where can I find the results page you mentioned? I am new to the forum and the Search function didn't pull up anything useful.

[Kitkat]

I'm sorry to even have to ask, but where can I find the results page you mentioned? I am new to the forum and the Search function didn't pull up anything useful.

That is because it is not part of the forums of thegracafe.com . You can find them here . Good searching!

[rainy_day]

AW scores are not heavily weighted. Why would a program spend much time considering a score partially determined by a computer, when they have your writing sample, sop, and LORs in front of them? Congrats on your good scores; don't worry about the AW.