I absolutely bombed the GRE :(

[northstar22]

I took the GRE today, and I absolutely flunked it. My preliminary scores were 540-610 on the quantitative portion and 710-800 on the verbal portion. I'm a master's student in political science, and I'm looking to get into a PhD program in the same. I guess that's not going to happen with those scores. I cannot believe I did so poorly . . . I'm usually very strong in math (algebra, statistics, etc.), but the GRE was really heavy on high-school geometry, stuff I haven't looked at in years (I wasn't even good at geometry in high school).

What do you guys think? Am I done, or do I still have a realistic shot at maybe a sub-50 program? The rest of my academic record looks really good . . . high GPA, good writing samples, solid LORs.

[maeisenb]

I don't think that would rule you out per se, especially if the rest of your app is strong. Can you take it again though?

[northstar22]

Not for 60 days at a minimum. Plus, the cost (both the $160 test fee and the 3 1/2 hour drive to the testing site) is too prohibitive for me.

[cunninlynguist]

Well, your verbal score is fantastic and as a result, your composite score is roughly 1330 (based on the middle of both ranges). That's certainly not "flunking."

It depends on where you're applying and what methodology you employ. Are you qualitative or quantitative? If the latter -- and your program choices reflect it -- then an underwhelming Q score could be a major obstacle.

Perhaps you'll just need to widen your net and include some lower-ranked programs without completely abandoning higher-ranked ones.

[northstar22]

I'm much more quant than qual, which is why the low Q score worries me. I don't even know if it's possible to pursue my research interest from a qualitative methodology -- I'm sure it could be done, but it certainly isn't common. My actual grades in quantitative classes are high, so I don't think my GRE score is a true estimate of my mathematical abilities.

Edited October 20, 2011 by northstar22

[johndiligent]

I took the GRE today, and I absolutely flunked it. My preliminary scores were 540-610 on the quantitative portion and 710-800 on the verbal portion.

You have a hilarious definition of flunking. You did OK if not stellar on the least important part of your application. If you're worried, work on your SOP.

[cunninlynguist]

I'm much more quant than qual, which is why the low Q score worries me. I don't even know if it's possible to pursue my research interest from a qualitative methodology -- I'm sure it could be done, but it certainly isn't common. My actual grades in quantitative classes are high, so I don't think my GRE score is a true estimate of my mathematical abilities.

I would say, given your projected composite score (which is very, very likely not to warrant concern), that you will make it past the first cut-off point. After that, the admissions committee will give your transcript a more discerning look, and see how well you've performed in relevant coursework that proves you're competent with quantitative concepts.

I actually think you're in far better shape than many others in this situation would be.

And BTW, I encountered the same problem with the GRE -- never enjoyed geometry in 9th grade and sure as hell couldn't polish up my skills for the test, especially because I took mine during finals week!

[Safferz]

You did not bomb or flunk the GRE.

[northstar22]

You guys really don't think a 540-610 quant score is bad enough to warrant concern?

[johndiligent]

It's bad enough to warrant concern if you have at least a few of the following:

- a poor to middling GPA

- a poorly written SOP with no clear research goals

- indifferent letters of recommendation

- little to no research experience

- a poor fit with your departments of interest

- applications going out to a small number of highly competitive schools

As it stands, if you don't have any of those, you're worrying about nothing. Your combined score will be over 1200 no matter what, so you'll miss most of the Throw Out Before Reading Cut-Offs.

[kaykaykay]

For political science your quant score is pretty low.And the quant score is important. But your verbal score will be very good. Maybe you could ask the same question at the polisci sub forum, some adcoms sometimes chime in there.(also it would be helpful if you would say more about your GPA)

Good luck!

Edited October 20, 2011 by kalapocska

[resource]

You guys really don't think a 540-610 quant score is bad enough to warrant concern?

I'm going to try to be a little more blunt that other posters here, but keep in mind, I come from an economics background where anything below a 770 on the quant warrants retaking.

Based on the little I know of political science programs, they tend to be fairly quantitatively focused and would like to see high scores on both sections but particularly on the quant. I think any advice that aggregates both your quant and verbal scores is misguided as admissions committees aren't going to sum up the scores, they're going to look at percentiles and a 600 is below the 50th percentile on the old scale.

That said, this quote:

I cannot believe I did so poorly . . . I'm usually very strong in math (algebra, statistics, etc.), but the GRE was really heavy on high-school geometry, stuff I haven't looked at in years (I wasn't even good at geometry in high school).

seems to imply that you didn't prepare for the GRE whatsoever. If you had done a practice test, you would have realized that the quantitative portion of the GRE is nothing but stuff you learned in high school. Also, the Powerprep software predicts, fairly accurately, what your actual score will be. That said, a Ph.D. is a big investment and if you are serious about doing doctoral work in political science the fit/prestige of your intended program is very important and, in the long run, outweighs the $160 and 3.5 hour trip to the testing site. I think you have a shot with your current scores if the rest of your application is stellar. The adcoms realize that applicants are people and have some blunders along the way. The GRE is just one of those hoops we have to jump through. In the end, the score won't matter much, but if you're serious about a Ph.D. and certain you can do better, buy a few practice books and retake it. Even if you delay your Ph.D. work for a year, going to a program that fits you is the most important.

[northstar22]

I did study (both verbal and quant), but my study prep materials emphasized algebra and statistics more than geometry, so that's what I expected on the test. When I took the test, probably 50-60% of the math problems were geometry questions.

Also, a program "that fits me" is not necessarily a program that is ranked in the top 25. Factors like program focus, classes offered, faculty specializations, and location are more important to me than an arbitrary ranking. I'd actually prefer a smaller, lesser-known program to one of the top-10 pressure cookers.

Edited October 20, 2011 by northstar22

[habanero]

What are the average scores listed for the schools that you wish to attend?

[northstar22]

What are the average scores listed for the schools that you wish to attend?

1) Michigan (my dream school) -- no averages, no listed minimums. Realistically, I probably have little to no chance of getting into Michigan.

2) Iowa (my first realistic choice) -- no averages, minimum 1200 combined.

3) Missouri -- no averages, minimum 1200 combined.

4) Southern Illinois -- no averages, minimum 1000 combined.

5) Northern Illinois -- no information on GRE scores.

6) Nebraska -- average combined score of 1100 with 4.0 analytical score -- I'd actually have an "above average" score there.

7) Illinois (Champaign-Urbana) -- no information on GRE scores.

8) Purdue -- no information on GRE scores.

9) Cornell -- no info on GRE scores, but I know I have basically no chance here.

10) Notre Dame -- average verbal 668, average quantitative 710, avg. analytical score of 5.0. I wouldn't be competitive.

Edited October 21, 2011 by northstar22

[Bimmerman]

Well, I bombed the quant GRE as far as engineering is concerned (didn't get an 800), and was quite a bit below all the schools' average GRE scores (i.e. 800). I got a 620 verbal, 730 math, 5.5 writing. Took it again, did much worse, said screw it.

I'm at Stanford now.

GRE doesn't matter, it's only ONE part of the whole application. I was below the averages at ALL the schools I applied to, and I got accepted to every single one (Berkeley, Stanford, Michigan, Ga Tech, CU) except UCSB; some even offered me funding.

Don't sweat it too much.

[resource]

If the rest of your profile is as good as you say, then you should be alright. Explain your GRE score in your statement of purpose. I think your verbal score will alleviate the quant to some degree and if you have taken any quantitative courses, those should be a better predictor of your aptitude in that area. It seems like you have a broad range of desired programs, so I wouldn't be too worried. Again, I'm not familiar with poli sci programs, you probably have a better idea of what is reasonable.

[orst11]

1) Michigan (my dream school) -- no averages, no listed minimums. Realistically, I probably have little to no chance of getting into Michigan.

2) Iowa (my first realistic choice) -- no averages, minimum 1200 combined.

3) Missouri -- no averages, minimum 1200 combined.

4) Southern Illinois -- no averages, minimum 1000 combined.

5) Northern Illinois -- no information on GRE scores.

6) Nebraska -- average combined score of 1100 with 4.0 analytical score -- I'd actually have an "above average" score there.

7) Illinois (Champaign-Urbana) -- no information on GRE scores.

8) Purdue -- no information on GRE scores.

9) Cornell -- no info on GRE scores, but I know I have basically no chance here.

10) Notre Dame -- average verbal 668, average quantitative 710, avg. analytical score of 5.0. I wouldn't be competitive.

Iowa: Requires 540 of the 1200 minimum come from verbal.

Purdue: receive a score of 600 or higher on the verbal section of the GRE. (listed on their grad school website). You should be competitive there.

Like other people have noted if the rest of your application is good, you should be competitive at quite a few programs. Don't rule something out just because one aspect of your application doesn't seem to par with their averages..

[northstar22]

Iowa: Requires 540 of the 1200 minimum come from verbal.

Purdue: receive a score of 600 or higher on the verbal section of the GRE. (listed on their grad school website). You should be competitive there.

Like other people have noted if the rest of your application is good, you should be competitive at quite a few programs. Don't rule something out just because one aspect of your application doesn't seem to par with their averages..

Thanks. I must have simply overlooked that information on Purdue's website.

Edited October 21, 2011 by northstar22

[johndiligent]

If the rest of your profile is as good as you say, then you should be alright. Explain your GRE score in your statement of purpose.

Due respect, I don't think this is good advice. Calling attention to low GRE scores in the SOP will just detract from the strength of the SOP. The SOP shouldn't include negatives or excuses. If the OP had an excellent explanation for the low GRE scores (say, ze had been in a car accident on the way to the exam or something) then I still wouldn't include it in the SOP, I'd add a short addendum somewhere in the application. In this case, the excuse seems to be that the OP didn't know that there would be so much geometry on the test. Honestly, I think the explanation would just make the scores stand out more and make the matter worse. Really, most profs know the GRE is useless and will focus on the more important aspects of the application. Don't use those more important parts to remind them about the GRE.

[orst11]

Due respect, I don't think this is good advice. Calling attention to low GRE scores in the SOP will just detract from the strength of the SOP. The SOP shouldn't include negatives or excuses. If the OP had an excellent explanation for the low GRE scores (say, ze had been in a car accident on the way to the exam or something) then I still wouldn't include it in the SOP, I'd add a short addendum somewhere in the application. In this case, the excuse seems to be that the OP didn't know that there would be so much geometry on the test. Honestly, I think the explanation would just make the scores stand out more and make the matter worse. Really, most profs know the GRE is useless and will focus on the more important aspects of the application. Don't use those more important parts to remind them about the GRE.

Exactly why even programs like Iowa have a page on the application where you can explain these negatives.

Thanks. I must have simply overlooked that information on Purdue's website.

We have looked at similar programs so really no problem. As far as GRE scores, Iowa and Purdue typically have applicants with similar scores.

[Bimmerman]

I didn't bother explaining away my poor GRE math score, I just acted like it didn't happen.

Worked well enough since the rest of my application was good.

[sacklunch]

I'm confused. That is a great score. Stop freaking out.

[Grunty DaGnome]

Northstar,

Look on the brightside. It's a whole new test and a new scale this year, so everyone will be caught somewhat by surprise, including Add Comms. It sounds like you have pretty high verbal scores, so I'm pretty confident you'll make the "cut." Just work on the SOP! Johndiligent's advice is good. Don't mess up your SOP worrying about test scores that are only used in the preliminary rounds and probably never looked at seriously again.