Relevance of Scores

[comicline865]

170V, 6W, but poor quant (162). If applying for classics & philosophy, this is largely irrelevant right? I wouldn't relish having to study for the test ...

[LateAntique]

You're kidding, right? 162 (87th %) is "poor"? Your scores are fine.

[Lox26]

I'm guessing you define success as the top decile. In that respect, you have fallen short of your target for quant. It is okay to be disappointed, but please exercise some tact. Your math score is 87th percentile, and that is nothing to sneeze at. Many people hoped for a score that high but were unable to attain it. To them, and to others with scores similar to/better than yours, you appear to be bragging. Perhaps this is not the case and you are just panicking, but people won't interpret it that way. I won't tell you your score is "good" because that is a relative term and you have decided that 162Q is not good enough for you, but posting that message on a board will only incite ire. Learn to at least feign humility.

[Cosmos]

I'm guessing you define success as the top decile. In that respect, you have fallen short of your target for quant. It is okay to be disappointed, but please exercise some tact. Your math score is 87th percentile, and that is nothing to sneeze at. Many people hoped for a score that high but were unable to attain it. To them, and to others with scores similar to/better than yours, you appear to be bragging. Perhaps this is not the case and you are just panicking, but people won't interpret it that way. I won't tell you your score is "good" because that is a relative term and you have decided that 162Q is not good enough for you, but posting that message on a board will only incite ire. Learn to at least feign humility.

I agree. Those are excellent scores, more than acceptable for classics and philosophy. With 170V and 6 AW it really seems like you are just trying to make people jealous or for them to commend you... but instead you are really just rubbing it in for lots of people that are disappointed with scores far below yours.

[taybaxter]

170V, 6W, but poor quant (162). If applying for classics & philosophy, this is largely irrelevant right? I wouldn't relish having to study for the test ...

I don't understand why you are so worried....

[jilly11]

Agree with the people above. I would dream for your Q score!! Lets put it into perspective - I got Q144 and thats about as good as I could dream of doing (and I studied really hard).

[comicline865]

I apologize. Deleting post.

[comicline865]

Errr, rather requesting that it be deleted.

[LateAntique]

Agree with the people above. I would dream for your Q score!! Lets put it into perspective - I got Q144 and thats about as good as I could dream of doing (and I studied really hard).

I got a 148 and that's about it for me. I will never in my life need to know how to figure the area of a trapezoid, so I don't really care about my Q score. My V is good and my overall is good. Like it is said over and over on here, the GRE doesn't get anyone into grad school, it only keeps some people out. As long as your scores are somewhere in a gray area and the rest of your application is fine, you'll do okay.

[non humilis mulier]

I'm also Classics, and I was worried about my Q score, which was a whole 15 points below my V score. I emailed the director of my top choice program, explaining my concern, and he reassured me that it's not a big deal, especially for a Q score. Basically, I got the impression that if I don't get into that top program, it will have nothing to do with my GRE scores. Like L. Antique said above, the GRE tends to keep more people out than it does get people in. And the verbal and writing sections are going to be weighted much more heavily for Classics -- when are we going to use math?? Lol.

Edited December 22, 2011 by non humilis mulier

[Hopin'-n-Prayin']

when are we going to use math?? Lol.

I know a lot of people look at like this, and thus downplay the significance of the Math portion on the GRE, but the same logic could easily apply to the Verbal section. When are we going to need to know the GRE words? There are many suitable and easier synonyms for words like bellicose, ebullient and intransigent.

The math section is a test of critical reasoning in the purest sense...if your brain can interpret the questions, identify the appropriate rule to apply, and correctly apply it, this is strong evidence of high-level problem-solving skills.

I am not at all trying to suggest that those who do score well on the Math do not possess great problem-solving skills, I just believe that doing well on the Math section has some value to those applying to disciplines which appear to require verbal, and not math, prowess. Like I said, it is indicative of sound critical reasoning and application at a high level...

Any one agree?? Disagree??

(I'm curious if people will agree or disagree on strict 'party' lines. In other words, will people who did well on the Math agree with me and will people who did not do well disagree...)

[non humilis mulier]

Dear Admitedlylucky,

I apologize if I seemed flippant about the Q section -- yes, I agree that Q does test certain reasoning skills that are applicable to any line of graduate work. Now, I will never use some of those precise skills -- finding areas, standard deviation, probability -- in my field. Unless I went into ancient mathematics or something... lol. I am a big fan of having a well rounded education -- honestly, I think that everyone applying for graduate study should be able to perform those math skills tested by the GRE, which admittedly are very basic. I don't mean to sound like I don't care about math -- I actually do, a lot! I love math! Now for my field, it's just undeniable that the verbal section is much more relevant. Have you read classics scholarship? They absolutely DO use those sorts of words, all the time! I do appreciate your point, though! Best wishes.

[Hopin'-n-Prayin']

NMH,

I feel bad...I wasn't in any way trying to assert that you or anyone else was being flippant or doing anything else that warranted an apology. I guess my point is two-fold:

1. I do believe that History, Classical studies and other humanities and social science adcomms consider the Math score relevant...and

2. I beleive that I feel this way because I did well on math. I suspect that how one does on the "other" section heavily influences how that person assesses its importance.

Also, you are right about the GRE words in historical works, they are used alot...

Anyway, I apologize for putting you on the defensive

[non humilis mulier]

Aw, don't worry! No offense taken!

I wish I had done a little better on the math section... I know I was capable of doing much better. I scored in the 70th percentile, which is about a 710 on the old test, which isn't bad, but isn't great. Oh well! I'm thankful for my scores. Actually, this may sound funny -- but do you ever wish the math on the GRE were harder? I'm awesome at Calculus!! Lol. (and I'll obviously be using Calc a lot in Classics.... ).

And I was relieved when the DGS at the department of my top choice program said that the GRE 1. did not play a decisive role in the adcom's decision 2. they stressed the verbal and writing scores more than the quantitative. I'm almost directly quoting his email.

Good luck, all!