blubb Posted March 26, 2012 Posted March 26, 2012 Can a GRE subject test score really compensate an ok GPA (3.7/4.0)?
Mr.special Posted March 26, 2012 Posted March 26, 2012 3.7 is actually not bad, If I were you I would concentrate on making a solid SOP and supplying brilliant LORs
blubb Posted March 26, 2012 Author Posted March 26, 2012 When I see the other ppl posting their profile here I feel more than below average.
Quantum Buckyball Posted March 26, 2012 Posted March 26, 2012 When I see the other ppl posting their profile here I feel more than below average. I think your GPA is reasonable . The admission committee have a different standard for each applicant depending on which institute he/she graduated from. I didn't take the GRE subject test, I believe the admission committee focuses on applicants' SoP and LoRs more than the standardized exam score nowadays.. Quantum Buckyball 1
phoenix12 Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 (edited) Agreed. However, it definitely doesn't hurt if you have a weak area on your transcript and a relatively high gre score in the subject area. Edited March 27, 2012 by phoenix12 Gneiss1 1
emmm Posted March 27, 2012 Posted March 27, 2012 In general, I'd say the answer is "No." A 3-4 hr test cannot make up for 4 years of average or worse work in your undergraduate program. All it might do is make people think you could be smart, but perhaps lazy or unfocused -- i.e. unable to sustain the effort required to do well in an academic class -- which is not what you want any graduate admissions committee to think. If your undergraduate GPA is really bad (NOT a 3.7 - sheesh, seriously?? If you really think that, you haven't done much research into grad admissions, have you?), then you should take more courses (either undergrad or grad level) to prove that whatever issues kept you from succeeding before are all in the past. Rachel B, Spore and Eigen 3
Buckyball60 Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 Don't know what is wrong with a 3.7 GPA but anyway the GRE itself is the most ridiculous I have ever seen. sareth 1
KCampbell Posted April 6, 2012 Posted April 6, 2012 In general, I'd say the answer is "No." A 3-4 hr test cannot make up for 4 years of average or worse work in your undergraduate program. All it might do is make people think you could be smart, but perhaps lazy or unfocused -- i.e. unable to sustain the effort required to do well in an academic class -- which is not what you want any graduate admissions committee to think. If your undergraduate GPA is really bad (NOT a 3.7 - sheesh, seriously?? If you really think that, you haven't done much research into grad admissions, have you?), then you should take more courses (either undergrad or grad level) to prove that whatever issues kept you from succeeding before are all in the past. They could also think that you went to a challenging undergrad program or chose challenging classes, and may have gotten straight As at a less challenging school.
OCS Posted May 2, 2012 Posted May 2, 2012 I am in complete agreement with the rest. A 3.7/4.0 is quite good. Well done to you. I do not see why you need to compensate. But to answer your question, I once knew a girl who was Pickering Fellow with a 3.4/4/0 who got into Georgetown's School of Foreign Service (SFS). With that said, do the math. Regardless of the fact that she was a Pickering Fellow, which might have caused the selection committee to see her GPA as more like a 3.5/3.6, SFS is one of the hardest programme in the world to get into. She had a really good GRE score plus God and an amasing title a Pickering Fellow next to her name. You just don't worry; you will do fine and you really should refrain from comparing yourself to others'it will be a constat losing game in the world of academia! I hope this help and good luck with everything!
emmm Posted May 2, 2012 Posted May 2, 2012 They could also think that you went to a challenging undergrad program or chose challenging classes, and may have gotten straight As at a less challenging school. True -- but I was thinking of a truly low GPA when I wrote the response -- one just at the cutoff, or even below. In other words, one really needing some sort of compensation/explanation. In other words, a record that is definitely mediocre, even accounting for challenging courses/schools.
Gneiss1 Posted May 2, 2012 Posted May 2, 2012 It's a whole package thing. Your GPA isn't bad, so I wouldn't be overly concerned about that. Your LOR, SOP, GPA, GRE, etc (yay acronyms) will all come together to form the image the prospective schools will perceive of you. Communication with the person you want to work with is also important and arguably one of the most important factors. If you can stand out and get them to like you then when it comes decision time you will be remembered:)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now