When schools say they don't have a minimum score...

[jameswooyoung]

What does that mean? I mean there has to be some sort of cutoff of scores that they won't even consider right? For example, I was looking at UC Irvine's page and that's what it says.

 

I'm thinking of applying for the CS or SE (software engineering) programs there.

[pterosaur]

It means they don't want to count out qualified applicants based on one factor.  They aren't probably going to go for a student with a 2.0 GPA, minimal research experience, and 33rd percentile GRE.  But they don't want to set a GRE cutoff and miss a potential applicant who has a great mind for research but isn't a good test taker, for example.

 

My guess is that at some point, yes, scores may be unretrievably low, but it's all fuzzy in such a wholistic decision process, and they don't want to try and make it a black and white line.  I think how low of scores you can "get away with" depends a lot on how all the other factors come in.

[juilletmercredi]

It means exactly what it says…they don't have a minimum score.  It means that they consider your GRE scores and GPAs holistically with the rest of your application.  Consider:

-A 30-year-old applicant who got a 2.7 GPA in college, but who has worked as a software engineer in R&D for the past 10 years and has high GRE scores and strong recommendations from advisers saying he's the best researcher that's come through their company in a long time.
-A recent graduate with a 4.0 GPA but low GRE scores who has a first-authored paper published in a reputable journal.
-An undergraduate with an otherwise outstanding packet, but who has a low GRE score because her father died a week before she took the exam.

If you're doing admissions to a program, you may want to admit one or more of these students - because GRE scores don't predict research success or one's propensity to finish the program.  What they predict is first-year GPA in the program, which isn't extremely useful in a research program.  So while (for a variety of reasons) programs may look for people with relatively high GRE scores, they are willing to make exceptions.  Also, plenty of students aren't focused on grad school during undergrad.  But maybe it's been a long time since undergrad, or they got very sick during college but are now better and have proven themselves in other ways.

So basically, if there are extenuating circumstances to explain one low part of the application packet - or you have such an outstanding holistic profile that the professors are excited and want to ignore the low mark - you can still gain admission, even if you are below what they would normally admit.  That's why there's no cutoff; they don't want to inadvertently pass on a potentially great student who made a mistake.

[Guest |||]

Schools might not have a stated cut off score, but it doesn't mean they may count you out based on a poor score.  If possible see past years admission scores and if youre comparable.

[juilletmercredi]

^True, but that means that there's no absolute floor for what a "cut off" is, and that other factors may mitigate a poor score.  So while you do want to at or above past years' averages if possible (and available), don't disqualify yourself by not applying if you're below the average - it's called the "average" for a reason.  The only sure way that you won't get in is if you don't apply.

 

I'm not advocating applying to programs where you absolutely know you are not competitive, but if you are unsure or borderline, make the investment.