Studying V Instead Q as a History applicant.

[ToomuchLes]

A few months ago, I came into contact with the Graduate Program Assistant from UCLA, UCSB, and UCI. I asked whether a high Quantitative score was necessary to be admitted into their History Graduate Department and heres a reply from UCSB : "GRE: A decent score on the quantitative would be great but, the quantitative score itself will not increase or decrease your chances for admission into the program" 

 

Other programs gave me similar replies.

 

Therefore, my question is, should i solely study for the V portion of the test from now? I will be taking GRE Nov. 9th. 

Overall, my practice V tests have been in the low 160s; however if I focus primarily on V for the next 3 weeks, Im sure I can raise that! Furthermore, I feel terribly behind in Q, as my practice test scores have been averaging in the late 140s. 

[powerlifterty16]

interesting scenario. i dont know if i full believe him that a good quant wont help....all things equal between applicants, the quant could be the deciding factor...also a score in the 140s is quite below average(my score was 150 and only 41st percentile)....chances are if you blow the verbal away youll be ok imo...maybe just do 1-2 weeks of quant.

[ToomuchLes]

However as a History applicant, why would the Q even matter? I'll probably never use math in grad school. Furthermore, I wouldnt see why they'd lie to me =P

Edited October 12, 2013 by LeventeL

[tspier2]

However as a History applicant, why would the Q even matter? I'll probably never use math in grad school. Furthermore, I wouldnt see why they'd lie to me =P

 

I think what the previous poster is saying is that you should just be careful about how steadfastly you believe what has been said to you. The circumstances for each year's applicants are different. What may not have mattered in the past may be considered as the deciding factor between otherwise excellent candidates. You should still spend some time on the quantitative section, because your score was awfully low and many of the practice tests were not, in my experience, indicative of the "real thing."

[ToomuchLes]

Mkay, I understand now. I appreciate the comments from the both of you