Importance of GRE scores and good schools that don't require subject test?

[B-612]

Hi all,

 

My question is twofold. I just took the GRE and received my quantitative and verbal scores (they're the 0-170 range, not the other scoring system) and am beginning to craft my statements of purpose. However, I don't want to be presumptuous and apply to a school if my GRE score is embarrassingly low for that particular school. I'm in a financial lurch and I don't want to waste money on applications. I also am trying to watch my wallet and am wondering what schools (out of the respected programs with good funding) *don't* require an English subject test. So let me rephrase those two questions:

 

1) What is the minimum verbal (and quantitative, if necessary) score that a good school along the lines of Berkeley, UPenn, Columbia, Iowa or Brown would accept? I know this doesn't make your application package, but it could break it.

 

2) What schools of the top 30 don't require an English subject test? 

http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-humanities-schools/english-rankings

 

Many thanks for your help.

[andromache]

Off the top of my head, I know that UChicago does not require (or even want) your GRE Subject test score for Literature.

 

As far as if your verbal score is good enough, I'm not speaking from any of my own experience here, just what I've read from other people, sites, etc--but you probably want your verbal to be in the 90%+ for a top ten school. Like I said, this probably isn't /for sure/ but just has been the impression I've gotten from my own research.

[BunnyWantsaPhD]

There's 28 schools out of the top 50 that don't require the Subject test. I forget which ones out of the top 30 in particular, though. I know that Chicago, Michigan, UPenn, Columbia, Duke, Brown, NYU, WashU, Northwestern, and a few others don't require it. It's pretty easy to figure it out from their websites... 

 

A lot of the websites I looked at in the top 10-20 say that the average scores are in the 90-95th percentile... : (

[B-612]

Jeezy creezy... goodbye, PhD dreams! I don't want to/can't afford to keep feeding the ETS monopoly. ?

[purpleperson]

Jeezy creezy... goodbye, PhD dreams! I don't want to/can't afford to keep feeding the ETS monopoly. ;p

 

The thing that makes me most sick about the whole Ph.D. application process is the cost of the GRE and sending scores.  I don't mind taking the GRE, and I don't even mind that I don't do well on it (at least not compared to many others), nor that I feel 'mediocre' as a result of it.  That bothers me little compared to the actual cost of the GRE and the subsequent sending of scores.   $25 to send a score that isn't actually even "sent," but just "revealed" or "made accessible."  It's so disgusting.  The only reason I can make myself do it (in fact, have already done it -- all scores are sent, totaling $300) is that I'm forcing myself to see the big picture.  Roughly $1300-$1400 for the whole attempt at the Ph.D. thing is not a bad investment for the next five years of my life.  I see it as no different from getting some professional certification for something that you want to try.  When i look at it that way, I'm not bothered by sending GRE scores at all.  But if I actually think only about ETS and its charging people $185 for tests and $25 to send (per school), I'm sickened.  I took the subject test and the general test.  $185+$185+$300.    ETS got $675 from me out of $1300 total that I'm spending to apply to about 12 to 13 schools.  It's disgusting!  I think the tests should be $120, tops, and the "sending" should be $15 tops.  Neither should be even that much, but those are rates at which I wouldn't complain.  

[B-612]

I hear you. My problem is shelling out that much dough without the promise of even getting accepted somewhere. Add that to the fact that some of the application fees for prospective schools are $100 a piece and REALLY?!

[champagne]

Jeezy creezy... goodbye, PhD dreams! I don't want to/can't afford to keep feeding the ETS monopoly. ;p

You will not be denied access to a PhD program or finishing your PhD if you are a scholar that works hard and has the talent to continue to produce meaningful work. If you base your selection on fit and not on prestige, you will get a great preparation to be a literary scholar. The programs that "require"--I put this in quotes because I feel their stated scores are more guidelines--GRE scores to be in that range end up missing out on great scholars that would fit well in their program because the higher-ups at these institutions want to see the best statistics possible coming in each year. That's how they maintain prestige. This is almost anathema to the pursuit of research within the humanities, but that's what happens when higher education handcuffs itself to standardized tests. It's been proven time and time again that standardized tests are a terrible indicator of how well one will do in education and life; however, the ones holding the pocket books at these institutions only care about scores. Don't let "prestige", rankings, and statistics deter you from your ultimate goal, if this is truly your ultimate goal.

 

TL;DR: Do your best, and FUCK ETS.

[aGiRlCalLeDApPlE]

Does the test fee still include sending out score for 4 schools for free? I took the test once a few years ago and that was the case then 

[skybythelight]

I didn't take the subject test, and these were the PhD schools I applied to: Michigan, Maryland, Minnesota, Rice and Vanderbilt. I know they aren't all top 20 (are any of them? I don't even know), but they're all well respected, great schools.

[Datatape]

These are all schools I applied to, over a course of two years, that did not require the subject test: Alabama, Emory, Florida, Georgia State, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Ole Miss, Nebraska at Lincoln, Nevada at Reno, UNC Chapel Hill, and Texas Tech.  In addition, LSU and WashU recommended you have a subject test score, but did not require it, and in year one I was very, very close to getting off the waitlist at LSU without a subject test score.

 

My advice: don't be so caught up in rankings that you overlook excellent schools that don't require the subject test.  Many, many posters on here have turned down offers from higher-ranked schools because a lower-ranked one was a much better option for them and what they wanted to do.

[jazzyd]

On 10/30/2013 at 8:18 PM, BunnyWantsaPhD said:

There's 28 schools out of the top 50 that don't require the Subject test. I forget which ones out of the top 30 in particular, though. I know that Chicago, Michigan, UPenn, Columbia, Duke, Brown, NYU, WashU, Northwestern, and a few others don't require it. It's pretty easy to figure it out from their websites... 

 

A lot of the websites I looked at in the top 10-20 say that the average scores are in the 90-95th percentile... : (

 

EditEdit (I'm getting this thread mixed up with the Subject test one! wow)

 

Okay, I'll say that if the bolded was a hard and fast rule (aka only someone in the 90-95 percentile had a decent shot) I would not be in a PhD program right now. Nor would many people, I'd gather.

 

As Datatape said, don't be so rankings focused that you overlook great schools, but I'll also say don't discount highly ranked programs just because your scores aren't near perfect or even near near perfect.

[jrockford27]

I applied to Duke, Emory, Pitt, Vanderbilt, SUNY Buffalo, Chicago, UMass Amherst*, Syracuse, Brown (Modern Culture and Media), and Carnegie Mellon, and didn't take the subject test.

 

*UMass English requires the subject test for some concentrations, but says that it does not if you are applying with the intention of pursuing their American Studies concentration.  I also looked at Boulder, who do not require it.