Do GRE Scores affect funding? (Chinese history/East Asian Studies)

[ashlee_liu31]

Hello everyone!

I want to raise a question about the importance of GRE scores to graduate level funding.

I am applying to study Chinese history (in the history or East Asian studies department) in grad school in December 2014. I am giving myself one month to prepare for the GRE and aiming to score around 90 percentile in the verbal section and 50 percentile in the math section.  I don't want to aim for higher that these because I want to spend my time working on the research sample.

I did my research and found that such scores shouldn't hinder me from getting into my dream schools, which are Harvard, Columbia, Stanford, or Princeton (I am applying to other "safe" schools too), but I have also heard that GRE scores can affect funding after getting admitted.

I am wondering if anyone has some insights on whether a 90 percentile in verbal and 50 percentile in math can negatively affect funding in the history/East Asian studies departments in the aforementioned schools. I am hoping to get accepted into a PHD program but can settle for MA programs. I heard that the aforementioned schools are very generous in funding and am wondering if GRE scores play a role in their considerations.

I have tried emailing the schools' contact emails on the departmental websites but have only gotten one reply from Stanford. Does anyone know how to get responses from these people?

Thanks 

[spellbanisher]

GRE scores are often important for university fellowships, but if the department really thinks highly of you they will offer a standard funding package no matter your GRE. A fancy fellowship is sweet, but if you neglect the most important parts of your application (the writing sample and the sop) to get a higher GRE you will be worse off.

 

From what I've seen, a 90 percentile on the verbal and 50 on the math might be slightly below average for the kind of schools you are applying to. Berkeley, which is as prestigious as the programs you listed, notes on its website that the averages for a recent cohort was 96% verbal and 71% quantitative. But keep in mind that there are a number of other factors at play for university fellowships.

Edited May 20, 2014 by spellbanisher

[ashlee_liu31]

GRE scores are often important for university fellowships, but if the department really thinks highly of you they will offer a standard funding package no matter your GRE. A fancy fellowship is sweet, but if you neglect the most important parts of your application (the writing sample and the sop) to get a higher GRE you will be worse off.

 

From what I've seen, a 90 percentile on the verbal and 50 on the math would be slightly below average for the kind of schools you are applying to. Berkeley, which is as prestigious as the programs you listed, notes on its website that the averages for a recent cohort was 96% verbal and 71% quantitative. But keep in mind that there are a number of other factors at play for university fellowships.

Thanks for the reply!

As for the Berkeley average, I am surprised because the stats i found here says otherwise http://magoosh.com/gre/2013/gre-scores-for-top-universities/ 

Can you link me to your source?

According to my link, the average humanities students in the top schools barely even hit 50 percentile in math. Are your stats for humanities students?

In my link, the verbal average for top-tier history programs is about 95 percentile minimum, but since i am applying to East Asian studies and Chinese history, I figured that the competition isn't as tough in the GRE verbal section since at least half of the applicants hail directly from China. It is hard to imagine that these applicants will have the same level of English skills as historians of Europe and America, who probably constitute the majority of the history applicants. That's why I aim for the average verbal scores of sociology (apparently less competitive than history), which is about 90 percentile. Do you think it is reasonable to assume that I can aim for a slightly lower score because many other applicants in my field aren't native English speakers?

What and where do you study? =)

[ashlee_liu31]

http://magoosh.com/gre/2013/gre-scores-for-top-universities/

here is the link

[hj2012]

If the school really wants you, your GRE score probably won't matter if you're above the cutoffs (which are probably around 310 combined, I would think). But I think it isn't wise to go in assuming that you're going to be the number one candidate that schools will fight over (though this very well may be true!). From what I understand, schools like Yale, Harvard, Princeton, etc give pretty standard funding packages across the board. Thus, your GRE might matter more for top public schools like Berkeley, as spellbanisher mentioned earlier, where funding packages can vary greatly. I scored 170V 168Q, and I've been explicitly told (from multiple DGS's) that this was a leading factor in why I received competitive university-wide fellowships. For these fellowships, the rigor of your writing sample matters less than the numbers, at least in the eyes of many university administrators.

 

Also, I wouldn't discount those applicants applying directly from China, haha. I do some grad school admissions consulting in Asia and most of our clients applying for humanities, even if they are not native speakers, pull perfect TOEFL/GRE scores all the time. It's absolutely amazing. 

 

That said, you're definitely right that the GRE is not the most important part of the application process. If it's a choice between a better writing sample and a higher GRE score, I'd choose the writing sample hands down. But if you have the time and resources to do both, I would aim a bit higher than what you've stated here.

[spellbanisher]

Thanks for the reply!

As for the Berkeley average, I am surprised because the stats i found here says otherwise http://magoosh.com/gre/2013/gre-scores-for-top-universities/ 

Can you link me to your source?

According to my link, the average humanities students in the top schools barely even hit 50 percentile in math. Are your stats for humanities students?

In my link, the verbal average for top-tier history programs is about 95 percentile minimum, but since i am applying to East Asian studies and Chinese history, I figured that the competition isn't as tough in the GRE verbal section since at least half of the applicants hail directly from China. It is hard to imagine that these applicants will have the same level of English skills as historians of Europe and America, who probably constitute the majority of the history applicants. That's why I aim for the average verbal scores of sociology (apparently less competitive than history), which is about 90 percentile. Do you think it is reasonable to assume that I can aim for a slightly lower score because many other applicants in my field aren't native English speakers?

What and where do you study? =)

http://history.berkeley.edu/graduate/program-faqs

 

Swimmer's methodology is very tenuous.  He's using GRE scores for engineering and education to estimate average GRE's for all other disciplines. The NRC provides some data, but the stuff available to me is from the years 2003-2006, and I only got an average verbal score (which was 665 for Berkeley, 705 for Stanford).

 

You might be right about East Asian studies having slightly lower verbal GRE. A 50% quantitative score is also very respectable for a humanities major. A 90%-50%-5.0 would probably be more than sufficient no matter where you apply. As I've already stated, its the sop and the writing sample that really makes the difference for acceptance, as well as languages.

 

My area is US History, 1870-1930. School is in signature. My GRE splits were 95%-29%-5.5.

Edited May 20, 2014 by spellbanisher

[spellbanisher]

If the school really wants you, your GRE score probably won't matter if you're above the cutoffs (which are probably around 310 combined, I would think). But I think it isn't wise to go in assuming that you're going to be the number one candidate that schools will fight over (though this very well may be true!). From what I understand, schools like Yale, Harvard, Princeton, etc give pretty standard funding packages across the board. Thus, your GRE might matter more for top public schools like Berkeley, as spellbanisher mentioned earlier, where funding packages can vary greatly. I scored 170V 168Q, and I've been explicitly told (from multiple DGS's) that this was a leading factor in why I received competitive university-wide fellowships. For these fellowships, the rigor of your writing sample matters less than the numbers, at least in the eyes of many university administrators.

 

The University of Oklahoma offered me the hoving fellowship, which is one of their several university wide fellowships and second best offered in the humanities. UC Davis has the provost fellowship in the humanities, social sciences, and arts, which is just a one year fellowship offered to 50 students (split between first years and dissertation years), but I wasn't offered that. I didn't apply to any really prestigious schools, but between getting the second best fellowship at Oklahoma and none at all at Davis (and getting waitlisted by George Mason and rejected by Rutgers), I figure I wouldn't have gotten into a more prestigious schools anyways. My ego, however, notes that I was eventually offered admission by George Mason and that Rutger's never received the official transcripts from my MA program.

 

It seems pretty standard at elite private universities and a few flagship public universities for the general stipend to be 20-30k a year (depending on the location), 3-5k for summer research, with 2-3 years of service (i.e. working as a teaching assistant or instructor) and 2-3 years of no service. I've seen Berkeley and UCLA  offer comparable funding packages, but I don't know if those are standard. The other UCs rely much more heavily on teaching assistantships, but to get much beyond that you'd have to win university or external fellowships. I don't know if Harvard-Princeton-Columbia-Stanford offered unfunded phd admissions(I know Stanford does for its MA), but I know that some prestigious flagships, such as the University of Wisconsin-Madison, admit a lot of students without funding.

Edited May 20, 2014 by spellbanisher

[kyjin]

Adding to what others have said, don't discount the native Chinese students and their GRE scores. Of the members of my cohort who hailed from China during my MA in East Asian Studies, all the ones who discussed their GRE scores me scored incredibly high- at least a couple with perfect or near-perfect scores. However, the entirety of your package is most important, not just your GRE scores. Good luck!

[hj2012]

The University of Oklahoma offered me the hoving fellowship, which is one of their several university wide fellowships and second best offered in the humanities. UC Davis has the provost fellowship in the humanities, social sciences, and arts, which is just a one year fellowship offered to 50 students (split between first years and dissertation years), but I wasn't offered that. I didn't apply to any really prestigious schools, but between getting the second best fellowship at Oklahoma and none at all at Davis (and getting waitlisted by George Mason and rejected by Rutgers), I figure I wouldn't have gotten into a more prestigious schools anyways. My ego, however, notes that I was eventually offered admission by George Mason and that Rutger's never received the official transcripts from my MA program.

 

It seems pretty standard at elite private universities and a few flagship public universities for the general stipend to be 20-30k a year (depending on the location), 3-5k for summer research, with 2-3 years of service (i.e. working as a teaching assistant or instructor) and 2-3 years of no service. I've seen Berkeley and UCLA  offer comparable funding packages, but I don't know if those are standard. The other UCs rely much more heavily on teaching assistantships, but to get much beyond that you'd have to win university or external fellowships. I don't know if Harvard-Princeton-Columbia-Stanford offered unfunded phd admissions(I know Stanford does for its MA), but I know that some prestigious flagships, such as the University of Wisconsin-Madison, admit a lot of students without funding.

 

Interesting, and congratulations on all your offers. I can't really speak to the Ivies from a personal perspective, as I was either waitlisted or rejected at the top private schools that I applied to (further proof that high GRE scores will not get you accepted  ). All the schools that offered me fellowships were large public universities. I don't know about UCLA, but receiving a fellowship at Berkeley boosts you quite a bit above the standard package. At Michigan, the stipend amount was the same for everyone in the department (~25K), but the fellowship freed me from teaching responsibilities for all but 2 years.

[ashlee_liu31]

Thanks for the replies!!

i'll train a bit harder in the verbal section to get above 90 percentile. But i really dont feel like studying any more math; i rather put the time to raising my korean reading to an advanced level

[Mandarin]

Having received some funding packages from the schools you speak of (and being a China specialist myself), I can tell you for sure that funding from Chicago, Princeton, Stanford, and Yale has no relationship to GRE whatsoever--all students in any given program receive the same level of funding at these schools, and there are no merit-based scholarships.  Harvard and Columbia are undoubtedly the same.  Berkeley, like most public universities, DOES offer merit-based scholarships, and students differ fairly dramatically in the level of funding they receive (in my year, standard package was 17000 a year, but that could go up to 28000 with a merit-based scholarship), but GRE is hardly much of a consideration there, so long as you meet their basic standards.  It is also almost certainly true that the existence of Chinese students in the pool of applicants will drag the average GRE verbal score UP, rather than down, as they tend to be excellent test-takers, regardless of their actual level of English fluency.

 

In addition, don't assume the math score is meaningless.  Several senior scholars in the Chinese History field, including Pomeranz, Rowe, Bin Wong, and Perdue, are known for preferring students with some quantitative background.

Edited May 21, 2014 by Mandarin

[ashlee_liu31]

Having received some funding packages from the schools you speak of (and being a China specialist myself), I can tell you for sure that funding from Chicago, Princeton, Stanford, and Yale has no relationship to GRE whatsoever--all students in any given program receive the same level of funding at these schools, and there are no merit-based scholarships.  Harvard and Columbia are undoubtedly the same.  Berkeley, like most public universities, DOES offer merit-based scholarships, and students differ fairly dramatically in the level of funding they receive (in my year, standard package was 17000 a year, but that could go up to 28000 with a merit-based scholarship), but GRE is hardly much of a consideration there, so long as you meet their basic standards.  It is also almost certainly true that the existence of Chinese students in the pool of applicants will drag the average GRE verbal score UP, rather than down, as they tend to be excellent test-takers, regardless of their actual level of English fluency.

 

In addition, don't assume the math score is meaningless.  Several senior scholars in the Chinese History field, including Pomeranz, Rowe, Bin Wong, and Perdue, are known for preferring students with some quantitative background.

wow thanks for the info. i didnt expect to actually find someone in Chinese history here ><

it is relieving to know that GRE scores don't affect funding and I only need to reach the basic standard; this is the last thing i wanna spend my time on. can you clarify a bit on what would be considered as "basic standard"?

as for some scholars' preference for students with math backgroumds, it is a bit of a surprise to me. i think there is nothing i can or willing to do about my math skills at this point anyways. My research focus is literature and textual history. Although i wont have an edge in terms of math (shame on me), my edge will be my advanced skills in Classical Chinese, Mandarin, Cantonese, Japanese (some Classcial Japanese too), and Korean. Instead of brushing up my math skills or trying to push for a higher verbal score, I think it is better for me to prepare harder for my Korean assessment test in Oct. I have proofs for my Chinese and Japanese skills on my transcript but I need something to demonstrate my level in Korean.

 

Having received some funding packages from the schools you speak of (and being a China specialist myself), I can tell you for sure that funding from Chicago, Princeton, Stanford, and Yale has no relationship to GRE whatsoever--all students in any given program receive the same level of funding at these schools, and there are no merit-based scholarships.  Harvard and Columbia are undoubtedly the same.  Berkeley, like most public universities, DOES offer merit-based scholarships, and students differ fairly dramatically in the level of funding they receive (in my year, standard package was 17000 a year, but that could go up to 28000 with a merit-based scholarship), but GRE is hardly much of a consideration there, so long as you meet their basic standards.  It is also almost certainly true that the existence of Chinese students in the pool of applicants will drag the average GRE verbal score UP, rather than down, as they tend to be excellent test-takers, regardless of their actual level of English fluency.

 

In addition, don't assume the math score is meaningless.  Several senior scholars in the Chinese History field, including Pomeranz, Rowe, Bin Wong, and Perdue, are known for preferring students with some quantitative background.

 

[Mandarin]

This is just an educated guess, but "basic standard" at Berkeley, or any other top school, would likely be 95% verbal (a few percentage points lower probably won't kill you), somewhat above average in math, and a 5.5 or 6.0 on the writing section.

 

And sure, if you're doing straight up literature and textual analysis, you probably shouldn't apply to Perdue, Pomeranz, Rowe, etc. anyway.

Edited May 21, 2014 by Mandarin

[tenguru]

I had trouble due to my low quant and average AW score. I found a Professor who wanted to sponsor me at a great (NRC top ten) Japanese history program. The East Asian committee there agreed with him, and recommended me to the dept for admission and funding. I didn't get funding and therefore didn't go. I obviously had the rest of the package and also a 98% verbal, but the low quant hurt me (it was below 50th). I must say it was a bummer to get a couple of really positive emails basically leading me to believe I was in, only to have my bubble burst! Thank goodness I made it in elsewhere.

 

All I am saying is that having a POI pulling for you is not always enough. It still comes down to the Ad com and dept.

 

I got into a couple other programs, and I think it will be for the best. But, I plan on retaking the GRE next summer in preparation for possibly moving elsewhere for my doctorate.

 

Either way, best of luck to you!

[ashlee_liu31]

Congrats on ur acceptances!

May I ask, if u don't mind, what was your quant score? It's shocking to me that a quant score can hurt a history applicant. Is your research interest somewhat related to math? (History of science, etc) Were you explicitly told that your quant score was a problem?

I had trouble due to my low quant and average AW score. I found a Professor who wanted to sponsor me at a great (NRC top ten) Japanese history program. The East Asian committee there agreed with him, and recommended me to the dept for admission and funding. I didn't get funding and therefore didn't go. I obviously had the rest of the package and also a 98% verbal, but the low quant hurt me (it was below 50th). I must say it was a bummer to get a couple of really positive emails basically leading me to believe I was in, only to have my bubble burst! Thank goodness I made it in elsewhere.

 

All I am saying is that having a POI pulling for you is not always enough. It still comes down to the Ad com and dept.

 

I got into a couple other programs, and I think it will be for the best. But, I plan on retaking the GRE next summer in preparation for possibly moving elsewhere for my doctorate.

 

Either way, best of luck to you!

[tenguru]

Hate to say it, but just above 30th IIRC. I took it a few years ago. I was an unconventional student, coming into my undergrad program from JC after years working construction and traveling and hadn't taken math in ten years (aside from stats, which I got an easy A in?). I obviously should have brushed up a bit. Despite that, I think I am in the perfect place for now, as I needed to deal with being an Asian Studies major who wanted to pursue a history doctorate.

[ashlee_liu31]

Hate to say it, but just above 30th IIRC. I took it a few years ago. I was an unconventional student, coming into my undergrad program from JC after years working construction and traveling and hadn't taken math in ten years (aside from stats, which I got an easy A in?). I obviously should have brushed up a bit. Despite that, I think I am in the perfect place for now, as I needed to deal with being an Asian Studies major who wanted to pursue a history doctorate.

Ok it makes more sense now. When you said less than 50 percentile I was thinking about 40 something.

Just curious, it says in ur signature that you are accepted by MA programs. How are the funding going? I'm quite worried about having to pay for my MA

[ashlee_liu31]

Btw 始めまして 私も日本語わかりますよ。13歳の時から日本語勉強していましたから、今はもうなんでもわかる程度です。主に中国歴史研究しますが、日本も興味あります。

私は今MCGILLに通ってます。Professor Thomas Lamarre 知ります？彼は私のClassical Japanese の先生です。あなたは今どの学校？

Hate to say it, but just above 30th IIRC. I took it a few years ago. I was an unconventional student, coming into my undergrad program from JC after years working construction and traveling and hadn't taken math in ten years (aside from stats, which I got an easy A in?). I obviously should have brushed up a bit. Despite that, I think I am in the perfect place for now, as I needed to deal with being an Asian Studies major who wanted to pursue a history doctorate.

[maelia8]

Just to add my personal experience to the mix: I got into a top public school (Berkeley) with 97th percentile verbal scores on the GRE but only 33rd percentile math scores (I applied to a humanities program, and I'm just not that great at timed math tests). I got the standard funding package without any extra fellowship tacked on, which is definitely enough to live on, but I'm planning on applying for other external fellowships as soon as possible once I get there to bump it up a bit. Even if your GRE scores don't get you the chance for getting special merit-based fellowships above and beyond the standard package as an entering student, this doesn't mean that you won't have chances to apply for further funding over the course of your graduate studies! I don't think that there were even that many merit scholarships that entering grad students could qualify for (based on what I remember from the funding/scholarships section of the Berkeley website). Don't let your GRE scores define you or drive you crazy - a good SOP and LORs are in my opinion much more important.

[tenguru]

Ok it makes more sense now. When you said less than 50 percentile I was thinking about 40 something.

Just curious, it says in ur signature that you are accepted by MA programs. How are the funding going? I'm quite worried about having to pay for my MA

 

 

I was very lucky to get fully funded after being on the funding waitlist. Of course, "fully funded" will be a few steps down from my current lifestyle.

[tenguru]

Btw 始めまして 私も日本語わかりますよ。13歳の時から日本語勉強していましたから、今はもうなんでもわかる程度です。主に中国歴史研究しますが、日本も興味あります。

私は今MCGILLに通ってます。Professor Thomas Lamarre 知ります？彼は私のClassical Japanese の先生です。あなたは今どの学校？

 

Nice to meet you too! Very cool, you certainly have studied longer than me (so, thanks for using kantan nihongo)! Haha. I don't know Thomas Lamarre, but Ill look him up.   My classical Japanese Prof. was Mack Horton at Cal, although I did a bit of work on the Heijimonogarari while doing my year abroad at Sophia. I'll be in Eugene pursuing my MA in early modern Japanese history starting in the Fall. よろしくね〜

[eurosc]

Does learning Korean help you get into Chinese history program?

[CageFree]

If you need to learn a new language why not learn the one you will use in your field? You can't do Chinese history without leaning Chinese from the era you're working on.

Edited July 20, 2014 by CageFree

[pudewen]

I'm going to guess that if eurosc is asking about learning Korean, they already know Chinese, and are wondering if knowing Korean in addition would be helpful.

 

I think the answer to that question is that it will help only a little bit if it doesn't have some direct connection to your research, but could help a lot if it does. Faculty will generally look on more languages favorably, in part because it gives you more flexibility if you end up moving away from the topic that you're interested in at the time of application, but if you don't have a plan for how you're going to use a particular language to do research, it won't end up playing a major role in getting you in. For Chinese history, if you're considering learning a language beyond Chinese, and there isn't any that is particularly relevant to your topic, I'd recommend Japanese over Korean. Many programs will actually require you to learn Japanese, so having a start in it will immediately put you ahead of potential applicants who don't, and even if the programs you're applying to will not require you to learn it, they will almost undoubtedly consider it a relevant language for you to know, given the large amounts of important Japanese language scholarship in pretty much any are of Chinese history.