Should I, an EECS student who just scored V 157 & Q 170, retake GRE?

[perfectionming]

Title says it all.

 

I am an EECS student aiming to get into top PhD programs (Harvard, Stanford, etc.). This is my second time doing GRE. Should I take it a third time? Is this good enough for those top PhD programs?

 

(AW score is not out yet, but I feel it should be higher than 4.0, which was my AW score at my first attempt)

 

P.S.: I understand that they do not set hard "minimum score". I am hoping that someone could answer this question with empirical examples (either story of yourself or stories that you've heard of).

 

Thanks a lot!

Erik

Edited July 27, 2014 by perfectionming

[jeffleung1992]

Hello,

For schools like Stanford, your score is more than enough. Honestly, you should focus on your research statement. Getting in will involve demonstrating that you have strong research experiences (potentially publications). Your time is better spent focusing in either trying to get a paper published (if not journal, then a 1st author conference paper), and writing a polished SOP.

Once you have a 3.6+ GPA, and a GRE like yours, the research is what actually matters for PhD. Unlike MS, a PhD is a research degree, and therefore you need to show that you have very strong research skills.

Best wishes!

[bsharpe269]

I agree that your scores are probably within the range they are looking for. If you think that you can drastically increase it (like at least 5 points on the verbal) and keep the same quant then it might be worth it retake. In my experience, it takes quite a bit of work for us math/science people to improve the verbal by that much though so I if you dont think you can easily improve the score then I agree that your time would be much better spent on your research or SOP.

[jeffleung1992]

Hi bsharpe269,

I hate to disagree with you, bc I think you offered great advice, but I think even if he increased his verbal score by 5 points it wouldn't matter. Heck, I would posit even if he increased it by 10 points it wouldn't make a difference.

From personal experience I know that Stanford cares about research (and almost all other schools for PhD EE) way more than any other factor. I think all the OPs time should be spent ensuring that you either get publications and/or strengthen your research statement. I'm pretty sure the GRE is used as just a sanity check/cut-off to make sure you can do basic math and reading. The OP meets this cut-off.

The top EE schools are looking to match you up with faculty who share your interests. Those faculty are not interested in knowing if you can solve some math/reading problems, but rather if you can do the work that needs to be done in the lab. Of course, they want to make are you can do the basics, but beyond that your experience will matter. Case in point, MIT EECS actually got rid of the GRE requirement alltogether; I suspect the other EE schools are somewhat in the same boat, though they haven't fully eliminated it yet.

Best wishes!

[perfectionming]

Thank you all the guys for the great advice! It helps a lot! I should really spend my time in more meaningful stuff, like research.  

[Admissions Advice Online]

While your scores are within range, it should be noted that it is probably the only thing you can change at this point to materially increase your chances. Your quant score is great, but a higher verbal score will certainly help. There is a huge misconception that the top programs do not care about the verbal score. They do, for every person with a low verbal score they admit, they normally have to offset that with someone with a high score. Scoring high on both sections of the exam, great research and professional experiences, and a good undergrad gpa will put you at the top of the admissions pile. - Admissions Advice Online 

[perfectionming]

The AW score is out. I got 4.5. Any comments?