GRE should be defined as Garba*e Record Examination

[YoungR3b3l]

Greetings everyone

Sorry, but yes. As i have stated in the topic.

Trust me, Its not that my once and only time that Ive took GRE my scores were very low. I dont mind having low scores in somethings I almost wont be dealing with (Graduate studies in Political Science) actuallt, it is more than normal to get low scores with such an exam, specially if it had nothing to do with either common knowledge nor the major itself.

Heres why I think the GRE should is a Bad indicator of prospective students performance:

1- The Quant. Part of the exam isnt hard as many claim, however, since my major is among arts & humanities, why do I have to deal with such quant. Methods? If someone claims "you will do quant methods in statistics in your grad studies" im sorry to tell that I am already a grad student, took two statistics in social sciences & research scored B+ in both classes at the graduate level. And almost nothing in those classes were included in the exam, only very minimal type of questions. What has algebra and geometry to do with social sciences quantitave research methods for Gods sake?

2- we all took math classes during highschool and almost all the educational levels throughout our lives, why atleast the highschool grades of math dont be asked for to indicate how we perfom & comprehend math?

3- the verbal part is very confusing for many. We as prospective international students are actually non native english speakers, however it doesnt mean we dont know how to handle a good academic writing skills, the verbal part of the exam includes many words that I almost had never knew they existed. By the way my score in the IELTS is 7.0 which is equivalent to about 100 in TOEFL IBT. So it is very confusing to evaluate my english as a language knowledge from a the verbal part on the GRE. As non native speakers, no matter how well and great we may score in the verbal part, we will use the dictionary many times often, which is not a negative thing.

4- Why most US Grad. Colleges ask for the GRE? Why arent the TOEFL/IELTS arent enough? I know that both tests tend to examine different types of things, however the GRE is frustrating, I do not think it represents how will I do in english at all. If I didnt know the word, why is that a bad thing?

5- I may accept the fact that GRE being used in Tier 1 prestigious universities to dump many applications they receive, however why many colleges are following their approach? I think its illogical to imitate someones motives despite the differences between both situations.

6- GRE plays a huge role in admitting grad prospective students. Why is a 4 hours exam overweighs a 4 years undergrad GPA, years of extracurricular activities , additional graduate classes in prior colleges and a satisfying score of TOEFL/IELTS?

Id like to conclude that the GRE is a shameful test to evaluate how distinct an applicant is. Its great to see many score very well in GRE, in fact, many of them are actually native english speakers. Give me an Arabic version of the GRE, I swear to God Id score atleast 169/170 in the verbal part which puts me in the 90% percentile easily.

International applicants should be considered with less GRE score restrictions, actually some universities do that like Boston uni. & North Carolina Chapel Hill. But I hope the others understand that fact.

I havent wrote those words as im mad of my low scores. Im actually proud, because I know that test should be removed as a strict requirement to admit or reject applicants, My application without it is good, why an illogical test demolishes my chances?

I really hope that most of universities either dont require it, or make it an optional thing to add to your application, at least with the social sciences.

Thoughts would be appreciated,

[victorydance]

Heres why I think the GRE should is a Bad indicator of prospective students performance:
1- The Quant. Part of the exam isnt hard as many claim, however, since my major is among arts & humanities, why do I have to deal with such quant. Methods? If someone claims "you will do quant methods in statistics in your grad studies" im sorry to tell that I am already a grad student, took two statistics in social sciences & research scored B+ in both classes at the graduate level. And almost nothing in those classes were included in the exam, only very minimal type of questions. What has algebra and geometry to do with social sciences quantitave research methods for Gods sake?

 

This is just so wrong it is completely laughable. 

 

The quant section isn't designed to really test your knowledge of math subjects, but rather your  quantitative logic and reasoning skills. The actual level of math is high school level but the logic behind getting some of the answers can actually be quite complex.

 

Ergo, they want to see how applicants fair in an identical environment and gauge them on that. Things like GPA are highly variable depending on where you did your undergrad, the GRE is a score that is the same for everyone. Of course, you can study and "inflate" your score but it is still the same measure for everyone. 

 

If you can't get above a 155 range on the quant section, how you expect your will fare when you want to learn how to do regression analysis or formal theory? Unless you are in political philosophy, most political science is quite quant heavy these days. 

 

The fact that you can't see the connection between algebra and learning mathematics and statistics is really troubling. Algebra is at the root of countless mathematical branches. Like seriously?

[GeoDUDE!]

Most people who do poorly on the GRE say they test badly: maybe thats true, but what is probably also true is they didn't study correctly or as hard as they should have. There are plenty of reasons why an adcom should care about a decent Q/V in any subject: are you competent? The GRE isnt designed to push you intellectually, its designed to see if you can perform on a simple test while knowing about it ahead of time. Sure, you have work, other classes, and real life to deal with, so many people do not have time to study. But thats also what grad school is about, finding a way to get it all done well. 

 

While the correlation between GRE scores and student success isn't as strong as ETS probably wants it to be, its a lot stronger than most make it out to be. 

 

The truth is, the GRE doesn't great candidates out as often as it removes bad ones. Some have a much harder time figuring that out, mirrors are harsh. 

 

There are a lot of fallacies in your post:

 

6- GRE plays a huge role in admitting grad prospective students. Why is a 4 hours exam overweighs a 4 years undergrad GPA, years of extracurricular activities , additional graduate classes in prior colleges and a satisfying score of TOEFL/IELTS?

 

It doesn't outweigh the 4 years, but its something that everyone else has! If everyone has a score of 20 as a baseline, and then someone does better on the GRE, their score is going to be higher (ie 25 vs 24). Note these are just made up numbers, the idea is in the logic. 

Edited August 6, 2014 by GeoDUDE!

[YoungR3b3l]

Heres why I think the GRE should is a Bad indicator of prospective students performance:1- The Quant. Part of the exam isnt hard as many claim, however, since my major is among arts & humanities, why do I have to deal with such quant. Methods? If someone claims "you will do quant methods in statistics in your grad studies" im sorry to tell that I am already a grad student, took two statistics in social sciences & research scored B+ in both classes at the graduate level. And almost nothing in those classes were included in the exam, only very minimal type of questions. What has algebra and geometry to do with social sciences quantitave research methods for Gods sake?

 

This is just so wrong it is completely laughable. 

 

The quant section isn't designed to really test your knowledge of math subjects, but rather your  quantitative logic and reasoning skills. The actual level of math is high school level but the logic behind getting some of the answers can actually be quite complex.

 

Ergo, they want to see how applicants fair in an identical environment and gauge them on that. Things like GPA are highly variable depending on where you did your undergrad, the GRE is a score that is the same for everyone. Of course, you can study and "inflate" your score but it is still the same measure for everyone. 

 

If you can't get above a 155 range on the quant section, how you expect your will fare when you want to learn how to do regression analysis or formal theory? Unless you are in political philosophy, most political science is quite quant heavy these days. 

 

The fact that you can't see the connection between algebra and learning mathematics and statistics is really troubling. Algebra is at the root of countless mathematical branches. Like seriously?

-Most political science programs are fine with 150 range in Quants, so no need for a 155 and how do I expect, actually, there are two answers for your statements regarding regrrsson analysis or formal theory:

1- All grad studies include such classes to teach grad students the statistical academic methods to imply on their researches.

2- There are variety types of researches that does Not necessarily include any sort of mathematic numbers. And IF we presumaly would claim such thing, nothing wrong with studying a "specific part of mathematical analysis" to be included in the research.

3- I am actually interested in Pol. Philosophy & theory. Comparative politics also wont necessarily need such quant. Skills, it mostly depends on what type of a research you "prefer" no one is forced to imply quant methods in their papers unless they want to.

4- Appreciate your remark on algebra, however, it is like you're saying that Agricultural studies should have philosophy classes, as philosophy is the "mother of science". It sounds logical, but not all logical things can be accurate in all situations. I never needed algebra in my undergrad or grad papers, the only methods ive used is regular statistics quant methods.

In addition, I didnt ask for an overestimation of a GPA i know undergrad institutions vary by rankings a 3.20 from a Yale alumni can be equivalent to a 3.70 from The New School of Social Sciences at New York for example, however I didnt restrict the evaluation of an applicant with the GPA solely, ive mentioned other points you can read them well. It is an overall process to evaluate, the logic behind equality in GRE testing to applicants to judge and dump a qualified ones because of poor scores sounds harsh. The GRE is overrated, overestimated & is an oppressive representer to reject applicants.

[victorydance]

-Most political science programs are fine with 150 range in Quants, so no need for a 155 and how do I expect, actually, there are two answers for your statements regarding regrrsson analysis or formal theory:

1- All grad studies include such classes to teach grad students the statistical academic methods to imply on their researches.

 

Yes, but if someone enters social science or science grad school programs without a proper foundation of mathematical skills they will have a hard time being able to digest and master quantitative methods. i.e. You can't learn how to run before you learn how to walk.

 

 

 

2- There are variety types of researches that does Not necessarily include any sort of mathematic numbers. And IF we presumaly would claim such thing, nothing wrong with studying a "specific part of mathematical analysis" to be included in the research.

 

Sure, but in the field of political science, qualitative analysis is a dying breed. The norm of the field today is multi-methods and quant heavy methods.

 

 

 

3- I am actually interested in Pol. Philosophy & theory. Comparative politics also wont necessarily need such quant. Skills, it mostly depends on what type of a research you "prefer" no one is forced to imply quant methods in their papers unless they want to.

 

Admission committees don't weigh quant scores on the GRE as heavily for political philosophy majors as the other majors. 

 

Comparative can be just as quant heavy as any other sub-field of political science.

 

Secondly, yes no one can make you use quant methods. But you won't publish in the top journals without at least multi-methods, and it is increasingly difficult for qualitative political scientists to get tenure-track jobs. So you may be forced to publish in lower-tier journals and may not find a TT job. Is that what you want? 

 

 

 

4- Appreciate your remark on algebra, however, it is like you're saying that Agricultural studies should have philosophy classes, as philosophy is the "mother of science". It sounds logical, but not all logical things can be accurate in all situations. I never needed algebra in my undergrad or grad papers, the only methods ive used is regular statistics quant methods.

 

False equivalence. It's not the same.

 

You may have never used algebra yet, but if you go deep enough into statistics you definitely will. For example, hypothesis testing is very algebra driven.

 

----------

 

I wouldn't worry too much about your quant score if you are intending on majoring in political philosophy. However, the verbal is still relevant. 

 

I don't particularly like the GRE either. I wish it wasn't used. But it is and I can understand why. Therefore I have studied for the last 4+ months and will continue to study for the next two months before taking it. It is what it is.

Edited August 6, 2014 by victorydance

[GeoDUDE!]

The reality is no one is asking you to get a prefect score, they tend to ask you to answer 60-75% of the questions correctly.  Our education system is seriously failing if the GRE becomes some insurmountable task for many students. 

[Catria]

The GRE is used for a few purposes, all right, but, if not used as a screening device, it does happen that fellowships awarded university-wide may use general GRE scores as a basis... again, not the sole basis.

[bsharpe269]

I actually like the GRE and think it can be useful information to grad schools. Here is why:

 

I think that if everyone took the GRE without studying then the quant would give a rough measure your natural strength in working through logical problems and the verbal would give a rough measure of reading comprehension mixed with vocab knowedge. Some people do amazing at one or both of the sections without studying which is great for them and might mean that they can also get away with less studying in school than other people in similar areas. If you do not naturally do great at the GRE then it is completely in your power to study your butt off, memorize vocab and work through problems until you do well on it.

 

In summary, in my opinion, to do well on the GRE you need some balance of 1) awesome natural intelligence or 2) great work ethic

 

I think that these same skills are transferable to grad school. There are some very intelligent people who can learn things very fast and may have an easier time in school and there are others who will have to spend twice as long on the same problem but with hard work can be just as successful. I dont think grad schools care which category you fall into, as long as you are willing to put in the time that you you personally need to do well. I do think that GRE gives some rough measure that you fall into one of these categories.

[Gvh]

I don't agree that the GRE is a test of natural intelligence - from different thinking styles to testing anxiety, there are a number of reasons why a very competent person capable of grad school might not do well on the test. However, I do agree with bsharpe in that it is a good test to gauge your willingness to work hard to get something you want. If you're not naturally good at standardized tests, then the GRE presents an opportunity to work extremely hard - whether it be acclimating yourself to the anxiety of the testing environment or studying the material - in order to get the score you need. It is also presents an opportunity to potentially correct any issues with other "numbers" on your application. If you had that awful stats prof that one semester who hated you and you got a B, then this test gives you the power to help mediate that. Think of it as an opportunity rather than an obligation.

[YoungR3b3l]

Our education system is seriously failing if the GRE becomes some insurmountable task for many students.

With all due respect, but giving this highness & blessing to the GRE is a little too far. You do recognize the fact that the vast majority (If not all) the international top universities in the world (except the US) do not ask for the GRE? That deplorable test is only required in the US, Other Top universities outside the US do not require what a medium grad school in the US requires, does that make the Top school better? For instance, University of Oxford or the University of Cambridge (UK) are top schools just as top as Harvard & Yale in the US. Both do no require a GRE, how shameful that thing would make them look? US schools should be atleast independent and start re-establishing new standardized requirements instead of the "Applicants should take a GRE" cliche. Edited August 7, 2014 by YoungR3b3l

[Vene]

Here's why there's a quantitative section, enough graduate programs care about mathematical ability that a test designed for all graduate programs will have it. A particular department can ignore it if it so desires.

 

Here's why the verbal section requires you to know a wide range of words, academic writing is dense and is filled with multisyllabic words and with complex sentence structures. Not everybody takes the TOEFL so the GRE needs to have a method of evaluating prospective students language skills. When you have both a graduate program can look at the GRE score and the TOEFL score to make a determination of a prospective student's ability.

 

UK universities don't require the GRE because the GRE is an American test. To expect them to want it is actually kind of a bizarre thought to me.

 

You seem to be under the impression that the GRE should be tailored to your specific interests. There are subject GREs if a program wants to assess your knowledge of a particular subject matter. But, that's not the purpose of the general GRE, it's a quick evaluation of intellectual ability and is treated as such by admission committees. It may well be the least important aspect of an application.

 

As an aside, you'd do a lot better job of convincing me the verbal GRE doesn't accurately reflect your abilities if your posts weren't so poorly written. I understand English isn't your first language and I'd fully admit I'd be incoherent in any other language, but US programs are taught in English and so incoming students need to have strong English skills.

[geographyrocks]

I hate the GRE. I do not feel that it clearly portrays who will or will not succeed in grad school.

I hate buzz words in resumes. I hate that resumes are scanned for them. I don't think it accurately portrays who will do a good job.

I hate that it is easier to get a job if you have one because it's easy to thin a herd of resumes by looking at current employment.

Unfortunately, like jobs, schools have to go through hundreds of applications every year. Standard tests and rules make it easier to thin the herd. It's just life. You learn to get over it.

And I would agree that the test is harder for internationals except this: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/02/21/ets-releases-data-gre-averages-country

Take a look at quant...America scores are next to last.

As for verbal, the way I understand it is that verbal scores are looked at along with TOEFL scores so a lousy verbal is generally balanced with a great TOEFL.

This entire thread simply sounds like someone who is pissed that their scores were too low for acceptance. It's a ridiculous hoop to jump, but we all do it.

PS. Quantitative classes are generally undergraduate classes in my field with only advanced methods taught as graduate glasses. And all science contains philosophy. We wouldn't have any questions to answer if we didn't ask why.

[GeoDUDE!]

With all due respect, but giving this highness & blessing to the GRE is a little too far. You do recognize the fact that the vast majority (If not all) the international top universities in the world (except the US) do not ask for the GRE? That deplorable test is only required in the US, Other Top universities outside the US do not require what a medium grad school in the US requires, does that make the Top school better? For instance, University of Oxford or the University of Cambridge (UK) are top schools just as top as Harvard & Yale in the US. Both do no require a GRE, how shameful that thing would make them look? US schools should be atleast independent and start re-establishing new standardized requirements instead of the "Applicants should take a GRE" cliche.

 

Its a high school level material, and they are asking you to get 7/10 questions correct.

[ExponentialDecay]

For any international students that don't get it: the TOEFL is a basic language comprehension test.

 

It measures the likelihood of you being able to 1) order in a restaurant 2) ask for the bathroom 3) explain yourself to doctors and policemen in English. Maybe do a job interview if they give you a quantitative problem. Being able to score in the 9000% percentile on the TOEFL or IELTS does not mean you can do graduate-level work in English.

 

To the OP: yes, the GRE is a stupid test. But so is the TOEFL. Why do you think it would be logical for universities to cancel one stupid test that you did poorly in, but give you admission based on another stupid test that you did well in?

Edited August 7, 2014 by ExponentialDecay

[ExponentialDecay]

The fact that you can't see the connection between algebra and learning mathematics and statistics is really troubling. Algebra is at the root of countless mathematical branches. Like seriously?

 

The really troubling thing is that I meet social science students all the time, even students in economics, who are like, I'll just learn the formula and copypaste it into Stata and it will give me TEH NUMBERS and my advisor will be like, glee. It's like, people have never enjoyed or understood mathematics, and now they're being forced to do it because real! science! needs! numbers!, and it's now a systemic problem in the social sciences.

[VioletAyame]

As an aside, you'd do a lot better job of convincing me the verbal GRE doesn't accurately reflect your abilities if your posts weren't so poorly written. I understand English isn't your first language and I'd fully admit I'd be incoherent in any other language, but US programs are taught in English and so incoming students need to have strong English skills.

 

 

For any international students that don't get it: the TOEFL is a basic language comprehension test.

 

It measures the likelihood of you being able to 1) order in a restaurant 2) ask for the bathroom 3) explain yourself to doctors and policemen in English. Maybe do a job interview if they give you a quantitative problem. Being able to score in the 9000% percentile on the TOEFL or IELTS does not mean you can do graduate-level work in English.

 

To the OP: yes, the GRE is a stupid test. But so is the TOEFL. Why do you think it would be logical for universities to cancel one stupid test that you did poorly in, but give you admission based on another stupid test that you did well in?

 

Both of this. I scored 105 on TOEFL iBT when I was in high school 7 years ago and I was in NO WAY ready to take on graduate coursework and research at that level of English. Your writing in this test does not reflect a good grasp of the language and would score poorly even on the TOEFL test.

 

About the validity and effectiveness of the GRE and its use in the admission process, this topic has been discussed to death on here. Domestic, native-speaker students hate it too. I personally think it has its merits and it actually doesn't play that big of a role in the process as you're making it out to be. Also, I noticed that you've opened a lot of threads lately criticizing the US admission process and lamenting how it's unfair for international students. Of course it is, but it's not insurmountable and instead of criticizing and being bitter, asking for questions and advice and trying to improve your chances might be a better use of your time.

[YoungR3b3l]

For any international students that don't get it: the TOEFL is a basic language comprehension test.

It measures the likelihood of you being able to 1) order in a restaurant 2) ask for the bathroom 3) explain yourself to doctors and policemen in English. Maybe do a job interview if they give you a quantitative problem. Being able to score in the 9000% percentile on the TOEFL or IELTS does not mean you can do graduate-level work in English.

To the OP: yes, the GRE is a stupid test. But so is the TOEFL. Why do you think it would be logical for universities to cancel one stupid test that you did poorly in, but give you admission based on another stupid test that you did well in?

Dear Latte,

if you've read my topic carefully, you'd have noticed that i mentioned i already know and perceive the fact that GRE & TOEFL arent similar, thats first.

Second, I forgot to mention that even If I had scored a FULL MARK in the GRE, I'd still consider it unrepresentitave & a deplorable test. As for the TOEFL, of course there has to be a test to measure english proficiency, which is covered by the TOEFL, however, that does not mean that the TOEFL is a good standarized test, despite my satisfying score in it which is eligible to many universities in the US, let me make it clear and state it: TOEFL has lots of flaws and weak english proficiency measures. For instance:

1- the Listening part does not focus on Listening as much as on measuring your memorizing strength, which makes the listening concept meaningless.

2- The reading part focuses mainly on a scientific based topics like "Technology of Orbits, Archaeology, Evolutionary biology" loaded with a specialized major-terms & concepts that has 0 relevance to the major I aim to pursue my studies in (Political science) topics arent event related to Social Sciences for Gods sake.

3- Speaking part despite being the easiest, however speaking to a computer shouldnt be a decent measurement to examine.

4- Writing. Briefly, The subjectivity plays a substantial role on how markers evaluate. If you write a decent essay and you know it, give it to at least three professional academics in its field. I am 100% sure that atleast TWO would give contradicting evaluations. This is simply the defect in the writing part.

Tell me if that wasnt enough, because It was a brief.

Edited August 8, 2014 by YoungR3b3l

[VioletAyame]

Dear Latte,

if you've read my topic carefully, you'd have noticed that i mentioned i already know and perceive the fact that GRE & TOEFL arent similar, thats first.

Second, I forgot to mention that even If I had scored a FULL MARK in the GRE, I'd still consider it unrepresentitave & a deplorable test. As for the TOEFL, of course there has to be a test to measure english proficiency, which is covered by the TOEFL, however, that does not mean that the TOEFL is a good standarized test, despite my satisfying score in it which is eligible to many universities in the US, let me make it clear and state it: TOEFL has lots of flaws and weak english proficiency measures. For instance:

1- the Listening part does not focus on Listening as much as on measuring your memorizing strength, which makes the listening concept meaningless.

2- The reading part focuses mainly on a scientific based topics like "Technology of Orbits, Archaeology, Evolutionary biology" loaded with a specialized major-terms & concepts that has 0 relevance to the major I aim to pursue my studies in (Political science) topics arent event related to Social Sciences for Gods sake.

3- Speaking part despite being the easiest, however speaking to a computer shouldnt be a decent measurement to examine.

4- Writing. Briefly, The subjectivity plays a substantial role on how markers evaluate. If you write a decent essay and you know it, give it to at least three professional academics in its field. I am 100% sure that atleast TWO would give contradicting evaluations. This is simply the defect in the writing part.

Tell me if that wasnt enough, because It was a brief.

 

Ahhhh there are so many things wrong with this that I now have to be an unlikely defender of the TOEFL.

 

1. The point of the Listening test is for you to listen, TAKE NOTES, and then answer the questions, you know, just like in college. One thing that the iBT test was trying to do is to test for skills people actually use in college, so asking you to listen to a brief lecture, take notes and then answer questions designed to test your comprehension of that lecture is a perfectly acceptable way to test your listening skill the way you use in college classes. Why would you have to rely on memory when they give you pens and paper?

 

2. Again, they can't tailor their test to YOUR specific major or interest, not to mention those major and interest may change later on  Also, college students in the US have to take a lot of GE classes in completely different areas, e.g 6 units of natural sciences, 6 units of social sciences, 3 units of language, 3 units of arts & humanities, etc. Chances are you will encounter those specialized texts during your college career. Now it's true that you can use dictionary in normal setting, but on the test often times they don't require you to actually know what those terms and lingos mean. Comprehension questions rely a lot of understanding of grammar, structure, inference of meanings and grasp of contexts.

 

3. Your oral answers/speeches aren't graded by computers. They're recorded and handed to human graders, who by the way are as subjective as the human graders for the writing test. Which brings me to the last point

 

4. HOW can an essay ever be graded objectively? You just denounced computer grading in your last point, which wasn't even true, and now you said human graders can be subjective? What can we do with oral or written exams then? I don't want to say it, but really, I can't even.

[spunky]

The really troubling thing is that I meet social science students all the time, even students in economics, who are like, I'll just learn the formula and copypaste it into Stata and it will give me TEH NUMBERS and my advisor will be like, glee. It's like, people have never enjoyed or understood mathematics, and now they're being forced to do it because real! science! needs! numbers!, and it's now a systemic problem in the social sciences.

 

SHHH!!! all those people are potential future clients of the likes of me!

 

the less they know about this stuff the more i can charge them! 

[Guest |||]

The reality is no one is asking you to get a prefect score, they tend to ask you to answer 60-75% of the questions correctly.  Our education system is seriously failing if the GRE becomes some insurmountable task for many students. 

 

Whether or not you believe the gre is appropriate/good/evil or not

 

Reading your statement brought to mind that relative to other fields, those going into education tend to perform worse on the gre

 

http://testprep.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zTi=1&sdn=testprep&cdn=education&tm=49&f=10&su=p284.13.342.ip_&tt=65&bt=3&bts=9&zu=http%3A//www.ets.org/s/gre/pdf/gre_guide.pdf

 

http://www.ncsu.edu/chass/philo/GRE%20Scores%20by%20Intended%20Graduate%20Major.htm

Edited August 8, 2014 by |||

[juilletmercredi]

1. Aside from what victorydance already said...algebra and geometry actually have a lot to do with social science quantitative research methods.

 

2. Because high school transcripts are difficult to obtain for many people, whereas the GRE is an easy standardized measure.

 

3. I don't think graduate programs care whether you are native or non-native; what they care about is whether you, as a non-native speaker, can function verbally on the same level as a native speaker - or at the very least, at a level at which you can understand your classes and write papers.  Many of the words that appear on the GRE also appear in higher-level academic writing.

 

4. The outward answer is that they want some standardized way to compare students from different backgrounds.  Your undergrad might have had serious grade inflation or deflation, so they want a "standardized" way to compare your ability.  In addition, GRE scores are used in the rankings of some programs, so that probably plays a role.

 

5. It doesn't.

 

Also 

 

[qupte]4- Writing. Briefly, The subjectivity plays a substantial role on how markers evaluate. If you write a decent essay and you know it, give it to at least three professional academics in its field. I am 100% sure that atleast TWO would give contradicting evaluations. This is simply the defect in the writing part.