GRE English Lit (Sept/Oct 2014)

[zanmato4794]

I'm a brazen jerk and think that for eighty dollars, these committees can read the amount of pages they ask for, give or take fifteen percent. Any school that rejected me for sending a twenty-two-page essay when they requested twenty wouldn't, in my opinion, be worth attending.

 

This has been my attitude throughout life and it blows up in my face all the time.

Edited October 27, 2014 by zanmato4794

[hypervodka]

I've a quick question (technically unrelated to the GRE) - do writing sample lengths typically count works cited pages at the end? (Some programs will specify this, but some programs simply say 12-20 pages). I'm assuming that if they don't specify, works cited don't count towards the page limit.

 

Whenever they don't specify, call them, but typically it doesn't count.

[wetheplants]

650, but my plan of study was murdureous (3.5 months of prep time, flashcards every day - and I really do mean every day - for 2-5 hours).

 

This was advised against by graduate students and Professors in my department who 1) questioned the relative value of this exam and 2) worried about my sanity. I don't recommend this plan of study to anyone who values their sanity...

Holy shit, really? Wow. I'm so impressed! I only studied for 2 weeks!!! (But I got a 600, so I guess that's okay.) 

[andalus]

I took the test last Saturday too, and felt it differed quite a lot from the practice tests, to the point where I have no idea if I did fine or terribly. I tried to base my studying the last few weeks around what felt weakest on the practice test, which was a mistake, because little to nothing of what I studied ended up on the final test. And I really have no idea how, in retrospect, I should have studied. It's such a crapshoot.

 

Usually I can make educated guesses, but all my guesses this time around turned out wrong.

 

Now I just have to worry about it for the next six weeks. gah.

[wetheplants]

I took the test last Saturday too, and felt it differed quite a lot from the practice tests, to the point where I have no idea if I did fine or terribly. I tried to base my studying the last few weeks around what felt weakest on the practice test, which was a mistake, because little to nothing of what I studied ended up on the final test. And I really have no idea how, in retrospect, I should have studied. It's such a crapshoot.

 

Usually I can make educated guesses, but all my guesses this time around turned out wrong.

 

Now I just have to worry about it for the next six weeks. gah.

Hey, don't sweat it. So many admissions pages on the schools I'm interested in literally say that a good score might help you but a bad score won't mean anything to them. 

And you're right, it is a crapshoot! Try not to worry! =]

[universitydays]

It honestly depends. Typically, page counts don't include works cited, appendices etc., but one DGS I contacted basically said that the adcomm doesn't want to read more than fifteen pages...period (the page count has 15 as the maximum). Having a WS that is around fifteen pages (not including back matter) seems to be a good idea, as it allows you to trim or expand by small portions, depending on the program you are applying to. And you can only be so creative with font and margin sizes.

 

 

Whenever they don't specify, call them, but typically it doesn't count.

 

Thanks, guys! I called in to each department I was applying to this morning and they all told me that works cited don't count towards the page limit.

 

Holy shit, really? Wow. I'm so impressed! I only studied for 2 weeks!!! (But I got a 600, so I guess that's okay.) 

 

wetheplants - I wouldn't call my plan of study "necessary" or even "advantageous." There are two factors that went into my thinking: 1) I had a lot of time to prepare, so I was going to use it. 2) I've never been great at standardized tests so my strategy has always been consistent practice over a long period of time. I also get nervous under testing conditions, so drills / practice problems help me to focus on the actual exam rather than what's going on around me.

 

I think the key is to know yourself and how you work - I was getting pressure from people around me to take the exam in the Spring because they assumed that I would be ready, but I really, really wasn't. So I put the brakes on a lot of things and did what I felt I needed to do in order to prepare.

[universitydays]

On 10/28/2014 at 12:21 PM, andalus said:

I took the test last Saturday too, and felt it differed quite a lot from the practice tests, to the point where I have no idea if I did fine or terribly. I tried to base my studying the last few weeks around what felt weakest on the practice test, which was a mistake, because little to nothing of what I studied ended up on the final test. And I really have no idea how, in retrospect, I should have studied. It's such a crapshoot.

 

Usually I can make educated guesses, but all my guesses this time around turned out wrong.

 

Now I just have to worry about it for the next six weeks. gah.

 

The GRE Literature is a horrific exam because no matter how much you rehearse, it still catches you off-guard in some way or other. As other users have mentioned, the exam is now skewed heavily towards interpretation rather than identification, although learning your IDs will still help in the long run.

 

I personally think it's rather cruel that the official tests the ETS has released (1989, 1995, 1999, and 2010) have chunks of questions that have nothing but identification but then give us exams this year that basically have passage after passage of comprehension questions with an ID or two scattered throughout. I'd been taught to do "two passes" - one simply getting through all the ID questions which are supposed to be "easy" points, and one where you're really buckling down on comprehension questions. The September exam (and, from what I gather, the October exam as well) was nothing like this since IDs were attached to comprehension questions.

 

Princeton Review's guide no longer has a strong bearing on this exam, and neither do the comments that you should spend the majority of your time learning IDs. IDs should by no means be neglected, but what everyone (both online and in real life) advised me to only brush over - reading comp. - is the one thing that shouldn't be overlooked. Learning how to read quickly and developing an instinct for spotting the "correct" answer in reading comp. will take you just as far as learning IDs. Perhaps this is a skill that prospective grad students are expected to have, but guides (and word-of-mouth advice) should focus on acknowledging the large amount of comprehension questions that are now on the exam. The reading comp. is an onslaught, and it wittles away at anyone's concentration after the first two hours.

 

In any case, don't worry too much about your score! What's done is done and you've survived a really tough exam that grad students and Professors still shiver over...give yourself a pat on the back and move on.

[hypervodka]

Now, that I'm thinking about it, I think part of the reason that I felt the test seemed more "familiar" than what other people are reporting is because I never used the two-pass method. Princeton Review, for example, has been hawking that method since I first took the SATs, but I've always been more interested in just barreling through. (For future test takers: it took me about all but the last forty minutes to finish, then I went back a reviewed unanswered questions.) So, if anyone ever asks me what percentage of the test was ID and what was interpretation, I'd be hard-pressed to tell you.

 

But, honestly, the "interpretation" does rely fairly heavily on identification in the first place. For example, there's one such question in the PR practice test, asking why the speaker is so upset at some other character--and the question is pretty to answer if you're familiar with the poem as Robert Browning's "My Last Duchess." The interpretations are pretty straightforward, but only if you're familiar enough with the voice of the authors. I got a lot of comprehension questions wrong on my practice exams (I even missed the Browning question, despite recognizing, and even memorizing, that poem from my senior year), but, as I studied more texts, my score got higher and higher. Just reading beforehand was so helpful to me, because foreknowledge of the texts is basically some pre-interpretation.

[SilasWegg]

I just visited this thread after a few head-scratching days post subject test. A kind of weird malaise and self-doubt is pervasive but also a hedged optimism. I agree that the test was much more interpretation-heavy than the Princeton Review had led me to believe. There were only a few purely identification questions. The major challenge, of course, was getting to all the questions in time. The upside was that there were a lot of slow pitch interpretation questions. I don't know about you, but I've mastered the art of identifying phony paraphrases which makes POE on these questions pretty easy. I actually think the reduced number of ID questions will help my score and I believe that its a more fair testing format overall. Let's be honest, in no way is MATCHING a good indicator of graduate student success. 

Edited October 28, 2014 by morristr

[Dr. Old Bill]

This is all valid, and I don't disagree with any of it, really. Here's the thing though: even if you know the material intimately, you can still wind up screwing up several answers. There's an instance on the September test in which I know got four answers wrong. I had narrowed the passage down to two possibilities, and they were both works I had studied extensively. I just simply couldn't remember which of those two works it was! As a result, I made an educated guess, and three (maybe four) questions about that excerpt basically had options that would have applied to each of the individual choices of that first question. I won't say the question specifically, but here's a good analog: you're given a pre-death speech, clearly from a play. You know it's Shakespeare, but you can't figure out if it's say, Cleopatra from Antony and Cleopatra, or Juliet from Romeo and Juliet (okay, so the example is a bit far-fetched, but bear with me). If you think it's Cleopatra, you select "Cleopatra," and then you see that the rest of the questions have options about Egypt or about the Capulets etc. You go down the string, choosing the ones that are most in line with Antony and Cleopatra. Well, if you're wrong about the first question, you're going to be wrong about all of them! This, as I recall, is a difference from the practice exam...and there may have been more instances of this on the September exam.

 

The fact that some GC folks got good and even incredible scores on the September test (no names named, but you know who you are!) shows that it's not a hopelessly flawed test. But I still think that it's not something you can really study for. Those with great memories are going to do far better than those who might be great analysts, but don't have a mind for diverse and disparate details of literature.

 

In any event, it's all over now for us...which is great. Here's hoping that none of us get shut out this year and feel compelled to retake it in April!

[Dr. Old Bill]

 I actually think the reduced number of ID questions will help my score and I believe that its a more fair testing format overall. Let's be honest, in no way is MATCHING a good indicator of graduate student success. 

 

Perhaps not...but on the other hand, neither is selecting from five pre-ordained "objective" options in what is an inherently subjective process (interpretation, that is).

[SilasWegg]

True the whole test is bogus... but I think I understand why the people at ETS want to scale back on matching type questions. It just makes the test seem even more arbitrary, more like an AP English exam.

 

One test-taking strategy I would like to recommend for interpretation questions is to work backwards. When the last question is an ID question, answer that first, then backtrack through the interpretations to see if the answers are consistent with your ID question. For example, you identify the passage as Juliet (as per Wyatt's example) but then when all the interpretation questions cite passages about the Nile River, you go back and revise your initial theory. OR you identify the passage correctly, and then the interpretations become clear because you have a working theory about the text.

[zanmato4794]

Oh, how I wish I didn't check every day to see if scores somehow magically appeared way earlier than ETS says they will.

[unræd]

Oh, how I wish I didn't check every day to see if scores somehow magically appeared way earlier than ETS says they will.

 

September scores appeared exactly on the day they were scheduled to. Very early in the day, sure, but not before it, alas--and believe me, I kept checking, too!

[1Q84]

SCORES ARE POSTED. I REPEAT SCORES ARE POSTED.

 

I got a 610.

 

I'm going to go sob into a pillow from too much joy.

 

Edited November 24, 2014 by 1Q84

[hreaðemus]

I GOT A 650!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

OMG I too am going to go collapse into jelly now. That was the most stressful thing I have ever done.

Congratulations, you guys!!!!!! We survived the last horrific hurdle before the actual degree committees!

[zanmato4794]

WHAT?! my scores aren't up!

[hreaðemus]

What? No, they have to be! Did you try resetting your cookies?

[zanmato4794]

now i have them!

 

i... shouldn't complain about a 640, but seeing as though i got a 620 five years ago, i'm a little bummed.

 

i just wish i had known to go faster.

[Dr. Old Bill]

Congrats guys!!! Y'all did better than I did, so quit yer complaining, Zanmato!

 

ALL of your scores are high enough that they most certainly won't be a factor against you in your applications. That's what matters most.

 

Super glad that all of us here on GC are now in the same boat from a completion standpoint.

Edited November 24, 2014 by Wyatt's Torch

[unræd]

Yay, everybody! That is DONE.

[Put a cat on it]

Man, I got a fairly mediocre score. Trying not to freak myself out (this is what I get for not studying poetry extensively, wah wah wah).

[Dr. Old Bill]

Man, I got a fairly mediocre score. Trying not to freak myself out (this is what I get for not studying poetry extensively, wah wah wah).

 

If it's any consolation, I got a mediocre score too...and I did study poetry extensively!

[Put a cat on it]

If it's any consolation, I got a mediocre score too...and I did study poetry extensively!

 

We'll be mediocre together.

[Radcafe]

650!! Got a 630 last year, so I'm thrilled. Man was that hard.