sjoh197 Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 Looking back at the history for 2 of the schools that I applied to, they don't even have any february acceptances.... mostly march. So I also think that a lot of schools are simply just now starting.
sophie anne Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 MIT sent out visiting weekend invites recently if anyone was lurking on that. So that's Caltech and MIT off the table. Looks like I might be back here next year trying for round two
GeoDUDE! Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 So that's Caltech and MIT off the table. Looks like I might be back here next year trying for round two A few schools accepted me in march, so fear not.
GeoDUDE! Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 I'm not sure why so much attention is given to GRE scores as they have been proven to be unreliable in predicting graduate student success. ETS studies reveal that the GRE is misued (as a cutoff, against their advisement), but to say that GRE is unreliable is a harsh. That being said... Lets think about your statement here, "GRE scores have been proven". What does that mean? Show me the study where a majority of students who score below 50% do better in graduate school than those who score higher than 50%. You won't find it. If you actually do a literature search on these studies, what you will probably find is 1 study at yale that shows a ~5% variance in grades with correlation to GRE scores, but the problem is they only sampled Yale students, who all did very well on the GRE! Another thing you will find is that the GRE is a stronger predictor than any of us want to admit. While there is some selection bias, as mostly people with high GREs get into gradaute school, GRE actually serves as a better predictor than GPA. This should make intuitive sense, there are many reasons why a very smart student could get a low GPA, as GPA is evaluated over a long period of time where both the intelligence and quality of the student is malleable. Think of the GPA like a time series of performance. GRE on the other hand is more like instantaneous (derivative) performance. The shorter amount of time makes it more draconian in its average, meaning it leaves less room to mess up, but it also leaves less ways to mess up by corollary. So while its good and all to shoot down the GRE, certainly I don't care if its there either way, lets not pretend that its useless. Thinking like that will only make it harder on yourself. In graduate school there are times where you just have to get stuff done, no matter how much aptitude or boring it is. Think of the GRE like your first graduate school assignment... how do you want to do on it? idiochromatic and jamesy1116 2
jamesy1116 Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 As someone with a good GRE and low GPA I support that post. prospecting 1
teddybrosevelt Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 ETS studies reveal that the GRE is misued (as a cutoff, against their advisement), but to say that GRE is unreliable is a harsh. That being said... Lets think about your statement here, "GRE scores have been proven". What does that mean? Show me the study where a majority of students who score below 50% do better in graduate school than those who score higher than 50%. You won't find it. If you actually do a literature search on these studies, what you will probably find is 1 study at yale that shows a ~5% variance in grades with correlation to GRE scores, but the problem is they only sampled Yale students, who all did very well on the GRE! Another thing you will find is that the GRE is a stronger predictor than any of us want to admit. While there is some selection bias, as mostly people with high GREs get into gradaute school, GRE actually serves as a better predictor than GPA. This should make intuitive sense, there are many reasons why a very smart student could get a low GPA, as GPA is evaluated over a long period of time where both the intelligence and quality of the student is malleable. Think of the GPA like a time series of performance. GRE on the other hand is more like instantaneous (derivative) performance. The shorter amount of time makes it more draconian in its average, meaning it leaves less room to mess up, but it also leaves less ways to mess up by corollary. So while its good and all to shoot down the GRE, certainly I don't care if its there either way, lets not pretend that its useless. Thinking like that will only make it harder on yourself. In graduate school there are times where you just have to get stuff done, no matter how much aptitude or boring it is. Think of the GRE like your first graduate school assignment... how do you want to do on it? I apologize if my comment seems as though I am trying to 'shoot down' the GRE. I do agree that the test is a good indicator of an individual's intellectual ability. However, I do not think it is the ONLY metric that can determine this. My main point was, my experience showed that other universities can determine your strengths without a standardized test, which leads me to believe US universities can as well. Not instigating an argument, merely sharing an opinion.
columbia09 Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 ETS studies reveal that the GRE is misued (as a cutoff, against their advisement), but to say that GRE is unreliable is a harsh. That being said... Lets think about your statement here, "GRE scores have been proven". What does that mean? Show me the study where a majority of students who score below 50% do better in graduate school than those who score higher than 50%. You won't find it. If you actually do a literature search on these studies, what you will probably find is 1 study at yale that shows a ~5% variance in grades with correlation to GRE scores, but the problem is they only sampled Yale students, who all did very well on the GRE! Another thing you will find is that the GRE is a stronger predictor than any of us want to admit. While there is some selection bias, as mostly people with high GREs get into gradaute school, GRE actually serves as a better predictor than GPA. This should make intuitive sense, there are many reasons why a very smart student could get a low GPA, as GPA is evaluated over a long period of time where both the intelligence and quality of the student is malleable. Think of the GPA like a time series of performance. GRE on the other hand is more like instantaneous (derivative) performance. The shorter amount of time makes it more draconian in its average, meaning it leaves less room to mess up, but it also leaves less ways to mess up by corollary. So while its good and all to shoot down the GRE, certainly I don't care if its there either way, lets not pretend that its useless. Thinking like that will only make it harder on yourself. In graduate school there are times where you just have to get stuff done, no matter how much aptitude or boring it is. Think of the GRE like your first graduate school assignment... how do you want to do on it? I disagree with your point of view on how the GRE is a strong indication of ones performance in grad school. Although I'm not in grad school yet, looking back at similar tests such as the ACT/SAT, if you go by me as an example, the tests did not predict how I will do in college at all. 21 on the ACT and I think a 1200/2400 on the SAT. So what do those numbers mean? That I'd get a GPA around a 2.0? Bottom line I don't think that standardize test scores should be used or at least they shouldn't be weighed as much.
sophie anne Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 A few schools accepted me in march, so fear not. My POI at Caltech just confirmed for me that the AdCom didn't recommend me for admission, but also said she had already initiated an appeal to reconsider me for admission (apparently she was hoping to have good news for me before I emailed to ask... no such luck haha). So, I'm in a weird almost-certainly-rejected-but-maybe-not limbo right now. Fun! I emailed my POI at MIT today, so I should know soon. GeoDUDE! 1
sjoh197 Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 My POI at Caltech just confirmed for me that the AdCom didn't recommend me for admission, but also said she had already initiated an appeal to reconsider me for admission (apparently she was hoping to have good news for me before I emailed to ask... no such luck haha). So, I'm in a weird almost-certainly-rejected-but-maybe-not limbo right now. Fun! I emailed my POI at MIT today, so I should know soon. That really sucks, and I wish you the best. That almost sounds worse than not knowing at all. The stress of limbo for me is so much more than the stress of rejection.
teddybrosevelt Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 To further clarify my point: If a single standardized test can determine an individual's qualities, such as; humility, curiousity, dedication, excitement, and initiative then I am at a loss for words... Sophie anne: I hope things work out in your favor!
sjoh197 Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 I disagree with your point of view on how the GRE is a strong indication of ones performance in grad school. Although I'm not in grad school yet, looking back at similar tests such as the ACT/SAT, if you go by me as an example, the tests did not predict how I will do in college at all. 21 on the ACT and I think a 1200/2400 on the SAT. So what do those numbers mean? That I'd get a GPA around a 2.0? Bottom line I don't think that standardize test scores should be used or at least they shouldn't be weighed as much. I think that it is important to remember that the GRE tests high school level math and reading comprehension. The vocab is a little extensive, but still not impossible for an native english speaker. As someone who didn't do well on the GRE, I can understand your inclination to dislike its importance. You are very likely an oddity, not the norm, when it comes to successful work despite bad test scores. They use this as a reliable indicator on your problem solving skills and reading comprehension. I have found that people who have scored lower on the GRE tend to have a harder time embracing new material and instead are better with repetitious learning. This isn't necessarily a fact, just something that I have observed. Also, people can have good gpa's without the corresponding intelligence. Copying, cheating, and memorization without varied application are all ways to maintain a generally good gpa without actually learning how to apply what you've learned. I am no way saying that anyone here has done this, but it is important to remember that adcom looks at everyone as a package deal. GPA, GRE, and research are all considered. I personally believe that research is more likely to show your true potential than either gpa or gre. GeoDUDE! 1
GeoDUDE! Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 (edited) I apologize if my comment seems as though I am trying to 'shoot down' the GRE. I do agree that the test is a good indicator of an individual's intellectual ability. However, I do not think it is the ONLY metric that can determine this. My main point was, my experience showed that other universities can determine your strengths without a standardized test, which leads me to believe US universities can as well. Not instigating an argument, merely sharing an opinion. Thats a good point, but other countries educational system before college is a lot stronger than the US, and you have to account for that: there are a lot of students in the US who get good grades despite not developing basic math, reading and writing skills. What I'm more shocked by is how heavily the GRE is used to weed out international applicants, and how it seems less important (just by my perception) for domestic students. You would think it would be the opposite. I disagree with your point of view on how the GRE is a strong indication of ones performance in grad school. Although I'm not in grad school yet, looking back at similar tests such as the ACT/SAT, if you go by me as an example, the tests did not predict how I will do in college at all. 21 on the ACT and I think a 1200/2400 on the SAT. So what do those numbers mean? That I'd get a GPA around a 2.0? Bottom line I don't think that standardize test scores should be used or at least they shouldn't be weighed as much. How much are they weighed? Do you know? I don't think unless your on an adcomm you really know. We definitely know that a low GRE isn't insurmountable, and we also know a low GPA isn't as well. But when applying to hyper competitive schools, why wouldn't you take the person with a lot of research experience, high gpa and high GREs ?There are more candidates like that then there are spots at these schools. Also, I think there is a misunderstanding in statistics. Just because a minority of people who have bad GREs can be successful in graduate school does not mean that it does not hold any predictive value: There will always be outliers vs larger polarities and majorities. Are you really willing to make the claim that the best graduate students are more likely to come from people who bomb the GRE vs people who do mediocre or great? Perhaps you are an exception (I certainly hope you are) and the point of this isn't to make anyone feel bad, but honesty. If you don't evaluate yourself objectively as possible it will be much harder to learn how you can improve. This is important for many aspects of life, and really important for graduate school! Before every week I make a list of goals. I then at the end of the week see how many I have achieved. I then evaluate if these goals were realistic, unachievable, or if the ones I never got to were because I was working inefficiently or being lazy. Some weeks I'm lazy, and so its important for me not to have two of those weeks in a a row so I don't get in a hole. Anyway, I'll shut up about this now Edited February 3, 2015 by GeoDUDE!
darkstar Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 Someone got into Arizona State, apparently. Good school. I love the Southwest. Congrats, random person!
mtnman20 Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 Someone got into Arizona State, apparently. Good school. I love the Southwest. Congrats, random person! Where'd you see this?
darkstar Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 Where'd you see this? It's on the results page.
mtnman20 Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 It's on the results page. I see it now, thanks!
mtnman20 Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 Did you apply there? Yup. Haven't heard anything yet. Still "in review" for application status.
darkstar Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 Good luck! When I mapped in western Arizona, we used a lot of literature and reference maps from Stephen Reynolds. He is a structure/tectonics professor there. My advisor had only positive things to say about him as well. It seems like a great department.
columbia09 Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 Did anyone hear from the following, UT Austin, Rice, Stanford, Texas A&M, Nebraska, Massachusetts, Wisconsin, or Virginia Tech ? I know a couple heard from UT and Stanford but did anyone else ?
teddybrosevelt Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 I can only say that I have yet to hear from UT-Austin.
sjoh197 Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 Did anyone hear from the following, UT Austin, Rice, Stanford, Texas A&M, Nebraska, Massachusetts, Wisconsin, or Virginia Tech ? I know a couple heard from UT and Stanford but did anyone else ? From what I've heard, Nebraska usually responds late february/early march. Same with a lot of Stanford responses and Texas A&M. The stats for Rice are usually all over the place time-wise. I don't really know about the others. I wouldn't worry too much yet. Give them another month. You have a lot of "later" programs on there. Hopefully someone else can help.
columbia09 Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 (edited) From what I've heard, Nebraska usually responds late february/early march. Same with a lot of Stanford responses and Texas A&M. The stats for Rice are usually all over the place time-wise. I don't really know about the others. I wouldn't worry too much yet. Give them another month. You have a lot of "later" programs on there. Hopefully someone else can help. Yea that's what my advisor said, oh FWIW, if anybody applied to Penn State they just started looking at the applications. 200 total with 20 spots open. My advisor is the head of the admissions committee so he lets me in on all the good stuff haha well not really. If anybody has any questions at all about the Geoscience program I'll be happy to answer them or questions about PSU/State College in general. Edited February 4, 2015 by columbia09
mars.tina Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 So that's Caltech and MIT off the table. Looks like I might be back here next year trying for round two Yeah Im on the same boat... Caltech was really the place I wanted to go to :-/... Maybe I will go back to looking for a proper job again.
columbia09 Posted February 4, 2015 Posted February 4, 2015 So that's Caltech and MIT off the table. Looks like I might be back here next year trying for round two Did you only apply to those two schools?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now