GRE Scores

[red7tribe]

I am pondering applying to PhD programs this fall, and am debating whether or not to retake the GRE. When I took it two years ago I received a 159 on the verbal reasoning (81st percentile), a 145 quantitative (21st percentile, yes, I'm awful at math), and a 4.0 on the writing (56th percentile). I'm sure if I took it I would do better on both the verbal reasoning and writing. My writing has improved exponentially since I started my M.A. Program. I just want to hear other thoughts on this. I really don't want to spend the money to retake it, but I don't want to limit myself by missing a chance to raise my scores.

[serenade]

Definitely retake it! I say that only because your scores were nearly identical to mine the first time I took it in undergrad to get into my MA program (mine were 157 Verbal, 145 Quant, 5.0 writing). When considering PhD apps, I retook it two years later during my MA after about 9 months of studying (Princeton Review book and online Magoosh practice tests) and came out with 163 Verbal, 149 Math (I'm just not a math person!) and 4.0 AW (but got to report all scores, so schools saw my 5.0 from my first test).

All that to say, your scores (in my opinion) show that you're not *quite* where most PhD programs want. BUT, I think that you definitely have potential to bring them up if you retook it, particularly now being in an MA program and having greater critical thinking skills, ability to read a passage and determine the overall argument etc than you probably did the first time you took it. At least that was true in my case.

Unless you are planning on the Ivies, for most PhD programs, aim for above 90th percentile in Verbal, 5.0 in writing, and at least upper 140s in Quant. I was terrified that my quant score would harm my application, but I got into a top #36 school (according to US News & World Report' s History grad school rankings, for what it's worth). When I went for my interview at said school, several of us at the interview had nearly identical scores: 163 verbal (92nd percentile), 5.0 AW (90th percentile), and 149-150 Quant (Can't remember exact percentiles but they weren't anything to brag about). So don't worry if you can't do math--just study enough to get a decent score but they're mainly looking at Verbal and AW.

Also, as you know, studying for it is a PAIN, but even a modest amount of quant studying can really improve your score. And for Verbal, memorize as many vocab words as you can. That really helped me. Also, for the critical reading, I was always surprised when I got the wrong answer on practice tests because I always *thought* I picked the correct answer. But getting a review book that explains ETS' reasoning behind a particular answer choice was really valuable because the whole point of the test is to think like ETS. So then the question becomes not, "which answer makes most sense?" but rather, "What would ETS think about this?"

Anyway, sorry this is so lengthy, but just wanted to encourage you that if you study for at least a few months, you could definitely improve your score! And just think, unless you're wanting to do quantitative research or interdisplinary stuff with social sciences, this may be the last time you ever have to do math! That in itself was one of the greatest moments of my life. Going to hit 'add reply' before I continue to ramble...but good luck!!! You can do it!!

Edited May 22, 2015 by serenade

[red7tribe]

Definitely retake it! I say that only because your scores were nearly identical to mine the first time I took it in undergrad to get into my MA program (mine were 157 Verbal, 145 Quant, 5.0 writing). When considering PhD apps, I retook it two years later during my MA after about 9 months of studying (Princeton Review book and online Magoosh practice tests) and came out with 163 Verbal, 149 Math (I'm just not a math person!) and 4.0 AW (but got to report all scores, so schools saw my 5.0 from my first test).

All that to say, your scores (in my opinion) show that you're not *quite* where most PhD programs want. BUT, I think that you definitely have potential to bring them up if you retook it, particularly now being in an MA program and having greater critical thinking skills, ability to read a passage and determine the overall argument etc than you probably did the first time you took it. At least that was true in my case.

Unless you are planning on the Ivies, for most PhD programs, aim for above 90th percentile in Verbal, 5.0 in writing, and at least upper 140s in Quant. I was terrified that my quant score would harm my application, but I got into a top #36 school (according to US News & World Report' s History grad school rankings, for what it's worth). When I went for my interview at said school, several of us at the interview had nearly identical scores: 163 verbal (92nd percentile), 5.0 AW (90th percentile), and 149-150 Quant (Can't remember exact percentiles but they weren't anything to brag about). So don't worry if you can't do math--just study enough to get a decent score but they're mainly looking at Verbal and AW.

Also, as you know, studying for it is a PAIN, but even a modest amount of quant studying can really improve your score. And for Verbal, memorize as many vocab words as you can. That really helped me. Also, for the critical reading, I was always surprised when I got the wrong answer on practice tests because I always *thought* I picked the correct answer. But getting a review book that explains ETS' reasoning behind a particular answer choice was really valuable because the whole point of the test is to think like ETS. So then the question becomes not, "which answer makes most sense?" but rather, "What would ETS think about this?"

Anyway, sorry this is so lengthy, but just wanted to encourage you that if you study for at least a few months, you could definitely improve your score! And just think, unless you're wanting to do quantitative research or interdisplinary stuff with social sciences, this may be the last time you ever have to do math! That in itself was one of the greatest moments of my life. Going to hit 'add reply' before I continue to ramble...but good luck!!! You can do it!!

Thanks, I appreciate your thoughts. I probably will retake it. Even if I just went up a couple of points it would definitely be worth it. How much do you think your quantitative score matters when applying to PhD programs? It is obviously unrelated to what I'm applying for, but I've always wondered if it is viewed as indicative of the applicant's overall intelligence. My math is quite awful, and I honestly thought I was somewhat lucky with even getting as high as a 145 on this past test.

[Gambaosaka1]

I am pondering applying to PhD programs this fall, and am debating whether or not to retake the GRE. When I took it two years ago I received a 159 on the verbal reasoning (81st percentile), a 145 quantitative (21st percentile, yes, I'm awful at math), and a 4.0 on the writing (56th percentile). I'm sure if I took it I would do better on both the verbal reasoning and writing. My writing has improved exponentially since I started my M.A. Program. I just want to hear other thoughts on this. I really don't want to spend the money to retake it, but I don't want to limit myself by missing a chance to raise my scores.

 

I am not really sure about how important they are in all honesty...I took them Sept 2014 and had similar scores to you: 159 V, 155 Q, and 4.5 after a month of studying. Not sure I'd want to put myself through more unless I knew for sure it would help my application.

 

I reckon your topic/fit, writing sample and LORs are the most important bit. Of course, it wouldn't hurt. 

 

There doesn't seem to be any consensus on how important GREs are though so I guess if you have the time then go for it.

[serenade]

How much do you think your quantitative score matters when applying to PhD programs?

 

If you're wanting to get into top 10-20 schools, it needs to be around 155 or higher. However, if you're content with getting into top 20-40 schools, you can get away with the 149-152 range, though I wouldn't venture any lower than 149. Make sure that your verbal and writing are in the 90th percentile, as that's what's History programs are mainly concerned about. As long as you have 90th percentile V + AW, a 149-152 Q score won't kill you.

 

I got into relatively decent schools (CUNY, Maryland at College Park, Notre Dame, and a few others) with V: 163, AW: 5.0, and Q: 149. As I mentioned above, several people I met at my interview had almost these exact scores. However, of course, none of these schools are super elite, so if that's what you're after, then you need a pretty high Q score. But if you're aiming at schools within this tier, you should be okay with a Q score no lower than 149-151. 

 

In terms of study aids, the Princeton Review book was helpful as were Magoosh practice tests and ETS power prep practice tests. Not to sound like an ETS spokesperson, but it really is true that the actual math on the GRE is easy (addition, subtraction, fractions, percentages etc). It's the way ETS words the questions that make them tricky. A review book is helpful in deciphering ETS code in that respect. Once you can crack the code, the actual math is nothing too difficult. Easier said than done, I know, because I am not a math person in any sense and even after doing quite a bit of studying, I only came out with a 149! Believe me - math sucks - but it's worth putting in that extra effort to get a decent score to get into a good program. 

 

So, in summary, I'd say to definitely retake it to get your V + AW scores up to 90th percentile and raise your Q score at least 4-5 points. 

 

Good luck!!!

[twentysix]

150 Q was 40th percentile this last cycle, which is still really bad lol. I haven't taken math since 11th grade in HS, that is what I got on the GRE.

Edited May 23, 2015 by twentysix

[turnings]

The quantitative score is essentially irrelevant at most schools, even in the "top 10." Provided your score is not genuinely abysmal the only thing that will matter to admissions committees is the verbal section - this, obviously, should be as close to 170 as possible.

 

(one note: I believe many state schools use gre scores to determine funding packages, so what I said above may not apply in all cases.)

[twentysix]

The quantitative score is essentially irrelevant at most schools, even in the "top 10." Provided your score is not genuinely abysmal the only thing that will matter to admissions committees is the verbal section - this, obviously, should be as close to 170 as possible.

 

(one note: I believe many state schools use gre scores to determine funding packages, so what I said above may not apply in all cases.)

 

With a Q at 40th percentile and verbal at 87th percentile UCLA gave me a full tuition fellowship ($31,000 no work obligation, for a masters), UCSD offered me even more.

Edited May 23, 2015 by twentysix

[lelick1234]

So bottom line with the quantitative is to get within the 40th percentile, above 85th percentile in verbal, and above 4.5 on the analytical writing?

[serenade]

So bottom line with the quantitative is to get within the 40th percentile, above 85th percentile in verbal, and above 4.5 on the analytical writing?

Good question, but I think, as you probably expected, the answer is it depends. For someone like Twentysix who obviously had a strong application to get into UCLA (congrats, by the way, Twentysix!), GRE scores probably were less of a deciding factor than in the case of someone like me who was coming from an unheard-of MA institution, and thus needed to perhaps "prove themselves" by means of GRE scores (also, I was competing at a far lower tier of schools than Twentysix).

 

So basically, if you're dealing with very highly ranked universities and are a "shoo-in", GRE scores probably factor less than if you're dealing with schools on a lower tier for which your application doesn't necessarily stand out (as was my case). GRE scores can push a mediocre application into getting a second look, whereas an already strong application might not need to rely on that when you're at the level of top schools, such as for Twentysix. 

 

For people like me who weren't natural "shoo-ins" I still say aim for 90th percentile in V + AW and 37th-40th percentile in Q. For those with stronger overall applications, the need for high GRE scores may be a bit less necessary. 

[lelick1234]

Hmm, I personally hate studying for the GRE.  Would excellent language preparation possibly limit the importance of GRE scores?  For example, I am an Americanist, but I am close to having advanced reading level in Arabic.  There has to be some exchange.  I personally believe that spending my time learning a language is far more beneficial academically then memorizing test-taking tricks to pass the GRE.  

[serenade]

I feel ya. I don't know anyone who enjoys studying for it. Language proficiency can certainly never hurt your application and in some fields of history, is necessary for an applicant to have a strong chance of a favorable review.

There are multiple facets of an app that can to some degree compensate for less than stellar scores.

However, adcomms are frequently overwhelmed with numerous strong apps, and cutting down the pile via GRE scores is one way they often handle this. So, GRE scores are a threshold one has to cross to often get a second look. The main expectation is excellent performance on the Verbal and AW sections (though your writing sample will be the primary means of assessing your writing skills --not your GRE essay). In terms of Quant, most history programs aren't expecting excellent or even good scores--more like decent (37th-40th percentile and up).

I agree that studying for it often feels like a waste of time when you have so many other History-related aspects of your app that you could be working on instead. But adcomms are looking for the total package, and GRE scores, particularly Verbal, are a threshold to cross in order to demonstrate the strength of the rest of what I'm sure is a great application. Cheers and good luck!

Edited May 24, 2015 by serenade

[countrync]

Do you need high GRE scores to balance average grades? My scores are V:165, AW:4.5, Q:145. I would be considered an older student.

[ashiepoo72]

The GRE won't get you in a program but it can keep you out. Some programs have GRE cut offs because it helps them weed through applications quickly. Others that don't have hard cut offs may use GRE scores as an across-the-board comparison, because grades are often subjective and a B at one institution is like an A at another--how else do adcomms do a real comparison? Also, if you have holes in your application, high GRE scores can act as "filler." I had a low undergrad overall GPA, but I did pretty well on the GRE (165v 5aw). I should qualify that statement with my history GPA as an undergrad was like a 3.75. I know that's way more important than my high GRE scores.

Honestly, just about all other parts of your application are more important than the GRE. The writing sample and statement will make or break you, and if you have reasonable scores (I'd say around 85th percentile verbal, at least a 4-4.5 in aw, and screw the quant unless it's like 20th percentile) you should forget about it and start working on the real money makers.

[lelick1234]

I think a realistic goal for me is 93 percentile verbal, 5 on aw, and at least 50th percentile on quant.  I have got time so I am going to start reviewing math concepts now.  The last time I took it, I gave up on the math section and guessed all the way through.  I believe I was within the 20th percentile. 

Edited May 24, 2015 by lelick1234

[serenade]

"Do you need high GRE scores to balance average grades? My scores are V:165, AW:4.5, Q:145. I would be considered an older student."

I think those scores would considerably strengthen your app, particularly the 165 V. Congrats on those scores!

[Joan Callamezzo]

I am not in History (so YMMV..) but I had sort of an interesting experience re: my lack-luster GRE scores when applying to my humanities programs and I think it's worth sharing here. I scored 163 in verbal and I can't remember what my quant score was, but I know it was somewhere in the high forties, percentile wise (i.e. not good!). I got into multiple Ivy league schools, so the quant score obviously didn't hurt me there, but at one of my "safety" schools I was told that I lost out on a university-wide fellowship because my GRE scores were not competitive enough. I think the takeaway here might be that at top programs, where everyone is guaranteed funding, a solid verbal score is all you need, *but* at programs where funding is scarce and more competitive, a high quant score may also be necessary.  

[stillalivetui]

If you're wanting to get into top 10-20 schools, it needs to be around 155 or higher. However, if you're content with getting into top 20-40 schools, you can get away with the 149-152 range, though I wouldn't venture any lower than 149. Make sure that your verbal and writing are in the 90th percentile, as that's what's History programs are mainly concerned about. As long as you have 90th percentile V + AW, a 149-152 Q score won't kill you.

 

I got into relatively decent schools (CUNY, Maryland at College Park, Notre Dame, and a few others) with V: 163, AW: 5.0, and Q: 149. As I mentioned above, several people I met at my interview had almost these exact scores. However, of course, none of these schools are super elite, so if that's what you're after, then you need a pretty high Q score. But if you're aiming at schools within this tier, you should be okay with a Q score no lower than 149-151. 

 

In terms of study aids, the Princeton Review book was helpful as were Magoosh practice tests and ETS power prep practice tests. Not to sound like an ETS spokesperson, but it really is true that the actual math on the GRE is easy (addition, subtraction, fractions, percentages etc). It's the way ETS words the questions that make them tricky. A review book is helpful in deciphering ETS code in that respect. Once you can crack the code, the actual math is nothing too difficult. Easier said than done, I know, because I am not a math person in any sense and even after doing quite a bit of studying, I only came out with a 149! Believe me - math sucks - but it's worth putting in that extra effort to get a decent score to get into a good program. 

 

So, in summary, I'd say to definitely retake it to get your V + AW scores up to 90th percentile and raise your Q score at least 4-5 points. 

 

Good luck!!!

 

I disagree with your emphasis on the quantitative and the GRE in general. I got a 145 on the quant sectionand got into a top 20 program. The ways schools use it is a complete crapshoot and merely a formality for applying. Sure if you do horrid on it it will hurt you, but it also doesn't guarantee anything. Heck I know someone who got a 154 on the verbal and got into two amazing programs. 

 

As Ashiepoo noted, what matters most are your LORs, writing sample, and statement of purpose. 

Edited May 25, 2015 by stillalivetui

[serenade]

I think the takeaway here might be that at top programs, where everyone is guaranteed funding, a solid verbal score is all you need, *but* at programs where funding is scarce and more competitive, a high quant score may also be necessary.  

I agree. I think that partly explains the diversity of opinions in this thread. 

[countrync]

My history GPA was 3.6. My overall GPA was 3.3. I am concerned about my chances of getting into a good Masters program. I know that I need a MA to bolster my chances of getting into a good PhD program.

[kotov]

I am pondering applying to PhD programs this fall, and am debating whether or not to retake the GRE. When I took it two years ago I received a 159 on the verbal reasoning (81st percentile), a 145 quantitative (21st percentile, yes, I'm awful at math), and a 4.0 on the writing (56th percentile). I'm sure if I took it I would do better on both the verbal reasoning and writing. My writing has improved exponentially since I started my M.A. Program. I just want to hear other thoughts on this. I really don't want to spend the money to retake it, but I don't want to limit myself by missing a chance to raise my scores.

 

I would say take it again, mainly to improve your writing score. That's probably going to be the most important of the three as far as you getting into a Ph.D. program.