Chance me?

[PizzaCat93]

Current student at small liberal arts college in the south, 3.8 GPA, 3.9 major GPA. Political science major, Middle East studies minor (4.0 in minor). Need to retake the GRE, but hoping to have 160+ on each section (somewhat concerned about ability to get quant score that high, but I'm working on it).

 

I have two peer-reviewed publications, one solo authored, one co-authored with a professor. I also have 3 published book reviews. I worked as an RA last summer and a TA for one semester. I've presented at 4 political science conferences and won best undergraduate paper at my state's annual political science conference. I know French and can use SPSS. I want to do qualitative CP research (can get more specific if needed). My LORs will come from the professor for whom I worked as an RA and published with, my major advisor/statistical methods professor, and the chair of my minor (religion professor). Latter two are tenured. 

 

I'll be using my senior thesis for my writing sample as it's most indicative of the path I want my research to take. 

 

Hoping for top-10 but also applying to schools in top-30. UMich is probably my ideal school (two profs with whom I would love to work). 

Edited July 13, 2015 by PizzaCat93

[TimB]

My understanding after speaking to people who sit on PhD admissions committees is that statements of purpose are generally the most important part of an application, followed by the writing sample and recommendations. GREs and transcripts are used to identify people who were unlikely to succeed because they won’t be able to complete the curriculum. I imagine that top 10 programs, which likely see a lot of applicants, are more likely to use GRE scores and GPAs to narrow the field. However, the people on admissions committees are aware that some schools inflate grades much more than others, or that some professors help students develop writing samples more than others, and take account of that.

 

One thing they pointed out is that not retaking the GREs if you have time to do so, after getting a low or middling score, can indicate a lack of commitment. 160’s is near the top of the range however.

 

Don’t know what else to tell you, but on the bright side, apparently the low acceptance rates of most PhD programs are a bit deflated because every program gets a number of unserious applications each year, from people who don’t really understand what a PhD program is. For example, people who are looking for professional masters programs and want private sector careers apply, even though their goals aren’t aligned with a PhD program.
 

Oh, and they said the biggest way to torpedo your application is to list people you want to work with who:

No longer work at that school

Work in other departments

 

(IMO this is kind of unfair though because some schools leave faculty profiles ups for a long time after a member has left.)

 

Or to:

Misrepresent someone’s research in your statement of purpose/ make it clear you only skimmed their papers while getting ready to apply.

Edited July 14, 2015 by TimB

[PizzaCat93]

An update - my GRE retake yielded 166V 159Q. Last AWA was 5, so I believe this one should be comparable. 

[esotericish]

If you can get your Q score higher that would really benefit your application. While people will correctly tell you GRE score doesn't make or break an application, you'll see very few people in top 10 programs with a low Q score in particular.

[MaxWeberHasAPosse]

great score.

[cooperstreet]

Its a great score but esotericish is right that the Q score is low for top programs.

[PizzaCat93]

Can my publications make up for it? 

[PoliticalOrder]

159 Q isn't even bad, that's probably median/mean score of applicants at most programs. I really wouldn't worry about it. 

[cooperstreet]

Can my publications make up for it?

 

Depends. Where are they? Are they in undergrad journals? No. Are they in political science journals that political science professors submit and read? then definitely,

 

159 Q isn't even bad, that's probably median/mean score of applicants at most programs. I really wouldn't worry about it.

 

No one is saying it is bad. But, if they want to get into a top program, its going to need to be higher.

[PoliticalOrder]

No one is saying it is bad. But, if they want to get into a top program, its going to need to be higher.

 

No it doesn't. 

[PizzaCat93]

Depends. Where are they? Are they in undergrad journals? No. Are they in political science journals that political science professors submit and read? then definitely,

 

No one is saying it is bad. But, if they want to get into a top program, its going to need to be higher.

No, not undergraduate journals. The coauthored paper is in a fairly reputable political science journal, and my solo authored paper is in a decent area studies journal. 

[esotericish]

No, not undergraduate journals. The coauthored paper is in a fairly reputable political science journal, and my solo authored paper is in a decent area studies journal. 

Then you'll probably be fine! Nobody here can tell you what the score means, but they can tell you (quite obviously) that higher score = better chances. So if you really wanted to maximize your chances, and have the time and resources, you could take the GRE again. I'm not saying I would in your position, but a higher score wouldn't hurt.

[law2phd]

No it doesn't. 

160 and 90th percentile (around a 163?) are common cutoffs which are floated on the application pages of top programs for what they expect from applicants.  While I don't think the 159 will hurt OP at many places (if any) and he probably shouldn't feel the need to retake, especially if the publications are in respectable places, I would be hesitant to tell applicants without qualification that they do not need the scores that the schools themselves say they need.

 

Good luck, OP.  Assuming your letters and SoP are solid, I would be surprised if you weren't accepted to a couple of top 15 programs, and I wouldn't be surprised if one of the more elite programs took you as well.

Edited August 4, 2015 by law2phd

[PoliticalOrder]

160 and 90th percentile (around a 163?) are common cutoffs which are floated on the application pages of top programs for what they expect from applicants.  While I don't think the 159 will hurt OP at many places (if any) and he probably shouldn't feel the need to retake, especially if the publications are in respectable places, I would be hesitant to tell applicants without qualification that they do not need the scores that the schools themselves say they need.

 

There are no 'hard' cutoffs, in the sense that if someone has a 159 and they generally look for 160+ then they will not be denied because of this.

 

There are dozens of applicants this year that got into great programs with quant scores 150-160. Look at Yale on the results section for example, I think around half of the acceptances this past cycle got in with Q scores below 160. There are also multiple people who got into programs like Michigan, Cornell, Columbia, ect, with scores such as 153. 

 

Generally speaking if you have 158+ you should be fine as you are highly unlikely to ever get denied for that score. 

 

Obviously the higher the better, but seriously people on this board claim the GRE is way more important than it really is. 

 

And the argument that "well most of the acceptances from top programs have way higher scores" is irrelevant, obviously they do because they are often the best students in the country but that doesn't mean you need to match those scores to get accepted. 

[law2phd]

FWIW, my advisor, who was on the faculty at HYP for decades, told me that my 163 might hurt me with his former school, as it would be weakly competitive with most of the formal theory people he saw admitted when he was there.

 

All of this is school/subfield dependent.  But if someone blanketed the top 15, the probability that a high 150s score would be a deciding factor in denial for at least one school is not trivial.  Given the myriad uncertainties involved (that one school could end up being OP's top choice), it's at least worth consideration.

 

With that said, I wouldn't retake a 159 unless I had an over-abundance of time on my hands.

Edited August 4, 2015 by law2phd