GRE Scores for Non-Native Speakers

[Davidspring]

I cite a discussion about this topic from this website:

 

Send me a message privately, and I'll drop a few tips on the AW.

 

I'll say this: If you're a non-native speaker, then I hear that admission committees typically overlook the AW score. They *should* overlook that score, in my view, for non-native speakers. Having said that, we all know that life isn't fair. Members of admission committees may still hold you to some standard.

 

I suggest that non-native speakers shoot for a 4.0 on the AW.  If you can "pass" the TOEFL, then you can probably hit 4.0 with proper studying.

 

I also suggest that non-native speakers who earn <=4.0 on AW flag this in the statement of purpose (or some suitable place in the application). Say something to the effect of, "I'm not a native speaker, and the AW score reflects this."

 

Typically non-native speakers should also be given an upward "adjustment" from admission committees on the verbal score, as well.

 

Really, the GRE is designed for native speakers. So (for what it's worth) it's extremely unfair for an admission committee to judge a non-native-speaker candidate's qualifications on the basis of GRE scores.

According to my personal experience as a non-native speaker, it takes me a lot of time (I mean several months) to improve the GRE scores.  I used to think that to improve my analytical writing is particularly important and so I did that, scoring 5 in this section.  I also improved my quantitative score, which is good enough for philosophy applications, but it seems so hard for me to improve the verbal score.  I hope I can get 160+ on the verbal portion and I did that in the practice tests, however in the real tests I got scores as low as 157.  I will definitely retake the test, but now I am wondering what people will say about this: Do you think that the admission committees will just use the same cut-off standard in my case as that in the cases of native speakers?  Stories from previous international applicants are particularly welcome.

[PorchlightPhilosopher]

I don't think anyone would get thrown out of contention with a 157 verbal and 5.0 AW.  I am a native speaker and got 160/5.0 and I'm not worried about my GRE affecting me at all. You'll be fine. 

 

I really do think students are far too concerned with the GRE.  Adcoms are philosophers, not number-crunching Nazis.

[Davidspring]

I don't think anyone would get thrown out of contention with a 157 verbal and 5.0 AW.  I am a native speaker and got 160/5.0 and I'm not worried about my GRE affecting me at all. You'll be fine. 

 

I really do think students are far too concerned with the GRE.  Adcoms are philosophers, not number-crunching Nazis.

Thanks for this reply.  The reason why I am so concerned with the GRE scores is that those top programs seem to have no substantial reason to accept a student who has low GRE scores, since they have far more competitive candidates than the offers they can send out.  But I am just curious whether they will separately consider non-native applicants, since non-native speakers can hardly compete with natives on the aspect of English vocabulary.

[gughok]

The reason why I am so concerned with the GRE scores is that those top programs seem to have no substantial reason to accept a student who has low GRE scores, since they have far more competitive candidates than the offers they can send out.

I'm a little confused by this statement. You say "top programs seem to have no substantial reason to accept a student who has low GRE scores". What if the student in question has an outstanding application in every respect but their scores? Fantastic recommendations and a powerful writing sample? Do these not count as "substantial reason"? I can assure you that no admissions committee would hold GREs against an applicant if everything else on their application is strong, unless maybe if they've scored abysmally (and a 157 is not remotely abysmal).

This is to say nothing of how tertiary GRE scores are to applications. The consensus from professors I've consulted is that they're much less important than the substantive parts of your application like, you know, recommendations and your writing sample. I've even been told that some admissions committee members simply don't look at an applicant's score report. At all.

I wouldn't worry about it in your place.

[Davidspring]

I'm a little confused by this statement. You say "top programs seem to have no substantial reason to accept a student who has low GRE scores". What if the student in question has an outstanding application in every respect but their scores? Fantastic recommendations and a powerful writing sample? Do these not count as "substantial reason"? I can assure you that no admissions committee would hold GREs against an applicant if everything else on their application is strong, unless maybe if they've scored abysmally (and a 157 is not remotely abysmal).

This is to say nothing of how tertiary GRE scores are to applications. The consensus from professors I've consulted is that they're much less important than the substantive parts of your application like, you know, recommendations and your writing sample. I've even been told that some admissions committee members simply don't look at an applicant's score report. At all.

I wouldn't worry about it in your place.

Thanks for your suggestion.  What I want to say is that if the admission committee considered two candidates, both of whom had very strong letters and writing samples and perfectly fitted with the program, then it seems that they would tend to put they candidate who has much lower GRE score on the waiting list and send an offer to the other candidate.  Does this make sense?  I personally really dislike any standardized tests.  However, since the competition is so fierce, I have to try to make every part of my applications outstanding.

Moreover, I am not sure whether most faculty members in those top programs would not use the scores as a measure to throw some files away.  I am sure the people in Cornell and Michigan won't do that, but I don't know any information about the other strong programs.  I am worried about my scores particularly because I read the lessons that the philosophy applicants got from the previous application season on this website: many people cautioned that we should be serious about GRE and poor scores could hurt.

Edited October 29, 2015 by Davidspring
Clarification

[gughok]

Thanks for your suggestion.  What I want to say is that if the admission committee considered two candidates, both of whom had very strong letters and writing samples and perfectly fitted with the program, then it seems that they would tend to put the candidate who has much lower GRE score on the waiting list and send an offer to the other candidate.  Does this make sense?  I personally really dislike any standardized tests.  However, since the competition is so fierce, I have to try to make every part of my applications outstanding.

If two candidates are completely equivalent save for their GREs then yes, those scores will likely be the deciding factor. You're definitely correct there. It just seems, to me, incredibly unlikely that out of those candidates who are competitive, the GREs will turn out to be the difference-making factor. But I've never been on an admissions committee. It becomes a matter of weighing how likely you think it is that for you it'll come down to your scores versus those of another applicant against the trouble of taking the GRE again.

[Davidspring]

If two candidates are completely equivalent save for their GREs then yes, those scores will likely be the deciding factor. You're definitely correct there. It just seems, to me, incredibly unlikely that out of those candidates who are competitive, the GREs will turn out to be the difference-making factor. But I've never been on an admissions committee. It becomes a matter of weighing how likely you think it is that for you it'll come down to your scores versus those of another applicant against the trouble of taking the GRE again.

Yes, I agree with you.  Given the large number of strong candidates, the GRE scores could make a difference.  And this is the sad part.

[Dialectica]

Moreover, I am not sure whether most faculty members in those top programs would not use the scores as a measure to throw some files away.  I am sure the people in Cornell and Michigan won't do that, but I don't know any information about the other strong programs.  I am worried about my scores particularly because I read the lessons that the philosophy applicants got from the previous application season on this website: many people cautioned that we should be serious about GRE and poor scores could hurt.

I'm curious why you even consider Cornell here with respect to GRE scores, as they don't require that you submit them to apply. Is your point merely that they wouldn't view such scores in that light as they don't require them? Or is it rather that you have some information regarding how they view the GRE?

[Davidspring]

I'm curious why you even consider Cornell here with respect to GRE scores, as they don't require that you submit them to apply. Is your point merely that they wouldn't view such scores in that light as they don't require them? Or is it rather that you have some information regarding how they view the GRE?

Yes, Cornell doesn't require GRE and so they won't use the scores as a measure to discard some files for sure.

[nonexistententity]

One thing I've heard professors say is that GRE scores of non-US students are taken with a grain of salt, because non-US students are not as used to the system of standardized tests.

[thatsjustsemantics]

Strangely enough, I get the opposite impression. I'm bilingual, but I'm nowhere near as fluent in French as I am in English. Writing philosophy in English is difficult as it is, so I can't imagine doing that well in French. A lot of anglophone professors are like this as well. So if I were remarking on the GRE score of a non-native speaker, I would be impressed by scores that would otherwise not impress me if the applicant were a native speaker. In that case, some greater weight will be put on the GRE than normal because among several other impressive applicants who are non-native speakers, you'd want the applicant who seems to have the "best" command of English.

Edited October 30, 2015 by thatsjustsemantics

[gughok]

One thing I've heard professors say is that GRE scores of non-US students are taken with a grain of salt, because non-US students are not as used to the system of standardized tests.

Strangely enough, I get the opposite impression. I'm bilingual, but I'm nowhere near as fluent in French as I am in English. Writing philosophy in English is difficult as it is, so I can't imagine doing that well in French. A lot of anglophone professors are like this as well. So if I were remarking on the GRE score of a non-native speaker, I would be impressed by scores that would otherwise not impress me if the applicant were a native speaker. In that case, some greater weight will be put on the GRE than normal because among several other impressive applicants who are non-native speakers, you'd want the applicant who seems to have a sufficient command of English

I think you're in agreement: nonexistententity's report was the statement that "from non-US students, judgment of GRE scores is mediated by the awareness that these students are less accustomed to standardized tests" i.e. "they're judged less harshly", in concord with thatsjustsemantics' suggestion that "the same scores would be more impressive coming from non-native speakers of English."

And I'm not part of any committee but intuitively I agree.

[thatsjustsemantics]

 

I think you're in agreement: nonexistententity's report was the statement that "from non-US students, judgment of GRE scores is mediated by the awareness that these students are less accustomed to standardized tests" i.e. "they're judged less harshly", in concord with thatsjustsemantics' suggestion that "the same scores would be more impressive coming from non-native speakers of English."

And I'm not part of any committee but intuitively I agree.

At first blush, it seems like we are in agreement. The upshot of my impression, however, was that non-native speakers have a greater incentive (than native speakers) to have better verbal scores than the average anglophone philosophy major and the average international philosophy student; the reason why there is a greater incentive consists in my presupposition that adcoms place greater attention on the way GRE scores might indicate how well non-native applicants communicate in English, or something like that.

Edited October 30, 2015 by thatsjustsemantics
grammar and reasoning

[nonexistententity]

On 30/10/2015 22:58:52, thatsjustsemantics said:

At first blush, it seems like we are in agreement. The upshot of my impression, however, was that non-native speakers have a greater incentive (than native speakers) to have better verbal scores than the average anglophone philosophy major and the average international philosophy student; the reason why there is a greater incentive consists in my presupposition that adcoms place greater attention on the way GRE scores might indicate how well non-native applicants communicate in English, or something like that.

There might be something to that. Of course, most departments have TOEFL cutoff scores that will guarantee a certain level of ability to communicate in English; but if there is still any doubt (a grammatically shoddy writing sample, for instance), verbal scores might enter into that consideration.