ETS raised the price!

[liszt85]

You said it yourself mate, just because I can afford something (i.e. something utterly useless) doesn't mean I should naturally be expected to pay for it. I don't consider myself to be a helpless victim, but the fact remains I am being ripped off. TOEFL is completely different because it is entirely reasonable to want to make sure an applicant's English is okay before accepting him/her.

You really think the TOEFL is a good test to judge how good one's English is? Lets say I agree with you, I think its equally important to make sure an applicant (and a future TT professor, hopefully) knows basic fractions and geometry, an ability to encode memories (of word meanings in this test but it extends to much more than that) based on associations with word roots, reasoning skills, comprehension skills, etc. You think these are not as important as judging how good a student's English is? Again, no justifiable reason to complain against the quality or the design of the test (there is always room for improvement of course..but that's true of any human endeavor, which is why we as humans progress as a race). Price increase is probably the only thing people should be debating about because you could always ask if the price increase is justified. Now to ask that question in a meaningful way, you would have to try and get information from ETS as to why they did it in the first place.. if they aren't justified in doing so (after you've evaluated their reasons), you have perfectly good reasons to be complaining (but ONLY about the price increase, not about the design of the test. Work hard and you'll do well on the test, its as simple as that).

[JerryLandis]

Frankly I can't say whether I think TOEFL does a good job of testing how well people can speak English, but I've never heard anyone complain about it before. Maybe it is a ripoff, and if that's the case, that's a real shame. I'm sorry you had to be ripped off twice. The fact that some people have to take extra tests does not make it acceptable to rip off everyone else who just has to take the GRE.

As far as my discipline is concerned, being able to speak and understand English is far, far more important than being able to find the slope of a line in 30 seconds or to memorize hundreds of words. Sure, having an expansive vocabulary is important, but it's not really necessary to memorize words no one ever uses because in the offchance that some pompous twat did decide to use one of the more obscure GRE words, the grad student reading the article could simply look the word up in the dictionary and move along. Sure, work hard and you'll do well on the test. I understand that logic. But frankly, it's a complete waste of my time that I could be spending on actual academic work. Sure, I understand that it's not the grad school admissions folks' problem if I have to waste my time to take a test they may not even take into consideration. I recognize that that is just my problem and I'll just have to suck it up and move along. Still, I think I'm pretty justified in being annoyed about it, especially since (feeling like a broken record here) I am being ripped off in the process.

[JerryLandis]

I personally know many other people who feel they have been ripped off. Many people who post on this board feel the same way (or I mean, are also aware of the fact, since it's not exactly a matter of opinion - we ARE being ripped off).

Just because my family income is not under $5000 a year, as you randomly assume Liszt85's to be, does not mean that I deserve to be ripped off, and that I have no right to complain about it. Does ETS represent Robin Hood to you or something?

I do recognize that it's my problem. I have sucked it up. I paid the egregious amount of money to take the pointless test and to have my scores sent. I sat there and wasted my time studying geometric formulas I'll never use, when I could have been doing relevant and necessary academic work. I also paid for a study book, since I was told that the test studies how well one has learned tricks and test-taking strategies, not one's actual intelligence or scholarly aptitude. I don't see why it's so outrageous that I may want to complain a little bit about it with people who have done the same thing. I'm not outside the ETS offices with a picket sign. I'm just stating my opinion amongst like-minded people, venting my frustrations a little. What kind of rule of thumb is it that when you get ripped off, you should just say "ah, well, I don't really deserve that money anyways" and congratulate the shameless profit hunters?

[JerryLandis]

Sorry I missed that. Regardless, just because one person's family has more money than another, that's no reason to justify ripping off one or the other. That sucks that Liszt is being ripped off like that, but just because she has "sucked it up" and paid the fees doesn't mean that it was right for ETS to rip her off in the first place. Maybe she agrees that the GRE is a useful way of measuring people's intelligence; maybe the skills it tests are actually applicable to her field. They are not applicable to mine, at least not enough to justify the price.

I have repeated myself so many times simply because you seem incapable of understanding what I have to say, or, more accurately, unwilling. If you think it's acceptable to charge people $20 for a service that actually costs under 40 cents to perform, so be it. But for you to claim that I am a spoiled brat because I decide to voice my opinion against it is simply ridiculous. I have a right to an opinion, and a right to complain about being overcharged. Just because I am not living below the poverty line does not mean that I deserve to be ripped off, or that I have no right to complain about people cheating me out of my money.

Lastly the reason I keep repeating myself is that I find your childish responses to be hilarious. Please keep them coming.

[liszt85]

They are not applicable to mine, at least not enough to justify the price.

And which field is that, which does not require logical reasoning, comprehension skills, the ability to memorize (not blindly but applying concepts..in this case, memorizing using the concept of associations with word roots, a lot of these words can be memorized using that technique), basic (VERY BASIC) mathematical ability (even if you're doing English, you will need to calculate how to divide your funds between student support, research support, etc..and will have to calculate what changes you will have to make if you get an additional student, etc.. that is precisely the kind of questions the quant section has. It tests basic ability, that while not being directly pertinent to your PhD, is related to your general intelligence level), etc.

So I don't agree with "the GRE doesn't test ANYthing that's pertinent to my field".

I have repeated myself so many times simply because you seem incapable of understanding what I have to say, or, more accurately, unwilling. If you think it's acceptable to charge people $20 for a service that actually costs under 40 cents to perform, so be it.

costs under 40 cents? So you assume that the GRE is just about sending your scores to you and your universities via post and since it takes just 40c worth of stamps, that is what you should be charged? So who pays the thousands of employees? Who pays the graders of the AWA section? Who pays the technicians who are responsible for the technology associated with the secure and efficient organization of the test? What about paying the test centers? I'm sure they will have hundreds of expenses more to add to this list here. You think it costs just 40c a person to do all of this?

While $23 may not be justifiable while $18 might be (again base these on facts, not on whims), I am amazed at how people think it should cost a certain amount because that is what it would cost him/her to do it (one time, for one person).

I challenge you to send scores of just the gradcafe forum members for 40c each and tell me if you've been compensated enough for your work. If not, then also tell me how much more you would have liked (and assume that this is going to be your only income..so you have to quote a price that is reasonable for a monthly salary). This is just for sending the scores. Then multiply that amount by the total number of ETS employees divided by number of gradcafe members. This is a naive calculation of course..but it would give you a sense of how much it would cost (per test taker) just to pay these employees, unless the ETS is a non profit/charity organization which it is not.

[JerryLandis]

Considering that ETS sends the scores of many of its customers at one time to these departments, I really do not believe that the service costs so much. Let's take Yale for example, since I know from my rejection letter that their graduate school received over 10400 applications this year. Assuming all these people sent GRE scores, that means that ETS was paid $208,000 just to send score reports to Yale. Granted, I am sure that some of the applicants applied to only 4 departments, but I doubt that a majority of the score reports were free. Besides, I doubt the score reports are really "free," rather they are included in the price of the test. Now, considering that ETS apparently sends out score reports every two weeks, and the application period lasts between September and December (a 3.5 month period), that means that they sent scores to Yale 7 times. Taking into account that each score report costs $20 to send, that means that each time ETS sent a disc to Yale with a batch of scores on it, it cost $29,714. Sounds like a person's salary to me! I don't know how much ETS employees are paid, but judging from these basic calculations it seems that the simple act of sending one disc to a university can cover one employee's entire salary for a year (or 2 graduate student stipends). If it truly costs them that much to send scores out, how many employees do they have working for them? Now let's keep in mind that this $20 fee is simply for having one score sent. The costs of creating and administering the actual standardized test should be covered in the actual test fee.

Concerning whether the GRE tests anything applicable to my field, I suppose you're right in that it kind of does. It tests my ability to study for a pointless test and to select the "best" answer from the 4 (or was it 5?) provided. I would assume that highly intelligent people are more likely to score well, and that extremely stupid people are more likely to score abominably. I also assume that most people of average to quite strong intelligence score somewhere in between. However, considering all the other supporting information we are required to include in our applications, I don't think it can really be all that useful in comparing applicants. In order to ascertain that I know how to write, admissions committees should be evaluating my writing sample and personal statement, not the AW score. And in order to confirm that I am a hard-working student, they should consult my GPA and letters of recommendation. Perhaps that requires a bit more work than just looking at a collection of 3 scores, but I'm sure that it's a much more effective method, not to mention that the $100+ application fee should cover them at least reading my application. My understanding of the way it works in history departments (according to the departments themselves no less!) is that GRE scores are generally ignored in favor of these other components, which is why it irks me that I still had to take the test.

And seadub, you'll have to excuse me for not noticing the gender of someone I've never met in person. I didn't read Liszt's profile so I wasn't aware that he is a man. I have actually read every single point you have made, and have also responded to those points. I'm not repeating my argument mindlessly; I am re-stating it in slightly different, increasingly simpler ways so that it can be understood by one apparently mindless person.

[glasses]

Oh boy.

Now you are simply deluding yourself with made-up numbers that you are pulling out of thin air. First of all, you assume that everyone pays the $20 score report fee instead of taking advantage of the three included score reports. Most people are smart enough to take advantage of those reports before paying any additional costs. You have no idea how many people pay for the $20 score reports or how much income the ETS receives from additional score reports. The $208.000 number you made up is useless.

You foolishly believe that the $20 fee only factors in the cost of the ETS sending the score to a particular school. Do you really believe that the only cost to the ETS is the price of the disk? If you even have an elementary concept of how to run a business, you would realize that the $20 pays goes largely to administration costs, salary, database and computer maintenance, etc. Do I pretend to know exactly where every penny of that $20 goes? No. But I am intelligent enough to realize that the ETS does not receive $19.40 in pure profit for each score report sent. There are many costs to running any business that you seem to be totally, utterly ignorant of. This is just like every other business out there.

I have already stated previously in other posts that I agree with the notion that the ETS is essentially a monopoly. Of course there are pros and cons to a monopoly test organization, but the greatest "pro" is that it standardizes graduate testing for everyone and levels the playing field, so to speak. Also, considering that the ETS is classified as a non-profit organization, it would be very dangerous for the organization to price services so outrageously that the government steps in to reassess non-profit status.

The Better Business Bureau maintains an A rating for the ETS. Most complaints seem to be resolved. I suggest you stop overly concerning yourself with the ETS and go on with your life before you get a heart attack. The deed is done. You've paid up. Move on.

Are you some kind of undercover ETS henchman?

I personally and perennially subscribe to the "suck it up" philosophy; I do what's required and respect that while I won't always get why something is required, it's required nonetheless. That being said, I don't think JerryLandis is "deluding" himself/herself about anything -- he/she is simply stating that there are some seriously steep costs here that put very real limits on what an applicant can and cannot do; when those steep costs pertain to an aspect of the application that many (including professors at these programs we're applying to, by the way) do not think adds much value to the application, the one paying up (as you put it) has every right to his/her concerns.

And seriously, the Better Business Bureau? Really? Oi to the vey.

Edited February 16, 2010 by glasses

[JerryLandis]

Requiring two standardized tests instead of one does not imply that a department has "lower standards" of admission, simply that they have different requirements. Oh, and Glasses, I am a she.

Concerning my "made up numbers," I can tell you that they are certainly not made up. I gave you the source of all the numbers I mentioned, and explained exactly how I came to my calculations, so to say that I pulled my point out of thin air is simply untrue. Yes, one should take into account the likelihood that some of the Yale applicants used their "free" report pass to cover the expense of sending the score. However, if we are really to believe it costs ETS a considerable amount to send scores in the first place (which I do not believe it really does), it's logical to assume that the cost of the "free" score report is actually included in the price of the actual test. Regardless, even if we were to assume that a large number of the applicants did apply using their free score report, we're still looking at thousands of dollars being paid for quite an insubstantial service. If we assume that half of the 10,400 applicants sent their scores to Yale as one of their free score reports, that still leaves ETS being paid almost $15,000 for each fortnightly disk shipment to Yale. I very much doubt it costs that much to send one disk of data to Connecticut.

Of course, the "free score report" business makes it more difficult to arrive at a definite amount of money, but we should keep in mind that most grad school applicants seem to apply to more than 4 universities. I used every one of my free score reports the day I took my test, but I still had to pay to send scores to the other places I applied to, and technically I still paid to send my "free" scores, as part of my testing fee. I applied to 8 programs, and probably should have applied to more. That's $80 to ETS. Judging from the experience of my personal friends as well as the people who post on this board, it seems that most people applying to graduate programs apply to well over four places, many to over ten. Especially when competitive institutions like Yale are concerned, it seems reasonable to assume that most of their applicants are applying to several institutions, and as such are paying for several score reports to be sent. Whatever the case, even if an exact number is not possible to come by, a little bit of experimentation with the numbers makes it quite clear that ETS is overcharging people for the score sending service.

I'm starting to come to the conclusion that either you're a) a really bored employee of ETS wiling away your time at work by belittling people online or actually an engineering student applying to grad school with the benefit of very high GRE scores but with no other impressive credentials. I'm sure I'll never know the truth, but it's fun to consider.

[JerryLandis]

"My God, I've heard of many Chinese and Indian students who score well above the 90th percentile and probably have a much more limited understanding of English than any domestic student taking the exam."

That simply suggests to me that the exam doesn't really test one's understanding of the English language, but the ability to memorize a list of definitions.

[liszt85]

"My God, I've heard of many Chinese and Indian students who score well above the 90th percentile and probably have a much more limited understanding of English than any domestic student taking the exam."

That simply suggests to me that the exam doesn't really test one's understanding of the English language, but the ability to memorize a list of definitions.

It also suggests that these students are much more serious about their grad studies and they work hard to surpass any barrier (whether or not they think it makes sense for such a barrier to exist..which comes in handy later on in grad school and in life as an academic). Makes sense?

Also who told you the GRE is designed to test understanding of the English language? If that was the case, why would schools demand the TOEFL in addition to the GRE score? The GRE is NOT designed to test knowledge and understanding of the English language (which is why the Asians beat you at it in the first place..). I'm sure you'd have been very happy with the GRE had it been designed to test knowledge of the language in which case you would have had an unfair advantage being a native speaker (and unfair advantages seem to be what many people ride on these days and this is what I believe has instilled a kind of entitlement in you).

By "you", I am not referring to you personally.

[liszt85]

that still leaves ETS being paid almost $15,000 for each fortnightly disk shipment to Yale. I very much doubt it costs that much to send one disk of data to Connecticut.

Both seadub and I have pointed out numerous times that it doesn't work this way. You don't sit at a computer and figure out how much it would cost you to do it. Try running a business (even if it is some kind of non-profit thing) and you'll see what we mean. assume that ETS has 15000 employees. According to your number, each gets $1 for every fortnightly shipment to Yale. Multiply that by the number of universities in the US to which such a shipment goes (now while multiplying, you should lower your 15K estimate as Yale obviously has a high number of applications coming in. The average number would be MUCH lower). This would give you an amount that wouldn't be enough to cover salary of 15000 employees (but I'm sure ETS has MUCH more employees than this). So we have only addressed the issue of salary of employees here. Lots more hidden costs which I'm sure business students in here can tell you about. So your numbers are meaningless and far removed from reality.

Also if you want to believe that we are ETS agents, do so by all means. I have been here for almost a year now and never before have I talked about my employer (ETS).

[JerryLandis]

By "understanding of the English language" I am referring to reading comprehension, which the verbal section seeks to assess.

Yes, for the individual students who do manage to score very highly on the verbal despite potentially not being fluent English speakers, it would suggest that they worked exceedingly hard to do well on the test. What that shows is that the test evaluates how well a person prepared for it (as well as how much money they were able to spend on test prep materials such as books, classes, etc. - I know that this is not necessary, but it can make a gigantic difference in a person's score). If academic stamina is what admissions committees are interested in hearing about, they can get that information by looking at a person's GPA and letters of recommendation.

[JerryLandis]

Liszt, I was referring to seadub, not you, when I made the comment about working for ETS. I just think it's funny that (s)he does not appear to have made any comments on this website except in the GRE/GMAT section, and most of those comments seem to be quite inflammatory and insulting.

As far as ETS is concerned, paying for the simple service of having a score report sent should not involve paying the entire salary of all its employees. That should be part of the cost of the actual test. It would be very unfair for the overall expenses of the company to be sought through score report charges, since those paying for a larger number of score reports would be bearing a much larger financial burden than those paying for fewer score reports. The sending of scores is a specific service that really only requires the labor of a small number of people. The cost of creating and administering the test should be covered by the actual test fee. Yes, Yale is a university that attracts a larger number of applicants than other universities. However, it is still only one university. And yet, I have demonstrated how the sending of one fortnightly score report to that one individual university could pay for one employee's full yearly salary (or, if you're more conservative with your numbers and wish to assume that half the applicants send their scores for "free," half an employee's full yearly salary). That is only ONE disk sent to ONE university - and these are JUST the score report fees we're talking about here, not to mention the fees for the actual test. Considering that the cost of sending an individual's score report is miniscule - a fraction of 40 cents - that implies that for each score sent, over $19 (now $22) is being spent in labor costs. Any company that requires $19-22 in labor costs to add one person's information onto a disk really should not be trusted to test the intellectual capabilities of university applicants.

[liszt85]

they can get that information by looking at a person's GPA and letters of recommendation.

Do you know what the term "standardized" means? Do you know why it was invented? I'm no native speaker but I think I understand this much better than you do.

I have seen that grades in undergraduate institutions (especially the elite ones) here in the US are INFLATED!! Of course, many of you may take issue with my observation but I'm speaking from my experience (which also includes TAing and grading for ug courses here. I have had professors tell me to award full points even if the answers don't make complete sense). I'm not claiming that undergraduate education in India or China is much better/harder/difficult gradewise, etc. All I'm saying is universities vary WIDELY in grading policies. As for LORs, all of us know that there are cultural differences that lead to different styles of writing (some may call it exaggeration)..

[JerryLandis]

And who cares if the verbal section isn't a great indicator of your English ability?

I do.

If you want to get into a top English program, you have to do well on the verbal section. Period.

Not really. It helps, but it's not absolutely necessary. Also, I don't want to get into a top English program. That's not my field.

If you get <700 V, they are going to notice that and take it into serious consideration.

Actually, many don't. Also, the average verbal score at every top program I applied to was below 700.

So why bother questioning the legitimacy of the exam?

Because this is a discussion forum.

You aren't doing any potential English applicants any good by telling them that the GRE is dumb and that they shouldn't study their asses off for the Verbal section.

I never told anyone that they shouldn't study, just that it's a shame that they should (and that they should have to pay for the privilege).

I don't question a publishing company for charging me $14 for a book. But if I ordered a book from a publishing company, and they charged me $14 for the book and $20 for shipping (let's imagine this is a very lightweight book and the shipping should only cost a couple dollars), I'd be pretty annoyed. I already paid for the book, which means I already paid my share of the money that should go to the author, the editor, the publisher, and the printers. So why should I have to pay for all that stuff as part of the shipping cost? The only thing I should be paying for as part of the shipping cost is a) the postage and the labor involved in putting the book in the envelope, sealing it, writing my address on the envelope, and putting it in the mail (handling - a one minute job). I would expect the same in ordering my GRE score reports.

[liszt85]

And who cares if the verbal section isn't a great indicator of your English ability?

I do.

Doesn't matter because the people who designed the test did not intend the test to be what you want it to be.

[liszt85]

I don't question a publishing company for charging me $14 for a book. But if I ordered a book from a publishing company, and they charged me $14 for the book and $20 for shipping (let's imagine this is a very lightweight book and the shipping should only cost a couple dollars), I'd be pretty annoyed. I already paid for the book

When you start your career as a professor, be sure to tell the students that they don't owe the university anything when they've paid for their books (which the university might sell them at inflated prices, say $50 in addition to what they would otherwise pay to take into account other expenses: to pay you to teach them the material in the book). Also teach your students to argue that since they could teach one person for free if they agreed to pay for their books + $50 as compensation for their efforts, they should expect you to be paid the same.

Edited February 16, 2010 by liszt85

[JerryLandis]

Believe me, I am fully aware of the problem of grade inflation, because it isn't as much of an issue here in the UK (at least not at the university level) and I'm bitter that the grade inflation taking place elsewhere devalues my GPA. All of my essays and exams are cross-marked by external examiners, people who are brought in from outside the university. So if a professor is too generous with his grading, not only does that one essay receive a lower mark, but ALL of the essays he marked are brought down by a certain amount. So it is in a professors best interest not to mark generously, as this may result in all of his students receiving a notch off their marks in his class. What this means is that my GPA is actually accurate, not inflated. However, I have "sucked it up" during my time at university and have still managed to pull off a GPA that is high even by grade-inflation standards. Maybe I'll get some respect from Seadub for that. Anyways, I expect my professors to explain in their letters of recommendation where I stand in the class, how I compare to other students, how good my work ethic is, etc., elements which can be used by admissions committees to confirm that my GPA is appropriate. Sure, there are cultural differences in the way letters of recommendation are written. However, admissions committees will be aware of that, since they receive loads of the things. I don't really see how adding another assessment tool to the mix, one that is far more arbitrary (based on the performance in one test, on one isolated day) and far less relevant than the others really fixes the problem. I don't think it's necessary, and if I were in charge of admissions I wouldn't use it. However, I know that's not the case, so too bad. Taking the test is one thing. Being ripped off in the process is quite another.

[liszt85]

However, I have "sucked it up" during my time at university and have still managed to pull off a GPA that is high even by grade-inflation standards.

That explains why you don't see that others need "standardized" scores to be evaluated fairly. While you may be this super genius (I'm not being sarcastic, this may very well be the case.. though not judging by your intuition of how business or the real world works), there might be hundreds of other deserving candidates who have more diverse interests than just keeping their GPAs intact (while being brilliant at the subfield they are interested in) regardless of how strict the professors were with grading at their undergraduate institutions,who might want to compete at a more standardized level. And GRE scores are not used in MAJOR admission decisions anyway.. I mean, these are not used as final word, mostly just for screening purposes, funding decisions (you may miss out on a university fellowship and instead land a TA job if your GRE is not high), etc. In any case, I'm done arguing with you as you don't/won't see my (what I thought was a) simple point.

[JerryLandis]

A university is more than a dispensary of books. My university doesn't even sell books. Your analogy makes no sense. Also, my professors do far more than simply explain material out of a textbook. I don't even have any textbooks. Textbooks aren't really suitable for teaching history past the high school level, so courses are rarely taught out of a book, and if they are, then get the hell out of that course!

Seadub, the wild baseless comments I am making about ETS's costs being funded by the score reports are based on your comments. My point is that ETSs operational costs (research, facility rentals, etc.) should not be factored into the cost of sending a score report, which you repeatedly insist is so expensive because all of these maintenance costs are necessary. In essence, you have just agreed with me in declaring that it doesn't make sense for ETS's operational costs, those which have nothing to do with the sending of score reports, to be part of the cost of having a score report sent. Thanks for teaching me.

[liszt85]

LOL WTF.

Did you just go off on a tangent about grade inflation? What does that have to do with the ETS. Are you 5?

That would explain a lot.

Dude, tone it down. She isn't throwing insults at you, is she? While I agree with your reasoning in this thread, I do not agree with how you've been responding to JerryLandis' posts. I think we've both made our point as has she.

[liszt85]

A university is more than a dispensary of books.

That was a hypothetical situation :|

[JerryLandis]

"there might be hundreds of other deserving candidates who have more diverse interests than just keeping their GPAs intact"

Those "diverse interests," if applicable, should come across elsewhere in the application, i.e. in the statement of purpose, or the cv. I don't see how GRE performance would really demonstrate one's achievement in these "diverse interests," unless your chosen field is high school mathematics or dictionary studies.

[glasses]

omg

I'm sorry "glasses," but you are apply to English PhD programs. Now I'm not sure about "English Lit" v. "English," but every top English PhD program I have researched requires not ONE but TWO GRE scores - the general and the English Subject Test. Now are you really going to sit at your computer and tell me that Berkeley, Princeton, or Harvard English Depts, etc., do not perceive any real value out of requiring two standardized exams out of every applicant? Really?

Berkeley English Dept says that "those admitted score, on average, in the 700s (97%) in the Verbal test and 650 (88%) or higher in the Subject test."

Princeton English Dept says that they look for "high GRE scores, especially in the Verbal and Subject tests."

I would actually argue that English programs care WAY more about the GRE relative to many other programs. If you get <700 V on the general test, you are putting yourself at an incredible disadvantage.

Unless "English Lit" programs have much lower standards of admission that English PhD programs, I honestly don't understand how you can trivialize what appears to be a very important part of your application.

I'd be worried about the future of English Literature if English Lit applicants were unable to memorize vocabulary words and excel in reading comprehension on a standardized test that a middle school student has all the knowledge to take. My God, I've heard of many Chinese and Indian students who score well above the 90th percentile and probably have a much more limited understanding of English than any domestic student taking the exam.

Yes, "I am apply" to English PhD programs, and "English lit." only means "English literature," a.k.a. the name of the discipline ("omg"!). For the record, although it's hardly relevant, I am not writing out of sour grapes as you appear to quasi-imply about myself and several others; I did well on both my general and subject tests, and I haven't trivialized a thing during the application process. I've said before that I'm a suck-it-up kind of person; I'm also a no-stones-unturned kind of person. I'm quite sure that many others on this forum are the same way, given that it does take a certain "mindset" to apply to graduate school; hard, thorough work falls squarely into that mindset. Believe me: I kind of wish the GRE(s) counted for more: I worked my tail off. But then again, I worked my tail off on the whole thing and for many years beforehand, as -- again -- I'm sure many, many others did.

Sure, test scores matter: that's why they're required. I did not say that these tests don't have "any real value" -- I said they "don't add much value to the application." They are not UNimportant; they are simply not the MOST important. They don't say NOTHING; they simply don't say much. They have precisely as much value as they appear to: they tell admissions committees how well the applicant performed on a standardized test. If I get in, it will have nothing to do with my test scores. It'll have everything to do with my current and proposed future scholarship, as well as my past academic record. In saying this, I am relating precisely what I have been told by several highly qualified, dazzlingly successful professors. Regarding my own scores, the professors I spoke to from my own alma mater as well as the schools I applied to said something along the lines of, "That's awesome! But, it's up to the rest of your application to say convey your potential to admissions committees -- these tests don't do that." Straight from the horse's mouth. And yes, some of those professors do work at or have gotten their degrees from some of the schools you have explicitly mentioned. Yes, these schools look for good scores -- that's a given. The question is, how good are good scores? And the answer, as I have been told, is simply that good scores are good to get in the "read me" pile: not good enough for an offer of admission. Thus, "not much value," in the scheme of things.

Regardless, none of this is relevant to the discussion of money, which people have likely griped about since the first coin was made. Why on earth do you see the need to argue when people are simply upset that it will cost them more to apply in the first place? In fact, a rather prominent literature professor who I'd love to work with himself said to me, entirely unprompted, that it's a crying shame how expensive this process is.

And oh, god, stop throwing nationalities around. You have no idea where I'm from or what my background is, nationally, ethnically, socioeconomically, or in any other way. You're putting your foot so far into your mouth that I am surprised you have yet to taste it.

And that's enough of that noise.

[JerryLandis]

Sorry if I went on a tangent. I didn't realize that this was a formal debate and that I am not allowed to express personal thoughts and ideas as I see fit. Liszt mentioned grade inflation, and I thought I'd comment about it in a way that illustrates that I'm not just some hyper-privileged idiot banking on my super-inflated GPA to get me into a grad school spot I don't deserve. And Seadub, I thought you'd appreciate the heartfelt story about how I sucked it up, pulled myself up by my bootstraps and did well despite unfavorable circumstances! That's what you love!

Liszt, thanks for being reasonable. I too am getting a little tired of this discussion. Actually I'm not, because it's supplying me with ample procrastination material. However, I don't find you as entertaining to argue with because you actually make some valid points in your discussion.