The Importance of the Verbal GRE Score for Science Fields

[blah0016]

I just talked to the director of admissions at a top engineering university (top 5), and was stunned to hear that the verbal GRE score was more important to the university than the math score in admissions. He said "Pretty much everyone has a good math GRE score, so the verbal GRE score is the most important. We find that there is a strong correlation between success in our program and the verbal GRE score." Wow! I certainly didn't know that.I just wanted to share this with any science students out there, the message seems to be that you need to study at least as hard, if not much harder, for the GRE verbal than the math. Perhaps it is opposite for humanities programs.

Edited January 25, 2010 by blah0016

[Mumbet]

I just talked to the director of admissions at a top engineering university (top 5), and was stunned to hear that the verbal GRE score was more important to the university than the math score in admissions. He said "Pretty much everyone has a good math GRE score, so the verbal GRE score is the most important. We find that there is a strong correlation between success in our program and the verbal GRE score." Wow! I certainly didn't know that.I just wanted to share this with any science students out there, the message seems to be that you need to study at least as hard, if not much harder, for the GRE verbal than the math. Perhaps it is opposite for humanities programs.

Makes sense; so many engineers and hard science students can't write or communicate worth a darn. I've gotten so many e-mails from my teachers that read like cell-phone texts.

[socialpsych]

This seems suspect to me. I completely believe that the GRE quant doesn't explain much variance in student performance, because the distribution is so skewed, but that doesn't mean it isn't important to do well; it might even be more important, if, for example, so many people have 800s that the only way in is 750 or up.

[piccgeek]

It's not reversed for the humanities--at least, not for English. It was made pretty clear to me by the schools I applied to that they cared WAY more about verbal and would hardly even look at the quant...which was unfortunate, because I scored higher on the quant. I am of the unshakable opinion that the gre is total bs, mostly because the verbal gre is so very ineffective for ACTUALLY measuring textual communication skills...it's only good for measuring how well you can recognize words sans context and arbitrarily choose which of the many possible connotations of a word is the one the testers chose. But I digress. It makes a lot of sense that more people do well on the quant than the verbal sections of the gre, because quant actually DOES have provable right and wrong answers, and you can logic out those answers from the info they give you. Not so with the verbal questions.

Sorry, I just can't help but rant at the attempt to give an subjective exam over something as objective as language. And now back to your regularly scheduled thread.

Edited January 25, 2010 by piccgeek

[katalytik]

two of my programs have GRE averages on their websites. Even though my major is quite quantitative, the verbal scores for the programs were well into the 90%. So I think they expect both to be up there. I got completely scared when the average at UMichigan was so high for entering students:

740 Quantitative

720 Verbal

These are just averages!

[blah0016]

This seems suspect to me. I completely believe that the GRE quant doesn't explain much variance in student performance, because the distribution is so skewed, but that doesn't mean it isn't important to do well; it might even be more important, if, for example, so many people have 800s that the only way in is 750 or up.

It's obviously important to do well on the quantitative, too! If you get below a 750 you prob. won't be considered. But verbal is just as important, if not more. And, I don't think the GRE is a good indicator of success or anything...I don't agree with the adcom member who told me that, just to clarify.

Edited January 25, 2010 by blah0016

[Mumbet]

It's obviously important to do well on the quantitative, too! If you get below a 750 you prob. won't be considered. But verbal is just as important, if not more. And, I don't think the GRE is a good indicator of success or anything...I don't agree with the adcom member who told me that, just to clarify.

I have a 740 (still 80th percentile) because I got test-taking anxiety, but I think I'll "probably" still be considered by at least most of the schools I applied to. A university has incredibly poor priorities if it throws me out just for that without considering everything else. I strongly doubt that typical universities have such a harsh cutoff.

Edited January 25, 2010 by Mumbet

[expressionista]

It's obviously important to do well on the quantitative, too! If you get below a 750 you prob. won't be considered. But verbal is just as important, if not more. And, I don't think the GRE is a good indicator of success or anything...I don't agree with the adcom member who told me that, just to clarify.

I disagree with the statement that "verbal is just as important, if not more" based on what the admissions person said. You've acknowledged that you probably won't be considered with a quant score below 750, but you definitely don't need a 750 verbal score to be considered (I mean, maybe at the highest ranked program in the world or something, but not generally). He can say that they look at the verbal scores more and directly compare them more, but you still need that even higher quant score to just make it to the point where they're going to look at your verbal score.

[blah0016]

I disagree with the statement that "verbal is just as important, if not more" based on what the admissions person said. You've acknowledged that you probably won't be considered with a quant score below 750, but you definitely don't need a 750 verbal score to be considered (I mean, maybe at the highest ranked program in the world or something, but not generally). He can say that they look at the verbal scores more and directly compare them more, but you still need that even higher quant score to just make it to the point where they're going to look at your verbal score.

a 750 verbal score is a lot better than a 750 math score. a 750 math score is 84%, and a 750 verbal score is 99%. this was a top-ranked engineering school btw, ranked #1 in nearly every field. i think most eng schools consider everyone with gre math >700, and then in that pool, they tend to favor ppl with higher verbal scores. but all those ppl with like 300 on the verbal section but 800 on the math section, might be screwed.but if you get >700 on verbal, you are in a good area thats my opinion, at least

Edited January 25, 2010 by blah0016

[origin415]

I don't believe this is the case for mathematics. While its true that the quant score won't differentiate, the mathematics subject gre is very difficult even for math majors and differentiates just fine (whether what it is differentiating between is relevant to a mathematics research is debatable though). I'd assume the case is similar for other sciences, like physics, where the subject gre is important.

Edited January 26, 2010 by origin415

[blah0016]

I don't believe this is the case for mathematics. While its true that the quant score won't differentiate, the mathematics subject gre is very difficult even for math majors and differentiates just fine (whether what it is differentiating between is relevant to a mathematics research is debatable though). I'd assume the case is similar for other sciences, like physics, where the subject gre is important.

i agree, makes sense, i've heard stories from chem majors that would fit with that

[hmmmmm]

I don't believe this is the case for mathematics. While its true that the quant score won't differentiate, the mathematics subject gre is very difficult even for math majors and differentiates just fine (whether what it is differentiating between is relevant to a mathematics research is debatable though). I'd assume the case is similar for other sciences, like physics, where the subject gre is important.

I doubt this - a subject test that tests you mostly on calculus, how is it going to differentiate people at all? No matter which direction (pure, applied etc) you are heading into, the subject test is not a good indicator in any sense IMHO.

[twocosmicfish]

First of all, subject GRE's are an entirely different jar of mustard. They are oriented towards and generally only taken by students in a few select fields per subject, and however valid they are as a cross section of the primary field (generally not very) they are at least limited to that specific population.

Second of all, at most schools general GRE's are one of the lowest-valued admissions factors. Most schools have some formal or informal top/bottom values that they look for - if you are below the bottom score you are noted as a bad risk in that area, but being above the top score is not particular advantage. For example, in an engineering department, a 650 or lower might effectively disqualify you, while scores from 750-800 are treated essentially the same.

As to the verbal/math weighting, as has been noted it is a lot easier to get a high score on the math than it is on the verbal. In most areas where math is not important, they will of course value the verbal more highly, but in those areas where math IS more important they are usually most concerned about the verbal score. Why? Because your transcript and LOR's are usually talking to your math skills, so even if you have a "risky" GRE score they have a lot more and better measures to go by. But in the verbal, all they have is the SOP which could have been written by someone else. In grad school they will expect you to produce a legible thesis and hopefully a few pubs, perhaps teach a few classes, etc. They need you to have a "decent" understanding of the language - not great, a 700 is much higher than most will expect, but a 450 raises red flags and there is little to ease that worry.

[origin415]

I doubt this - a subject test that tests you mostly on calculus, how is it going to differentiate people at all? No matter which direction (pure, applied etc) you are heading into, the subject test is not a good indicator in any sense IMHO.

What I mean by differentiate is that not everyone gets the same score, which isn't the case for the quant section of the regular gre. Regardless of it being on calculus, it is still a much more accurate representation of ability at mathematics than the verbal and writing sections of the regular gre, wouldn't you agree? That is my point, that verbal is still useless for math programs.

Besides, my professors have told me specifically that the regular gre is inconsequential in comparison to the math gre (even the quant section), so its not just me. Of course, even if getting a better score won't help, getting an especially bad score could hurt

Edited January 26, 2010 by origin415