Should I Retake the GRE for Cornell or MIT Admissions?

[brentd49]

I need someone to be honest with me. I just got back from taking the GRE and I got a 410/610 for verbal/quantiative. I have 3.79 gpa with a double major in EE & physics with some research experience. But I want to get into cornell or MIT. Do I definitely need to retake? I hate these stupid standardized test. They are such a waste of time to study for.

 

[quantumdude]

Yes, I think you do need to retake the exam, and you should probably take a prep course. The GRE is very coachable, and it's more a matter of beating ETS^* at its own game than anything else. I have taught GRE courses for The Princeton Review, and I've gotten people to improve by over 100 points on each section. Of course, the higher your score is the more difficult it is to improve. So in your case you can expect a prep course to bring you up by more than 100 points on the verbal part, and less than 100 points on the quantitative part.

If you try to go to MIT or any Ivy League school you are going to be going up against a bunch of valedictorians. I would think that the fact that you didn't exactly break the bank on the math section is going to raise some eyebrows.

^*ETS=Educational Testing Service, the authors of the GRE, SAT, and GMAT

 

[brentd49]

I barely have enough money to take another GRE, let alone the $1000 plus classes. I went through barrons quantitative section, but I didn't really study for the verbal. Maybe I should just get an old book of past GREs and practice. The thing is, I can answer all the quantitative questions, eventually. I just tend to be a slow test taker. That probably just means I need to do more practice problems. Plus the physics GRE is coming up and I'm trying to prepare for that, but with classes and everything there just isn't enough time. I wish schools had December admission, then I wouldn't have to cram all this stuff in. Any advice? I could really use it.

 

[quantumdude]

Here's what I would do then:

* Call the admissions offices of each of your schools of interest and ask them to give you their opinion.

* If you have to retake the exam (which I think will be likely) then go ahead
with your plan to practice.

* Regarding the verbal section: You should look into getting a Princeton Review book that covers the "Hit Parade", which are the 300 most frequently recycled vocabulary words on the GRE. The problem solving tricks that you find in any book will be useless to you unless you have a great vocabulary.

And I have a question for you: Did you take a pencil-and-paper test, or the computer adaptive test (CAT)?

 

[brentd49]

That sounds like a good to just call and ask. I assume they would give a straight answer.

I took CAT--I think you have to unless they don't have CAT within a two drive or so.

I'll consider picking up the hit parade. Have you looked at Barron's 333 high frequency list?

But what about the quantitative part. Would just working more problems be the best thing?

 

[quantumdude]

I took CAT--I think you have to unless they don't have CAT within a two drive or so.

OK, then there's something else you need to know: Not all the questions are of equal value.

The average GRE score on any section is 500 (this is not a coincidence, the test is engineered to produce that result). At the start of the exam the computer thinks that you're an average test-taker, and it gives you a 500 level question. If you get it right then the computer thinks more highly of you and gives you a more difficult question at, say, the 620 level (I'm just pulling this number out of the air). But if you get it wrong you are demoted by the same amount, so you would be at 380.

These adjustments start out coarse and get finer as you move through the exam. If you get yourself in a hole early then it is very difficult to dig yourself out. By the time the exam is 2/3 over, you are fluctuating in a narrow band of scores, and by the time you get to the last few questions your score is basically determined (except for the finest adjustments).

What this means is that the early questions are by far the most important, and that you should spend the most time on them. Getting the last 5 wrong doesn't hurt your score that much, whereas getting the first 5 wrong is a total disaster. This brings me to the toughest thing to get through to a GRE student: In most cases you can actually improve your score by slowing down.

You should get the PowerPrep software with practice GRE CATs to get used to this system. It is authored by ETS.

I'll consider picking up the hit parade. Have you looked at Barron's 333 high frequency list?

I haven't, but I do know that Barron's is a good name. I would assume that their list is well-researched.

But what about the quantitative part. Would just working more problems be the best thing?

Yes, but there are tricks to be learned. Technical students are the hardest to coach for the GRE quantitative part, because they want to tackle all of the problems the way they learned to in their courses (set up equations and solve them, etc). ETS knows that the average test taker is going to try to solve the problems that way, and they deliberately put more problems on the exam that can reasonably be solved conventionally within the time limit.

There are techniques for avoiding algebra, spotting "trap" answers, and using estimation that help cut through the minefield that ETS lays out for you.

 

[brentd49]

I knew everything that you told me. I used the powerprep software and did the two exams, which i averaged around 500/640. And I learned a lot of the tricks from barron, but for some reason I was much slower on the real test. I still had 5 or 6 questions left.

 

[hitssquad]

ETS cumulative score reporting

Do I definitely need to retake?

Regardless, if you submit new scores MIT will see your old scores as well.
http://www.ets.org/portal/site/ets/menuitem.1488512ecfd5b8849a77b13bc3921509/?vgnextoid=ed252d3631df4010VgnVCM10000022f95190RCRD&vgnextchannel=a4e846f1674f4010VgnVCM10000022f95190RCRD

Cumulative Reporting (Score Retention)

• GRE score reporting is cumulative. Current GRE Board policy states that your scores are retained for the 5 testing years following the testing year in which you tested.
• All scores earned during this time will be reported to each institution you designate.
• You may choose to send only General Test scores, only Subject Test scores, only Writing Assessment scores, or any combination of the above, but you may not choose to have only those scores from a specific test date reported.
• Your score report will indicate your designated recipients and your cumulative record reported at that time. However, your designated recipients will not receive information concerning the other score recipients you have chosen.

 

[brentd49]

do you think it really matters if they see my old scores?

I figure at this point with classes and the physics GRE, there is no way I can go back and study for the general GRE and still do decent on the physics GRE. So if I have to retake it, then I will essentially have to push back applying for grad school for another semester. Also, since admissions for the top schools are only in the fall, then I would pushing my starting of grad school back a year. Which sucks, but I would be willing to sacrifice if it meant getting into a top school.

 

[brentd49]

I was just reading your post again Tom, and you said that you should slow down at the end. But how many questions can you leave blank and still get the same score?

Thanks for all the advice. I think if I memorize the word list and work math problems till they all look the same (is this possible?), then I should be alright. I've studied quite a few of the math tricks, and If I see that a problem takes more than a minute then I'll look that sort of problem up in a guidebook.

I just don't see why graduate schools take this test seriosly. I am essentially studying how to take a test.

 

[quantumdude]

I was just reading your post again Tom, and you said that you should slow down at the end.

NO NO NO

Slow down at the beginning!

But how many questions can you leave blank and still get the same score?

Don't leave any blank. The penalty is pretty stiff. Instead, if you see yourself running out of time just pick a letter (A through E) and click it until the questions are all used up.

Thanks for all the advice. I think if I memorize the word list and work math problems till they all look the same (is this possible?), then I should be alright. I've studied quite a few of the math tricks, and If I see that a problem takes more than a minute then I'll look that sort of problem up in a guidebook.

The math problems won't all look the same because of the different question types (problem solving, charts, etc). But practice can only help. If you are going to forego a prep course, then I strongly recommend that you get the PowerPrep software. If I am not mistaken you can order it from ETS when you register for the CAT.

I just don't see why graduate schools take this test seriosly. I am essentially studying how to take a test.

That is exactly right. In fact right at the beginning of the Princeton Review's GRE Manual, it says in bold font: The GRE tests how well you take the GRE. That that's all it does. But ETS has managed to hype up their exams as "intelligence tests" because they produce nice bell curves. After all, everyone knows that a small fraction of the population is very intelligent, a small fraction is very...not intelligent, and most people are unspectacular. ETS exam results reflect that, but it is because the exams are engineered to reflect it. On every ETS exam there are unscored "experimental" questions that may or may not appear on a future exam, depending on whether or not the correct number of people answer it correctly.

Get a load of that: You pay them to do their R&D. :grumpy:

 

[quantumdude]

Don't leave any blank. The penalty is pretty stiff. Instead, if you see yourself running out of time just pick a letter (A through E) and click it until the questions are all used up.

My mistake: Pick a letter from A through D. Not all questions have 5 answer choices, but they all have at least 4.

 

[brentd49]

The math problems won't all look the same because of the different question types (problem solving, charts, etc). But practice can only help. If you are going to forego a prep course, then I strongly recommend that you get the PowerPrep software. If I am not mistaken you can order it from ETS when you register for the CAT.

I've used the powerprep software. I averaged a 500/650 on verbal/quantitative when I took the two practice test. I went down a bit on the real thing--stress, I guess. So what is the best way to study quantitative, because I know anything less than 700 is going to be looked down upon by the top schools. And I suppose 300 or so vocabulary is enough for the verbal.

I know your giving your advice away for free, but I do appreciate it. If I could afford prep classes I would.

 

[Grogs]

Get a load of that: You pay them to do their R&D. :grumpy:

I just took the test and they had an entire *section* that was experimental. After sitting there for 3 hours taking the real test, I wasn't much inclined to participate.

Brentd: You mentioned Barron's. Have you got their Passkey to the GRE Book? It's a pretty small (and cheap :tongue: ) My situation was unusual in that I had already been accepted into Grad School, so I didn't put a whole lot of time into studying, but I found that a little time spent with this book really paid off. The tips and tricks in there are really helpful, but there's a limit to how much they can help. If you don't know how to solve the problem (or at least reduce the number of possible choices) all the tips in the world won't help you. They just help you *not* miss questions you already know the answer to.

In your case, if you're finishing up a degree in physics, you've got all the math you'll ever need (and then some!) for the quantitative section of the general test. If you're missing a lot of problems here, it's most likely because you're running out of time -or- getting fooled by an answer that looks right but isn't. If you can get yourself familiar with all the *types* of problems in that section and the best way to solve them, you should be able to raise your quantitative score quite a bit. I can't get a whole lot of advice for the verbal section other than just learn some good vocabulary words (the Barron's book has a decent list of maybe 300 - might be the same one you're talking about.)

 

[hitssquad]

The ETS unscored sections

I just took the test and they had an entire *section* that was experimental.

Yes.
west.net/~stewart/gre/gre101.htm#Pretest

After sitting there for 3 hours taking the real test, I wasn't much inclined to participate.

ETS does not label its experimental sections. Once you get to the second verbal or quantitative section, there is no way for you to know if you have already taken the experimental section or not.

 

[hitssquad]

Typical MIT applicants and their perfect-800 GRE-Q scores

I know anything less than 700

800.
graduateshotline.com/cf.html

"
University of Virginia
MS in Computer Sc.
The current nominal scores for successful applicants for admission are 750 for the quantitative part and 550 for the verbal part. The average scores of accepted applicants are generally higher than those scores.
"

is going to be looked down upon by the top schools.

 

[Grogs]

ETS does not label its experimental sections. Once you get to the second verbal or quantitative section, there is no way for you to know if you have already taken the experimental section or not.

It didn't say experimental, per se, but it had a disclaimer at the beginning that said 'Your participation in this section is optional and it in no way affects your final score' or words to that effect. I thought it was some type of survey actually, but it seemed to be testing a new format, i.e. different shaped boxes, questions that required more than 1 answer, etc. Since it was 45 minutes long I stopped after about 2 questions and left. It wasn't reflected on the final score report that popped up on the screen at the very end.

 

[brentd49]

Quote:
Originally Posted by brentd49
I know anything less than 700
800.
graduateshotline.com/cf.html

"
University of Virginia
MS in Computer Sc.
The current nominal scores for successful applicants for admission are 750 for the quantitative part and 550 for the verbal part. The average scores of accepted applicants are generally higher than those scores.
"

I don't understand that statement. How can you average the scores from "successful applicants" and be lower than the average of "accepted applicants"? Are successful applicants and accepted applicants different?

Berkeley has minimums suggested as 540/580, but they also have 560 for analytical so those scores might be from the old kind of tests. And cornell says 80%/90% for minimum suggested.

 

[quantumdude]

I don't know about this "successful" vs "accepted issue, but:

Berkeley has minimums suggested as 540/580, but they also have 560 for analytical so those scores might be from the old kind of tests. And cornell says 80%/90% for minimum suggested.

You should talk to your specific departement of interest as well. School-wide averages aren't going to be useful to everyone, especially technical students. For instance Berkeley has one of the top physics departments in the US. I'm sure they wouldn't even consider a 580 in math. but that's the average you get after factoring in a few thousand communications majors.

 

[juvenal]

Given that the GRE has quite a bit of correlation with the SAT, I would venture to guess that you didn't do that well on the SAT and are probably not in a top-ranked undergrad program?

 

[brentd49]

I'm not sure where you're going with this. But yes, you are correct juvenal. I didn't get serious about school till I started college and found something I was interrested in. But this damn GRE is breaking my balls.

 

[hitssquad]

Nominal vs average

University of Virginia
MS in Computer Sc.
The current nominal scores for successful applicants for admission are 750 for the quantitative part and 550 for the verbal part. The average scores of accepted applicants are generally higher than those scores.

I don't understand that statement.

I think the author might have meant different things by the words nominal and average. Nominal might be taken in this case to mean minimally-acceptable (perhaps the scores at the 10th or 25th percentiles of successful applicants are considered by the author to reflect minimal acceptability).

 

[dnvlgm]

Hi, I'm a double major in math and physics and i'll be trying to go for a phd. in physics. here's the problem, my GPA will end up being about 3.0 maybe a little more but not much more, and the way i see it, it seems that i could also use the GRE Physics subject test but the damn thing seems scarry, so honestly could someone tell me what is a fairly good score like 600, 700, 800... i don't know. Also, I'm trying to apply to school such as Ohio State, SUNY Albany, Missouri, Temple, UPenn... I would really appreciate if someone could tell me something about it, and don't worry about being honest, you can really tell me "forget about it" or "might or might not". Thanks!

 

[ircdan]

I need someone to be honest with me. I just got back from taking the GRE and I got a 410/610 for verbal/quantiative. I have 3.79 gpa with a double major in EE & physics with some research experience. But I want to get into cornell or MIT. Do I definitely need to retake? I hate these stupid standardized test. They are such a waste of time to study for.

I think it's easier to bring up your quantitative score. Just do tons of practice problems from the book you have. I used it, and brought my score up significantly.

Another thing that I didn't see mentioned is that the graduate schools at most universities have a minimum combined score, and if you don't meet that, you can't get in I think. For example one school might have a minimum combined score of 1200, etc.

 

[InbredDummy]

for the general GRE, if you have a computer based one, do they still let you use scrap paper?

 

[TMFKAN64]

for the general GRE, if you have a computer based one, do they still let you use scrap paper?

Yes, as I recall, they supply you with scrap paper. You are expected to leave it in the testing room. (No copying questions to take home!)

 

[neevil07]

Quick one...so I also just got back from the GRE and my unofficial scores were 500 V / 720 Q

Now I know that these are not stellar, esp..the verbal, but I will probably die if I have to retake...I plan going to a good grad school in chem but I'm not sure how hard they are on the GRE if you have a good application otherwise (GPA, research, etc.).

Any thoughts? Retake or not?

Sorry everybody has posted abt this a million times...just need to clear my mind.

Thanks.

 

[leumas614]

It depends where you want to go to grad school. If you are shooting for a top-tier program then you may have to retake the test. If you are shooting for a good state school then your scores are probably fine. State schools tend to emphasize GPA more anyway and few schools really look at the verbal.

The best thing to do is go to the websites of the schools you are interested in and see if they post the average scores of accepted applicants.

 

[Topher925]

The GRE is a scam and ETS is just a company out to make money and will use what ever BS they can to do it.

The first time I took the GRE there were 3 - 45 minute verbal sections and 1 - 30 minute quantitative section. The first time the test was ridiculously hard and I think I got a 420/580. The second time I took the test there was 1 - 45 minute verbal and 2 - 45 minute quantitative and it was a lot easier. I think I got like a 580/760 or something. Enough to get accepted but not enough to get any support.

BTW, this was all with ZERO preparation and maybe 4 hours of sleep the night before. If you want to get into a top school , you need a 650/800+.

 

[leumas614]

The average verbal score for MIT is a 570 not 650. Even so a 570 is the 85th percentile. I think if you reach the 85th percentile in anything then you are a competitive applicant.

 

[Ben Niehoff]

Tom earlier mentioned that ETS engineers tests to produce bell curves. This is mostly true, but not completely true. The GRE produces bell curves except on the Quantitative section, when compared among students going into math-intensive fields (physics, computer science, mathematics). Within these subjects, the curve instead has an exponential shape, with a delta function right on the highest score. That is, among quantitative science-geared students, the vast majority of them get perfect scores on the Quantitative section. If you earn less than a perfect score, you are below average among this particular subset.

Graphs are available within the PowerPrep software, broken down by major, which you can look at for proof of this. The worst misbalance occurs in computer science, with some 1100 data points on the 100% mark, and quite few below.

Oddly enough, the Verbal section does exhibit nice bell curves for every subset, including English majors, Journalism majors, Linguistics, etc.

I'm not sure whether this is the result of a flaw in the test, or the fact that math always has clear-cut, logical answers (whereas Verbal questions can appear to be debatable if you think about them wrongly).

Of course, the result is that in quantitative science departments, a good GRE Quant score doesn't really have a lot of weight (but a bad GRE score can have a negative weight).

 

[G01]

What I have heard in my research of the GRE and what it is used for in regards to physics grad school is the following:

The quantitative GRE is absolutely meaningless for picking physics grad students except to pick out applicants who really cannot do basic math. I have been told to get >700 on quantitative and that should be fine. How far above 700 your score is really doesn't matter, since this score is used mostly as a threshold to pick out candidates who may have basics math problems.

The verbal GRE score is even less meaningful. Get somewhere on the positive side of the bell curve and you should be fine.

More of you studying time should be spent studying for the GRE Physics test. The reason ETS even offers this test is because Physics grad programs know how useless the general test is in picking applicants. They might as well be rolling dice to pick students. The GRE Physics is scored out of 990 and I have been told that the average for American applicants at top 10 programs is somewhere in the vicinity of 850.

If any of the information I have provided is incorrect, someone please correct me.

Anyway, My scores are:

Q- 730 (I'm a slow worker and had to guess on the last few.)

V- 560

From what I was told (what I said at the beginning of these posts), these scores won't prevent me from getting into top 10 programs, but they also won't seal the deal. I think that most of my time is better spent working on upping my physics GRE score, rather than retaking this to get a 800Q. Is my analysis correct?

 

[leumas614]

I don't know if those scores are enough for a top ten program in engineering because there is no subject test. I think you're right for physics though. From what I've heard grad schools place much more emphasis on the subject test than the general test.

I think Ben is incorrect in saying that the vast majority of science-geared students get perfect scores on the Quantitative. ETS averages scores according to majors and the average score for physical science is a 690 and for engineering a 720. This would be impossible if most people got 800's.

 

[proton]

What I have heard in my research of the GRE and what it is used for in regards to physics grad school is
The verbal GRE score is even less meaningful. Get somewhere on the positive side of the bell curve and you should be fine.

where are the sources of your 'research'?

also, what's considered the 'positive' side of the bell curve for the verbal GRE?