<p>I'm applying for graduate school- mainly interested in bioorganic and chemical biology. I have completed an internship at a major pharmaceutical company (synthesis), and I have been doing undergraduate research (bioorganic) for a little over a year now. I've been promised solid recs. I go to a great school, my major is a 3.5, I'm a white female.</p>
<p>I am of the personal opinion that you can be a great chemist, yet score miserably on the GRE. I know people here are a bit brutally honest and harsh, but with a 730V/630Q, do I even have a chance? Before you laugh and tell me I am awful at life, bear in mind that I am a horrifically nervous test taker...be nice. People keep telling me that the GRE does not matter, but I'm unconvinced. I'm applying to some top 20 schools, but no Harvard or MIT etc.</p>
<p>I think your research is strong and while you scored astronomically well on the Verbal section of the GRE (I envy you with every fiber of my body!), I think your Quant score could stand to be a little higher. As for your GPA, a 3.5 is not bad, but it is not strong either. </p>
<p>I think it really comes down to your SOP and LOR's. If you can effectively reflect on your research experience and internship in your statement I am sure Ad Comms are bound to notice. </p>
<p>One last thing: Are you applying to PhD or M.S programs? I can never really tell nowadays! lol</p>
<p>My statement of purpose is clear and to the point - I did not ******** about my first exciting chemistry course or something silly like that. My LORs from both of my research advisors should be pretty strong.</p>
<p>I guess I will be living proof as to how much these ridiculous standardized exams matter. Were it not for my sad, terrifying quant score, I'd be in the running for top schools I am sure.</p>
<p>My only comment: do not limit yourself to the popular name programs. There are many doctoral programs that will provide you with outstanding training and position you well for your future career. The trick is to investigate the potential fit with your career goals and the success rate of the graduates from each program.</p>
<p>I've been doing my research. Unfortunately, my boss is of the impression that I will still somehow get into top schools, and has expressed disappointment that I chose to save $500 and not apply to Caltech, MIT, Harvard, or anything else in the top ten really.</p>
<p>I'm having difficulty choosing "safety" schools, and I'm restricted to East Coast only. </p>
<p>I've been encouraged to apply to top schools based on the fact that for domestic students, the competition is nowhere NEAR as stiff as for international students. This whole application process is awful and I wish I had time to study for the GRE :(</p>
<p>
[quote]
I guess I will be living proof as to how much these ridiculous standardized exams matter.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>People who score 800 in Q don't consider them "ridiculous". Kudos on your Verbal score though, that's very impressive.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Were it not for my sad, terrifying quant score, I'd be in the running for top schools I am sure.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Not to be a Negative Nancy, but a 3.5 isn't exactly stellar for top schools (unless it's coming from HYPSMC). It's a good acheivment overall tho.</p>
<p>I think standardized tests are ridiculous, sorry. But then again, being anti-system never helped me very much.</p>
<p>And as a domestic student, I'm pretty sure a 3.5 would get me into some decent programs. Chemistry graduate schools are desperate for domestic students - not including the top ten. If you had read my previous post, you would know that I was not deluded to the point of thinking that I was Harvard bound. </p>
<p>I know several people who have been accepted for excellent PhD programs with lower GPAs.</p>
<p>Last paragraph of post: "People keep telling me that the GRE does not matter, but I'm unconvinced."
Later post: "I guess I will be living proof as to how much these ridiculous standardized exams matter."</p>
<p>No offense, bb4628, but it appears you didn't actually post to ask anyone's opinion. You've already made up your own and are posting to vent your frustration against ETS. That's fine--I too have issues with standardized tests--but it's silly to pretend this is a "Do I have a chance?" thread when you've spent most of your time answering your own question and disagreeing with people who reply to the negative. ("I am of the personal opinion that you can be a great chemist...." "I know several people who have been accepted for excellent PhD programs....") You already know you'll be accepted to decent programs. So why are you really here?</p>
<p>Are you here because, contrary to your protestations, you really want to be Harvard-bound and want to be given the kick in that direction (as implied by the hints that your superiors have encouraged you to go top 10, the competition isn't impossibly fierce for domestics etc.)? Are you here because you were just boiling over with anger against the seemingly impenetrable wall of your quant. score and need to stew? Or are you here because while you know logically that you have an excellent application, you can't get rid of those nagging little doubts?</p>
<p>If you are going to include a title like "...you can laugh", the least you could have done was include a humorous anecdote. I found nothing funny about your post. In fact, I found it quite boring.</p>
<p>You are in a fine position to apply to graduate school in chemistry. I don't know what a quantitative score in your field should be, but with a 3.5 and research experience, you will be fine.</p>
<p>I don't know if it applies to your discipline, but in Computer Science, there is a authoritive paper (asst prof, CMU) which is insightful and worth quoting"</p>
<p>"For the top Ph.D. programs in CS, the most important component is your prior research experience and what your recommendation letters and personal statement have to say about your prior research experience. At these schools every application is carefully scrutinized by at least 3 faculty, all of whom are trying to gauge your research potential. At lesser-ranked schools, there may be a simple formula which looks at GRE scores and GPA and undergraduate school and based on that classifies applications into piles of “highly-desirable”, “less-desirable”, etc.. Everyone in the highly-desirable pile is then admitted.</p>
<p>Your score on the GRE will be largely ignored by the top schools, particularly if you are coming from a top school. At CMU we look at the Verbal GRE score only when the applicant is not a native speaker of English. We look at the Subject test score only when we have an application from a school whose CS department we’re not familiar with.At lesser-ranked schools, however, your GRE score can be the difference between your getting in or not."</p>
<p>My daughter has also heard that she will have some consideration for being female and US citizen (and interested in a particular theoretical area.) But she is going to apply to top schools based on her professors's reccomendations and the research work she has done. Her Q GRE is not stellar but she is 85 percentile at least, she is not retaking it cause she can't see that a better score will help too much and she is also currently studying abroad. But yours must be around 60 percentile, right? Any reason not to retake? It should be possible to greatly improve if you use a study program.</p>
<p>^^Like BrownParent said, it's not a bad idea to retake if you think this is the only barrier between you and MIT. It doesn't have to be like the sadistic 4-hour experience of last time; you can click "end this session" without answering any questions in verbal and analytical to receive a "No Score" and put your energy into the quantitative. I know by the time I got to the math problems I was dead tired and hungry because my granola bars were in my purse, which was locked in a cubby in the waiting room...I ended up doing stupid things like thinking 2/(2^1/2) simplified to (2^1/2)/2. And in a ridiculously non-normally distributed section like that, that probably dropped me 50 points. In my case that didn't matter, because a 75 percentile is more than enough for aspiring librarians, but in your case a slip-up would be quite costly.</p>
<p>Personally, if I were ETS, I wouldn't base the exam on algebra and geometry-type questions alone. I would have test takers check a box with the highest level math class they had taken (maybe just advanced algebra for humanities majors, calculus for us wimpy life-science majors, modern algebra or differential for the hard-core guys and gals) and then use the non-scored part not just for 'research questions,' but as a trial to see the taker's level of expertise in the subject they indicated. Then during the actual section, in addition to the existing basics, I would throw in standard questions by the level indicated in the prior section. Or they could just limit the levels to "calculus 1", "calculus 2," and "non-calculus," plus a "stats" component, and use questions they already wrote for the AP exams. Of course, this would be difficult to pull off, but it would give a more accurate representation of the takers' abilities and there wouldn't be so many dang 800s floating around.</p>