<p>So I should state that I'm looking at applying to CMU's ACO program (it's a PhD program), and that I'm also graduating a year early. </p>
<p>A few of my stats:
University: Within the top 30, tier 1
Major: Mathematics
GPA: 3.61
Major GPA: somewhere around 3.7
GRE General: 560V 660Q (no writing scores yet)
GRE Subject: didn't take it</p>
<p>Problematic stats:
NO research
NO related field research
NO published papers</p>
<p>I'm wondering that since I'm graduating early, does that put me at a disadvantage, seeing that I have no research, or even research experience? Does anybody know if I can get into Carnegie with these stats? Is anyone else who is graduating early applying to a PhD program?</p>
<p>Delay graduation until you can get your quant up for sure. Also, yes graduating early is detrimental in the respect that you have one year less to build a resume that might look impressive to programs.</p>
<p>I could be exaggerating, but I think a PhD program like that would expect an 800Q on the GRE, and may grudgingly tolerate a 750+. You absolutely have to retake and get much higher than 660Q.</p>
<p>You should probably take the GRE Subject as well, if you're planning on applying to more than one program; many other programs either explicitly require, or really want to see, math subject scores.</p>
<p>I concur with the other replies: unless you have financial hardship, you should stay for a fourth year, to bolster your application all around as well as to give yourself another chance at the GRE.</p>
<p>I was originally intending on graduating early from my university, but after deciding on going to graduate school, I knew that I had to stay longer to get more research experience and take additional courses. It would be very hard to get into CMU without research experience. Also, since you are a math major, you would need a much higher quantitative score than that. You should also consider taking the math GRE subject test. Although I am not applying for a math PhD program, I have read posts here where it is very common for mathematics undergraduates to be taking graduate courses.</p>
<p>In a nutshell, graduating in three years would be very detrimental. Why the rush, anyway?</p>
<p>Depends on your reasons for graduating early. I'm graduating this year (my third) for a pretty big reason: $20k for tuition and living expenses that I'd rather devote to my years as a despondently unfunded masters student. If you're lucky to have rich parents who will pay for your fourth year without incurring a debt that will hang over their heads until retirement, it would be better for you to stay and get the extra experience.</p>
<p>If you're graduating early because you're burned out, like I practically am, or for money reasons, try to get a job that will get you some experience in the field. In biology it's pretty easy to get a lab tech job somewhere to pay the bills, but I don't know how that would work in math. Can you be a paid AI as an undergrad for the lower level courses (or at least get a partial tuition remission)?</p>
<p>You say you're "looking at applying," as in you haven't started the process yet? So you're thinking of going into graduate studies in 2010? That would give you plenty of time to gain experience.</p>
<p>The lack of research is what is detrimental, I doubt the years in undergrad matter too much. The gpa is solid, but 'did well in class' isn't much indicator of PhD potential, as I read it. That is the key to PhD acceptance from everything I have read (many don't have pubs so don't sweat that.) What kind of reccomendations have you got? Are they professors who will be noted in the field and known to the admit committee?</p>
<p>That GRE is 60 percentile, right? and any reason no subject GRE? my dd didn't take subject GRE either but is math/cs so likely neither one is geared to her area. oh I looked at ACO and that covers some of her interests.</p>
<p>So I guess I'll start in reverse order because it's easiest.
Yes I've read the CS PHd application form. That's why I wasn't particularly concerned about the low math GRE. I ended up taking it cold, and even though it was tenth grade math, I hadn't done those silly kinds of calculations my entire time at college. Forgive me if nobody ever asked me to calculate the following: If there are 500 students and 40% of the class graduates on time, and 10% are seniors, how many juniors are graduating 3 year late? </p>
<p>But my scores are what they are, but according to the document, CMU doesn't really look at the general score, which is what I'm hoping happens this time. I believe I have 3 solid references, and a pretty good Statement of Purpose. I also asked about the lack of math GRE scores, and they said that coming from my school, it wouldn't be a huge problem. They would just rely more on the recommendations. </p>
<p>As far as why I am graduating early, I feel like that has nothing to do with my application. It's mostly for financial reasons, but what would it matter if it wasn't? I get at most a few thousand for financial aid (most of which is actually just work study, which I would earn from my job regardless of their giving me it), therefore 1 less year= +$40,000 and 0 debt for myself or my parents. Otherwise, that's straight up 40k of debt. It seems a bit cruel to hold that against me, but I suppose one could. </p>
<p>I know the quant GREs are bad, but can they not be overlooked?</p>
<p>I agree that the GRE is ridiculous. I certainly didn't like taking it. However, math programs would expect a math major to be able to do very well on it.</p>
<p>About the CMU document, that is about the computer science school. The math department will likely have different criteria for who gets accepted. If I recall reading that paper, they said that they don't pay too much attention to the verbal section unless you are an international student. That suggests that they do look at the quantitative score. Plus, everyone applying probably has a high quantitative score. It would likely be a red flag to see a low score like that, but then again, you could be right.</p>
<p>Regarding graduating early, like others have said, there is nothing explicitly wrong with graduating early. The problem is in the lack of research experience. Additionally, some professors may view graduating early as a sign that you will try to rush through your graduate degree. It would be cruel to hold your financial situation against you, but then again, nobody really is. You are competing against hundreds (thousands?) of other applicants. They are looking for the graduate students who will have the best fit at the school.</p>
<p>Anyway, I wish you luck in whatever you decide.</p>
<p>If you plan to go to grad school, you better stay the extra year to build up recommendations, take advanced upper-level courses in your major, and possibly gain research experience (including a thesis if possible). Graduate school committees simply don't like undergraduates who graduate early unless there's a compelling reason. PhD admissions is ridiculously competitive, and the departments only admit those who they deem capable of doing well in the program.</p>
<p>Let me put it this way. The point is to CONVINCE grad schools that you're up to their programs, and can make use of their top caliber faculty and resources. If you've had less time to show this, it is all the more reason to make that time really really compelling. Also, I think they would require very good teacher recommendations to excuse the fact that you have fewer years to demonstrate consistent mastery. Recommendations should also speak to your ability to succeed as a <em>researcher</em> since you do not have research experience, it seems. </p>
<p>Note -- I believe that if you had less time in school, your GRE's will actually LESS likely be overlooked. Why? Well, the less you have a chance to show off using your standard scheduled activities, the more other factors end up having to be stronger. Someone with a weaker GRE but insane research experience and academics is likely going to escape any nasty looks because of the GRE, because they've shown potential otherwise. </p>
<p>Just be careful! Be sure to convey your reasons very very carefully, for graduating early.</p>
<p>It doesn't matter how many years that you take to graduate -- technically you're not graduating "early," you just managed to finish all your required courses in 3 years. What matters is what you do while you are there.</p>
<p>Frankly, no matter what you have said or seen on the CC topics, a 660Q is low for a mathematics graduate program applicant. I found that my 740 was only in the 85%ile; a 660 is probably in a lower percentile, and while I agree that the GRE is probably not very predictive of your graduate grades CMU may not look kindly upon a mathematics applicant that couldn't score higher than more than 60% of ALL of the applicants on the GRE (even though a 660 is a respectable score, it's somewhat low for mathematics programs).</p>
<p>But even a 660Q could be overlooked if you had strong research experience demonstrating your ability to do mathematical research. Your problem is less in your GRE scores (which are a small part of the application) and more about the fact that you don't have any research experience. Applicants without research experience are unlikely to get admitted to Ph.D programs, especially top Ph.D programs.</p>
<p>You don't necessarily have to do another year of college to improve your stats. In addition to applying to CMU, apply to some mathematics MS programs as well as some jobs that will allow you to get research experience in mathematics (maybe you can be a research coordinator for a lab at a university or a research assistant on a project for a year or two). This will allow you to get more experience AND you don't have to shell out thousands of dollars on another year of undergrad that you don't need. I would also suggest studying for the GRE and retaking it, OR if you think that a GRE Subject Test score would blow that quant score out of the water, taking that instead.</p>
<p>I'm guessing the OP simply wasn't prepared for the arithmetically intensive nature of the GRE. With the grades he/she has as a math major, I'm guessing that a couple weeks of arithmetic practice without a calculator will get him/her near 800.</p>
<p>I'm an EE and I do math day in and day out, but when I took a GRE practice exam cold, I got like 600. After 10 days of practice doing arithmetic without a calculator, I had a 750 on the real exam. A couple more weeks and I'm sure I could have gotten 800.</p>
<p>Your complaints about the GRE are certainly valid (and I think the Subject GRE is equally worthless; being able to do calculus really fast doesn't mean I can write a better PhD thesis), but that doesn't change the fact that you will be expected to get 800. I applied for Math PhDs, and when I asked people about the importance of the GREs, I was almost unanimously told that the Subject GRE is the important one (for purposes of distinguishing among math majors), but 800Q on the General would be expected. There are some programs that will realize you obviously have quantitative skill-- enough to finish a math degree-- and won't hold your score against you. There will probably be others who will see 660Q and throw your application away. Unless you're dead certain that CMU is in the former category, you ought to retake.</p>
<p>Anything less than a 750Q is going to raise eyebrows. Period. The reason math programs say that the general test isn't important is that they don't care about the verbal section (unless you get a 200 - 250 and English is your first language, which might also raise some eyebrows), and they fully expect you to ace the math portion. PhD programs are very intensive and you're expected to be able to focus on a very specific problem for a few years with almost no direction; if you can't get some arithmetic and high school algebra down, it certainly doesn't bode well for the ability to do mathematical research. I know mathematicians can be bad at arithmetic, but there's no excuse to not putting in the extra effort and fixing something like that on your application that's so fixable.</p>
<p>As far as graduating after three years instead of four, you have to ask yourself what you could accomplish in your fourth year. I'd bet that most schools don't even notice if you graduate in three years or four, as they're probably skimming transcripts really quickly to see which math courses you took and how you did in them. What's important to them is your potential to do research in your area of interest. If you don't have any research experience, then that already puts you behind a large portion of the applicants. Spending a fourth year in school getting more experience might certainly be worth the $40,000 as far as experience goes, both for you personally and also for your resume.</p>
<p>If a fourth year in college isn't an option you're willing to take, then you have to realize that you're not nearly as competitive for graduate schools admissions as you could be if you stayed around for an extra year. You probably won't get into the same caliber of schools that you might if you had more experience. This might be the end of the world for you, but it also might be fine. You have to decide if it's worth it for you.</p>
<p>However trivial you may think quantitative section is (and I agree that it's completely useless), a low score necessarily says that you cannot do arithmetics- I don't think there is any redemption from that, especially for a math major.</p>
<p>OP has focused on one fact to the detriment of another. The CMU paper said that GRE, and even GPA does not matter to the top 10 schools, if the student has great research and great LOR. Hello? that is for TOP TEN.</p>
<p>But the paper said that for everyone else, and for all the other schools, scores can be a major factor.</p>
<p>OP should talk to his current school about applying for a one year Masters. If this is a cost issue, his school should help him out, but more importantly, he may be elgible to go on to Masters for final year, then the PhD application will be stronger.</p>
<p>BrownParent - The one year master's suggestion is a great idea if they offer it. I would definitely recommend that to the OP.</p>
<p>Also, I'm under the impression that when someone says that the top schools don't care about GRE and GPA, what that means is more of "We have enough applicants with near perfect GRE scores and GPAs that doing well in either of these endeavors will not make you stand out; however, doing poorly will make you stick out like a sore thumb." Graduate school admissions is often completely based on "How well do we think this student could do research?" but if a student does poorly in his or her undergraduate mathematics classes, it shows an inability to do well in one's main arena and does not bode well for research possibilities. How can you do research if you're unable to master the basics?</p>
<p>Not that the OP has done poorly in math classes, but I just wanted to make that point.</p>