<p>“There is absolutely no reason I can not acquire the knowledge I need, and get an exceptional test score.”</p>
<p>I think the OP is too smart to really mean what he is writing here. To me, this sentence shows that he has realized that his PhD dream is hopeless - and that he’s just getting a kick out of arguing with us for the sake of arguing.</p>
<p>I’m posting to hopefully provide clarification. If this thread becomes a “can not!/can too!” I will probably refrain from replying. Once again, all the people who gave advice and were patient with my questions, many, many thanks.</p>
<p>plscatamacchia,</p>
<p>LOL :)</p>
<p>I never said it was simple. Please stop putting words into my mouth.</p>
<p>Many people have missed part of high school and do exceptionally well on the test. If the capability is there, along with the ambition and effort, then there is no reason why not. It’s simply irrational that you think people are incapable of acquiring the knowledge they need and putting in the effort to get an exceptional GRE score. </p>
<p>Your “scenario” demonstrates as much.</p>
<p>cosmicfish,</p>
<p>So, you think I can get 580q, 590v? around 600 with a 6. analytical(at least 5 or 5.5).</p>
<p>Well, I’m telling you, I will get at least 700 for both. I understand the significance, and will be putting in all the effort necessary to make this happen. I have no problem with people doubting me, that is absolutely fine. As long as they admit they don’t have all the facts, and are basing their overly conclusive judgements of posts on an internet forum.</p>
<p>I will follow the steps outlined above, and I will eventually get into a PhD program. There is little reason why I will not, if I follow the steps outlined above, based on the advice given to me in this thread.</p>
<p>And…, I have not dug myself into a hole, at all. I have been listening to everything people have said in this thread, except when they are being negative and drawing conclusions without even bothering to read the thread, from their very first post such as the above few users(except kilgali). I know that I have the capability, and I know that if I put in the effort required(without underestimating that effort in the least) I at the least, have a very good chance.</p>
<p>Also, at no point am I trying to undermined the effort or academic accomplishments of people on this forum. I would never intend to do this. With all due respect, people are simply drawing the wrong conclusions.</p>
<p>People have said I have no chance as I stand now</p>
<p>People have also offered advice so I can get to a level where I have a very good chance</p>
<p>I outlined these steps above. I will follow them, I will meet them, and I will have a good chance at doing a PhD in the states at a top university.</p>
<p>Honestly, Can you, or anyone else suggest a reason why I would not have a good chance if I follow the steps listed above, and excel at them? I have no problem with people doubting I can achieve success at each of those steps, but it is another thing to say I have no chance even after following those steps.</p>
<p>EBStenowsi,</p>
<p>Ahh, what is there to say? In the absence of a coherent argument, you have resorted to veiled insults. How…predictable.</p>
<p>josh2008, I’m sure this has been said before, but don’t you think you could be putting your time to better use than arguing on this thread? It’s been 10 pages, and like you’ve said, there have been some great pieces of advice given from incredible students. However, it probably became “can not/can too” a while ago and the advice-to-wankage ratio has gotten low.</p>
<p>You have expressed your point very clearly, and I’m sure there are many that agree. But there is no point in your defending yourself or repeatedly cursing the system, as none of us are in on the admissions committee or on the ETS board. Let others say and think as they like. You’ve gotten your advice and seem to have taken it to heart. Now I highly suggest you turn your efforts towards making those goals of yours a reality.</p>
<p>forgetter,</p>
<p>Thank you for the sensible post. I really have gotten some amazing advice, and I am genuinely appreciative of it. I have a bad character trait, which is to defend myself, when I should instead just walk away.</p>
<p>If some of the original posters reply with questions or further advice I will respond to clarify or say thanks. As you say, there is little point in defending myself further.</p>
<p>Many thanks to everybody who made a positive contribution to the thread.</p>
<p>I will return to let everyone who expressed interest know how I go. Once again, many thanks.</p>
<p>Ciao :)</p>
<p>josh,</p>
<p>once you are able to afford the GRE test prep books, you will discover that even with 3+ months of study, the books and your efforts can really only improve your quantitative score by about 150 points, and your verbal by under 100 points. so if you got a 510 verbal, even sweating bullets with that GRE book and dedicating yourself to study, odds are that you will at best only manage 610 verbal, which is still too low for humanities/social sciences programs.</p>
<p>the difference between 650 verbal and 700 verbal is HUGE. i studied for two months for the GRE and was only able to lift my 620 on practice tests to 670 on the test. on practice tests, i could often score 690, maybe 700, but never break it. that was fine with me, because 670 is the 95th percentile and was good enough to get me into my top fit PhD program with their best fellowship package. but even with studying for as much as 6 months, there is a ceiling on how much you can improve. to a degree, the GRE does test your general ability. you will not break 700 verbal. you can get into a masters program without it (even a PhD program, provided the rest of your app is strong), but you won’t break 700 verbal.</p>
<p>will one semester of latin help you in archeology/anthro programs that don’t require latin? probably not. one semester of study is negligible and within a year or two of not taking latin, you’d probably lose what little knowledge you had. ad-coms know this, and one semester of a language demonstrates neither proficiency nor dedication. the ability to read and translate latin would help you, certainly, but the amount of latin you have now will not give you that ability, so admissions committees won’t care.</p>
<p>for an anthro/archeology degree, i am not sure exactly what you will need overall, but you’ll definitely still need proficiency in two languages (probably french and german, though it varies by program). and you don’t have this. so even with choosing anthro over history, you are looking at two years of language study, picking up two foreign languages simultaneously.</p>
<p>and yes, even with all this language study, you could only get into a terminal masters history program in the states. from there, you can apply to a different school for a PhD, but as you pointed out, you already have a terminal masters. you won’t get transfer credits for your current terminal MA, and you won’t get many for your US-earned terminal MA, so you’re looking at one year of language study (minimum), two years of a US terminal MA, and 4 years of a PhD (minimum). that’s a lot of time. even with the language study, the LORs, and the improved GRE scores (even if they broke 700, which they won’t), you will still not make it into an MA/PhD program right off the bat.</p>
<p>so… you’ve already got a terminal masters, and don’t see the point in getting another one. neither do i, frankly, which is why i suggested you take two or three years to gain these languages and then apply for the joint MA/PhD programs outright. your australian online degree will mean nothing to US grad schools and you likely won’t get any transfer credits from it, so you’ll be starting from scratch like any other BA student would be. get the languages (and get at least 2 years of one of them, or it’ll be another terminal masters for you AT BEST) and apply in a year or two.</p>
<p>in all honesty, it probably won’t be enough. your profile is absolutely horrendous up until this point, and you started this thread with the belief that what you have right now could be enough for the top schools. you’ve quickly been told it’s not enough for even the lowest-ranked accredited programs, but the part that troubles me is that it hadn’t occurred to you (before this thread) that you simply weren’t good enough as a student to attend a US grad school. at every step of the way, whichever direction you choose (CS or ancient studies), you will be going up against dozens, even hundreds of students competing for the same 3-5 spots, and they’ve probably been stellar throughout their academic careers. they have high undergrad GPAs, did well on their GREs the first time around (remember, schools will get copies of every test you took, not just your best), and better letters of recommendation. some of them will even be published, and many of them will dwarf you in the language department.</p>
<p>even if you take everyone’s advice to heart and improve your application overall, your chances will not be “good.” chances aren’t good for near-perfect students as it is. there are many, many fully qualified applicants who get turned away year after year. so you have to ask yourself: if you do everything you’re planning to do, if you put all the work into it, get the GRE scores, courses, and LORs you need, and you still get rejected from every school you apply to, what then? will it all have been a waste? because, honestly, if you do everything to improve yourself, there is still a very high chance you won’t get in anywhere. a “better than good” chance, if you will.</p>
<p>Well, you scored better than I did on the GRE!! My GPA was a 3.08 and I got accepted to the first and only grad school I applied to, Boston College. All you can do is write a VERY strong essay and have GREAT recommendations! I would get your advisor, current employer to sell you… </p>
<p>MIT, I hate to tell ya, my ex worked there and you can probably rule that out… I would say if you attended a “B” college for 2 semesters, maintaining a minimum 3.8 GPA would increase that by about 50% but it’s the toughest school in teh US.</p>
<p>I have a link to the highest ranked schools for graduate social work programs that I’m sure they have highest schools for your study, email me and I’ll send the link…</p>
<p>Josh, I’m glad you found some good advices from this marathon discussion, I agree that if you take a master degree from some mid range school with great GPA you will have a decent shot at good programs</p>
<p>just keep this in mind—master takes around 2 years, and PhD takes another 5 years… make sure you are willing to invest that many years of your life to get a degree after you already started working (a PhD student with $10k saving??? that’s just… weird LOL)</p>
<p>Strangelight,</p>
<p>Thankyou again for your reply. Yours, and the subsequent replies, are truly refreshing after the previous insultfest.</p>
<p>I respect you, and your advice a lot, but I have to strongly disagree with you that my score can only improve by a maximum of 150q/100v. I may lack your experience with the test, but looking at what you are saying rationally, the only reason I can see for reaching that conclusion is assuming a certain capacity, despite any amount of effort put in.</p>
<p>This is where I have to disagree, without meaning to come across as stubborn or arrogant… My previous scores are not indicative of my capacity in the least. Of my knowledge, yes, which is quite a different thing. Without going into details, there were many circumstances, both practical and emotional, leading to me not putting in the appropriate amount of effort. Part of this was having a duedate on when I could last take the test, which could not be rescheduled, and that I did not want to lose. </p>
<p>In any event, I am positive that if I put in 6 months, or even a year if need be, that I can get both my scores above 700. I don’t want to dispute this further, as there are only two possibilities. I am talking my mouth of, and will have a sad surprise, or I am correct in my bleieve a score of at least 700 is possible. I am the only one truly in a position to make an educated guess, and will have to see if that is correct, as I believe it will be.</p>
<p>I have the opportunity to take a second semester of latin, by choosing to not receive credit for an elective. I am considering taking this, as it is another opportunity to get better grades and improve my GPA, although I would think 1 year of latin would be much the same as one semester for what you are saying.</p>
<p>Why is it, that even with all the language study suggested, I could still only gain entry to a terminal MA in the states? What would be required to gain admission to a non terminal MA, aside from doing a bachelors course? In the student profile momwaitingfornew pointed out, a post-baccalaureate certificate and years of field experience seemed to be sufficient.</p>
<p>I am unclear on how a terminal MA program in the states could lead to a PhD program. Based on what WilliamC was saying, the major point about a terminal MA is that they do not prepare you for PhD study. If you have not said this, I apologise for misunderstanding you.</p>
<p>I have to stress, yet again, my degree is not an “online” degree. It is an accredited degree from a respected university in Australia, and I linked to my course earlier in the thread in a reply to WillaimC. It should not be confused with some of the online degree programs offered in the states.</p>
<p>If I pursue AH/anthro, I will certainly get the language experience and apply for an MA/PhD program as soon as I am in a position to be competitive.</p>
<p>One more note…My intention with starting this thread, which I apologise for not making clear, was to find out if there were ways to get around a PhD. I certainly underestimated how competitive the applications would be. I understand exactly what I need to do to improve my chances, and will work hard towards this end. Additionally, I have some CS papers I have been working on that I can finish and, if published, this will no doubt improve my chances, for CS at least.</p>
<p>I appreciate your honesty, and I do understand that even if I get stellar LOR’s, a combined GRE score of 1400 and an exceptionally high GPA in a US masters program I will still have many things bringing me down and other students will be more competitive. This is where I will have to work that much harder to overcome this…i.e. original research, incredible SOP, etc.</p>
<p>To answer your question, if at the end, I put in all this effort, there is no way it will have been a waste. I may not achieve my goal at getting into a top US university, but at the very least, I will be able to do my PhD at a “lesser” US university, or in Australia. In addition, everything I will have learnt, both in content and experience, could never have been said to have been a waste.</p>
<p>JenSully9,</p>
<p>I’ll have to see how I go from here on :)</p>
<p>Mr.Zoo,</p>
<p>Many thanks for the kind words :)</p>
<p>I really did get great advice. My only regret is that some people had to bring down the thread with needless insults and arrogance, and I contributed by responding.</p>
<p>I certainly am willing to put in the time and effort, as it is certainly my goal. 7 years of hard work is well worth it for the rewards(it’s actually about 10k, so about $14k…all as a result of a different type of hard work…part of the reason I did not have time to learn german).</p>
<p>i know that you think if you work really hard, you can break 700. not everyone can break 700 on the GRE. especially on the verbal section, breaking 700 is not just about knowledge and memorization. it is about reading comprehension skills, time management, and understanding of grammatical structure. believe it or not, some of this cannot be acquired in 6-12 months. very, very, very few people score 800 on the GRE verbal section. if the amount of time one spends studying correlated to the score they could receive on the verbal section, you would see many more 700-800 verbal scores.</p>
<p>i will say this again. 700 V is about the 97th percentile. that means that you did better than 97% of the people that took the test that year. at that extremely high level, i think studying gives way to natural aptitude, and i don’t think you have the aptitude to break 700. i’m not saying that as an insult, i don’t think i could break 730 if my life depended on it.</p>
<p>when you do finally buy one of those prep books (and you should), you’ll see that they’ll tell you right there that studying can only improve your scores by a finite amount. even studying for too long can be a detriment because you will forget some of the stuff you learnt a few months earlier.</p>
<p>by all means, study as hard as you can and aim for 700 on either (or both) scores. but also understand that not everyone can get a 700 on the verbal section regardless of how much work they put into it. if you can score a 700 on either section of the test, i think a lot of people here will reevaluate your prospects. i do also think, however, that you will have to study quite hard to simply make it into the 600s on the verbal section. something over 650 V will set you up fairly well for top 40 programs, provided you do everything else necessary to get your application up to snuff.</p>
<p>i would suggest beyond just working on increasing your vocabulary that you focus specifically on the reading comprehension sections of the test. just a hunch.</p>
<p>also, i am very glad to hear that doing all the prep work necessary won’t be a waste to you if you don’t get into a program in the states. that’s great to hear, actually.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>for entry into a combined MA/PhD program, you’ll need to be able to translate 1 page of a foreign language (usually an academic article) into english in two hours, with the use of a dictionary. this translation will be graded. if you don’t pass these translations, you won’t be awarded your MA or PhD. when grad programs look at prospective students, if they see that a student doesn’t have the sufficient coursework to be able to do this sort of translation, then they won’t take you on.</p>
<p>for many history programs, a student having 2 years of a primary language and 1 year of a secondary language is enough for admission. unfortunately for you, ancient history is a slightly different case. it is far more competitive than most history subfields, and as a result they can demand more of their students. they will undoubtedly want to see three years of at least one language, as well as two years of another and at least a start on a third. without this, you can’t get into a PhD program for ancient history. so you could take 2 and a half years to get your latin up to 3 years, get two years of greek, and get a year or two of french or german, and then you could make a go for a combined MA/PhD program. but without three years of one language and two of another, you will at best gain entrance to terminal masters programs.</p>
<p>a terminal MA means you won’t be able to continue into the PhD program at the school that awarded the MA. schools have an unofficial policy to not accept their terminal masters students into their PhD programs. i don’t know why, but it’s standard practice. you can, however, use a terminal MA to gain entry into a PhD program at a different school, where you will have to do 4 years at the PhD level on top of the 2 you did at the MA level.</p>
<p>so terminal masters degrees aren’t a dead end to the PhD, but they’re a dead end to a PhD at that particular school. holding a terminal masters can be a real boon to a student’s application, but as i’ve said before, you’ll still need the three years/two years language requirements to get into the PhD program.</p>
<p>so… basically…</p>
<p>without the 3 years/2 years/1 year of languages, you can only get into a terminal masters program. once you complete the terminal MA AND get the 3 years latin/2 years greek/1 year german or french, then you can get into PhD programs. with the terminal MA but without the languages, you’ll still be shut out of the PhD programs.</p>
<p>you might be able to get into a combined MA/PhD if you take 2-3 years to work on your languages first, but that’s a lot of time to spend only learning languages and not learning history, so a lot of people go for the terminal MA and continue upgrading their languages at the same time. i imagine that’s what you’ll try to do.</p>
<p>i will remind you, though, that while you can get into a terminal MA without having 3 years/2 years/1 year of three languages, you can’t get in with just one semester of latin and knowledge of a language you won’t be using in your research.</p>
<p>Josh, right now, as you prepare to implement your plan, you must decide between CS and AH. You cannot possibly prepare for both. For AH, you’ll have to concentrate on intense language instruction, and for CS, intense math preparation. Both can, and probably should, be supplemented by one or more additional courses in the field. I’m pretty sure that, if you haven’t taken statistics, you should do so for either path.</p>
<p>I admire your determination to implement your plan. Make it as specific as you can, and realize that it’s going to take years. If your passions are indeed equal between the two, decide which is the more realistic (and quickest) path to overcoming deficiencies.</p>
<p>I do want to point out that the student profiled on the Penn page (the one who majored in computer science) went to an Ivy League school for undergraduate studies, which puts him in the top student population in the US, regardless of major. </p>
<p>Strangelight’s point about the GRE V is a good one. It’s more than vocabulary testing, although obviously that’s one area where a student can study to do better. The reading comprehension and, worse, the analogies (which combine vocabulary with the ability to see relationships) test skills which cannot be easily learned. For that reason, some people have suggested that the verbal GRE is a test of IQ, something that is supposed to remain relatively static. However, I do agree with you: if your first tests did not adequately reflect your true abilities, then you can do significantly better if you understand the test. Just keep in mind that this year, a verbal score of 630 is in the 90th percentile, high enough for all CS programs and many AH programs. Remember that GRE scores don’t get you admitted; they just keep you from being cut in the first round. If you can get a verbal of 630 or higher and a quantitative score of 700 or higher, that should put you in the ballpark. (With CS, you’ll have to get a 750 or higher.) Don’t make your goals so unrealistic that you end up being disappointed with perfectly good scores. </p>
<p>Keep in mind also that you really can only afford to take the GRE one more time. Schools don’t like to see lots of sittings – two is usually the max, but three, especially in a case like yours, will be acceptable. Four or five times . . . that’s really bad. If you do well, you may want to address it with a single sentence in your SOP, something like, "I realized after getting my first two GRE scores back that attending graduate school was not something one could do lightly, and so I set to work on preparing myself more rigorously for advanced studies by enrolling in intensive German and Greek classes . . . " Don’t talk about studying for the GREs, just mention how the scores prompted you to realize how much you still needed to do, and how you did it.</p>
<p>And if you bomb the GREs a third time, accept that graduate education in the US won’t be in your future.</p>
<p>Just as you’ll have to take two or more languages for archaeology, you’ll have to take more than intro to calculus for CS. You have to get the “minimums” out of your head. If you choose CS, go to the Princeton site I pointed you to, and see how many of those undergraduate courses including math you can cover before you apply. Keep in mind that even all Princeton CS students who complete that major aren’t necessarily able to gain admission in a graduate school program. Remember that CS straddles math and engineering. When CS was a new field, some schools put it in the math department while others put it in the engineering school, something which should alert you to the kind of preparation you need.</p>
<p>You’ve gotten some good information from this thread. You seem determined. Now you just have to figure out how you can accomplish your goals while holding down a job to pay the bills.</p>
<p>The popularity of this thread is quite interesting. Had you asked for advice and presented average or better admissions “qualifications” I doubt this thread would have more than a handful of responses. The same arguments and observations have been made by different posters ad nauseum, as well. I have to wonder why this is the case; why do some individuals here feel so compelled to reiterate the hopelessness of your desires, especially when they aren’t necessarily contributing a fresh perspective or anything? There is an equal amount of legitimately helpful responses, as well, but I’m intrigued by the other half.</p>
<p>Is it possible you’ve unleashed the insecurities of those who feel their degrees and worth are threatened by the possibility of perceived mediocrity actually obtaining admittance into a “respectable” program? I realize this statement could elicit some serious criticism, but I don’t really care. Here’s a radical suggestion for you Josh: ignore the circle jerk of egos and the sham that education often is. I think someone here claimed graduate admissions was hard for a reason… or something like that. I think that’s complete crap, because really hard things aren’t so well-defined: if you can go to a bookstore and purchase 500 self-help books on “beating” the GRE or fostering relationships with professors, it isn’t hard. I saw this the other day and laughed: How to Win at College: Surprising Secrets for Success from the Country’s Top Students.</p>
<p>If the reality of the situation is that you want to learn (and I hope it is), you don’t need anyone to admit you into their little club to do so. That’s actually the easy way, because it’s so clear what you need to do to get there. However, if you don’t play by the rules, and this is a game, you can’t play at all. Posters are correct in that you’re “competing” with others who have mastered this game. You are, essentially, stepping on the toes of those who take this game -really- seriously.</p>
<p>I also recall people objecting to your desire to obtain two PhDs, especially in very different fields. After all, how could you possibly snub those who expect you to be a good little research drone? Don’t you want to make them look better when publishing countless dry papers that nobody reads except for those in the club? Real genius does not require anyone’s permission or stamp of approval. Of course, I’d be pretty naive if I said society would view you the same as a PhD from MIT, unless you’re really lucky (or unlucky, depending on how you look at it).</p>
<p>Bottom line is this: graduate programs do not sprinkle magic dust over you and transform you into a cerebral giant. They teach you a secret handshake so you can get your ideas spread around and provide you with some resources. Luckily for you, you’re still equipped with a brain, yes? If you don’t get in anywhere and have some time and a good idea you’ve got everything you need. What a horrifying thought that you’re somehow not entitled to sate your curiosity because of the GRE or high school. I hope primarily to show you that your desires DO NOT rest on the GRE or undergrad GPA. If, on the other hand, you’re exclusively seeking a “degree” from a prestigious university care less about the actually learning… well, there’s not much I can say.</p>
<p>My response is not aimed at anyone in particular and is just a reflection on the whole. I’m not trying to insult anyone attending graduate school, either, as I’d be a hypocrite. Seriously, Josh, good luck.</p>
<p>JS911, I’m not going to disagree with your statement. I am agreeing with it, actually. If a student with a low undergrad GPA and a mediocre grad GPA, and terrible GRE scores, who lacks the professional relationships with professors and prerequisite courses for graduate study gets into a program – yes, it does threaten the worth of our degrees. I’m in psychology. If my program admitted someone without basic statistics knowledge or who had never taken general psychology, they would fail out of my program in the first year. If we get students who consistently fail out of the program, my program’s reputation goes down. A poor reputation in the field makes it more difficult for graduates to get jobs, more difficult for the department to recruit excellent scholars, and more difficult for our department’s faculty to earn grants for research.</p>
<p>So no, you’re right – I don’t want anyone with poor preparation in psychology and statistics in my program as a colleague, nor do I want anyone who believes that they are special and above the system and who doesn’t want to play by our rules here, because they ruin it for everyone, generally end up being a giant pain, and eventually fail out anyway.</p>
<p>Are some of the things in graduate education arbitrary? Of course, that’s the way it is everywhere. IS everything arbitrary? NO. Graduate faculty and scholars have found methods that work for producing top scholars in the field. A big part of being a top scholar is having the foundational knowledge in the field. Another big part is being able to generate original ideas and about that foundational knowledge to push forward the limits. And a third big part is being able to play the game. It doesn’t matter how brilliant you are, if you aren’t willing to play the game, you won’t get very far. That’s not just academia; that’s life in general.</p>
<p>Graduate school is not about genius. Most of us are not genius. It is about 40% about intelligence and 50% about hard work, dedication, perseverance, and motivation. (The other 10% is other factors.) In addition to that, the intention of graduate programs is not to make you into a “cerebral giant,” so I fail to see what that statement is relevant here. The purpose of graduate programs is to equip you to work within your field, and conduct research as an independent scholar. It’s not only about learning. You can take classes at $400 a pop to learn.</p>
<p>Some of us take our “game” seriously, just like people in other fields take their specific games seriously, too. I don’t see anything wrong with that.</p>
<p>“They teach you a secret handshake so you can get your ideas spread around and provide you with some resources.”</p>
<p>This is, metaphorically speaking, essentially true. The point is, if you want more resources and a job in the field, you have to perform the secret handshake. It seems as if the OP does indeed want to work within the field, so he will have to join the frat and learn the handshake.</p>
<p>Grad school is not only about curiosity, and that may be the OP’s problem (it certainly is yours). You have to have more than curiosity to get through it. Just like you have to more than “like to argue” to be a good lawyer and more than wanting to “help people” to be a good doctor.</p>
<p>StrangeLight,</p>
<p>I do understand that not everyone can break the 700 barrier, and that there is a limit to just how much can be accomplished with study and effort. I also understand, that given the information available to you, you have drawn to the conclusions that I don’t have the capacity/aptitude to (b)reach the 700 barrier.</p>
<p>With this, I have to respectfully disagree. As I explained in my last post, there were many factors influencing why I did not study as hard as I should have and do as well on the GRE as I could have. Based on the facts you have, which are necessarily limited, I understand your position. However, as I have access to all the facts(concerning me), I feel it is incorrect.</p>
<p>AS I said previously, I will either get a rude shock and be shown to be wrong, or I will be shown to be correct. Time will tell, and I will post back here in a year or so with my results. I am also fairly sure my reading comprehension was fine, and it was my vocab that let me down. I will, in any event, be working on both areas tirelessly until I am satisfied.</p>
<p>The entry test for an MA/PhD was interesting. As was your explanation that a terminal MA may be a pathway to a PhD, but not at the school it was received. That clarifies things a bit further. I understand the importance of languages, and if I am to continue down the AH/anthro path, that is what I will be focusing on.</p>
<p>Once again, thankyou for your advice. I will more than likely keep referring to it, and other parts of this thread.</p>
<p>Momwaitingfornew,</p>
<p>I understand all too well that I have to decide on a specific discipline, and that is not something I have gotten around to doing, as I have not had the time to dedicate to investigating everything more thoroughly. I do understand it is the first step of course.</p>
<p>I do understand the significance of GRE scores, and that is good advice to address it in my SOP. I understand the importance of bombing out a 3rd time, and that simply will not happen.</p>
<p>I’m going to have look at what will be required for CS. I understand that the “minimum” requirements are not necessarily reflective, but I also understand, something that people don’t wish to acknowledge, is that I have studied a significant amount of CS courses already.</p>
<p>As for holding down a job…I’ve been working the last few years and have quite a bit of money saved up. I can pretty much dedicate the next few years to just studying, allowing me to focus purely on my study. Which is a good thing :)</p>
<p>js911,</p>
<p>Your post was well written and most insightful, and I do agree with much of it. Thankyou for the read. :)</p>
<p>juillet,</p>
<p>I appreciate where you are coming from, But I have to disagree with a few things in your post.</p>
<p>Someone who did not have the preparation you speak of, and managed to overcome this and acquire this knowledge would not be a detriment to the reputation of your program in the least. If anything, they would be a testament of capability, perseverance and ambition. This is nothing to do with the admissions program, but everything to do with an applicant in a worse position managing to get themselves into a position via hardwork to pass entry. This is not “beating the system” nor does it ruin it for anyone else.</p>
<p>I agree not everything in graduate school is arbitrary. I don’t agree that they have a method for producing the top scholars in a field, at all. I am sure a great many are left behind, and many of those would be better candidates than those admitted. This is partly what I was getting at at the start of the thread, which people took as referring to me. I did not mean it to refer to me, at all. In any event, the discussion of how well the system works, and how much is arbitrary is a complex one, which many papers and books have been dedicated to, and I leave it to those people to further investigate and settle the issue.</p>
<p>The rest of your post was interesting, and advice taken on board.</p>
<p>Once again, thank you everybody for your replies.</p>
<p>I don’t want to make a long response on why your program’s reputation shouldn’t be dragged down for his trying, and I think Josh’s actually did this already in his post. The only point I’ll make is that I think it’s interesting you believe the intention of grad school is produce “independent scholars” who rely on their program’s reputation (as noted by your own concern) and not their own merits exclusively… seems like a contradiction. Unless you meant independent in the “ivory tower” sense.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not quite sure what you mean by this. I’ve also played the game… the only difference is that I don’t believe it’s a necessary one. I’m not opposed to grad school, and, perhaps to your surprise, I’ve actually defended its purpose to several people.</p>
<p>Josh, I don’t think juillet believes you would drag down the worth of the program if you did the preparation. If you were admitted as is, then the value of all the degrees would be diminished; however, you know what you have to do, and having done it and done it well, no one will resent your nontraditional path.</p>
<p>On a note related to juillet’s post (but not directed to Josh), another devaluation of degrees occurs when the faculty grants degrees to substandard students. The admitted students who don’t have the chops must fail out, or else everyone’s degree is suspect. Admissions standards are rigorous for this very reason: the faculty doesn’t want students who cannot do the research and who cannot go out into the world to use that secret handshake. They would much rather “fail” a student by denying him admission than do so after having expended funding and effort to educate him…</p>
<p>Wow long thread! </p>
<p>I skimmed through… did anybody answer what the difference between an IT and CS degree is? I went to uni in Australia (maybe the same one as josh since we had GPA on a 7.0 scale - University of Queensland?) where I studied mech engineering. There were degrees offered in computer engineering and IT and I always had the impression that IT was a ‘watered down’ version of the computer engineering degree as I had a friend who found CE too hard and changed to IT because he said it was easier. Perhaps not representative but I also though IT focused more on applied stuff like how to be a network admin or something to that effect. </p>
<p>Another observation: my grad GPA (at a US school) is higher than my UGPA was. Conversely, I would argue everybody in my program deserves the high grades since they seem to be a smart bunch 
</p>
<p>Oh and as for GREs I’d echo the sentiment of others here in that they won’t make your application but they can break it if you have bad scores 
For mathy degrees verbal also doesnt seem to matter at all because one guy in my program apparently scored in the 20th percentile for verbal.</p>
<p>good luck!</p>
<p>Bigglemon, in the US, we have computer engineering, computer science, and information technology. Although the three overlap, they require different skill sets.</p>
<p>There are actually 5 computing fields in the United States:</p>
<p>-Computer engineering (CE) was born out of electrical engineering and focuses on hardware and related software.
-Computer science (CS) is the oldest and most common computing degree and has its roots in mathematics departments, usually. It is concerned with theory and high-level software.
-Information systems (IS) deals with the organizational issues of business using computer systems to improve the flow of information.
-Information technology (IT) deals with the maintenance and use of technology in business.
-Software engineering (SE) is about managing the complexity of large software. </p>
<p>IT and SE are the newer branches, so they seem a little less defined to me. In the US, at least, IT and IS are closely tied to business schools. This document has a lot of info on these degrees, but it is a couple years old: <a href=“http://www.acm.org/education/curric_vols/CC2005-March06Final.pdf[/url]”>http://www.acm.org/education/curric_vols/CC2005-March06Final.pdf</a></p>
<p>I read through this whole thing and wanted to reply. After thinking about it, I have faith in the OP’s ability to do well on the GRE. Why? Because the quantitative section, and math at that level, is very learnable. It’s much more learnable than the verbal, and he did score 510, ~64th percentile, on the verbal. We’re not talking about an IQ test here, this is the quantitative section of the GRE. My guess is that he’s never really had to buckle down and learn math and so he just hasn’t learned how to study for it yet. No wonder he did so poorly. After all, he hasn’t taken calculus and he never learned high school math. The average business major knows more math than he does. My suggestion to the OP is to go out, buy a book on GRE math and read the whole thing. Take as many practice GRE exams as you can, do every GRE math problem you see. You should be able to correctly answer the hardest GRE math problems out there in under 30 seconds. In fact, you should be at the level where you can tutor others in GRE math. Don’t take the GRE again until you’re at that level.</p>
<p>I think the OP should know at least univariate calculus and basic linear algebra to prepare for a good graduate education in the US for CS. If I were the OP, I would postpone applying to a graduate program until after I’ve taken those courses and done very well in them. These courses will also help you with the math needed for the GRE.</p>
<p>One thing that was unclear was the OP’s ability to do well on the GRE subject test for CS. He mentioned he took a few practice tests before and apparently did nearly perfect on them. What percentile did you get on your practice tests? It’s a hard test and a good score on that would remove any doubts about the OP’s potential to succeed in a challenging CS environment.</p>