Realistically do I need to take the GRE again?

<p>Hey guys, I want to get your opinion on my GRE. I took it two years ago in my senior year of school(I will be honest I had some sernior-itis going on), got 147V 144Q and a 4 on my writing. Most schools I am looking at say that as a standard a 300 is the minimum they will accept for the GRE. With that being said I graduated college with honors with a 3.85 GPA, and I know I will have stellar letters of recommendation, a strong writing sample and letter of intent and I have been teaching for the last two years.
I am going for my B.A. in Geography with Environmental Emphasis, I am wondering if I need to spend $200 and the next 3 months of my life studying to take the GRE again, or if I have a good shot of getting in as is. I am wanting to save the money and hell, but I don't want to waist time applying to not get in.</p>

<p>I took it back when it was on the 800 scale, but my advice for verbal would be to take your time on the first few questions as I think I made a dumb mistake on an early question and it was too much to recover from my first time taking the test. I think that helped my verbal score jump 50-100 points. As for math, well I was a math major, so I found every question easy, but you should really spend some time studying it if you haven’t taken a math class in many years. Writing can be hit or miss depending on the topics.</p>

<p>You didn’t specify how good of a school you went to, or how good of a school you’re trying to get into. Elite programs probably won’t take you with low GRE scores, and if you went to a mediocre score, 3.85 isn’t a huge accomplishment (from their perspective).</p>

<p>Although I don’t know which schools you’re applying to or anything about geography graduate programs, I can see you being rejected for a 147/144, which is very low on both counts. My experience with graduate programs in general is that a high GRE won’t get you in, but a low GRE can keep you out. If many schools you’re looking at outright say that a 300 is minimum (and “bare minimum” is not what you should be aiming for), it would behoove you to retake it and do better.</p>

<p>And $200 is not much in the grand scheme of things. It’s certainly better than taking the risk of being rejected across the board and having to reapply next cycle. Besides, if you got a 3.85 with honors and are as good a writer as you say (ie, you have solid verbal ability), then it shouldn’t take a lot of studying for you to score relatively well on the GRE–certainly not an intense 3 months’ worth.</p>

<p>Or maybe try your hand outside the US… if you can afford a MA abroad.</p>

<p>Even so, better retake it… and purchase a GRE book as well. However I am not that well-versed on which books are more suitable for a 147/144 student.</p>

<p>You don’t need GRE for BA. Master’s?</p>

<p>Perhaps there are those schools where decent research experience can overcome a low GRE… tell us about it. And, maybe, if you have some research experience (or work experience where geographical skills matter) and have a decent score on retake, you can try a direct PhD application and then drop out after the quals, which is the point where many people earn a MA if done en-route; funding is usually better that way.</p>

<p>And, yes, I suspected a MA was in the cards.</p>

<p>A 147 V puts you in the 32nd percentile; a 144 Q puts you in the 18th percentile. Yes, you need to take it again.</p>

<p>Even if you are aiming for an MA, some funding is partially determined by your GRE scores.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>True, but I don’t recommend this route. Number 1, PhD programs are harder to get into, and these GRE scores are not competitive. But Number 2, PhD programs are designed for PhD students, not master’s students. It seems like a tenuous distinction, but PhD students are generally in it for the long haul and intend to get research or academic positions afterwards. Therefore, most of the advising and career advice is directed towards that. MA students who only want an MA have different needs - primarily with professional development and networking.</p>

<p>Example 1: I didn’t get my MA until the October after my third year of my PhD. Part of this was because my coursework requirements were so stringent; if you are in a PhD program with heavy-ish coursework, you might be encouraged to spread it out over 3 years instead of two in order to do more research - since that’s the point of a PhD. That may not be ideal for someone who wants to graduate in 2 years. Moreover, it took me longer primarily because of my master’s thesis; I wanted to publish it and so did my advisor, so I took longer than the allocated 1 year on it to get it polished up right. If you are in a PhD program, you have to contend with that kind of pressure. It’s not uncommon to take 2.5 or 3 years to earn the MA in a PhD program (although not universal, either).</p>

<p>Also, all of the professional development will be geared towards research and academia.</p>

<p>A related question: is it necessary to retake it if you took it on the 800 point system but within the past 5 years? I’m happy with my score (800Q, 550V, 4.5W) other than the fact that the ETS website says my 800 corresponds to 166 instead of 170.</p>

<p>^^no</p>

<p>When ETS changed the scale, they re-normalized the scoring to spread out the Quantitative scores. The 800 was not turning out to be the 99th percentile. This means that they stretched the top range and that is why the correspondence is 800 --> 167. That being said, there is no reason to take it again. 167 is perfectly fine.</p>

<p>I understand that, but it would have been nicer if they had some sort of raw score to use for the conversion since I got every question right. I realize it doesn’t matter, but honestly, the math section on the test is so basic that there’s no reason it should be used for admissions for any math-intensive program.</p>

<p>If there was one thing I would change on the math section of the general GRE is that it must contain actual college-level math… and not just high school-level math.</p>

<p>But that would be “unfair.” “College-level math” also isn’t very well-defined. That could mean remedial courses, or pre-calculus, or calculus. Or I suppose it could refer to topology or real analysis or other topics from the Math Subject GRE. I agree it’s a problem that the Math section is easier than SAT math, but either you suck it up if you’re applying to humanities/social science stuff, or you ace it and it’s meaningless for math/science admissions.</p>

<p>High school-level math is OK (since pre-calc is high school-level) to have but calculus, college/linear algebra would likely suffice. Adding upper-division pure math is overkill.</p>

<p>Does linear algebra mean “multiply these two matrices,” or does it mean “let V be a finite-dimensional vector space over Q and let T : V -> V be a linear transformation with T^2 = -I. If V has a non-trivial proper subspace W invariant under T, what is the smallest possible dimension of V over Q?” Does calculus mean “differentiate x^2*e^x,” or does it mean “is the set of real-valued differentiable functions with f’(x) = (f(x+n) - f(x))/n for all n the set of polynomials, exponential functions, linear functions, or constant functions?”</p>

<p>One just has to accept that the GRE is pretty meaningless, and the only real reason to have it is to satisfy the universities’ desires, but the departments making admission decisions won’t care, except for Subject Tests.</p>

<p>Edit: I realize my examples are a little extreme, but calculus can range from easy freshman derivatives/integrals to challenging multivariable problems to tough theoretical problems (i.e., analysis). Linear algebra can be easy matrix computations, or it can be tough theoretical problems. If you need to show off your knowledge, a large portion of the Math Subject test covers calculus and linear algebra. Or you can show these classes on your transcript.</p>

<p>College curricula vary quite a bit, it’s not like high school where everyone takes more or less the same set of classes.</p>

<p>But the GRE has to stay accessible to students that didn’t major in a math or science, and that’s the major constraint on how hard the math section of the general GRE should be.</p>

<p>Then why would you want to add calculus and linear algebra? Btw, linear algebra normally is upper-division math (unless you’re talking about a class where you sit around adding vectors and multiplying matrices).</p>