<p>I have noticed that many computational neuroscience programs 'recommend' taking a subject GRE (Berkeley 'strongly recommends' it). How big of a disadvantage is it not to have taken one? I know that you can choose not to submit subject GRE scores, so I suppose taking one (after a lot of studying, of course) couldn't hurt.</p>
<p>Also, there is the question of which one to take. I was a bio major in college (I have graduated), but the bio I studied isn't on the test, so there would be a lot of rote memorization. I was considering the math test, but I have heard it is very hard. The reason that I am attracted to the math test is that I did badly in my math requirement (due to laziness), and I think my perceived inability to do math is my biggest weakness applying for a computational program. I am applying <em>next</em> year, so I would have over a year to prepare for it. Is it doable, or should I stick with memorizing biology?</p>
<p>How much math have you had? The math subject test is target at students who are looking at PhD programs in pure mathematics. It assumes that you have had several years of proof-based mathematics (real and complex analysis, abstract algebra, topology) in addition to the lower-level stuff (linear algebra, single- and multivariable calculus, differential equations, elementary number theory, probability). If you haven’t had much math beyond calculus, you are going to do very very poorly. </p>
<p>If you think you might be up for that, take a practice test and see how you do. FYI, 80th percentile is considered good for pure math and 50th percentile good for applied math. Anything below the 50th percentile I would not submit optionally.</p>
<p>Thanks for the reply. In high school, I took linear algebra, multi calc, vector calc, and differential equations (although obviously, since it was high school, it should be taken with a giant grain of salt), so I do have exposure to more than just calculus. </p>
<p>I completely agree with you that if I took the test now, I would do terribly. But, I do have over a year to study for the test. I have casually worked some questions, and I’ve done fine on the questions on subjects I have background on. Most time in upper-level math classes is spent going over proofs, and since that is not covered on the subject GRE, I think I could cover a decent amount with some (yearlong balls-to-the-wall) self-study. I have A LOT of free time, so if this is the best (though probably most painful) path, it would be worth it.</p>
<p>I have also thought about auditing some math-oriented grad school CNS classes (e.g., stochastic processes), but since it’s an audit, I don’t have anything to show for my abilities. (I could get a rec from the teacher to attest to my abilities, but it is always difficult to foresee whether or not a teacher would be a good source before taking the class.)</p>
<p>I think if your GPA is solid you shouldn’t have to take it. I’ve already talked to some students who were accepted into bio programs at Cal and it seems that half of them took a subject GRE and half didn’t, so statistically it doesn’t put you at a disadvantage if you don’t take it.</p>
<p>I am leaning in the opposite direction of denizen. A strong math subject GRE score might help you tremendously (it IS supposed to be a hard test to do well on, and a strong performance shows strong reasoning skills and not just rote memorization) and getting your calculus/linear algebra/discrete math down cold is bound to help you in any computational field down the road. </p>
<p>Two words of caution. First, research experience is important for grad school admissions. Do not sacrifice a research opportunity to self-study for the math subject GRE. Second, beware of the test format. </p>
<p>I personally found that the calculus & diff eq problems are very predictable and basically straight out of the textbook. Other areas, most notably linear and abstract algebra, real and complex analysis, and topology, have questions from all over the place and you really need to have the theory down cold to get these. And then there are a few questions from random fields (e.g. set theory, graph theory, logic, algorithms, …) that don’t assume any background in the field but require you to think on your feet quickly - these are immensely much easier if you have experience with rigorous mathematics. </p>
<p>With all the necessary math background, I personally found that the biggest obstacle was time. I can easily solve all of these problems given unlimited time and/or some reference material and a computer algebra package, but solving them by hand in 2.5 minutes per problem was a challenge. (You have to breeze through the calculus problems to have enough time to work on the more involved problems later.)</p>
<p>I am a tidbit concerned that you might be underestimating the test - students who spent half (or all in the case of foreign students) of their undergraduate years studying math so successfully that they are motivated to pursue a PhD struggle with it. BUT you sound like a smart kid and if you think you could do well, go for it!</p>
Did you go through the full test? In the second half of the test there are find-the-flaw-in-this-argument questions and questions where finding the correct answer requires basically a proof. (“Which of the following properties is/are equivalent to this condition?”) The math subject GRE definitely assumes that you have experience with proofs.</p>
<p>Barium - the OP asked how much of a disadvantage he would be if he didn’t take the subject GRE. I thought I gave a pretty decent answer; not much of a disadvantage. </p>
<p>Now, a lot of students ask this similar question - take the GRE subject or not? Typically these students don’t have a lot of time before applications are due so it’s just another headache that could greatly waste their time and money, so my answer was somewhat tailored to the general public. </p>
<p>Given the OP’s situation however - a year to prepare, concerned his/her math skills don’t show through w/o the exam - I think he could benefit from taking it. But again, the stance I took in my response was only based on whether it would hurt if the OP didn’t have a subject GRE score, and I stand by what I said. Its never really necessary even in “strongly recommended” circumstances if you’re grades, research experience, etc are in good order.</p>
<p>I think we are both dancing around the following statement: “Not submitting a GRE score would not be held against you, but a strong score might help your application.”</p>
<p>But you are right - I was answering the question “should I study for the [math] subject GRE” which is not the question (“How big of a disadvantage is it not to have taken one?”) that the OP had asked.</p>
<p>To answer barium’s question, I didn’t do the whole test - I just picked out a few from the Math pdf just to see what it was like. I took a number theory class (again, in high school), so I have some experience with proofs, although I’m sure that would also be something to review. </p>
<p>As far as the advantageous vs. disadvantageous, I posed my question a bit ambiguously, but I think both questions are important to what I should plan to do next. If it’s not disadvantageous, I can afford to ‘risk’ taking the math if the time commitment would pay off enough.</p>
<p>I suppose the most important question is whether or not people on an admissions committee would know how much of an undertaking it would be to self-study math and take this test (and how they would weight a math GRE vs. a bio GRE). If working my ass off and getting an okay score on the math test would be looked upon more highly than just memorizing for the bio test and getting a better score. (Of course, actually learning something is infinitely more important to me than memorization, but unfortunately, I do have to ‘play the game’ to a certain extent.)</p>
<p>On the program’s website sometimes it lists explicitly subject GRE exams they recommend (if nothing is listed then call them and ask). If it says anything like “…in Biology, Biochemistry, or Math,” then take take whichever one you can get the best percentile score on (biology in this case). However, if it says Biology only then lucky you. Take the biology test and don’t even worry about it. If it says Math, however, then you’re going to have to study up and take the Math. </p>
<p>The reason is I don’t think adcoms will really know how much work it was for you to study the math GRE. That’s why you should just 1. go with what the programs suggest 2. based on that, take whichever test you’ll do best on.</p>
<p>To add to denizen’s post, I have the impression that programs who ask for a subject GRE of the applicant’s choice (rather than a specific one) want to know how well you do in the area that you know best. They probably don’t want you to spend much time studying for the math subject GRE unless they explicitly ask for the math subject GRE.</p>
<p>From this point of view, it would make a lot more sense to raise your quantitative score on the general GRE than to take a shot at the math subject test.</p>
<p>The issue is that the OP is applying to a neuroscience program with a specialization in the computational subfield. Because neuroscience is interdisciplinary, with applicants coming from diverse academic backgrounds, there’s no set subject GRE. Although applicants in the computational subfield are likely to have a strong background in math and/or computer science compared to other neuroscience applicants, their math background is not generally advanced enough to do well on the math subject GRE, and their computer science background is not advanced enough to do well on that subject GRE. More generally, undergraduate neuroscience majors will have backgrounds in biology, chemistry, molecular biology, math, and psychology, sometimes with specializations in other fields, but they usually do not have the background to do well on the individual subject GREs. Their education has been focused on the neurological aspects of each field instead of having the breadth and depth required to do well on the subject GRE. They have specialized depth instead.</p>
<p>In years past, I’ve seen many CC neuroscience applicants who haven’t taken the subject GRE gain admittance into top programs that recommended it. IIRC, some programs have dropped the recommendation in recent years. My advice is to NOT take the subject GRE unless you believe you have the background to do well in it. If a program requires it, and if you know you can’t do well on it, cross that program off the list.</p>
<p>Thanks for the reply, Momwaitingfornew. You’ve made it clear that not taking a subject test will probably not be disadvantageous for me. But, is there another area that I should be putting my free time into? I will probably be auditing a couple of grad CNS classes and working full-time in my lab, but I still think that I will have a decent amount of free time nonetheless. My thought is that if the math GRE is the best way to strengthen my application, I might as well go for it (and if I do badly, just not send the scores). Do you think I would be better off doing something else in my free time? (Although I haven’t taken the general GRE yet–and will make sure I am completely prepared before taking it–that will not take a year to prepare for.)</p>
<p>If you do well on the math subject GRE, then that’s will strengthen your application, especially since you are already doing full-time research. Auditing courses probably won’t strengthen your application by themselves, although if they help you do well on a subject GRE or prepare you better for graduate studies, then they will be worthwhile. I wouldn’t audit courses just to say that you did.</p>