Hypothetical Question About Admissions to Clinical Ph.D's

[Solracselbor]

So I have a 3.7 gpa cum. and a 3.85gpa psy. I have 1 semester of research assistance. I still have not taken the GRE's but i am schedualed for Nov.1. Assuming I only get a 1000 GRE cumulative score, what are my chances of getting into a Clinical Ph.D program? Also, with this regard what schools would you apply to that would increase your chances of getting in (i.e UCLA vs Alliant)?

***UPDATE
MAY 17, 2009

Well, it has been a very long time since I first posted on this board with questions regarding the GRE and graduate school admission. I took the GRE's Nov 21st and scored bellow 1,000...yes I thought I was doomed for disaster...but I wasn't. I wont post my actual score because, well, the term "below 1,000" is far more positive than my actual score

After that day I really felt compelled to take a year off, or just apply to some Masters Programs. However, after talking to one of my professors he advised me to apply to one or two Ph.D programs in hopes of getting feedback as to the exact reasons why I wasn't admitted. I decided to apply to three: 1) One school was way out of my reach, 2) the other school was still out of my reach, and the 3) third school was also out of reach just not as far as the first two. So I wrote my purpose statements, got three LOR, filled out all the apps, paid the fees, and waited. I also included a research paper I had completed for my Research assistantship during that semester.

Well, February rolled around and I got my first rejection from the 2nd school. I wasn't surprised and I received no feedback as to why (which I really didn't need anyways). Then around early March I got my second letter of REJECTION from the 3rd choice, also no feedback. Fortunately, at around the same time, I got a bunch of acceptance letters from psychological research master programs, which at least made me feel like I had something secured. Then in early April I received it, my final rejection letter...or at least I thought. This letter wasn't larger or more grand in any way when compared to the others, so when I opened it, to my surprise, I received a request for an INTERVIEW!

Anyways, I made arrangements to go to the school and I was nervous as all hell. But to make a long story short, I received a letter a week later telling me that I was accepted! I was told by many people, including one professor, that I would not even be considered due to my GRE scores..at least they were wrong. I'm not sure how much my "minority status" played in this decision but the state in which the school is located does not allow affirmative action. One of my profs. did say he would write me a "bitchin" LOR and, judging by the outcome, it may very well have been.

In the end, a 3.72 GPA, 1 year of research, Below 1,000 GRE score, 3 letters of recommendation, and, what many consider, an exceptional purpose statement was all it took for me to be admitted into a top tier clinical psychology Ph.D program.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[psybee]

So I have a 3.7 gpa cum. and a 3.85gpa psy. I have 1 semester of research assistance. I still have not taken the GRE's but i am schedualed for Nov.1. Assuming I only get a 1000 GRE cumulative score, what are my chances of getting into a Clinical Ph.D program? Also, with this regard what schools would you apply to that would increase your chances of getting in (i.e UCLA vs Alliant)?

1000 is low, low enough to seriously limit your chances. are you sure that's the best you could do? if there was any chance of doing better by having more prep time, i'd wait a year, get another year of research under my belt, up those gre's, and apply then. unless you have to be in school to stay in the country, taking a year off really can be good thing. with a 1000, UCLA is very much unlikely to happen, and schools like alliant (besides being totally different from UCLA) are expensive as heck and will put you in a world of debt.

i'm not saying it's impossible to get into a program with a 1000 gre, but it'll be tough. in general though, there's more out there than UCLA and Alliant. there are great programs in less popular parts of the country that fund and are more flexible/have lower averages and medians for GRE scores. i'd look into those, too, though 1000 will still be low there. how good is your RA expereince?

i'd really recommend taking some time to find programs you love, doing what you need to do to become competitive (your GPA is great so that's at least done) and apply. PHD programs are hard, and from those i know who have been there, it's a nightmare to slog through a program you attended not because it was a great fit but because they let you in.



good luck!

 

[erg923]

I would go even further and say your chances would be nill with 1000. Thats the lowsest common denominator, and clincial program doesnt want the lowest denominator they are looking for the highest. Trust me they can afford to be as picky as they are. Unless you had ENORMOUS qualifications that could trump that, such as Ph.d in another research field, or gobs of publications, its nill realy. A good GPA and 1 semester of experience is not even close. Most applicants will have 3.7s and good research experience. You really would get tossed out on the first pass, sorry. Alliant doesn't require the GRE at all, but I wouldn't go there. UCLA and Allient ave absolute nothing common. People who go to one, would be miserable at the other.

 

[deleted176373]

So I have a 3.7 gpa cum. and a 3.85gpa psy. I have 1 semester of research assistance. I still have not taken the GRE's but i am schedualed for Nov.1. Assuming I only get a 1000 GRE cumulative score, what are my chances of getting into a Clinical Ph.D program? Also, with this regard what schools would you apply to that would increase your chances of getting in (i.e UCLA vs Alliant)?

0 (or close to it.) for competitive clinical psych programs.

Of course, Alliant (non-competitive) vs UCLA (very-competitive) is a whole different story. These schools have nothing in common beyond offering coursework in clinical psychology. You couldn't have picked two schools at more opposite ends of the spectrum.

So while you might have a 100% chance at Alliant or Argosy, you still have a 0% chance at UCLA or ASU.

There are exceptions, e.g. Our Lady of the Lake Counseling Psy.D., low GRE (~1000), High Cost ($25k/yr), but looks like a really decent program after a visit. Good facilities, etc, and they are selective despite the low GRE cutoff.

Another great school that has good facilities, low GRE hurdle, and great facilities. Oklahoma State University. GRE (~1100), mostly funded, low tuition costs (state school), and selective with good faculty.

Mark

 

[myelin]

Sadly, you'd lack about 200-300 points on the GRE to be considered for admission to a solid PhD program. You could still have a chance with more research experience and publications, but it would be a stretch. To put it clearly, my GRE score is less than 1100, but I will have a MA degree and 6 years of research experience with publications and I still don't know if I will be accepted to a PhD program.

 

[Solracselbor]

Thanks for the info. The reason i believe i may score a 1000 is because on the SAT's i only got 1010 (twice), however i didn't study at all. In the past 4 days i have studied for the gre approx 25 hours total. I have been bustin my butt trying to comprehend all this. I realize i get lots of answers on the quantatative wrong because i make stupic mistakes on artihmatic (like forgetting to carry the one, etc). The comparison i made about alliant and ucla wasnt to say which is better, but to ask what schools would be easier to get into in my circumstance (comparing really hard schools like UCLA to really easy schools-- Alliant)

Also, i bought the insider's guide to clinical psy. 2008, and there was an interesting passage that applies to me: Under the heading "For the racial/ethnic Minority Applicant" they talk about how nearly every APA-accredited program makes special effors to recruit minority applicants. They found in a study of Psy.D programs that some lower, or waive GRE scores, give extra points, lower or waive gpa, and some programs interveiewed all minority applicants regardless of their materials. Furthermore, since women are compising 70% of all doctoral students some schools are acknowledging males as minorities. Now, I know this is a HUGELY CONTROVERSIAL topic, but putting ALL BIASES aside, do you think this fact will make me more competetive?

Also these are the schools so far I am going to apply to (keep assuming that I get a 1000 GRE, and tell me what your thoughts on my odds are for any of these programs):

Purdue University
University of Southern Mississippi
UC Berkley
University of Rochester
University of Wisconsin-Madison

Im planning on at least 10 schools, still looking for others. Also, for these schools what would be the minimum GRE neeeded to be considered?

 

[deleted176373]

Furthermore, since women are compising 70% of all doctoral students some schools are acknowledging males as minorities. Now, I know this is a HUGELY CONTROVERSIAL topic, but putting ALL BIASES aside, do you think this fact will make me more competetive?

No because many minorities can spell competitive correctly and have good GRE scores.

Mark

 

[erg923]

To be blunt, its close to nill. Especially UC Berkley and Wisconsin Madison! These are programs where you really need hardcore RA and lab experience for a year or so, ONTOP of stellar grades and 1300 GREs. These are really the top program in the country. Heavy heavy research. Its a clincial program, but they are NOT in the business of producing clinicians. If they see that you are interested in practice, you will be thrown out without a second thought. I'm not sure why you would be applying to Alliant AND UC Berkley? If you're a total "research hound", Alliant cant really offer tons of research experience, and if your not, then you would be miserable at places like Berkley and Wisconsin-Madison, as thats 80 % what those program are. Whats the logic here? These are totally different programs who training goals are very very different.

PS: 1200 is the minimum range top be competitive anywhere. People who get in with 1100 have qualifications that help offset it. That is, years of resesrch experience and several pubs. 1000 and below is really just not doable.

 

[JockNerd]

Also, i bought the insider's guide to clinical psy. 2008, and there was an interesting passage that applies to me: Under the heading "For the racial/ethnic Minority Applicant" they talk about how nearly every APA-accredited program makes special effors to recruit minority applicants. They found in a study of Psy.D programs that some lower, or waive GRE scores, give extra points, lower or waive gpa, and some programs interveiewed all minority applicants regardless of their materials. Furthermore, since women are compising 70% of all doctoral students some schools are acknowledging males as minorities. Now, I know this is a HUGELY CONTROVERSIAL topic, but putting ALL BIASES aside, do you think this fact will make me more competetive?

Well, look at the study that they cited and see. Some programs might indeed offer minority students the opportunity to pay them $100k for a degree. But UCLA and its kin are not going to invest nearly that sum in a student who doesn't show promise.

 

[Thrak]

Now, I know this is a HUGELY CONTROVERSIAL topic, but putting ALL BIASES aside, do you think this fact will make me more competetive?

No.

Ok, so, first of all, yes, males are making up less-than-expected numbers of admitted students (and probably applicants as well). If we analyzed a binomial distribution, the difference would probably be significant (Guess who's taking stats right now? ) Problem is, the profession is still most likely male-heavy due to historical admissions decisions. I don't necessarily think being male is going to be a saving grace.

Also, being a minority helps, but not *that* much. Also, and I swear, I don't mean to be harsh like this, but... they say they are looking for *qualified* minority applicants. That to me says that if you're close to the means, they might give you a nudge. With your presumed 1000, and a let's just say 1250 mean admitted score, you're looking at 250 points. That's not a nudge.

You're also not aided by the fact that you only have one semester of research assistance. With a 1450 and a 3.8 or 3.9, and being a minority, maybe that would be ok if you were a great fit with a prof and had some really good research ideas. But not with a 1000.

Also, not to pour it on, but I don't think you can necessarily predict a 1000 on the GRE based on a 1010 on the SAT. The SAT is normed around a slew of high schoolers who want to go on to college. That's a wide range of ability levels. The GRE is taken by a group of students who are looking to go on to graduate work, including in the maths and sciences, as well as literature and history. They're already probably in the top third of their class or better. That probably makes the curve a bit steeper.

Honestly, I'd really recommend you not apply this year. It's a lot of money, and a lot of time, and it (sorry to say) probably won't pan out for you at this time. Graduate, get a job in the field, take the GRE again. Find someone who still has access to your school's libraries, and use them to get you resources (copies of articles, etc). Put together a couple of research proposals. Then apply next year, with greatly improved odds.

I'm also going to say this, and it's going to sound a bit "Chicken Little"-ish. I think programs are going to cut back in acceptances this year given the nature of the economy. Profs without multi-year grants may not be able to support many new students, and universities, especially state universities, and doubly-especially Californian state universities, are probably going to be in for budget cuts because of the tanking economy. Cali's in the hole, what, $22 billion? Also, there's a tendency in other fields (law and business that I know of) where people try to escape the economic downturns by returning to acedemia. If this happens in psych, the competition will even be that much tougher.

Just my one cent. The other cent is helping to bail out AIG.

 

[amphigory]

I'm pretty sure Berkeley admits about 0% of applicants who call it Berkley.

 

[erg923]

Fine, we will refer to it as "Cal"......But that term seems to be more local northern Californians.

 

[Ollie123]

As others have mentioned "minority status" gets you a bump. Male does not = minority for those purposes in most situations. Even if it does, a "bump" isn't enough to help you at this point.

Not to sound harsh, but right now you are not even in the ballpark for schools like Berkeley and Madison. You could get a 1600 on the GRE and still not even be in the ballpark.

Those are two of the best in the country, but even the others are VERY unlikely to happen. If you applied to the complete bottom of the barrel....you might have a chance.

I'm not trying to be totally discouraging here...all of this can be corrected. Just realize that you will need to build up your resume a good bit before you'll be a competitive applicant. Study like crazy for that GRE, do whatever you need to do. If it isn't going well, put off taking them for awhile and keep studying. If you want to go someplace like Madison, it probably ain't gonna happen this year, so there's no rush. Build up that research experience (I'm assuming you want to be a professor given the schools you're looking at).

 

[Solracselbor]

I want to practice and do research

 

[erg923]

Then don't mention the practice issue in your personal statement to Cal or Wisconsin. They'd chuck ya if they heard that. But seriously, they would chuck your app anyway if you weren't over 1200.

I think many of us would give the advice that if you do not get a 1100 or over, save the time, money and the hassle, and apply on the next cycle, with a much improved GRE score.

 

[Solracselbor]

Heres my problem though, I need to start asking for letters of rec, and I plan to give my professors all the necessary college info to the schools i am planning to apply to. Say i do bad on the GRE and so i decide not to apply to a Ph.D program, what do I tell my professors who are already writing the letters for me, and may send them to the schools?

Also, would it hinder me to take a year off and do a clinical internship, or would it be better to go to a masters program and then apply to a ph.d afterwards?

P.S: Just took a damn Kaplan practice and got a 460Q, better then my original 310 i suppose.

 

[Thrak]

P.S: Just took a damn Kaplan practice and got a 460Q, better then my original 310 i suppose.

If I had to draw an absolute line in the sand, it would be 550 for Q. You could get a 700V and if you have a 540Q I don't think you'd have much of a shot.

 

[erg923]

You would best advised to get a Research Assistantship or some kind of research position, rather than any clinically oriented position. Clinical experience does not boost your applications much at all. This is because you can't do much of anything with a bachelors degree that would be applicable to the kind of clinical skills you develop in a Ph.D program (i.e., assessment, psychodiagnosis, psychotherapy). They will teach you the clinical stuff when you're there. You wont start seeing clients until at least your second year, so they have plenty of time to teach you that stuff. But the research...they want you doing that from the moment you get on campus. However, you may wish to do some clinical experience for your own benefit, getting exposure is good. Nevertheless, if you are gunning for Ph.D programs, they will care alot more about research experience. Thats how they know you are dedicated to it, and that you will be a productive researcher. They need to see your commitment to it.

Masters program can be good if you have a low undergrad GPA that you need to offset, but you don't. Yours is very solid. You need research and GREs.....thats it.

 

[Solracselbor]

If I had to draw an absolute line in the sand, it would be 550 for Q. You could get a 700V and if you have a 540Q I don't think you'd have much of a shot.

You dont think i can do better? I can seem to phrase the questions on the quant.

 

[lucyguard]

i think that if you can break 1100 then you have a shot. just make sure to match your qualifications to the program. there are lots of programs that don't have 1300 averages. now if you are trying to make it into somewhere funded in, say NY and Cali then wait a year, get awesome scores and apply. otherwise, u'd just be giving the school your $50 to toss your application at a first glance. But like someone was saying in some other thread, if you are willing to live in like Kansas or Arkansas then you havea shot with low scores.

 

[cara susanna]

I pulled my score from a 350 to a 540 through using the Kaplan workbook, which went up to a 580 my second time after I had gotten tutoring.

I'm not going to pretend that's a stellar quant score by any means, but, if I could pull my score up from a 300, anyone can.

 

[Thrak]

You dont think i can do better? I can seem to phrase the questions on the quant.

No, no... not an evaluation on how well I think you can do... simply what I think the programs will look for in terms of admissions standards.

I've got zero idea what's driving your score. For all I know, your score is "artificially" low because you're spending the same amount of time on each question, when you should be frontloading all your efforts on the first 10 questions. I know that was my problem initially.

That and geometry. I suck at geometry.

 

[psybee]

No, no... not an evaluation on how well I think you can do... simply what I think the programs will look for in terms of admissions standards.

I've got zero idea what's driving your score. For all I know, your score is "artificially" low because you're spending the same amount of time on each question, when you should be frontloading all your efforts on the first 10 questions. I know that was my problem initially.

That and geometry. I suck at geometry.

gahh, geomoetry was the only thing i was good at!

Im planning on at least 10 schools, still looking for others. Also, for these schools what would be the minimum GRE neeeded to be considered?

back on topic. i was too soft with my first comment. have you taken a look at the admissions data for the programs you're interested in? do you know how to do that? the vast majority of APA accerdited programs will have that info on thier program website. sometimes it may be hard to find, and it's often labeled "disclosure data" but poke around and it'll be there. the same page will usually have other important info, like number of applied to accepted (to give you more of an idea as to how competitive the program is), # getting funding, and internship match data. these are all things (esp. match) you should consider when looking at programs.

you should do that, and seriously evaluate yourself in comparison to those scores. the insiders guide, i believe ( the one by main and norcross) has a worksheet that may help you more realistically orient yourself in comparison to programs you're looking at. i think the advice i was given was to be within 1/2 a SD, and if not but there was an awesome match, it would be a long shot if i was closer to 1 SD, but it might be worth a try. i was interviewed at programs where my overall score was competitive to above but my math score as 1/2 below. also, really look at what you want. you say you want to practice and research, but then why are you looking at madison? it's one of the best programs in the country, but it's not a balanced program--its heavily research focused. IMHO, you may be well served by taking a year off and really exploring what you want to do, what kind of psychologist you think you'd want to be (on the research-practice scale, and also what kind of orientations you want to be exposed to, what kind of research and clinical opps) and really craft a solid list of programs, and do your best to break a 1200. a 1200 is still very low for most of the programs on your list, but can put you in the running for many very good programs along with the right fit.

and i agree with everyone else on the minority thing--it may give one a slight push, but you already have to be competitive. what i have seen is that there is more funding available for minority, and more often in fellowship form, as opposed to assistantship. but you still have to get accepted first!

good luck!

 

[Solracselbor]

Thanks psybee, Yes i have researched the schools i am looking into, but not all of them. With working 20hrs a week, studying for the gre at least 5 hours a day and taking class full time, I have been struggling to get stuff done.

Also, i have come across a dilemma, there's this psychologist at the Univ. Southern Mississippi that is studying forgiveness, an area that I have been interested in for years. However, this particular psychologist works for the Counseling program. Would it be unwise to mention this person on my application to this school?

Also, in regards to the school, what is the "reputation" of University of Southern Mississippi. When I tell people I am considering this school, they look at me like "Why the hell would you go there?" I'm hoping that it is simply a results of the geographical stigma, but I am wondering whether the school might have some bad things I may not know about.

 

[erg923]

As long as the faculty is within the psych department, then it shouldn't be a problem, unless the website states otherwise. Sometimes, counseling psych is housed in the Education department at universities, in which case you might not be able to work with him/her.

I don't know the rep of Southern Miss, but as long as it's APA accredited (which it is), the match rate is good, and it can offer the research interests you want, its all good. If these factors are met, then "prestige" means very little. Hattiesburg is hot and very humid though..... But its a cool southern college town for the most part.

I guess my question is, you're young and coming from undergrad...so whats the rush? If you can't put yourself in the competitive range with GREs (around 1200)...wait a year, get more research and boost your GRE. Its gonna save you alot of headaches and disappointment.

 

[JockNerd]

Also, i have come across a dilemma, there's this psychologist at the Univ. Southern Mississippi that is studying forgiveness, an area that I have been interested in for years. However, this particular psychologist works for the Counseling program. Would it be unwise to mention this person on my application to this school?

... you might just apply to the Counseling program, then.

 

[Solracselbor]

As long as the faculty is within the psych department, then it shouldn't be a problem, unless the website states otherwise. Sometimes, counseling psych is housed in the Education department at universities, in which case you might not be able to work with him/her.

I don't know the rep of Southern Miss, but as long as it's APA accredited (which it is), the match rate is good, and it can offer the research interests you want, its all good. If these factors are met, then "prestige" means very little. Hattiesburg is hot and very humid though..... But its a cool southern college town for the most part.

I guess my question is, you're young and coming from undergrad...so whats the rush? If you can't put yourself in the competitive range with GREs (around 1200)...wait a year, get more research and boost your GRE. Its gonna save you alot of headaches and disappointment.

Well like I said before:

"Here's my problem though, I need to start asking for letters of rec, and I plan to give my professors all the necessary college info to the schools i am planning to apply to. Say i do bad on the GRE and so i decide not to apply to a Ph.D program, what do I tell my professors who are already writing the letters for me, and may send them to the schools?"

 

[erg923]

Well then tell them not to send the letter to the schools until after your GRE is in. And if for some reason the do get sent, so what?!

 

[psybee]

Well like I said before:

"Here's my problem though, I need to start asking for letters of rec, and I plan to give my professors all the necessary college info to the schools i am planning to apply to. Say i do bad on the GRE and so i decide not to apply to a Ph.D program, what do I tell my professors who are already writing the letters for me, and may send them to the schools?"

are you in the position where you could literally get anything from a 1000 to a 1500? or are you posting because you feel based on practice tests, the SAT, whatever, you're likely to get in the 1000 range. if that's the case, and you really want to go to those exclusive schools, don't apply this year. the average gre at madison is around 1400. otherwise, if you still want to apply this year, apply to schools where the combination of GRE/GPA?and research make you somewhat competitive. i think that insider book has a way for you to figure that out roughly.

this may be my own personal experience going through this application process, knowing many others in real life who have done it and also participating on this board, but people have an idea within 200 points of how they'll do, and especially if they take an ets practice test, like powerprep.
by the time you're asking for letter, you really should have an idea if you're competitive for the top programs in the country, very good ones, lesser known but good ones, etc. if you don't know by now, that's worrisome, and suggests that your application won't be focused enough to get you interviews, even if your GRE/GPA data match.

perhaps a better way to apply would be to find programs you are interested in and realistically weed them down after that, based on your scores and your experience (research/clinical) compared to their orientation (very research oriented, very clinical, balanced). and since most folks have an idea of where they stand when it comes to standardized tests, and should by now know if they want a balance, a research, or a practice-oriented program, if they're looking at a 1000, madison, berkley, yale, etc is out of the running.

happily, they have thier list of schools that are good matches. while making it, the checked out the disclosure data and they quickly dropped the schools with median 1300, 1400 gre's off that list, and they're looking at ones with median 1100, 1200. and if you have a reach school that is such a great fit and you know you're other experience is totally competitive, you may add a few of those, knowing that it's a long shot, and feeling comfortable with spending that application money on an unlikely shot.

that way, you can comfortably give your professors that list of schools, because while there may be a reach or two that may be a bit more likely if you score on the high end of your expectations, you're not wasting thier time or your time, because the bulk of the schools on your list are ones that you realistically have a chance of getting into, and would go to if you were accepted.

 

[BorntoRun]

Well like I said before:

"Here's my problem though, I need to start asking for letters of rec, and I plan to give my professors all the necessary college info to the schools i am planning to apply to. Say i do bad on the GRE and so i decide not to apply to a Ph.D program, what do I tell my professors who are already writing the letters for me, and may send them to the schools?"

Just tell them you decided against applying this year, but you appreciate their willingness to write for you. Depending on how close you are with them, you can tell them your concerns as well. They will probably be very understanding. In fact, I bet most of them haven't started writing yet, so I wouldn't worry.

 

[myelin]

This whole thread is based on speculation. You haven't even taken the GRE yet so you don't know if your score will be similar to your SAT score or not. Personally, I'd focus my time on the GRE and then worry about this other stuff after you know your score. Even if they do send the letters and you decide not to apply, many schools will keep your materials should you decide to apply the next year.

 

[deleted176373]

... you might just apply to the Counseling program, then.

+1, agreed. Many people focus on clinical programs only, when in fact, many excellent counseling programs exist and offer many of the same career trajectories as clinical psychology programs. In practice, the lines become very blurry between the two disciplines. I feel that many times people who would do well in counseling programs discount them because of the name.

If it's a better match for you, then you should consider the counseling programs as well.

Mark

 

[alleycatpsych]

My two cents (as a current Clinical applicant): Take a year off and
-get some more research experience
-study for the GRE so you can get a competitive score
-figure out where your interests actually lie (more research experience will help with this)
-figure out if you want a counseling or clinical program (e.g. whether you want to do research or practice more)
-research schools to find advisors who are doing the kind of research you are interested in and where you would be competitive
-relax (something i don't have the luxury of doing right now!)

Good luck! You'll save a lot of money and stress if you take the year to figure things out.

 

[myelin]

i'd split the difference and apply to both PhD and MA programs in clinical psychology. that way you can take care of research and continue your education while studying for the GRE. this will take 2 years.

 

[Solracselbor]

copied to first post

 

[cara susanna]

Wow, congrats! I love hearing stories about getting admitted despite a low GRE score. Would you mind PMing me about which program it was? I'm curious because most I know have cutoffs of at least 1000.

 

[terpskins10]

Wow, congrats! I love hearing stories about getting admitted despite a low GRE score. Would you mind PMing me about which program it was? I'm curious because most I know have cutoffs of at least 1000.

Me too, I'm curious to know so I can at least feel like i have some hope this year.

Also, congrats! It's always nice to know fellow SDNers are getting in to their schools.

 

[AryaStark]

Me too! Congratulations! That is amazing news! I also did not get stellar GRE scores and got into the program that I really wanted to go to. See people, IT CAN BE DONE!

Me too, I'm curious to know so I can at least feel like i have some hope this year.

Also, congrats! It's always nice to know fellow SDNers are getting in to their schools.

 

[deleted176373]

Congratulations!!! You really beat the odds, and I would be willing to bet that your personal statement and your letters of recommendation are what did it for you. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that your low GRE score was addressed in both and dismissed by your letter writers as not relevant.

I know that we were awfully negative about the low GRE score, and I am glad that didn't stop you from going for it.

Mark

 

[Solracselbor]

Congratulations!!! You really beat the odds, and I would be willing to bet that your personal statement and your letters of recommendation are what did it for you. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that your low GRE score was addressed in both and dismissed by your letter writers as not relevant. I know that we were awfully negative about the low GRE score, and I am glad that didn't stop you from going for it. Mark

Hi Mark,

I am actually very happy that you replied. Your answer to my question of whether or not my minority status would play a role in determining my admission success rate was very rude, discouraging, and unnecessary. These types of responses do nothing for decreasing the anxieties of a college student (For your reference see post #7). However, I would now, more than ever, like to extend a hand of gratitude towards you. For it was your remark (and a few others, of course) that actually got me frustrated enough to ask my professor for his advice, who, in turn, got me to apply to a program I would have never dared to think of. For this, I thank you, as well as another member named JohnSnow (or Joesnow) whose continuous negative comments towards most professional schools led me to avoid them at all costs. You saved me money

Anyways, something I have been wanting to mention about the GRE's:

[Start GRE Rant]
Alongside a professor of mine, I did a lot of research on how the GRE's work. The only thing we could conclude is that the exam does not completely predict academic success. ETS themselves state that the best predictor of graduate success is the GPA, not the GRE. So, in that regard, why is it then that the GRE is so heavily weighed when the GPA is already accessible? What's more, the GRE fails to take into consideration creativity that of which is now, more than ever, a valuable and sought after characteristic in today's market and research fields. On the other hand, systematic reasoning through numbers only comprises a small domain of reasoning technique and capability that of which is more developed in individuals with mathematical backgrounds. Thus, the classification of the GRE as a STANDARDIZED exam is then, of course, contradictory. Additionally, the verbal section is best suited for determining the size of an individual's lexicon, rather than the degree to which a person can logically reason. Still, I have yet to find any compelling research that shows a significant association between a persons crystallized verbal knowledge and ability to reason. Moreover, it is not just the lack of ecological validity in the GRE that's problematic, but it is also the high standard in which schools rank this exam that makes things more challenging. Many schools have cutoff points around 1100-1200, this tends to be a near average score for Caucasian individuals, whereas Hispanics and African Americans tend to have much lower averages. The common idea is that these two groups have had more socio-economical disadvantages, which caused a trickle-down effect that prevented effective learning. However, has it ever been proposed that there may be a possibility that cultural variations in cognitive processing may influence reasoning technique that may not be measurable by the GRE? This, of course, is only a theory I had recently thought of that may serve a role in providing an explanation for the deviation in scores. In the end, I think schools should lower their cutoffs in order to allow a greater diversity of applicants who posses certain traits not measurable by the GRE, however…money talks and financial aid is too limited to provide an education to so many bright minds. Instead, they would rather take applicants with typical numbers than take risks with creative ideas. However I think some schools are slowly starting to realize this.
[End GRE Rant]

 

[cara susanna]

My problem with the GRE is the CAT. I think it decreases reliablity.

 

[PsychPupil]

Solracselbor, congratulations. The outcome of your situation is so inspiring.

 

[monkeycans]

Hi Solracselbor,
I was also wondering what schools you looked into for the GRE of 1000. I worry about what GRE score I need to get in because english is my second language (parents both were educated up to middle school and immigrated). I heard about low GRE scores hindering students from getting into top schools and your story is very comforting/inspiring--thanks for sharing!

 

[deleted176373]

Hi Mark,

I am actually very happy that you replied. Your answer to my question of whether or not my minority status would play a role in determining my admission success rate was very rude, discouraging, and unnecessary.... etc

I lack tact, for this I am guilty, no doubt. I doubt that your success was due to you being male in a female dominated field. While you might attribute your success to being male (your minority status) I think that it was your entire package and what must have been an obviously stunning personal statement and LOR's that carried the day.

So I apologize for the brash and rude bedside manner that I exhibited and will be looking forward to hearing about your continued success. Proof that if you want something bad enough, you can get it.

Mark

 

[schoolpsych1]

Congrats, I have heard of other stories like yours (not knowing GRE scores, but student saying "low".) I think other factors do enter in, research, what your LOR say (and how they say it) what you want to study, etc. A student at Penn State PhD program had very little research compared to their research rating, but she got in, why isn't important really, it's trying when you really want it. You can drive yourself crazy trying to figure out admissions sometimes although grad school is less vague compared to college.
I don't score well on SAT-type tests, but my school took a chance using other criteria,my grades, recs, etc. and have always been on the deans list, getting good grades, and hopefully that will help me again.

I have heard that because males are not as represented in certain areas, it can be a plus, but I don't think it helps a weak application. I read males still don't get in as often as women even when even numbers apply.
I also know a URM that wanted to work with in urban schools helping at risk children and he thought it helped him a little, but he also had a strong application but weak GRE scores.