GRE score question

[lowflyer14]

Hey everyone,

Would anything above the average be considered competitive? or how far above the average is considered competitive?

A lot of the schools I am looking into indicate that the averages were 150 for both Q and W. Would a competitive score or at least a "foot in the door" score be anything above this average? Even if it just a couple of points?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Rgvmed]

If the mean score of accepted students is 300 overall, and you score a 300, well you are competitive as you have a score that higher than half of the students half accepted into the program. However, it is also relative. The strength of the rest of your application has a big part in determining how competitive your particular GRE score is to YOUR application. For example, I'm non-traditional and have a low overall cumulative GPA at 3.17 due to coursework from ten years ago. I know this going into the application process and busted by tail to get a 320 because that is what will make MY application competitive. As a general rule of thumb, you want a mimim of a 300 to give yourself a fighting chance. In reality, I'd suggest a 305 to be safe and not waste your time. That being said, there are many applicants who get in with scores in the 290s. I'm happy to answer any other questions you may have regarding GRE scores. For some odd reason, I really enjoyed preparing for and taking this exam.

 

[lowflyer14]

I got a 306 my first time I took it. I guess I just want to know if I have a good chance so I can stop worrying so much. I'm taking it again to be safe.

Thanks for the help!

 

[davidtheusername]

If your schools have averages of 300, then I expect 306 should have you looking pretty good. 6 points is a fairly significant increase in the percentile your score falls in. I don't think it's "just" a couple of points. For example, in verbal going from 150 to 153 would move you from 45% to 59%. In math the same increase would be from 40% to 52%. That's pretty big. The only way I'd take it again if I was you is if your application is weak in other areas. If your GPA happened to be low then you need to show a higher GRE. If your GPA and GRE are around the average then about half the people who get in are below you, and that puts you in a pretty good position for getting in.

 

[FontTimesJ]

If you retake the GRE, would they see all of the scores or just the most recent one? Would you have the option of sending just one score?

 

[Rgvmed]

If you retake the GRE, would they see all of the scores or just the most recent one? Would you have the option of sending just one score?

You have a lot of options. One score, multiple scores, all scores. What you can NOT do is: report the highest score per section of the test. However, many schools will take the higher score from each section of each retake and basically judge you off of this amalgam of multiple test dates. ADVICE: Don't go into the test without prepping for the writing section. If you do well, you'll easily jump up in rankings and it will help give you confidence for the upcoming subject section. Go into the exam with a plan, a template so to speak, of how you are going to attach the topic when presented. Also, utilize "score it now" from the ETS to get some essays graded.

 

[DesertPT]

If the mean score of accepted students is 300 overall, and you score a 300, well you are competitive as you have a score that higher than half of the students half accepted into the program.

That would actually be the median you are referring to. If the mean is 300, and you score a 300, it is difficult to estimate how many accepted applicants you will outperform, as means are highly affected by outliers in a small sample size. The mean of a PT class of 25-85 students will be affected heavily by the 3 or 4 individuals that end up getting in with very subpar GRE scores. This may or may not be "evened out" to some extent by the few applicants with perfect or near perfect scores, there is no way to know without seeing the raw data. Note also that this will be probably more true for schools with no required minimums, as the degree to which an outlier can differ from the mean will likely be less extreme at schools with hard minimums, but again these are just generalities. The mean stats provided by PT schools give you a rough estimate of what the "typical" applicant looks like, however I wish they would provide median and quartile values as that would be a lot more informative.

 

[Rgvmed]

You're right, a mistake on my part. You get the point, thanks for pointing it out.

 

[Rgvmed]

That would actually be the median you are referring to. If the mean is 300, and you score a 300, it is difficult to estimate how many accepted applicants you will outperform, as means are highly affected by outliers in a small sample size. The mean of a PT class of 25-85 students will be affected heavily by the 3 or 4 individuals that end up getting in with very subpar GRE scores. This may or may not be "evened out" to some extent by the few applicants with perfect or near perfect scores, there is no way to know without seeing the raw data. Note also that this will be probably more true for schools with no required minimums, as the degree to which an outlier can differ from the mean will likely be less extreme at schools with hard minimums, but again these are just generalities. The mean stats provided by PT schools give you a rough estimate of what the "typical" applicant looks like, however I wish they would provide median and quartile values as that would be a lot more informative.

Just curious, what was your score?

 

[DesertPT]

Just curious, what was your score?

168V, 158Q, 5.0AW

 

[Rgvmed]

168V, 158Q, 5.0AW

Awesome scores congrats. I missed my power prep scores by 4 to 6 points and ended up with a 320 but I'm content. Still bugs me a little though!

 

[DesertPT]

Awesome scores congrats. I missed my power prep scores by 4 to 6 points and ended up with a 320 but I'm content. Still bugs me a little though!

Thanks! I did a bit worse on the math than I did on my practice tests but did much better on the verbal than I thought I would...I honestly really surprised myself haha

 

[lowflyer14]

I've read somewhere that the quantitative scores are not as stressed as the verbal scores or in other words the verbal score is more important.

What do you all think of that?

 

[davidtheusername]

It depends on the school. There are schools that don't even look at quantitative. But there are other schools that give you points based on your combined score so the two parts would be equally important.

 

[DesertPT]

Ya it's pretty much completely random on a school by school basis...as is almost everything else in the application process.

 

[Rgvmed]

exactly, it depends! For example, Andrews University provides 50% tuition reduction for students with a 320 or higher. As a poster above said, some schools only look at verbal and AW. It just depends and a lot of it is not advertised. You should focus on verbal and AW for the most part, but you can grab a lot of easy points in quant by just learning the basics. Getting a 160 or above isn't the easiest thing in the world to do. You make a few silly mistakes, that you don't see under the pressure of a standardized test, and you're score drops significantly. I scored a 166 and a 164 on the poweprep quant exams, and ended up with a 159 quant on test day (320 total with 161 verbal). I did feel like my exam had a lot of obscure topics that are generally considered fringe topics on test day. I felt like I killed my first section and second section, which I'm guessing was the experimental. The third I was very iffy and for the first time ran into time management issues on quant. Okay, sorry for my rant hah.

 

[davidtheusername]

I'm with you on the quant. I was scoring 170 verbal and low 160's quant on the powerprep. I got 169 verbal but the quant seemed out there. I ran short of time on the quant and got 156. I felt great about my first math section too. But the last one... Geeze... haha...

 

[lowflyer14]

Hey guys, my question is no longer about the GRE but I figured I'd ask since you all have been so receptive. I am about to start a 360+ hour internship at a private outpatient pt clinic. This will significantly boost my observation hours. I want to know when you all think is a good time to ask for an LOR?

 

[DesertPT]

Hey guys, my question is no longer about the GRE but I figured I'd ask since you all have been so receptive. I am about to start a 360+ hour internship at a private outpatient pt clinic. This will significantly boost my observation hours. I want to know when you all think is a good time to ask for an LOR?

I think it helps to maximize the time that the PT has known you before they actually do the letter, because that is one of the questions it asks. But you don't need to wait until the last week to ask. I assume you aren't applying for this current cycle are you?

Is this a paid internship at all? 360 volunteer hours of outpatient ortho is much much more than you need to be a competitive applicant, as breadth is favored highly over depth when it comes to observation hours. But if this is some kind of PT tech type job or you just really want to do it then by all means...

 

[lowflyer14]

I'm applying for the schools that start in january 2016. Not sure how the cycles work.

The internship is a capstone sort of thing to complete my undergraduate.

 

[SwampPT]

I wonder if schools look very close at GRE scores. If I were on the adcom I would not because there is no limit to how many times a person can take the test. Therefore, an applicant can just keep taking the same test until they get the score they want. That really doesn't prove intelligence or ability to succeed. I would put more weight on the essay, interview, and grade trend.

 

[davidtheusername]

It varies from school to school, but most schools put a lot of weight on it. Schools vary in what a GPA means. Essays, references, extra curricular activities, and work experience are hard to rank people on. The GRE is the easiest way they have to rank people, and that's what an admissions committee is trying to do. I've talked to several admissions people that said they use a score to rank who they make offers to. The GRE is worth so much, GPA so much, interview score so much, etc. Schools differ, but most admissions people that I've dealt with seem to think GPA and GRE matter the most.

 

[tweaze]

I don't know how many people just keep retaking the GRE again and again until they get higher scores. I had originally planned to retake it in August, but after going through the stress and expense once I just didn't want to deal with it again, and I don't think I'm alone in that sentiment.

With that said, I don't think it's unreasonable to take it 1-3 times if you have the time, money and inclination. After all, we are allowed to retake academic classes as well, right? What is worth more, my original B+ in a quarter of chemistry, or someone's A from a retake to replace a C or D? Not to mention the variation across college course offerings - when it comes down to it, the GRE is really the only consistent measure schools can use to rank applicants (although the value of what it actually tests is questionable).

 

[DesertPT]

While the GRE is definitely debatable as a statistical predictor of graduate school success, I don't think that the fact that it can be retaken repeatedly alone is enough to invalidate its use. There are very few people who take it more than twice. There may be an occasional 3rd time taker, but I've never heard of anybody who just keeps taking it until they get the score they want. It is a very painful test to sit for and is very expensive as well.