10+ Year Member
- Mar 4, 2009
- Post Doc
Join SDN on December 7th at 6:00 PM Eastern as we host Andrew Paulson of StudentLoanAdvice.com for an AMA webinar. He'll be answering your questions about how to best manage your student loans. Register now!
Thanks for your reply and the advice, psychology24! It sucks but is okay that you don't have a success story. A good "you're doomed" is always a picker-upper to hear too . Are you applying again this year? This will be my second time applying - applied for Fall 2009 admission previously with the same GRE score that I have now. All rejections last time and I guess we'll see what happens this time! Fun times .
Thanks, Applicant03. That's very uplifting. I agree - after you get selected for an interview, it's more about fit than scores. Good news - hopefully we all do well on our interviews. Where are y'all applying?
Unfortunately you won't find many success stories, but I believe they exist... I think your strategy for getting in really becomes super important for those people who don't "fit the mold" so to speak.
As someone who didn't fit the mold, I took a good hard look at what I was doing after my first disastrous attempt at getting in. My strategy the second time around was much more aggressive than my first time around... I had good GRE scores and a great GPA, but I lacked in other areas (notably research and clinical experience.)
You NEED to network, go to conferences, publish, and present. Develop these skills and show that you can produce. This is far more important than your GRE really, but you have to get professors interested in you to make your GRE matter less. I would much rather develop personal relationships with professors I wished to later work with than have a high GRE score. These professors can take ANYONE they really want... and these professors can intervene for those they like as well.
That's my 2 cents.
Research productivity will ALWAYS trump scores on the GRE. Couple this with a thoughtful essay or two and good interpersonal skills and you can transcend poopy GREs
Definitely agree with this. I had a relatively low GPA for clinical (80% avg) and an okay, but not great GRE combined score. Applied to 3 programs (only 1 clinical program), got into 2--including the best one I applied to.
Research experience means a better CV, potential presentations/publications, and more experience with faculty = more thorough letters of recommendation. Furthermore, if you have a lot of experience in one subject area, it can really help you craft a statement of intent directed for a particular prospective advisor.
IMO: much easier to distinguish yourself with solid research experience, than it is w/ GRE/GPA. Be confident in what you know. Be confident in your skills. Be confident in what you want to research in the future; you'll likely have a better idea of what you want to do than other students with less research experience. Be confident in how the particular faculty compliments your proposed program of research.
My program accepted 8 students (unusually high), and I had the worst GPA/GRE of all of them. I was terribly underdressed for interviews. I also said during interviews I wasn't really interested in clinical practice--I was (and still am) interested in research with this particular supervisor. Once you're in, people don't care about grades. They care about your research productivity, for which you'll be better prepared.
So, gauging from what I've been reading, it may be uncommon for average GRE scores (and GPAs) to get into really good PhD Clinical programs, but in my case, it was possible, and only because of my research experience.
I don't even remotely comprehend the new scoring system, but I got three interviews and one acceptance with a 44th percentile quant score.