Quantative vs Verbal

[sdb9]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Does anyone know how much weight admissions puts on the different sections of the GRE? I got an excellent verbal score (720) but a low quantative (640). How much will this Q score hurt me? It seems like they care more about the quantative section than the verbal. Any thoughts?

Thanks,

sdb9

 

[chris03333]

It seems like they care more about the quantative section than the verbal. Any thoughts?

Thanks,

sdb9

That may just be your thought because it was your Q which was lower than your V (which by the way is not a bad score in any means.) You have a great V score and a good Q, which gives you a pretty decent total score. I would not worry too much. I was the opposite of you (high Q, average V) and felt that they cared more about verbal to me😀 but I am a fourth year now, so it all worked out in the end. good luck.

 

[ReinaDeLuz]

hehe, i wouldn't worry too much!!!! your score sounds awesome.

i got an amazing V score (760) and an awful Q score (550) yet i still got into four schools. so just because your V score is higher doesnt mean theyre going to frown on you. who needs math right? i know my vet carries around a calculator ;-).

 

[sdb9]

Wow, thanks guys. You've given me a much needed confidence booster🙂

 

[bubbles525]

Hey,
I hate to disagree and discourage you but I think you need to think about your whole application before being satisfied with your score. I had a V730 Q620 W5.0 and was told durring my reappicant interviews that I needed to retake my GRE up my quantitative, and it would be best if I could up my other scores if possible. Those comments came from Tufts and Western. Colorado and Cornell only mail out these mailings about how you compare and in the 600's for Q is just not competative. That being said if your GPA is above a 3.4 and you have plenty of varried experiance I wouldn't worry to much.

I only the other hand only had a 3.2, with a very upward trend mind you, and a lot of experiance but primarily in one location.

~Marie

 

[youthman]

^^Good point (and kinda scary!!). I'm curious how "upward" of a trend you had? Was it all A/A- for the last 60 credits or so? If so then that's REALLY scary!

 

[chris03333]

Hey,
I hate to disagree and discourage you but I think you need to think about your whole application before being satisfied with your score. I had a V730 Q620 W5.0 and was told durring my reappicant interviews that I needed to retake my GRE up my quantitative, and it would be best if I could up my other scores if possible. Those comments came from Tufts and Western. Colorado and Cornell only mail out these mailings about how you compare and in the 600's for Q is just not competative. That being said if your GPA is above a 3.4 and you have plenty of varried experiance I wouldn't worry to much.

I only the other hand only had a 3.2, with a very upward trend mind you, and a lot of experiance but primarily in one location.

~Marie

Marie I am shocked that is the feed back you got from Western (my school). As far as I know (and they pretty much tell us everything😳 ), the admission process has an interview cut off which is where your paper application (grades, gre, essays...) are considered. It is my understanding that this information is not told to the interiewers ("cold interview") so they do not have a bias when interviewing you. As far as I know everyone interviewed is on an equal level, and the interview is what places you as class member vs. alternate, or they may reject post interview.

 

[bubbles525]

It was extreamly dissapointing after working so hard to improve to be rejected from five schools and waitlisted at my top chioce (Western). It was and A-/A upward for the last 50 (at least 50, it may have been 60).

^^Good point (and kinda scary!!). I'm curious how "upward" of a trend you had? Was it all A/A- for the last 60 credits or so? If so then that's REALLY scary!

Yeah, I was surprized too. But they clarified for me. They're point was that as an alternate there was very little they could tell me. However, improving my application on paper would be good since every year it gets more and more competative. So since it gets more and more competative improving my GRE scores would help me be more sure of getting and interview again. Does that make more sense?

Marie I am shocked that is the feed back you got from Western (my school). As far as I know (and they pretty much tell us everything😳 ), the admission process has an interview cut off which is where your paper application (grades, gre, essays...) are considered. It is my understanding that this information is not told to the interiewers ("cold interview") so they do not have a bias when interviewing you. As far as I know everyone interviewed is on an equal level, and the interview is what places you as class member vs. alternate, or they may reject post interview.

 

[youthman]

It was extreamly dissapointing after working so hard to improve to be rejected from five schools and waitlisted at my top chioce (Western). It was and A-/A upward for the last 50 (at least 50, it may have been 60).

Wow. I could understand if some schools rejected you but to not get into all the schools you applied to.... with those stats... I'm shocked

 

[kate_g]

It seems like they care more about the quantative section than the verbal.

I was surprised, looking at the "class profiles" for a bunch of schools, that the average quantitative score is usually higher than the average verbal score. The verbal section is way easier for me (like it seems to be for you) and I guess I just assumed everyone was that way. 🙂

Anyway, I dunno if that's what you were talking about, but just because the average quantitative score is higher doesn't mean they "care" more about it. (I.e. they might not be *selecting* people with higher Q than V, that may just be the way most applicants are.) And actually, if it *is* the case that most applicants have a higher Q than V, then Chris might be right to some extent in that they're looking for people with higher verbal scores, or are more impressed by higher verbal scores, because those are more unusual. Anyway, that's all academic, I don't have any practical information about it. I suspect like almost everything else, it will vary school to school.

 

[Moonpaw]

The verbal section is way easier for me (like it seems to be for you) and I guess I just assumed everyone was that way. 🙂

Am I the only one for whom quantitative was a joke and verbal was a bitch?

I'm not at all worried about Q, but is V640 ok, or should I retake the GRE? I thought it was good enough, but now with all these people posting V scores over 700, I'm reconsidering...

 

[PAThbrd]

Am I the only one for whom quantitative was a joke and verbal was a bitch?

My sentiments exactly! My scores were quite lopsided... Q780 V 560 stupid vocab. I got into all 4 schools I applied to last year, so I wouldn't worry about your V640!

Also on this thread, I've always kinda felt like the schools may look more closely at the Q score since it is a math/science oriented curriculum/profession. You can always retest or call the schools you're looking out and ask their opinion, though.

 

[are_jay]

My sentiments exactly! My scores were quite lopsided... Q780 V 560 stupid vocab. I got into all 4 schools I applied to last year, so I wouldn't worry about your V640!

Also on this thread, I've always kinda felt like the schools may look more closely at the Q score since it is a math/science oriented curriculum/profession. You can always retest or call the schools you're looking out and ask their opinion, though.

Yeah I got in with Q:780 and V:510, but I also took the biology (required for one school) and did really well. IMO, if I haven't heard some of those words in my 27 years, chances are I won't need them. What I was told by admissions people is that it is harder to overcome a poor quant score than poor verbal score, but if your verbal score is way up there it is pretty impressive because far fewer applicants pull that off. And if one of your scores is in the 700's, having the other in the 600's is not bad...
RE: The original post in this thread--Since there is no harm in retaking it, there is really nothing to lose (except the money, of course, but after you accept your first round of student loans, that will look like pennies). But then again, I wouldn't if I had those scores.

 

[chris03333]

RE: The original post in this thread--Since there is no harm in retaking it, there is really nothing to lose (except the money, of course, but after you accept your first round of student loans, that will look like pennies). But then again, I wouldn't if I had those scores.

Unless you are like quite a few people I know who retook and scored lower😱

 

[Moonpaw]

I definitely have time to retake it--I took it really early just because I figured waiting another year wouldn't make me any smarter. If I did retake it, I was thinking I would just kind of disregard/rush through the writing and q sections and just do the verbal sections, since schools only look at the highest scores.

Or is this a bad idea?

 

[cyrille104]

I went for an admissions information session at Penn last month, and they told me that they care about the quantitative much more than the verbal. This makes sense to me, since it's a school for science.

That being said, a 640 is below average at most schools, but not an *bad* score. Don't forget that, unless there were some serious outliers, about half of the people below average still got in. And they will still consider your verbal as an asset to your application.

Like everyone else has said, consider your whole application. If you have really good grades and a ton of experience, I wouldn't take it again. If you don't, it shouldn't be difficult to study a little bit and take it again to get in the 700s.

 

[cyrille104]

Am I the only one for whom quantitative was a joke and verbal was a bitch?

I'm not at all worried about Q, but is V640 ok, or should I retake the GRE? I thought it was good enough, but now with all these people posting V scores over 700, I'm reconsidering...

No, I felt the same way. Don't bother taking it again, really. It's just extra stress, and I think we've all had enough of that...

 

[youthman]

If you mean a "joke" as in too easy - you guys must be pretty smart. If I had all day to do it then yeah I'd say it was easy of course, but given the time constraints, I thought it was quite difficult. My Q score: 740

 

[chris03333]

I definitely have time to retake it--I took it really early just because I figured waiting another year wouldn't make me any smarter. If I did retake it, I was thinking I would just kind of disregard/rush through the writing and q sections and just do the verbal sections, since schools only look at the highest scores.

Or is this a bad idea?

This may be a bad idea, check with all the schools you apply to. Some will take you highest total score, which will most likely mean retaking only verbal seriously may higher that score but if does not higher the total score is a waste of your time. Some schools place more emphasis on your most current score (ie Western) so if you decide to retake you need to take the whole test seriously. Some schools take the highest in each section, this is the only situation that will help you if you blow aff the writing and q but do better in v.

 

[are_jay]

This may be a bad idea, check with all the schools you apply to. Some will take you highest total score, which will most likely mean retaking only verbal seriously may higher that score but if does not higher the total score is a waste of your time. Some schools place more emphasis on your most current score (ie Western) so if you decide to retake you need to take the whole test seriously. Some schools take the highest in each section, this is the only situation that will help you if you blow aff the writing and q but do better in v.

Yeah I was going to say, I think they look at your best *set* of scores. I actually haven't heard of any schools that will use the best score in each section, but I don't doubt that some schools do it that way. So just make sure you talk to all of the schools you are applying to first. Oh, and I have heard that if you don't type anything on the essay you get a "no score." You may see what your schools think of that, I know none of mine cared about the essay, which is good because I never did well on them.

 

[kate_g]

I actually haven't heard of any schools that will use the best score in each section

Cornell says that's what they do (take your best Q and best V, even if they weren't on the same test). BUT... Even there, if the first time you get a good Q and an OK V, then the next time you get a stinky Q and a good V... Your strategy won't be obvious and they'll probably wonder why you're so inconsistent. Do you really want to be faced with writing "Just so you know, I blew off the quant section the second time because I didn't think you'd care" in the explanation section on your application?

 

[youthman]

Davis also takes the best section from each test - but I agree with kate_g, and in addition, why limit the number of schools you may get accepted to by using that strategy?

 

[Vet2be2012]

Wow, all of this is making me feel I really bombed the GRE! 410V and 730Q, and 5.5A. The problem was the large discrepancy on my scores. How could I bomb the verbal completely, but get one of the top scores for the analytical? These two are usually connected if you know what I mean! I will never get a good score in the verbal. I was told that the average GRE scores for colorado were around 540V and 650Q. I don't think they expect you to get in the 700's on either section. Some schools might care a lot about the GRE, but not the ones I applied for. Especially since the gre format is given in such a weird way, adaptive. On my practice tests, I even got over 700 on my verbal sometimes. What's up with the large discrepancy in scores. I don't think the GRE says a lot about the candidates ability to perform well in veterinary school. During my interview with colorado after trying to find out why I didn't get in, they told me they really didn't care about the GRE. I thought that was the reason, but it wasn't. They said their cutoff started at any candidate with less than 1,000's hours veterinary experience, which I had, but I put it in the animal experience section since I had done other things at the shelter too! Number 1 tip, be careful about how you fill out your application and don't worry too much about your GRE scores unless they are exceptionally bad! Good luck!🙂

 

[Sassygirl]

Everyone realizes that this thread is 6m old right? Although it might be helpful for this year's applicants...

 

[wildfocus]

Everyone realizes that this thread is 6m old right? Although it might be helpful for this year's applicants...

oh, it's so sad these came up again, as now i am dwelling/obsessing on how much i suck in the gre category!!! 🙁 (focus on the positive...focus on the positive...focus on the positive)