CT 177: Strong Like Bull

[TownieDeac]

Absurd hard, or absurd stoopid?

kinda both, but i mostly meant hard

the literary analysis stuff is fair, but the identification is just ridiculous

something like 1/3 of the identification is pre-1660, and typically includes a bunch of stuff from the bible and a bunch of arcane nonsense nobody would ever learn in english undergrad

 

[wfudkn]

kinda both, but i mostly meant hard

the literary analysis stuff is fair, but the identification is just ridiculous

something like 1/3 of the identification is pre-1660, and typically includes a bunch of stuff from the bible and a bunch of arcane nonsense nobody would ever learn in english undergrad

From the web: "The factual questions may require a student to identify characteristics of literary or critical movements, to assign a literary work to the period in which it was written, to identify a writer or work described in a brief critical comment, or to determine the period or author of a work on the basis of the style and content of a short excerpt."

I'll give you absurd.

 

[ChicdeaC]

The Biology GRE was a good, comprehensive test of what an undergrad bio major should have learned. Maybe Columbia doesn't understand what they were designed to test?

I can't remember if I took the BIO GRE, I don't think so. I don't think anyone required it so I just applied without it (maybe I used my MCAT scores as a proxy?)

 

[TownieDeac]

I can't remember if I took the BIO GRE, I don't think so. I don't think anyone required it so I just applied without it (maybe I used my MCAT scores as a proxy?)

Sis just started PhD in micro at Emory, and none of the like...17 schools she applied to required subject GRE. Regular GRE was required at a few though.

 

[TownieDeac]

From the web: "The factual questions may require a student to identify characteristics of literary or critical movements, to assign a literary work to the period in which it was written, to identify a writer or work described in a brief critical comment, or to determine the period or author of a work on the basis of the style and content of a short excerpt."

I'll give you absurd.

I know this was the toughest part, because if you couldn't identify the work perfectly, it was really tough to use the syntax or diction to try and figure out the time period, because it wasn't like A) 1200, B) 1500, C) 1800, D) 2000. It was like A) 1580, B) 1590, C) 1600, D) 1610.

 

[wfudkn]

I know this was the toughest part, because if you couldn't identify the work perfectly, it was really tough to use the syntax or diction to try and figure out the time period, because it wasn't like A) 1200, B) 1500, C) 1800, D) 2000. It was like A) 1580, B) 1590, C) 1600, D) 1610.

Ugh. I would have scored a zero on something like that.

 

[ImTheCaptain]

this is the GRE?

 

[TownieDeac]

wakephan09, you had to take the subject GRE for English PhD, no?

 

[LadyDeac03]

Granted, I took the GRE back in like 2003, but I don't remember anything that hard.

I did fine in the Verbal and Quantitative (can't remember scores but it was enough to get into the grad programs I applied to). I also took it in what I think was the last year or two before the writing section. I had to do some sort of analytical section, but it was a test and not writing...like logic and stuff. Aced that section! Unfortunately no one cared.

 

[wakephan09]

the english GRE is absurd

Absurd hard, or absurd stoopid?

kinda both, but i mostly meant hard

the literary analysis stuff is fair, but the identification is just ridiculous

something like 1/3 of the identification is pre-1660, and typically includes a bunch of stuff from the bible and a bunch of arcane nonsense nobody would ever learn in english undergrad

I enjoyed taking it. 1/3 of the test might very well be pre-1660, but that section would almost entirely be after the advent of print -- indeed, probably post-1550. Lots of Spencer, Shakespeare, Milton. On my test there were three questions from pre-1550: one on Margery Kempe (on whom I'd written my MA, but very difficult for everyone else), one on The Canterbury Tales (it was a gimme), and one on Seamus Heaney (stupid). They were mostly about recognizing forms of pre-modern English.

I mostly struggled with the American Literature to 1925 and the c17 lyric poets. To this day I've never taken classes on any of these, nor will I probably read them on my own.

The Biology GRE was a good, comprehensive test of what an undergrad bio major should have learned. Maybe Columbia doesn't understand what they were designed to test?

Wow, seems Columbia English has taken down the pretty invective rhetoric about the GRE subject test in English. Now it just says that they don't require it.

 

[TownieDeac]

this is the GRE?

Granted, I took the GRE back in like 2003, but I don't remember anything that hard.

no, again, the English subject GRE, not the general GRE

 

[ImTheCaptain]

hm, i guess i dont' understand. what is the English GRE for?

 

[LadyDeac03]

no, again, the English subject GRE, not the general GRE

Aha. After I posted that I realized the difference.

 

[TownieDeac]

I enjoyed taking it. 1/3 of the test might very well be pre-1660, but that section would almost entirely be after the advent of print -- indeed, probably post-1550. Lots of Spencer, Shakespeare, Milton. On my test there were three questions from pre-1550: one on Margery Kempe (on whom I'd written my MA, but very difficult for everyone else), one on The Canterbury Tales (it was a gimme), and one on Seamus Heaney (stupid). They were mostly about recognizing forms of pre-modern English.

I mostly struggled with the American Literature to 1925 and the c17 lyric poets. To this day I've never taken classes on any of these, nor will I probably read them on my own.

I suspect you were better prepared for the test after your additional, what, 4 years of lit studies than I was after Wake's English major.

I found it pretty damn absurd. I guess as an entrance exam to an English PhD it should be that hard.

 

[wakephan09]

I know this was the toughest part, because if you couldn't identify the work perfectly, it was really tough to use the syntax or diction to try and figure out the time period, because it wasn't like A) 1200, B) 1500, C) 1800, D) 2000. It was like A) 1580, B) 1590, C) 1600, D) 1610.

From the web: "The factual questions may require a student to identify characteristics of literary or critical movements, to assign a literary work to the period in which it was written, to identify a writer or work described in a brief critical comment, or to determine the period or author of a work on the basis of the style and content of a short excerpt."

I'll give you absurd.

It's really not so difficult. Give me ten minutes, and I could give you some pretty easily identifiable indicators. Townie's example is a bit of hyperbole: in no way could anyone identify the differences in English between decades (without identifying the actual source text -- though perhaps that's what they're looking for).

Sis just started PhD in micro at Emory, and none of the like...17 schools she applied to required subject GRE. Regular GRE was required at a few though.

A lot of schools receive 500+ applications in literature. Gotta find some way to sort through the 400+ applicants with straight-As and glowing letters of recommendation.

 

[wakephan09]

I suspect you were better prepared for the test after your additional, what, 4 years of lit studies than I was after Wake's English major.

I found it pretty damn absurd. I guess as an entrance exam to an English PhD it should be that hard.

Hm? I was straight out of the MA, so I'd only had a single additional year.

 

[wfudkn]

It's really not so difficult. Give me ten minutes, and I could give you some pretty easily identifiable indicators. Townie's example is a bit of hyperbole: in no way could anyone identify the differences in English between decades (without identifying the actual source text).

I don't know if 10 mins would be enough with me. I'd probably struggle with the English GRE even if it were a speak and spell.

 

[Kory]

none of the communication programs I'm applying to right now require a subject GRE.

i'd take a rhetoric/argumentation theory GRE tho, that'd be dope.

 

[wakephan09]

Although according to the faculty on our admissions committees, they just glance at the Sub. GRE score in order to make sure it reaches a threshold. I doubt that a perfect score really reflects anything other than a broad undergraduate curriculum.

 

[wakephan09]

none of the communication programs I'm applying to right now require a subject GRE.

i'd take a rhetoric/argumentation theory GRE tho, that'd be dope.

There is some rhet/comp stuff and a good deal of theory on the English test. A lot of the rhet./comp. departments in the US are housed in English departments.

These are the areas in which a subject test is offered. Computer Science was apparently discontinued after 2013.

• Biochemistry, Cell and Molecular Biology
• Biology
• Chemistry
• Literature in English
• Mathematics
• Physics
• Psychology