Universities dropping GRE requirement?

[SiennaGreen]

I just realized that University of Maryland has dropped the GRE requirement for their MSN programs. They do not believe that the GRE's adequately or directly reflect one's ability to succeed in a Master's of Nursing program.

Has anyone heard of any other Universities doing this? I wonder if this will become a trend. IMO, I hope so. I was dreading that GRE.

[byrd262, BSN, RN]

If you have more than a 3.2 GPA, then Thomas Jefferson University will waive the GRE requirement for the FACT and APW programs. This probably applies to the regular MSN programs as well.

[MommyandRN]

I wish all of them would! The GRE has been the one major roadblock for me going back to grad school the past nine years. If it hadn't been for the GRE, I probably would have completed my MSN in something over 5 years ago. I am applying for some NP programs now and notice that a few don't require it at all, a few do, and a few waive it for a good GPA. I am determined to go back to school and hoping to avoid it at all costs! If I am forced to take it then God help me, I guess I will have to, we'll see. I have cancelled past GRE appointments twice out of pure fear.

[AWanderingMinstral]

I have mixed feelings about the GRE. Generally speaking, it DOES measure your knowledge...and you CAN prepare for it. However, due to time constraints, you rarely, ESPECIALLY in the math section(s), have time to do the actual math for every question. Instead, as emphasized in the review books, you need to know enough to eliminate possible choices and make an educated guess from, say, two choices. I took it about three weeks ago and, with six weeks of reviewing under my belt, I did surprisingly well. Considering the exam costs $140, I wouldn't recommend anyone taking it without preparing. Most individuals have a weakness (either verbal or math) and it's important to brush up a little beforehand. Good luck, everyone!

[ivanh3]

Many schools are dropping the GRE if there is a sufficiently high GPA. Also many schools waive the GRE if the applicant already has a masters.

[BBFRN, BSN, PhD]

My school still requires it for entry into the PhD programs, even for those who already have Master's degrees, and even with high GPAs. I have mixed feelings about the GRE, too.

[starbellyjm]

I am at UMASS med in the GEP program. They are talking about increasing their GRE requirement to a minimum of 1000 to interview (It used to be 800). :uhoh21:

[BBFRN, BSN, PhD]

800 is kind of a low requirement, though.

[TheSquire, DNP, APRN, NP]

1000 isn't terribly high, either.

[FA to CRNA2b]

Georgetown will waive the GRE for a higher GPA. Not sure how high though.

[tryingtohaveitall]

I didn't have to take the GRE to get into my AC-PNP program, thankfully! I'm a good test taker but I def would have to have brushed up on my math!

[Dr. Tammy, FNP/GNP-C]

Am I alone in thinking the GRE is nothing more than junk science? Here's a site that provides answers to FAQ's regarding the GRE:

http://www-ugs.csusb.edu/testing/grefaq.html

The most conspicuously absent question, however, is why?

What is the purpose of the GRE? Is it to establish the student has the mental horsepower to succeed in graduate level studies? Is it to weed out applicants in a highly impacted program? Or is it to provide a revenue stream to the architects of a for profit company [ETS] of this tool that is based on nothing more than junk science?

Why junk science? First, if the GRE is an instrument by which measures a students aptitude in future graduate work, I can think of thousands upon thousands of extraneous variables that would threaten the very internal validity that the instrument aims to measure--or I should say, measures the probable association in the form of a positive relationship between those who score higher on the instrument as compared to those who are ultimately successful in graduate education.

Here's a curious tidbit on the GRE,

"A meta-analysis of the GRE's validity in predicting graduate school success found a correlation of .3 to .4 between the GRE and both first year and overall graduate GPA. The correlation between GRE score and graduate school completion rates ranged from .11 (for the now defunct analytical section) to .39 (for the GRE subject test).

However, a lack of correlation appears when the analysis is extended to review of the literature in the past, and such a review appeared in a 1985 issue of the journal Research in Higher Education. Over eighty pages in length, it is one of the most exhaustive literature reviews on the question of test validity. The author Leonard Baird focused on studies completed between 1966 and 1984, reported in any of nineteen highly-regarded scholarly journals. In study after study many of the reported correlation coefficients were zero or near zero, and some studies even showed significant negative coefficients. Most striking, many of these negative correlations appear in the studies concerning the relationship between test scores and the number of publications and citations for graduates of PhD programs.

For instance: "Clark and Centra studied two samples of doctoral recipients… The resulting sample consisted of 239 chemists, 142 historians, and 221 psychologists, all of whom had at least one GRE score. In chemistry, the correlation of number of articles and book chapters with GRE-verbal was -.02; with GRE-quantitative it was -.01; and with GRE-advanced it was .15… For all historians, these correlations were -.24, -.14, and .00. For all psychologists, the correlations were -.05, -.02, and .02. Clark and Centra also examined the distribution of number of publications by GRE scores. The distributions were essentially flat, with no particular trend. In fact, the largest number of publications was reported by the lowest scoring groups in all three fields(emphasis added)."

I made it a point to screen out all schools that required a GRE. My rationale was, if a school relies on junk science to guide admission, what kind of junk will they use to guide, inform and direct the curriculum?

Second, if schools are using the GRE as an instrument to weed out applicants in an impacted program, why not use another instrument which is just as valid and reliable, like a ouija board or a certified palm reading analysis.

Just say no to schools who rely on junk science.

[CharmedJ7]

I'm going to jump in as the devils advocate here - I do support the GREs. Unlike GPA, the GREs do give a level playing field for evaluation of all students no matter what school they come from (for example, at some schools a 3.5 is decent, at others it's extraordinary). I do not think the GREs are a measure of intelligence, but they are definitely a measure of test-taking ability and your ability to prepare for a specific challenge. There are a lot more tests to be had in graduate nursing, both in coursework and for certifications, so it seems reasonable to want to ensure applicants have a degree of competence in that skill.

That being said, I suspect GREs do not form a large basis at all for evaluation of an application unless you did astoundingly poorly or astoundingly well, and I think that is how it should be.

Just my