if the GRE is 'irrelevant', what about GPA?

I think gpa is kinda important

Well, my brother-in-law is admission staff for (...) in one Ivy

they care about 5 points or so in the aplications..

intelligence, group work, proactivism, risk averse, and recomendations..

intelligence in GRE (GPA is irrelevant over the GRE) and in architecture the portfolio...
group work (statement and resume)

can't remember the rest

Not only goes your GPA matter but WHERE you went to undergrad matters some as well. They know which schools are rigorous and which are not.

rafe, thats not for an arch school those is it? "risk adverse"? that cant be a factor for architecture schools. My gpa was above 3.7 at a very hard arch school, and i got rejections all around...maybe it doesnt mater as much as we think?

my impression is that the portfolio and letter of intent are the two most important things. They say who you are, what you're thinking about and what you're capable of.

gpa and gre really just give a general impression of your intellectual abilities on a very particular level, one that your portfolio doesn't necessarily reflect, but also one that's ultimately very difficult to measure by any number. Though, since your GPA reflects 4 years of work, it's probably used as much more of an indicator than the GRE, which everyone knows is a BS exam that doesn't really reflect much.

id have to comment back as well

i have heard from many inside sources and im sorry i think it's just logical,

that the combination of your GPA and the reputation of your undergrad school's academic rigour is MUCH more important than one test for three hours.

for his master, universities tend to draw people of all kind... maybe one applicant with a 3.1 gpa spent his undergrad time partying .. but his GRE and his statement shows that he is intelligent and focused...and would work for post-professional studies..

the least important part is the recommendations, sometimes they use them to compare the writing with your essays.. recommenders often do poor recommendations.

"the least important part is the recommendations, sometimes they use them to compare the writing with your essays.. recommenders often do poor recommendations." ... thats just incorrect on so many levels. sorry buddy

no, is not architectural.
but the essence is that GPA wont harm you if you do well in the GRE...
In civil ing, for example, they only look at the quantitative part of the GRE, probably the same for architecture.

the recommendations are not even 10% of the decision...
essay is more important tha anyone imagined...

and for us... portfolio is all.

yea, recommendations are crucial in the application process. A friend of mine actually attributed one of her rejections to a poor rec. letter

I think you underestimate the recommendations.

no problem, i'm not stating that.. that just what i heard.

and that may be different for architecture.. i can't assure anything.

but i know about some rejections of people with very good recommendations.. (harvard grads, proffesors, etc)

while the gre and gpa may not matter so much in themselves, i suspect people (arch background) with high gpas/gre have very strong recommendations/portfolios/essays. theres no reason to underestimate the importance of test scores, so long as you have the primary application materials in order.

Grad cafe says Yale sent out waitlisting emails - I guess what means they're full!

wtf happened to Columbia and Cornell and UPENN this year?

I can't swear that this is all true... haha .. just telling you what i've heard

does UPENN suck now?

uPenn SUCKS

really? it used to be so good. what happened

it does?

Given the strength of so many architecture applicants, its fair to assume that every part of the application is important...in considering some applicants, it may come to a point where equally good portfolios/essays have to be weighed against the candidates' GPA/GRE/undergrad school

^agreed, thats what i was trying to say.

rafe, i actually think recommendations are taken really seriously, especially ones from former professors. they are best able to evaluate your talent and drive, and they are going to be pretty straightforward about whether or not you're cut out for grad school just yet. i know a lot of profs at my undergrad were really selective about who they'd write recommendations for, because they have a professional reputation to maintain with high level grad programs. they know sending ten letters a year that say, "so-and-so is the most amazing student i've ever had," will render all of their recs meaningless, so they warned their students that letters would be a candid assessment.

when i went to open houses in the fall, admissions folks said the order of magnitude is something like

70% portfolio
10% essay
10% recommendations
7% GPA
3% GRE

(and then give or take an extra 3% for luck)

uPenn only suck because I haven't heard from them yet. Saying it sucks is only a strategy to make a letter materialize in my mailbox, which I figure is as good a strategy as any at this point

it sounds logical!

hahaa 3% of luck.. nice ingredient

I have to agree with snarkitekt...but I believe recommendations are one of those application items that never really helps you but can only hurt you...unless you have a recommender well-known in architecture or at the school, every other recommender is going to provide an overall "good" recommendation since the person did agree to recommend you...the problem comes when recommenders provide really harsh critiques or provide inconsequential letters lacking detail or emphasis

yeah.. poor recommendations can hurt you

lol...exactly!

rose: why did we apply to UPENN?

grad schools sould e-mail everybody the same day... with acceptances and rejections...

no anxiety.. not eating a lot.. no bad dreams .. no realy good dreams..... no suffering...

for no reason, apparently

According to last year's Gradcafe, we won't hear anything until next week

i think recommendations can help you. the people i asked knew me well and took it upon themselves to write me some glowing LORs.

yeah same here. all of my recommendations came from Professors whom i consider close friends/mentors. and they were elated to help write a letter. i think that helps.

I agree with KS1000. GPA and recommendations are important. If you have a crappy GPA or even one mediocre rec, you better be a superstar in all other areas to cover if you want to go to an top school. Where you did your undergrad is also important.

BTW, congrats on RISD, ks1000. Is that your top choice? Are you also waiting for Columbia and the GSD too?

My comment was just that everyone generally has "good" recommendations, so its not a factor that can really make you standout like the portfolio or essay (unless you have big name, well-known recommenders, like a gehry or a koolhaas maybe)

i once applied for a really competitive job overseas. i think i was maybe 22 or 23 at the time, a very low age for the position. at the interview, the person kept asking me questions that were, at their cores, 'what will you do if we don't hire you?' at the time, that job was all i wanted in the world. id wanted to get into the industry ever since high school, id done all the right things, had awesome references and even a person in HR! but at the time i couldnt understand why my contingency plan was so important to them.

i get it more now. the interviewer knew that people who are serious and focused on something know they arent a sure thing. and theyll have another route to their goals if something goes sour. thats how im looking at this process, and no one has had to tell me to chill yet. no mean feat.

that said, that first something in the mail sure would be nice...

porfolio kills recommendations

but rec. may help choose between to contendants with very good portolios

my GRE Verbal was embarrassingly low, but i managed to get in so i think GRE score was irrelevant. i'm in asia at this moment. probably i won't receive any official admission letter by the end of march.

thanks mrbren... that was nice

modernmonk- got in where?

not my top choice but I was definetely really happy to hear from them yesterday. going to the open house to get some more insight into the school.
I'm waiting to hear form a bunch of schools still. GSD and Columbia are on that list.

gsd MArch 1

sitting, waiting, wishing...

sweet, nice work. when's open house?

so is the general consensus that if you didn't get that email from the gsd or you haven't heard yet, that it's an implicit rejection? Or is the consensus here that there there will still be more acceptances?

Being the pessimist that I am, I have been assuming the former, although you would all be welcome to talk me out of it.

There are two I believe. Next week Thursday and a later one in April.