i have a couple years before i take them, but just wondering what's the general opinion on whether taking them 2 or 3 times is normal, like the SAT for undergrad.

I think this has probably been stated before, but grad school admission is based largely on your portfolio.

How much do you think you will improve your GRE scores? 200 points? I don't know if it's really worth taking them again. I took the GRE once, got what I thought was a fairly respectable score, and sent it in.

I think (i'm not on any admissions boards, so I don't really know) that most schools are looking for students with good work and a diversity of interests. You could always email a school or call and ask how heavily they weigh the GRE. They may not tell you anything, but they may give you a percentage, or an idea of how important they are.

from what i know...GRE scores are averaged...not just highest one. so it would seem to only be helpful if u were able to score a good amount more on the 2 or even 3 time.

i know this is a long shot...but what are some scores that people have gotten. i'm hoping to take them soon but really have no idea what the norm is. what score would be in the 65-75 percentile? if it's a touchy subject then i apologize.

The scores aren't averaged. They're reported separately - but all on the same page. So the schools will see your older and newer scores. Some schools do average them, some count only the higher one, but most just record all of them.

It's not nearly as common to retake the GREs as it is with the SATs. I would not do this unless there'd been some major problem with the first time or there'd been some major distraction or something.

GRE scores are a fairly small factor in most M.Arch decisions (I'd say the portfolio and recommendation letters make up at least 70% of the decision process, with everything else making up the other 30%.) Some exceptions to this would be:
1. If your GPA is below average for the applicants to that school (say under 3.3 in the Ivies, or even below 3.0 at some other schools.) In this case high GRE scores may help reassure the committee that you have the general academic background to do well.
2. A few schools (Princeton is reportedly one) combine GREs and GPAs to do an initial "weeding" of applications in their general graduate admissions office before they ever get to the architecture department. In this case if both GRE and GPA are low then it would make sense to retake the GRE. This situation usually doesn't happen at any architecture school that has its own administration (as opposed to being a department of a larger graduate school.)

slomo - these percentiles are based on an exam I took last year:
Verbal - 570 (77%), Quant - 660 (62%), Analytical 5.0 (67%)

I spoke to the GSD (I know - it's a long shot) and they said they look at both scores, and unless my scores significantly improve then there is no real need to re-take them. They also said most people's scores do not change that much when they do re-take. The GSD says they do not have a weeding out process, that they look at your portfolio first and then look at your GPA and transcripts.

I will try to get in touch with more schools and can post what I find out if anyone is interested.

Great post..even if its an ongoing discussion in other posts. I too was somewhat concerned about the scores i recieved,, mainly the verbal. Got a 490 on verbal, 670 on quant. and 5 on written. the only school that mentioned a minimum requirement of the ones I called was Yale. They said that "if you are scoring in the 300s or 400s than you probably shouldnt be applying to Yale."
I dont plan on taking it over again due to cash and time constraints. I have also heard that those who take the test over again usually dont score much better. I am still hoping that it isnt as big a factor as the gpa, rec's and portfolio. i had a 3.6gpa so i hope that can offset my lackluster verbal score.
Crossing my fingers.

If you feel that you have a strong portfolio, great recommendations, and you've got at least a 3.0 GPA then - no matter what your GRE scores are - you should apply to the schools that you're most interested in attending. The scores are meaningless. Regardless of whatever they told monkeyboy on the phone, I know that Yale has admitted the occasional student with a GRE score in the 300s - as well as students with scores in the 800s.

I do believe that it would be possible, with directed and determined effort, to raise a GRE verbal score by 100 points or more - in fact some test prep companies guarantee this. It could be done by taking test prep courses and/or studying huge vocabulary lists, and practicing extensively.
However, I believe such an improvement would require a large investment of time. If I had that amount of time I would choose instead to put it into perfecting my portfolio, my statement of purpose, and my resume. These factors are all more important because they are more telling of the candidate as an individual.

This thread has made me even more paranoid about taking this test here in a couple of days. argh. Although, I have been studying my ass off for the past 4 months I still think that they have something up thier sleeves.

Few if any architecture programs look at the analytical portion, so focus on the other two. I've heard that a combination of those two should hit at least 1000 (of a maximum 1600) for the student to appear credible. 1200 is better, though.

In my experience, the very best way to prepare for the GREs is to take as many practice exams as you can. There is no way to learn all the information necessary to ace them. But you CAN get much better at reading, thinking, and narrowing down good answers... but only with practice, practice, practice!

And don't forget, architecture schools are able to look at portfolios---a major indicator of ability other disciplines don't have.

When I visited Berkeley I was surprised when they they told me that they care more about the analytical scores on the GRE than the quant.

That's very interesting. Time to revise my understanding on this...

When I was applying to M.Arch programs most faculty people I talked to at various schools told me that the verbal and analytical were of more concern than the math. But they also told me not to worry about test scores much and put my energy elsewhere (see my above comments.) Of course, this was a few years ago and the anaytical portion at that time was a regular multiple choice section with a score like the other parts (200 to 800), not the way it is now. At the time we were usually told that it didn't matter so much what the scores were in each particular section was so long as our 3 scores added up to at least 1500 or so (out of the possible 2400 at that time.)