the portfolio is 10 times more important.

i had great gre scores and still got rejected from my top choices.

i blame my (then) craptastic portfolio.

glad to hear the portfolio is on the up and up

Don't worry about GRE.

My GRE was something like 300, which is really low...and I was still accepted ( UCLA ) with a Fellowship.

Worry about your portfolio and statement of purpose.

gass_will you be in the MArch II starting this summer?

awkeytect _I agree with everyone, dont worry about the GRE, the most important thing is the portfolio.

I totally bombed on the GRE. Like historically bad. Still got into 2 out of 4 grad programs I applied to. Its all about portfolio, essays, and interesting background.

My first choice was not in the US at the AA, therefore i did not spend much time studying for GRE. Neverthelss in the US I applied for GSD, Columbia, and Sciarc. (GRE is only for US schools)

I got 700q 420v, the 420 being a clear weakness far below what is an acceptable mark. I got into Sciarc, but was rejected from both harvard and columbia. Columbia on their website have a minimum of 450 in verbal and harvard have no minimum mark. I rang them up and they said my portfolio was medium to high and the rest was medium low, the 'low' part being the GRE verbal. So in the end i think if it had id been slightly higher it would not have been important, but being this low, it was a major 'red flag' as the women called it.

So I agree with everything above, the portfolio is not 10 times more important, it is about 100 times more important....but a weakness in an application is a weakness.

(i'm bit shocked to hear the 300 UCLA case above, but i think everyone would accept how irrelevant the GRE is to the actual course.)

j'aime, I'd be curious to see what a medium/high portfolio looks like! (in Columbia's eyes)

Care to share? :D

isn't the gre mainly used to determine those who get scholarships? like an objective determiner?

i didn't do great on the gre and got into all the schools i applied to but one... (going to gsd). just get it out of the way and work on portfolio... i think most of the people i know scored between 1050 and 1300 and they all got into their top choices.

Despite the fact that the GRE is not weighted heavily, I had a great time studying for the verbal. I memorized like 1000 extra words which have been invaluable. I got a 640 in the verbal but was only accepted to UCLA (no fellowship). Anyway, my point is that if you consider it more than studying for the GRE, it is a good excuse to increase your vocab. See you at UCLA gaas! Maybe you can give me some of that fellowship money.

how far in advance is it recommended to take the gre for people submitting their applications this year? i'll be taking a full load of classes and working in the fall, so i'm wondering when i'll even have time to study for this test.

you can get away with taking it as late as early December. Start memorizing words now. Its easier to cram for the math than the verbal.

like everyone else is saying, don't sweat the GRE. The portfolio is what matters most.

hey...I graduated already.....and the money is GONE :)

gaas did you really get 300 on the GRE and still got accepted to ucla? did you sleep with any of the admissions people?

Hey, i got a question about the GRE's. I received v:600 q:760, but I got only 3.5 on the writing part(mostly because for some reason, i thought no one cared). SO, do you guys think I should take it again?

i hate you

Only the very best architects know how to write and produce from that speculative writing.

The rest of us are just craftsmen, myself included.