Anybody preparing for GMAT to get admission in PhD?

Thanks BrazilianPhD

Appreciate your honest answer!!

Its been 10 years since i finished school, spent 9 years in Corporate, 1 year sabbatical & about 8 months as an entrepreneur. A very unorthodox profile, but nonetheless i would want to give my best for the PhD applications. I am planning for PhD in Marketing (Consumer Behavior)

- Can you please suggest any reading material that one should go through as a prep for PhD applications? for e.g. as you mentioned the schools asked about research, how to do research?, latest softwares used in research? current trends in research? should i also be aware in detail about the latest research being done, in my area of specialization?


- Should i be going through research articles & is it wise to mention in the SOP, in detail my intentions about the research i am interested in?

- Do you recommend that one should get in touch with Professors & try to start a communication with him or her? provided they respond from their busy schedules.


Also how do you rate a PhD from Canada (Rotman, Schulich, HEC, Sauder) from the point of view of future prospects of getting hired by a university in Canada.



billionaire you may please chip in, your inputs are appreciated as well.

Hi:

Actually IIM FPM do not expect you to be a researcher but they expect you to show interest in research or rather you should be interested in research.
so you have to back up with a curiosity story .

There are so many applications which they have admitted on the basis of interest because they will teach us research .

Hope this help (after discussion with students from IIM FPM )

Hi, MrTodd.

I really wonder if there is such a thing as an "orthodox" profile since I've seen very different people doing a PhD. I don't think that's a big deal by itself.

I'm not a Consumer Behavior guy, I'm more into Quantitative Marketing and Marketing Strategy. And there are some big differences. So, I'll try to help, but see if you can find a CB student.

I believe that the most important reading for you is the Journal of Consumer Research. This should give you a good feeling about the type of research you are expected to do.

In CB, probably you will deal with lots of experiments. So, if you can have a good idea about how research in consumer behavior uses experiments, it should be helpful. Again, the Journal of Consumer Research should point in the right direction.

You should have at least a general idea about the research that has been done that is related to your research interests, according to your statement of purpose. In my case, for example, my interests are mostly related to the Marketing-Finance interface, and then I knew about concepts like brand equity and customer lifetime value.

There is a variety of software for research, I don't know which one is common in CB, and in the end it will depend also on the software that your advisor prefers. For a PhD application, I think it's ok if you show some knowledge in any of them, just to show that you are able to code or use a statistical software. Some common brands we hear in business are SPSS, R, SAS, Python, Stata, and Matlab. If you're just starting, R is used by lots of researchers and it is free. I had some experience with SPSS and studied a little about Matlab before applying.

CB usually do not use very complex statistics, I guess being able to talk about something like ANOVA or a common linear regression is more than enough. Do not waste too much time on this.

You are expected to explain your research interests in the SOP. What are your interests, why you are interested in that kind of thing, how do you expect the school to be able to support you in your interests, the professors that seem to be a good match for your interests, things like that. There is no agreement about the level of detail, there are different opinions about it. If you are too specific, it is going to be hard to find a school or a professor to match that interest. If you are too vague, it will look like you don't know what you want to do. Bear in mind that schools expect you to change your interests during the PhD, but they want someone who at least has a good idea about what is going on.

I've also seen different opinions about getting in touch with professors before applying. I think most students didn't do that, but I know at least a few did. If you get in contact, you must be sure that you're doing in a way that will leave a good and lasting good impression about you (not easy to do). Otherwise, you're just wasting everyone's time and not helping your application.

Rating PhD programs is one of the biggest challenges every applicant must face. UT Dallas is the ranking people usually mention in discussions about PhD programs, top 20 are usually dream schools, top 50-top 100 still very good ones. UT Dallas ranking for marketing journals places Rotman as 18th, so it would be great in any place in the world, among the best of the best, for example. However, rankings are also very flawed, especially because it depends on your research interests. Sometimes, a top 10 school is an awful choice because it fits badly with your research interests. On the other hand, sometimes a very famous professor is at a school you didn't expect.

Check also the placements of the schools you mentioned. See where former PhD students are working now. This should give you some clues about job prospects. Maybe the Who Went Where report from the American Marketing association can help you with that too.

Thanks BrazilianPhD

Appreciate your providing such detailed information!! It puts the Phd admission process in good perspective.

Another query i have, Does a high GMAT & a high post grad GPA compensate for a low undergrad GPA? In other words, does the undergrad GPA have any weightage if one also has a post grad degree in business with a high GPA?

Before I start, please bear in mind that I'm just a PhD student, I'm not involved in the evaluation of applications at my school. What I write is based on my own experience during applications, things I talked about with other applicants, PhD students and professors, and includes a lot of personal opinions.

Yeah, I think that "compensate" is not a good word, and the undergrad GPA is still relevant despite a high postgrad GPA and high GMAT. Having 2 strengths do not make 1 weakness go away, it is still worse than someone with 3 strengths.

But it's good to remember that very few applicants have the "perfect" profile, checking all the marks that schools love to see in an applicant. If the undergrad GPA is your only weakness, for example, I don't think that will prevent you from getting accepted by very good schools if you do your job right.

Now, back to the GPA. If schools had just the GPA, maybe a GMAT would compensate. One of the main problems with GPA is that it's hard to compare GPAs of different applicants, from different schools, from different countries. Maybe the GPA of an applicant is high because the school does a lot of grade inflation, for example. And one of the main advantages of the GMAT is that it allows schools to compare different applications since it is a standardized score.

However, what many applicants seem to forget is that the schools do not have only the GPA. They have the GPA + the transcripts. And that combination allows schools to evaluate an application in a way that is harder, or impossible, with the postgrad GPA and the GMAT.

Think about the two simplified cases below.

Applicant X has two courses on the transcript:
- Psychology, with a grade of A
- Brazilian Law, with a grade of C

Applicant Y has two courses on the transcript:
- Psychology, with a grade of C
- Brazilian Law, with a grade of A

Both applicants would have the same GPA, right? But applicant X seems to be excellent in Psychology, and applicant Y seems to be excellent in Brazilian Law. A Consumer Behavior PhD program would prefer applicant X, because Psychology is important for this type of PhD, while Brazilian Law is probably useless for them. The GMAT does not allow for this kind of analysis. Even with a high GMAT, applicant Y still looks weak in Psychology.

My GPA is bad (or at least it looks very bad when converted to the US GPA system). But I tried to show them that some of my best grades were in quantitative and marketing courses, since I was applying to quantitative marketing.

Schools can try to do that kind of analysis with the postgrad GPA and transcripts. But the variety of courses is much higher for undergrad than for postgrad.

Another advantage of undergrad transcripts is that it allows schools to evaluate what happens over time, in a period of several years (just like a PhD). They can see if the applicant is a student who started strong, but whose performance declined over time, for example. That's not a good sign, since a PhD usually require someone who does not lose motivation easily, and can keep going at a high level of performance for a long time.

So, the undergrad GPA + transcripts present detailed information, about a variety of courses, over a long period, in a way that the postgrad GPA and the GMAT cannot match.

I also believe that applicants often do not understand the purpose of the GMAT. They think of it as just a test of Math and Verbal skills.

As a test of Math, the GMAT would be really bad for PhD applications, since the Math required during a Business PhD is quite different from the Math required for the GMAT. You can ace the GMAT Quant without any knowledge about matrices and derivatives, but during the PhD these are some of the most important knowledge you must have, for example. So, the GMAT does not test if you have the Math knowledge that you need, but your undergrad transcript may show schools if you are good at Math (including matrices and derivatives) or not.

There are some aspects of the GMAT that are overlooked, people don't think about it that much, but I believe it is important. The GMAT is a weird test, it's no wonder that lots of intelligent people struggle with it.

First, it focuses on only 2 things: Quant and Verbal. Why? I think one of the reasons is that it's really hard to find people who are good at both. So, in order to get a great GMAT score, you must not only get a high score in what you are good, but also be able to get at least an acceptable score in what you are not good. A great GMAT score shows that the applicant has no weakness in either Quant and Verbal, or that they are able to overcome that weakness. And that's important for a PhD. We hear a lot of professors complaining about students who are great at calculating everything that is needed, because they are great at Math, but then get stuck when writing and presenting a paper. The weight of each part can change, for applications in Finance the Quant score is much more important, and in Quantitative Marketing the quant score is still the most important, but the verbal score can also be very relevant. But for any field, both Quant and Verbal skills are relevant.

Second, the test has been developed in a way that is new for most applicants. The GMAT often looks very different from the other tests applicants have taken before. Data Sufficiency questions seemed crazy to me, I had never seen questions like that. I also had never taken a test where identifying the questions to skip can be a vital skill, as I usually just tried to answer all questions without skipping any. So, the GMAT forces most applicant to face a new, challenging problem. It tests how you deal with something new, something you are not used to. And that's also valuable for PhD.

When I see a great GMAT score, I think of two main possibilities. One, the applicant is a genius, who was able to quickly adjust and so was able to get a great score on the first try. Two, the applicant worked hard, studied a lot, tried to understand how the GMAT works, tested different strategies to see what was the best one, motivated themselves to go over and over the same stuff, and ultimately was able to get a great score because they kept trying hard without giving up. Any of those two is great for a PhD: being a genius who quickly adjusts, and being a hard worker who doesn't give up.

So, for me the roles of the GMAT and the undergrad GPA are very different from each other, in a way that one does not compensate the other.

The postgrad GPA is less clear to me. I have both an Executive MBA and a Master of Science degree, and I think the way they helped me the most was not related to GPA and transcripts. It was the experience using statistical software, the opportunity to get stronger letters of recommendation, and to have a paper+conference presentation to show as research experience relevant to the field I was applying to.

Hi BrazilianPhD

I don't doubt that last actual average score they informed you for PhD acceptance at Bauer is 706.

Why would they inform you about that as being current PhD student ?

You are not involved in admission process.

Just asking.

I am not going to explain how 706 would not be that much different than 680, instead of that, why they would not update new info ?

Are they lazy ?

I will tell you why.

Even if their last average score across all disciplines may be 706 this year, next year it can be again 680.

It changes from year to year as application pool can also change, sometimes dramatically, still they have averages for like 5 year or 10 year and ball park what to expect and at the same time they provide that info to others as pretty much accurate guidance.

No need to explain to you, how when I contact admission representative, some professor lets say chair of department and professor who is designed as contact for that particular PhD program, I may get slightly different info and data in terms of average scores, usual application pool, competitiveness etc.

You have been there, i suppose you would know that.

No need to inform you how when you contact them, they will provide you with their desired score, while their actual average score may be less, meaning they did accept and they will accept students with lower scores.

They just want to portrait picture of them being more elite.

Purpose of my post, was to encourage people to apply not discourage them and when I post something, that is always backed with data and based on facts.


Also majority of people who asked about PhD previously, were targeting European schools, where we have different settings in terms of competitiveness, while you were little scaring them with demands for most competitive schools in the world (top US).


Skepticism is healthy for anything, especially anything related to intellect, however facts are facts.

Lets check them.


Marketing department accepts 2-3 students per year from application pool of 50+.

Ok.

2.5/50=5% admission rate

The median GMAT score of our current Ph.D. students is 680.

"This puts our department in the top 40 of marketing departments in the U.S"

https://www.bauer.uh.edu/doctoral/marketing/faqs/


Now, Department of Finance usually receives approximately 75 applications for 3-4 slots.

3.5/75=4.6%

The average GMAT score for Bauer was 698, with range from 640 to 760.

In 2010, the Department of Finance ranked 18th in the nation, according to an ASU finance research ranking.
The department also ranked 22nd in the nation in 2010, according to a UT Dallas finance research ranking.

https://www.bauer.uh.edu/doctoral/finance/faq.php

https://www.bauer.uh.edu/departments/finance/


You see, in general it was easier to get in Marketing than Finance at Bauer, and Finance is more competitive, we can even debate which department is stronger in corresponding field, although that alone doesn't have anything to do with cross competitiveness.

I thought that is obvious.


It is funny that based on research, Finance department at Bauer seems to be also above Marketing department in their respective fields rankings, however I don't have problem to be the other way around, that still would not affect my claim at all.


Now, I know what you are going to say, you were (probably) the only one accepted that year at Marketing.

Here is the news for you, although in general Finance departments over US have only two slots for PhD, rarely up to 4, even schools who put info that they are looking for like 4, often do not accept anybody that year, since they were not satisfied with candidates, so they can go from 0-4 or from 0-2.

I have seen that to be true multiple times.

That depends on their budget, plans, maintaining professor to student ratio etc. but can ultimately come to strength of application pool.

Sure we have also departments that do not accept new cohort every year, only on even or add years.


Speaking of strength of applicants, for PhD in Finance people compete with people who have extremely strong quantitative background and completed bachelor, master, sometimes even already PhD degrees in mathematics, physics, statistics, engineering and I doubt many of them will apply to Marketing, its just not their thing.

Having bachelor/master degree in Economics or Finance often is not enough for PhD in Finance (especially for top schools), strong quantitative background is a must.


Here are some admission statistics, by specialization, that reflects general rule/trend that happens to be too strong statement for you, although is simply a fact :

Marketing Applicants=137 Enrollees=3

Finance Applicants=283 Enrollees=5

https://www.stern.nyu.edu/programs-admis ... statistics


"Areas like Economics and Finance receive two to three times the number of applications that areas like Accounting or Information Systems receive"

https://www.cmu.edu/tepper/programs/phd ... /faqs.html


Marketing 5/130=3.8%

Finance and Economics 6/343=1.7%

https://www8.gsb.columbia.edu/programs/ ... statistics


Feel free to dig on and research on your own if you think you will find some other truth in data.


Regarding Bauer, I have spoken with Professor Kris Jacobs, Finance Program Coordinator, Crystal R. Lugo admissions coordinator for graduate and professional programs, Lilia Canas College Academic Affairs manager etc. although they have presented all relevant/pertinent info on school website, which is not always the case.


Hello MrTodd

Not having research experience does not jeopardize your chances and application, but then again it depends where you want to apply.

For most competitive, like top 10 US, that will be minus, however not definitively no.

You need to realize, that you compete with other PhD applicants, so compared to them everything can change.

Keep things in perspective.


In terms of rankings, Rotman is the best in Canada, then comes Sauder and not there is not much difference between Schulich and HEC, except like obvious language environment/location

Then again you may have later different preference, in terms of professors, research, climate, location, language, feedback, how much they want you and million other things.


Hello CAMANISHPARMAR

You are welcome.

Post here (PhD in Business forum) once you are ready, once you have GMAT score and all necessary info regarding application and I will reply.

If you decide to apply to PhD in Finance, then above applies/can be useful to you.

I don't know why they informed us about the GMAT score, but they did. And if you need some proof of that, send me your e-mail in private that I can send you.

If you think that 706 is not that much different from 680, then why are you that worried about what I'm saying? Because if that's a fact, then to me it seems like what I'm saying is not different from what you are saying. If they are about the same, your 680 would scare people off the same way my 706 would. If that's enough to scare people off, then they will go insane if they get accepted, when the stakes are much higher.

It seems you are just biased in your judgement. You discard an actual and more up to date information I provided, because the information that you have fits better in your arguments. You are free to think what you want.

And yeah, I think I have been very clear about the fact that I'm talking about top schools (about top 100) in the US, because that's where I have experience. If as a moderator you are saying I have also to talk about European schools, something I know little about, then I'd better leave this forum. I'm one of the very, very few still willing to come here to help people. And I had never heard about that requirement before.

Did I lie at any point? I really don't think so. Did I scare someone off because I'm telling the truth? Maybe. But if I'm afraid of telling the truth, then I'd better leave he PhD. For me, having more and better information about the competitiveness of PhD applications helped me to develop a stronger application, instead of scaring me off.

I agree that competition for Finance PhD is usually stronger, as I stated, and my background is actually in Finance. I just don't agree with that statement you made that makes it look like it is BY FAR more competitive in ANY school compared to ANY FIELD. It just seems to me you are not willing to accept that there may be exceptions.

So, yeah, you are basing your opinion of facts and numbers that you have. But you are choosing the facts and numbers that support your view, ignoring or diminishing the importance of those that are against it.

You don't talk about situations like Tippie, where in 2015 the average GRE of enrolled students in Finance PhD was 152V 163Q, which certainly is not BY FAR superior to Marketing PhD (160V 170Q) or Accounting (760 GMAT). So, to me it seems just like a self-selection bias in your analysis.

You talk about the superior strength in Finance regarding Quant subjects, but seems to disregard the Verbal side, for example. Yeah, for Finance the Quant side is more important, but in other fields it is not the same weight. You just see the side that puts Finance in good light, and again ignores that parts that don't. You talk like all that matters is Quant, so automatically people with a background in Psychology, for example, would be inferior. Just because they are weaker on the Quant side, it does not mean that people with a background in Psychology for example is less important, less competitive, less competent.

Usually Marketing PhD students also have at least a Master's degree. I have an Executive MBA and a MSc. in Finance, for example. We also have at Bauer a student who already had a PhD, so thaat kind of thing happens not only in Finance. Just because his PhD is not in Math or something like that you think he is worse? That looks really, really biased to me.

Applicants to Finance PhD are usually better at the things that are related to Finance, applicants to Marketing PhD are usually better at the things that are related to Marketing, and the same reasoning goes for the other fields. If you use the standards of Finance to judge applicants for all fields, of course Finance will look stronger. Marketing would also look stronger if, instead of focusing on the importance of the quant background I focused on the importance of a background in psychology, and if I talked about verbal skills instead of quant skills. But then we are just omitting relevant variables, and again biasing the analysis. Things like budget restriction, and schools not filling all spots they have available is not an exclusivity of Finance too, I don't see why it matters here,

Hello BrazilianPhD

First I said I don't doubt 706 as average score.

When I mention scarring it was referred to your previous post where you were parading with average score of 730 for top schools and your thought that 700 is way below average and that 710-720 was not really impressive etc. so some people got wrong idea, since that was not applicable to them (especially the ones interested in European schools, or top 50 US).

Bauer is top 50 or top 100 and you can get in with 700. Period. That was point, for other applicants to see.

Of course you are not obliged to know about European schools requirements, nobody said/requested that, or Asian, or Canadian, I do, we had people involved in this discussion from Budapest (Hungary), Germany etc. who although have some US schools as target, also have (believe me) European/Canadian schools perspective for PhD, so I was juxtaposing for them, and all others who will read this.

Tippie

I enjoy this.

Look you found one of outliers in Iowa.

And for 2015 year only.

Why don't you provide whole picture, even with Iowa ?

Finance:

Our admitted students average around 700 on the GMAT.

https://tippie.uiowa.edu/future-graduat ... m-overview


Your favorite Marketing department:

Admits typically have GMAT scores that average 650+.

https://tippie.uiowa.edu/future-graduat ... m-overview



Iowa Fall 2015 statistics:

Marketing

Applications: 35
Admitted: 3 (8.6%)
Enrolled: 1
Average GMAT, applied: 673

Finance

Applications: 84
Admitted: 4 (4.7%)
Enrolled: 2
Average GMAT, applied: 704

https://tippie.uiowa.edu/future-graduat ... statistics

So who is now playing with the facts/data ?

Who is ignoring reality ?

In both cases, what you presented only is outlier, only one enrolled student, in Accounting and Marketing, while in fact average for Marketing was 673.

Same as in your (personal) case, one student does not make the average

So even in far Iowa in one admission year only (2015) facts don't work good to support your claim.


Just to make something clear, I would never consider any fields/disciplines to be inferior per se, compared to others.

In fact, you mention psychology that is vastly important in Finance, as Finance having both quantitative and psychological/behavioral side, since all participants on market are social/psychological beings who act irrational at least as much as in rational manner, all the time.

I am interested in behavioral finance as possible research path.

Last Nobel prize in Economics winner, Richard Thaler comes from that field, behavioral economics/finance.

Daniel Kahneman is probably most popular among many others, Nobel prize winners who are behavioral economists.


I was only talking about competitiveness aka how hard is to get in, based on most important facts like average GMAT score and ratios as number of applicants vs. available spots.

I certainly was not talking about importance of research in any field, which would be value measure.


If we agree that, what I presented is true in 90% of cases I am fine with that. I think you are inclined to admit that.


I don't know why you are so sensitive, we are on same mission here, to help others in PhD pursuits and I actually like you and consider your inputs, insights, PhD experience stories, to be valuable for other members and appreciate them.

I just corrected some info, where I saw that others could get wrong impression and supported what I already know with facts and data.

I certainly do not plan to exercise my rights as moderator in fashion you mentioned, your posts and opinions are most welcomed.


If you have any other questions for me, I would be happy to answer.

Interesting discussion.

I do think what is evident, aside which score is which - whether my score to aim for is below the average or above - the BS admission rate - all is good.

However, this section should be exploited for the holy grail question that every student should ask himself before embarking on this journey :

• WHY? what do we not know about our world ?? what can foster our economy, what is the consumer's behavior? and millions of other questions that Ph.D. student have to answer after the doctorate.
• Moreover, after the Ph.D. I wanna back to industry or I wanna a tenure-track ?? Do I have a research proposal OR a strong letter of intent through which I want to go for that specific Ph.D. in that specific BS............??

99% of the question are devoted to: is my GMAT score enough ?? but nothing is said about the passion a student should have; whether is able even to write a literature review; ...............

It also true that during the coming years you will learn HOW to perform a research but if the student on his/her own, barely, ask if 680 is a good score, then I do think the student has no a clear cutting-edge idea of what a Ph.D. really is.

Regards

Yeah, I certainly agree that answering "why?" is much more important than the GMAT. I guess this forum is much more biased toward this kind of discussion than other places, since this is a GMAT site.

At least for me, I was pretty sure about my motivations, my main goals after the PhD, what I wanted to explore and the reasons behind that, etc. I already had a very good idea even before doing my masters. So, giving an answer to the "why?" question was never an issue for me. My main problem was to understand "how?", especially taking into consideration that doing a PhD in the US is very different from my own country. I had zero experience with standardized tests, I had very little knowledge about most US schools, I didn't know what a GPA is, for example.

Motivation and passion are often a very personal issue. I don't see many applicants willing to share details about that kind of thing, especially in the internet. Different people have different reasons, and my reasons certainly wouldn't apply to other people. But sure, if someone is not clear about that kind of thing before applying, that would spell trouble.

Given those differences, I'm not sure how I can help, but if someone has any specific concerns, I can try.

At the end of the day, why I crafted this post https://gmatclub.com/forum/guides-and-r ... 66271.html
right there.

To answer those questions before, during and possibly after. If the students wanna any advice, then they are welcome, of course.

However, if their main concern is the GMAT score a private message to Bunuel, perhaps, should be more advisable.

Regards

Hi friends, I am too preparing for GMAT to get into Phd. What should be our target? Getting into top 50 schools or top 100? I'm confused about it.

Hi everyone
I've been studying GMAT for about 6 months and I'm planning for a phd in US.
I've tried so hard, but I'm really disappointed since I saw my mock results (especially verbal).
I wanted to take the exam in the second half of October, but I may change the time.
By the way I would like to join you to share my experiences.

Hi everyone

Just wanted to keep you updated.
Things got difficult at work in summer. I am working on a cruise ship (70-80hrs/week, no weekend) and was on vacation when I focussed on studying for the GMAT. They then called me back on the ship in July where I am still at right now.
I am now planning to do the GMAT in a couple of days in Lisbon, Portugal (imagine being on a cruiseship travelling around Europe and then finding a test center that offers an appointment on that particular day that you are calling the port with your ship...HUGE coincidence!). At the moment I am scoring very low <600. Working full time at a place where you pratically live, even though it's an office job within the finance department, does not give you much space or "mental focus".

Usually, I am that kind of overachiever that is accomplishing everything perfectly well. This time, I am couraged to be just average. I am going to take the GMAT another time in late December (22nd) when I will be back in Germany for "holidays". Anyway, my hopes are not high but I can't quit my job to only focus on studying.

During the past months an interesting discussion has evolved above. When I was reading the different opinions on the different programs and tier schools, at first I was discouraged but then started to reflect myself: For about 5 years now, I have built my career around the goal to join a Marketing PhD program focusing research on tourism and hospitality management. If I look at top tier schools, they do not even have that research focus except for e.g. Cornell. To conclude, I was pleased to read carcass posts: Isn't research about being passionate about a certain topic?

That's why I reached out to professors at my alma mater (MBA at Southeast Missouri State University, got there with a German Scholarship, was a TA and loved the Campus, students and faculty! -> SEMO is so small, that it is not even ranked, but at least they have an AACSB accreditation which is why I assume that they belong to Top200 schools).
They all agreed that scoring greatly on the GMAT would be beneficial for the admissions process but also on searching the "right" school fit to me. Well, no matter how good I am going to score next Friday - the GMAT is going to stay a pain in the ass in my life for the next two months at least. I have some preferences for schools to start in fall 2019. In November I am going to reach out to them for further information on their research. Is anyone else planning on applying for next fall?

Getting back to topic: When applying to business schools, did you apply for financial aid (TA/ RA position aka tuition waiver)?
If so, is it right that most business schools have their deadlines for these Phd applications on December 15?
If so, did you submit all your records right away or did you hand in later for example your GMAT score?
What would you recommend?

Love to hear your feedback.

Best from the Atlantic Ocean

Julia

Here, everyone gets a TA/RA position, with stipend, tuition waiver, etc. No need for a separate application, it's part of the process. We get information about that when we get the offer (the letters says we have been accepted, and informs the value of the stipend and things like that).

Different schools have different deadlines. If I remember correctly, I applied to schools that had deadlines between December and February.

About the records and scores, also different schools have different rules. Sometimes they just inform you about that during the application or after that. There are schools that do not want official scores during the application and only ask for that if you are accepted, and there are schools which require the official scores before the deadline.

I'm only talking about US schools, I don't know if it's the same in other countries.

Hi
I'm agree with @BrazilianPhD; what I can add is the results of my own surfing on the different universities' web sites and talking to a bunch of phd students there.
680 is acceptable for almost all universities except the high ranks such as HBS...
also you need a ibt score above 90 for those schools
the deadlines range DEC-FEB, with a pick on January 15
I'm planning to take both GMAT & TOEFL before December 15 & it's been around 5 months I am preparing for GMAT... Just let me know if there is any favor I can do for you.

Good morning,

Thank you for your input. If you think back of applying, have you also done the AWA and IR section within the GMAT exam? Did you consider it as relevant to the schools?