For graduate schools, there are generally four big standardized admissions tests: the GMAT, the LSAT, the MCAT, and the GRE (I think it’s funny how most of them rhyme – why are you such a rebel, GRE?!).
- GMAT (business schools): $250
- LSAT (law schools): $132
- MCAT (medical schools): $225
- GRE (general graduate programs): $150
GMAT is the most expensive test out of the bunch. The MCAT is not far behind, but whereas the MCAT is an 8-hour test, the GMAT is 3.5 hours. From a layman’s perspective, this means that MCAT will take longer to grade and require more resources in that regard.
So, why is the GMAT the most expensive test? Hmmm. Perhaps the computer adaptive nature of the test is one reason? Although my understanding is that GRE is also computer adaptive.
Pearson (the testing organization that runs the GMAT) did note that they reinvest 40% of all testing revenue in to research and development of the test. And judging by those pesky adaptive questions…. I don’t doubt them!
Recently, a few business schools have quietly begun to accept GRE scores. A year ago, the New York Times dubbed this “a feud brewing in the graduate-school testing world.” Pearson is, not surprisingly, none-too-pleased about this development. In fact, one of the arguments in favor of the GRE is that since it’s $100 cheaper than the GMAT, it will offer more access to prospective students who cannot afford the $250 GMAT fee.
Colleges already have a dual-standardized testing model where both the SAT and ACT are equally accepted. I wonder if one day GMAT and GRE will reach that stage for business school admissions.
If Pearson is really worried about the cost of GMAT turning away financially-challenged students, I think increased fee waivers or reduction would be a step in the right direction. Apparently, schools can request fee waivers for their prospective students, but I’m not sure how many students that benefits. It might be more effective for students to be able to apply for waivers on their own.
My personal belief is that Pearson charges the $250 for the GMAT because they can – I paid $500 to take the test twice, and I know people who have taken it 3 times.
Have anyone made the decision to take one test over the other for financial reasons?
You May Also Want To Read :
Could it be... that I actually LIKE studying for the GMAT? Well, "like" is a strong word, but i ...
Taking and prepping for standardized tests isn't cheap, fortunately, there are many free study r ...
Parting is such sweet sorrow - except in this case. Finally took the GMAT today. Before th ...
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
I actually just found out that number 1 choice for B-School accepts the GRE. I almost did a double take when I saw the $100 discount. However, my fear is that they will be weighed differently.
I had a part-time position in my school's admission's office and I know for a fact that the ACTs and the SAT's aren't weighed the same. A low score on the ACT counts for more against you than a lower score on the SATs. Given that the GMAT was designed to test how a student will fare in Business School (and I don't doubt it, that test is ridic) and the GRE wasn't, I could imagine that a similar thing will happen – an average score on the GMAT will probably not hurt as much as an average score on the GRE.
What have you decided to do? I'm playing it safe and taking the GMATs.
I took the GMAT. Like you said, the GRE is still a newcomer on the bschool admissions front, and I didn't want to take a risk with a test that might not be viewed in the same light.
true story, I took the MCAT. It was my least favorite way to spend $200 ever.
debt ninja´s last blog ..“Good debt” is for dumb people
The MCAT is now about 5 hours long (with breaks), it switched from being 8 hours when it went from paper format to computer in 2007.
I do not envy you having to oay big bucks for these tests, but another thing to consider. It takes MANY millions of dollars to develop these tests to make sure that they really do what school's want them to do. Part of why tests may cost more or less probably has to do with how much they cost to develop and how many people take the test (more people = lower cost). But really, I think trying to compare these tests is apples and oranges…they're similar, but too different to really compare side by side.