Narrowly Missed. Darn! 690 Q51, V35 UPDATED [6.0 AWA] : Share GMAT Experience
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 17 Jan 2017, 13:23

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Narrowly Missed. Darn! 690 Q51, V35 UPDATED [6.0 AWA]

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 117
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Narrowly Missed. Darn! 690 Q51, V35 UPDATED [6.0 AWA] [#permalink]

Show Tags

09 Oct 2006, 15:14
Just got done and am dissapointed.

Here are my string of practise scores:

Power Prep 1: 650 (1 month back)
Power Prep 2: 740 (1 day before exam, yesterday)

GMATPrep 1: 680
GMATPrep 2: 700
GMATPrep 3: 700 (retake but many different questions)
GMATPrep 4: 710 (retake but many different questions)

MGMAT 1: 690
MGMAT 2: 710
MGMAT 3: 700

800 SCORE 1: 700
800 SCORE 2: 710
800 SCORE 3: 720
800 SCORE 4: 760
800 SCORE 5: 730

If you remember, I had taken GMAT 2.5-3 yrs back and received 680. I had a Q score of 53 then. That test was conducted under ETS--Prometric Testing.

Anyways, my disaster today started with them asking me for my passport. I had 3 forms of ID, license, work badge, bank card with pic.
The test was due to start at 9am, and I had to rush my office and get it and I started the test at 1050am. Yes I was under pressure for driving 20 miles each way.

The AWA section was a breeze, in fact the analysis question was the exact same I did in 2003 GMAT!!! That was funny.

Q Section:
My strong point. There were some hard questions no doubt. I lost on time toward the end and had to guess on 3 questions. But I still ended up 99 percentile.

V Section:
Had been working on this for 2 months. I thought this was much easier than the practise tests, and yet I got V35. I was shocked. I expected around V40 at the 'minimum'. Not even once did I feel confused or double minded. It may have been that I may have got all experimental questions correct and silly mistakes made else where. There were 5 RC passages. 3 were short, 1 medium and 1 long. I finished V section with 10 mins to spare. I did not even feel hurried.

Another posting of few days back hints at some Q-Math questions that he/she encountered in the test. Well, that is true, those questions did appear. So those giving tests this month can refer to that post.

Well, what should I say now? Would Stanford/MIT/HAAS/Kellogg accept students with 690? (assumin all other portions of the application are near flawless??)

Should I do my test again?

Pls advise.

Last edited by Hindustan on 25 Oct 2006, 09:00, edited 1 time in total.
Manager
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 80
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

09 Oct 2006, 18:42
Awesome Score Hindustan... Let me be the first to congratulate you on this terrific score.
Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Jun 2005
Posts: 454
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 41 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

09 Oct 2006, 18:50
Congrats Hindustan, its an awesome score. If I had that I'll still be happy but again I don't plan to apply to Stanford and Wharton etc. From what I have gathered is that GMAT is not the only thing schools look at....

I just recently spoke to someone and I realised talking to them that not only is a decent gmat score important but other parts of my application have to be really good as well, so ofcourse I have to work on everything

But main point, assess other parts of your application like gpa, work exp, extra curricular etc etc. I think we have a really high caliber person in our forum who can definitely comment on it and I think you all know who I am talking about

Good luck
Manager
Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 117
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

09 Oct 2006, 20:52
Thanks for the congrats and encouragement rbcola and uvs_mba.

I really like the folks here, it is as if everyone has a true interest in helping others out. I love the attitude of ppl here.

Yep I know who that person is, let's wait for his/her email.
Manager
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 198
Schools: Olin Business School - Washington University
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 51 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

09 Oct 2006, 21:12
Can you link to the post you are talking about?

Quote:
Another posting of few days back hints at some Q-Math questions that he/she encountered in the test. Well, that is true, those questions did appear. So those giving tests this month can refer to that post.
SVP
Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 2304
Schools: Darden
Followers: 43

Kudos [?]: 475 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

09 Oct 2006, 21:44
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Hindustan wrote:
Thanks for the congrats and encouragement rbcola and uvs_mba.

I really like the folks here, it is as if everyone has a true interest in helping others out. I love the attitude of ppl here.

Yep I know who that person is, let's wait for his/her email.

Are you trying to illicit a response from me?

According to some recent test-takers that do not have a history of lying here at GMATclub:

49Q/35V=690
viewtopic.php?t=30405
viewtopic.php?t=30479

50Q/35V=700
viewtopic.php?t=31201

So, I'm just wondering, if you beat each of these score breakdowns how come your overall score isn't higher? Shouldn't 51/35 be like 710 or 720 or something? I know that the percentiles have changed recently, but has the actual scoring been altered as well? Must be the new math

The response to your original post is that even at places like Wharton and Stanford, probably 30% of the people have GMAT scores below 700, so if in fact the rest of your application is perfect you have a chance. Let's not forget, however, that some 20,000 people will achieve 690 or better and each and every one of them would probably love to be at Stanford or Wharton (as would we all), so there's no doubt that flawless is an understatement to get one of the 300 or so seats available to those that score below 700. Keep in mind that virtually every single one of those 300 seats will be given to under-represented minorities. Flawless application and a lot of luck might work. So if you are a female from Tibet or something, then maybe. If you are a male Caucasian/Asian (non-under-represented)/Indian, then you better be named Trump or Kennedy or something.

Other elites and even some ultras are a different story, but Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, you need it all, including GMAT.
Manager
Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 117
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

09 Oct 2006, 23:02
Thanks for the information Pelihu.

As I entered the submit scores button, I had a strong feeling I'd get 710 minimum. I was dissapointed to see 690. That's just 10 pts more than my last attempt. An overall percentil of 91. Should it be higher?
Does the percentile, raw and scaled scores change month to month or something?

All said and done, I am debating whether it is worth another try to break the 700 barrier. My verbal seemed much stronger in the test today, but oh well, probably got the experimental questions right and others wrong.
I was taken a back by 4 passages. ( not 5, CORRECTION TO MY FIRST POST) But lucklily none seemed to hard. 2 short, 1 long and 1 medium length.

The admission officers claim that they do not have a quota system. Recently, I was at the World MBA Tour and I raised this question in the forum. Everyone in the admission officers panel was taken aback and mentioned there is none, nor do universities give preference to certain classes/nations etc. Though I still feel they are lieing, and therefore am in agreement with Pelihu that under represented folks have a better bet.

A friend of mine who comes from Pakistan, got into Harvard last yr. His GMAT was not stellar. It was 700 exact. His undergrad was Georgia Tech. He has some sort of scholarship there as well. So GMAT may not be the only factor. But again he is not your average White Caucasian/Asian/Indian.

I will think for the next few days what needs to be done, as it is I can't take the test for another 31 days.
Manager
Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 117
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

09 Oct 2006, 23:19
Diegmat,
The post link is:
http://gmatclub.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=36365

Scroll to the end of that page.
SVP
Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 2304
Schools: Darden
Followers: 43

Kudos [?]: 475 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

10 Oct 2006, 00:17
Quotas are in fact illegal for US universities under the Bakke decision. However, the decision also states that using race as a critereon for admissions is permissible.

Now, getting all legal and stuff, there were 2 lawsuits initiated some years ago against the University of Michigan (one for undergrad and one for the law school) regarding admissions. During discovery, documents were relased that showed being one of a number of preferred minorities was as valuable to gaining admissions as being a scholarship football player. As you know, atheletes are admitted to all kinds of Universities (Stanford gives D-I scholarships) as long as they can meet the minimum requirements - a certain number of high school core courses with a C or better GPA and a minimal score on the SAT. Preferred minorities were treated in about the same way.

So, race was used as one of many factors under the Supreme Court decision, but in fact for preferred minorities race was more important than every other factor including grades & test scores. It was also revealed that at the law school, there was nearly zero crossover between the LSAT scores of preferred minorities and others. A score that would have resulted in almost certain rejection for a white/asian (not that many Indians apply to law school) candidate could equal almost certain admission for a black/hispanic candidate.

There is no reason to believe that business schools do not treat preferred minorities in the same way. In fact, statistically, there are even fewer of certain minorities at top business schools than at top law schools. Try reading some admissions blogs and see what people that give advice about admissions year after year say when they comment on representative cases.
Intern
Joined: 31 Dec 2005
Posts: 42
Location: New Jersey
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

10 Oct 2006, 06:37
I have a couple of points and questions:

1. These scaled scores drive me crazy!!! Does anyone have any idea how scaled scores are used to determine your total score??? Unless this board has quite a few liers (which I do not believe) then total scores can vary 10-20 pts seemingly for no reason at all.

2. A few responses...

"The response to your original post is that even at places like Wharton and Stanford, probably 30% of the people have GMAT scores below 700, so if in fact the rest of your application is perfect you have a chance."

Is this accurate? I do not know the exact break downs of these particular schools but if we take X top school that has a mean of 700 generally the breakdowns seem to be a bell curve like breakdown, no? That is just as many people got 500-699 as 701-800. Am I off on this point?

"Let's not forget, however, that some 20,000 people will achieve 690 or better and each and every one of them would probably love to be at Stanford or Wharton (as would we all), so there's no doubt that flawless is an understatement to get one of the 300 or so seats available to those that score below 700. Keep in mind that virtually every single one of those 300 seats will be given to under-represented minorities."

As a Hispanic candidate I have a certain interest in this statement. I completely disagree with your point. I know several people of heavily represented pools who got sub 700 scores and were accepted to top schools. I also know many underrepresented minorities with AMAZING profiles and 700+ gmat scores.

"If you are a male Caucasian/Asian (non-under-represented)/Indian, then you better be named Trump or Kennedy or something. "

Or you better not be exactly like the other people of your group. I believe schools want diversity in every sense of the word. They want bankers, lawyers, accountants, engineers, non profits, entrepreneurs, government workers, soldiers, teachers....... I know of an Indian with a low 600 who got into HBS. How did he get in? He was a non profit dynamo with an amazing profile. Not your typical Indian candidate.
SVP
Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 2304
Schools: Darden
Followers: 43

Kudos [?]: 475 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

10 Oct 2006, 09:57
nothanks wrote:
I have a couple of points and questions:

1. These scaled scores drive me crazy!!! Does anyone have any idea how scaled scores are used to determine your total score??? Unless this board has quite a few liers (which I do not believe) then total scores can vary 10-20 pts seemingly for no reason at all.

2. A few responses...

"The response to your original post is that even at places like Wharton and Stanford, probably 30% of the people have GMAT scores below 700, so if in fact the rest of your application is perfect you have a chance."

Is this accurate? I do not know the exact break downs of these particular schools but if we take X top school that has a mean of 700 generally the breakdowns seem to be a bell curve like breakdown, no? That is just as many people got 500-699 as 701-800. Am I off on this point?

Well, your bell curve isn't a bell, 500-699 is 200 about points and 701-800 is 100 about points. The bell curve at Stanford and Wharton would be more like 650-780, with a peak at 715-720 and scores on either end being outliers.

Stanford has a median of 720 and an average of 712. Wharton 710 & 714. Let's just call it about 715 - and the rumor is that Stanford (and possibly Wharton) underreports their GMAT scores so they do not scare off potential applicants in order to keep their yields up. But even if that is not true, we can still analyze the numbers based on 715.

If the mean is 715, then 1/2 of the scores are between 715-780 (there just aren't many 790 & 800 scores even at these places). If it is a perfect bell curve, then the remainining 1/2 of the scores would be between 650-715, with the great bulk of the scores right in the middle, 700-730. But as we all know, people with score below 650 do get admitted, and within certain demographics it is not that much of a rarity. So to offset say a single 630 score, you'd need to admit 6 people that scored 730 in order to maintain an arithmatic mean of 715. The simple fact is that there is much more room below 715 than above 715, so to account for a few scores substantially lower than the average you'd have to admit many scores slightly above the average.

Now, take the elements of the analysis above (people can disagree if they'd like, but I haven't seen anything that makes more sense): 1. a bell curve dictates that the great bulk of the applications will be around the middle at 700-730 and the fact that a small number of very low scores will need to be balanced out by a larger number of somewhat higher scores and I think it's fair to say that at Stanford and Wharton, fewer than 30% of the people admitted have 690 or less.

nothanks wrote:
"Let's not forget, however, that some 20,000 people will achieve 690 or better and each and every one of them would probably love to be at Stanford or Wharton (as would we all), so there's no doubt that flawless is an understatement to get one of the 300 or so seats available to those that score below 700. Keep in mind that virtually every single one of those 300 seats will be given to under-represented minorities."

As a Hispanic candidate I have a certain interest in this statement. I completely disagree with your point. I know several people of heavily represented pools who got sub 700 scores and were accepted to top schools. I also know many underrepresented minorities with AMAZING profiles and 700+ gmat scores.

"If you are a male Caucasian/Asian (non-under-represented)/Indian, then you better be named Trump or Kennedy or something. "

Or you better not be exactly like the other people of your group. I believe schools want diversity in every sense of the word. They want bankers, lawyers, accountants, engineers, non profits, entrepreneurs, government workers, soldiers, teachers....... I know of an Indian with a low 600 who got into HBS. How did he get in? He was a non profit dynamo with an amazing profile. Not your typical Indian candidate.

First of all, I'm not talking about "top schools". I'm specifically talking about Stanford and Wharton, so let's not muddle the subject. As I said above things are different at other schools. And undoubtadly, there are under-represented minorities with stellar scores and accomplishments that would be admitted irregardless of their demographic. But that does not change the fact that an overwhelming majority of the low scorers that are admitted are under-represented minorities.

In other words, if you have a great score, great greades, awesome experiences and tons to contribute, it doesn't matter what your demographic is. Comments like "I know of..." mean almost nothing. There are outliers in any situation, and a 650 GMAT doesn't mean you will be rejected automatically. It does mean that unless you have done something of monumental proportions, you will be summarily rejected from H/W/S if you are cuacasian/asian/India, but will receive serious consideration if you are black/hispanic/inuit.

The numbers bear this out. I do not have statistical information regarding the GMAT, but I do know that for law school and the LSAT, there is literally no cross-over between the LSAT scores of preferred minorities and other admitted students at any of the top law schools other than Harvard. The simple fact is that virtually every single highly qualified preferred minority applicant gains entry to Harvard, and the other schools fight for whats left over, which means that at a school like Michigan (stats published because of the lawsuit), there was something like a 10 point difference in average LSAT (probably equivalent to 100 points in GMAT scoring). There's no reason to believe that business school admissions is any different.

Also, I'm not arguing for or against the system. A diverse class is a good thing, and it's clearly something that the schools are looking for, and they know best how to delivery a great education. I'm just pointing it out the facts as they stand. If someone is in a crowded demographic and their GMAT is 30 points below the average of a school, they need to look reality in the face. Crowded demographic can mean various things, but most often it relates to ethnicity. I challenge you to find a reputable admissions blog that doesn't continually stress how difficult it is for the Indian IT demographic to gain admission to top business schools. They don't talk about it because it's fun or something. They talk about it because it's a fact of life that their average GMATs probably needs to be 30 points over the average because the pool they are competing in is huge and high scoring. An under-represented minority, by definition, is competing is a far less crowded (and less competitive) group.
Manager
Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 117
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

10 Oct 2006, 12:44
Couldn't agree more with your analysis Pelihu.

It is just surprising that admission officers do not accept the fact that minority representation and diverse representation are something they strive for, if the candidate is good. (not stellar)

For example:
The ADCOM would rather choose 1 of 10 Indian ITs with a score of 780 and 1 Eastern European (for eg) candidate with 720, all other things being more or less equal. That's how universities bring diversity to schools.

In India it is the opposite, completely based on merit system, where a school would pick all 780s. Higher the scores, the better. (Ofcourse I am not limiting tio MBA schools in India but others)

So in conclusion, is it fair for the remaining 9 Indian ITs with stellar 780s? Probably not, but that is the way of life and the selection process.
I have spoken to many ADOfficers, and they are bent on denying it.
Manager
Joined: 09 Apr 2006
Posts: 173
Location: Somewhere in Wisconsin!
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

10 Oct 2006, 17:40
pelihu wrote:
I challenge you to find a reputable admissions blog that doesn't continually stress how difficult it is for the Indian IT demographic to gain admission to top business schools. They don't talk about it because it's fun or something. They talk about it because it's a fact of life that their average GMATs probably needs to be 30 points over the average because the pool they are competing in is huge and high scoring. An under-represented minority, by definition, is competing is a far less crowded (and less competitive) group.

pelihu, could you please provide a few links to some of these admission blogs that are expliclitly/implicitly suggesting that certain demographic groups need higher scores or better stats? Or provide pointers? Are the big guns (W/S/H/K/MIT) all saying the same?

Last week, in Chicago, I asked adcom members from Columbia and Stern whether such demographical balances are kept in mind while considering the composition of the class? And whether each member of the applicant pool competes against all other applicants or is limited to the confines of his/her demographic group? The adcom members emphatically replied in the negative!

I suppose male caucasians (consultants, investment bankers, lawyers) and Indian IT professionals just need to get used to the realities of life !
_________________

Thanks,
Zooroopa

SVP
Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 2304
Schools: Darden
Followers: 43

Kudos [?]: 475 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

10 Oct 2006, 21:33
Zooroopa wrote:

pelihu, could you please provide a few links to some of these admission blogs that are expliclitly/implicitly suggesting that certain demographic groups need higher scores or better stats? Or provide pointers? Are the big guns (W/S/H/K/MIT) all saying the same?

Last week, in Chicago, I asked adcom members from Columbia and Stern whether such demographical balances are kept in mind while considering the composition of the class? And whether each member of the applicant pool competes against all other applicants or is limited to the confines of his/her demographic group? The adcom members emphatically replied in the negative!

I suppose male caucasians (consultants, investment bankers, lawyers) and Indian IT professionals just need to get used to the realities of life !

Hi,

There are many many blogs and forums where such demographic differences are discussed. In fact, as I mentioned earlier, it is d@mn near impossible to miss. I like the Businessweek admissions form. There are threads dedicated to a number of different admissions counselors. There are also threads hosted by adcoms from various schools. I like the "Ask Sandy" thread - he's direct and blunt. Others might not like him because he gets right to the point and doesn't mince words, but I also believe that he's telling it like it is. You will find the same basic message in every other admissions blog.

In fact, we need to look no further than the accepted.com forum right here at the GMATclub. Paul is really good, and he states, with no uncertainty that certain demographics are tougher. Check out a few selected posts:

viewtopic.php?t=35213
"I don't see truly unusual experiences that set you apart from the crowd (which in your demographic is quite strong)"

viewtopic.php?t=28239
"Your demographic (Indian, Comp. Eng., male) means you must stand out from the pack of other similar applicants with strong numbers."

Now contrast with his reaction to these:

viewtopic.php?t=34950
"In my opinion, you have the kind of profile that B-schools design their college-applicant admissions policies in order to admit." Exactly why does he believe ultra-elite schools like HBS design their policies to accept someone with a 3.3 GPA & 690 GMAT? See for yourself.

viewtopic.php?t=32720
"In addition, you belong to an applicant pool that schools are highly inclined to favor." I'm guessing that neither the 2.74 GPA nor the high 500s GMAT is the part of the application that shools are highly inclined to favor. What could it be?

viewtopic.php?t=29984
"Being a member of an underrepresented minority *definitely* helps you, and helps you in a major way." In fact, for this person, with a 2.77 GPA and an unknown GMAT he suggests aiming higher and adding Kellogg the list. Why on earth?

Look, as I said before I'm not against the policy. In fact, I see the value of a diverse class and I believe in the ideal. But let's not pretend that all groups are treated equally. It's insulting to those that that face the tougher standard, and it is espcially insulting to those that are rejected. At basically all of the top business schools, the average GMAT for the Indian IT demographic is about 30 points higher than the overall average - so at H/W/S the average for the group is probably around 740-750, at other elite schools probably 720-730. It's a current trend - it wasn't like this 10 years ago, and it may or may not be like this 10 years from now; but that's way it is now.

I don't have a clue what the average GMAT is for under-represented minorities, but if the LSAT and top law schools are any guide, then we're probably looking at 80-120 points lower than the overall average. So at H/W/S, probably 620-640. THIS is the reason why admissions consultants believe that someone from the demographic with a 690 stands out so much. In fact, judging by the reaction, a 690 for this under-represented group seems much more impressive than a 770 for other demographics.
Manager
Joined: 09 Apr 2006
Posts: 173
Location: Somewhere in Wisconsin!
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

11 Oct 2006, 03:24
thanks for the details. they surely act as good examples. as adcom members say, the key is to distinguish yourself and present some 'unique features'. People can do that from tougher applicant pools. However the going gets even tougher as good GMAT and high GPA are quite common across these pools.

It is indeed very demotivating for well-qualified candidates from the tougher pools. I suppose people need to accept hard realities and fortify their applications (hoping for the best).
_________________

Thanks,
Zooroopa

SVP
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Posts: 2132
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 140 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

12 Oct 2006, 08:24
I'm going to find out if any of my ancestors had an affair with a Native American.
Manager
Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 117
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

25 Oct 2006, 09:01
update: 6.0 AWA.

YEAH!

I am planning another attack on GMAT next month....
Manager
Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 116
Location: Philadelphia
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

21 Jan 2007, 23:09
Wow,

I realize this is a relatively old thread, but I was skimming through the boards tonight. I feel that I must also give a separate point of view in regards to this topic. To begin with, I am the individual with the 690, and as you know, I am of African American descent. Throughout my entire application process, I have been totally aware of the virtual handicap minorities are given. Since we are all educated individuals, I am confident that we understand the implications of affirmative action. That being said, I will also assume that you understand the need for it. Nonetheless, affirmative action seems even more apparent with BSch mainly due to the low amounts of minorities who apply. Most of my most educated minority friends elect to attend law or med school. They themselves feel that the business community sets a limit (socially) towards underrepresented individuals. As a result, elite schools are competing for a small amount of students to help diversify their institution.

I must also add that during my campus visits I was shocked, to say the least. Many of the classes that I attended did not have more than 2 minority (Black/Hispanic/Indian) students. When recruiters seek for graduates at these schools, they are only left to choose from this homogenous crowd. These situations only ferment the â€˜white manâ€™s clubâ€™ mentality that most high level positions and companies share. In my opinion, the best decisions and products are a result of a diverse group of leaders converging as one. Furthermore, the most applicable measure of diversity in todayâ€™s market is race.

On the other hand, I truly understand what youâ€™re addressing pelihu. Indians and even Caucasians have to score in the upper echelon of the 700â€™s just to be considered.

Why shouldnâ€™t schools just take the highest scoring students?

Because as students, we will learn from each other as much as we learn in the class. Would you want to attend a school where it consisted of 50% Indian ITâ€™s and 50% Caucasian IBâ€™s?

690. Yea, it is not particularly impressive, but it is neither destructive. If it is enough to help further diversity in a community that has relatively little, then that number has exponentially more weight.
VP
Joined: 29 Apr 2003
Posts: 1403
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

21 Jan 2007, 23:59
Yeah the score sounds funnie! I took GMAT twice. Twice I got 690 [50Q34V and 49Q35V]. Looking at ur score breakdown you should have definately obtained more than 690! Are you sure about your score?

Last edited by sm176811 on 22 Jan 2007, 01:57, edited 1 time in total.
SVP
Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 2304
Schools: Darden
Followers: 43

Kudos [?]: 475 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

22 Jan 2007, 01:03
This is an old thread.

sm176811: Hindustan has been proven a liar time and again. We'll just leave it at that.

rdw28: I'm tired of debating affirmative action, but I totally disagree with your assertion "Since we are all educated individuals, I am confident that we understand the implications of affirmative action." The case is easy to make when you only consider the extremes. Certainly, there are enough rich Caucasians; and certainly there are not enough African Americans. But what of Asians, who for the past 30 years have born the brunt of affirmative action (nearly all studies show that affirmative action is neutral towards Caucasians).

The Chinese in the US have arguably had a more difficult time than any ethnicity other than African Americans. Long after Reconstruction, substantially all Chinese in America were indentured servants - railroad workers mostly, but also other menial labor. They were also the targets of narcotics distribution and kept as sex slaves. Certainly these are not the people that should bear the burden of affirmative action for the benefit of others; but every credible study I have ever seen clearly shows that the major loser in affirmative action are Asians - for a long time Chinese, but now Japanese and Korean.

This is a generalization, but affirmative action benefits the select few among minorities that are least disadvantaged. In other words, affirmative action doesn't help African Americans in general because as noted in your message even with affirmative action African Americans are represented in frighteningly small numbers. The truth is affirmative action generally benefits the rich and well-to do at the expense of the poor and disadvantaged of another ethnicity.

Then, there are the problems that affirmative action creates. As pointed out by Ward Connerly (sp?), the African American member of the UC Regents who spearheaded the abolition of affirmative action at in the UC system, affirmative action creates the perception that members of certain ethnicities are NOT qualified because they must have benefited from affirmative action. It also creates a perception among the people of those underrepresented minorities that they are not in fact capable of competing. Both perceptions are damaging to those that benefit from affirmative action.

The goal of affirmative action may be laudable, but the process is flawed. I can agree that all students benefit from a diverse student body. However, I can't personally understand how to face those that are denied spaces. Do you say "Yes, the 400 of here at TOP 10 B-School are better off because of our diverse class achieved through affirmative action; thank you rejected student for giving up the space that you earned but were not given." That makes my stomach turn. It was interesting when I talked to a professor at Michigan Law (an African American from Harvard) about affirmative action; but it was sickening to consider those that should have been part of the conversation as fellow students but were rejected because of affirmative action. I wonder, did those that were rejected just wind up at the next law school down the line? Not likely, considering there is literally no crossover between LSAT and GPAs of students on the two sides of the affirmative action divide. Most likely, they were rejected from their seat at Michigan Law and kicked down to a school 15-20 spots lower in the rankings. I also wonder, did they get the 4-5 job offers from top firms that all my friends at Michigan got. No, I'm sure they didn't.

Affirmative action is not without costs; it is paid for largely through the sacrifices of (as proven again and again) Asians that have not come from favorable social or economic backgrounds. Asians tend to do better in school because their culture demands it - African Americans, Hispanics and American Indians do not have a similar culture of valuing education. That alone, is the biggest reason for the disparity in qualified applicants. On the other hand, African Americans have a culture clearly values athletic development; yet where is the affirmative action in the NBA or NFL? Is it a travesty that there is only one Chinese player currently in the NBA (that I can think of) and none in the NFL? Should we do something to increase the number to 8%? No, that would be laughable. It's just plain stupid to believe that each facet of everything must accurately represent the overall population. There's no reason why, just because 10% of the overall population is Hispanic that 10% of a particular B-school's population must also be Hispanic. That would assume that all ethnicities valued everything equally, and worked as hard to achieve everything, equally. That's simply not the case.

I was at UCLA when the affirmative action debate was most heated prior to the vote on prop 209 (to abolish affirmative action). I was at Michigan when the law suits against the University and the Law School hit. It's my opinion that affirmative action is more divisive and creates far more problems than it solves. It's a zero sum game - each person that benefits does so at the expense of someone else. In the case of affirmative action, gains are at the expense of Asian students that are not from historically powerful social or economic backgrounds.

Check out this link to a recent article appearing in the NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/07/educa ... 1169614800

You'll need to sign up for a free account. It talks about how affirmative action is neutral towards Caucasians, but it's mostly about how Asians bear most of the burden for affirmative action. It also talks briefly about the hardships Asians (mostly Chinese) faced in American history.

To assert that the need for affirmative action is something that educated people must agree on is insulting, particularly to those that must bear the burden of affirmative action and are rejected for no reason other than their ethnicity.
22 Jan 2007, 01:03

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 28 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
8 790 (Q51 V49 AWA 6.0) - Debrief 30 25 Sep 2011, 10:05
2 770 Q51 V44 AWA 6.0 GMATClub rules. 32 23 Oct 2009, 13:56
Scored 690(Q49, V35, AWA5.0) 8 07 Aug 2008, 09:05
690 - Q49 V35, 6.0 7 08 Sep 2007, 21:26
1 GMAT Done !!!! Scored 760 V 41 Q 51. Debrief updated AWA - 6 46 31 Aug 2007, 17:05
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Narrowly Missed. Darn! 690 Q51, V35 UPDATED [6.0 AWA]

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.