Dear GMAC team,
Looks like you have been ignoring my messages (I had hoped against hope that you won't, I even made it a point to mention my hope in my last message)
Now, it has been more than a month and a half since I posted the message in question seeking your response for the first time (to be specific it was Jan 10, 2014)
For you convenience, I am reproducing the message below:
=================================================================
Dear GMAC team,
Thank you for your email on Jan 7 (email above)
You mentioned that “It is extremely rare that the Unofficial and Official Scores received by test takers ever vary”. The phone support executive mentioned it has never varied.
Why is there a disconnect here?Your reply mentions “extremely rare”, which means that there is a possibility of a variation; which points out that the scoring system is not full-proof.
Please quantify “extremely rare” in terms of percentage. You confirmed that the exam restarted twice – “The first restart was at the end of the first scheduled break after the Integrated Reasoning section of the exam. The second restart occurred after you had ended your exam and the Test Administrator was signing you out of the exam.” You did not mention that the computer restarted twice after the AWA and the IR section – without a mention of this, the investigation is incomplete.
Was the investigation even able to find this? Why did it take the investigation a month and a half to reach a conclusion that should have taken at the max a day? What triggered the restart? Was it a software or a hardware breakdown?No one takes the GMAT for compensation – the bare minimum one expects is a working system.
The words “one-time courtesy and allowed you to retest “ sound as if the computer shutting down was my fault. It was a software/hardware failure. GMAC’s software/hardware can’t handle a test at a time when the adaptive algorithm is not at work, then what is the guarantee that it can handle the test when the adaptive algorithm is at work.
It might not shut down or restart but one of the outcomes of such a faulty software could be erroneous score calculation.There are some more answered questions from my previous messages (refer to my message on 02 Jan 2014, 08:14)
1.
What is the need of experimental questions? Does GMAC doubt the competence of the test makers?2. No one exactly knows the number of the experimental questions –
is it one, two, three, thirty?Had luck or experimental questions played no role – there would not have been a drop of 8 points in Quant and an improvement of 8 in Verbal (my aptitude did not change in a month).
Why is it that even after consistently scoring around 690 on prep tests and the GMATPrep tests, I scored 570 on the real GMAT both times? – it has either to do with the faulty software or the “experimental” questions.
I would at least like to be able to review the questions and understand how my score dropped so much. This is what transparency calls for.Finally, almost every email of yours to me had the standard sentence at the end “This is our final decision and no further requests will be considered.”. More than anything, the right intent is what every test taker expects from the GMAC- accept your mistakes/shortcomings and don’t just dismiss everybody’s genuine requests without proper investigation.
=================================================================
I am again hoping (against hope) that you won't ignore this message...looking forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Govind Singh Patwal