EMPOWERgmatRichC
Hi Lamda,
GMAC has publicly stated that the Official Score that you earn on Test Day is within +/- 30 points of actual ability. Your 2 Official Scores show that you essentially performed the same each time (about 660 +/- a few Scaled Score points). You handle certain aspects of the GMAT consistently well, but you also make certain consistent mistakes. Based on this data, it appears that you might have gotten 'stuck' at this general score level, so if you're looking to score a lot higher, then you're going to have to make some significant changes to how you 'see' (and respond to) the Exam. Thankfully, the GMAT is a consistent, predictable Test, so you CAN train to score at a higher level.
Before I can offer you the specific advice that you’re looking for, it would help if you could provide a bit more information on how you've been studying and your goals:
Studies:
1) How long have you studied in total? How many hours do you typically study each week?
2) What study materials have you used so far?
3) On what dates did you take EACH of your CATs/mocks and how did you score on EACH (including the Quant and Verbal Scaled Scores for EACH)?
Goals:
4) What is your overall goal score?
5) When are you planning to apply to Business School?
6) What Schools are you planning to apply to?
You might also choose to purchase the Enhanced Score Report. While the ESR doesn’t provide a lot of information, there are usually a few data points that we can use to define what went wrong on Test Day (and what you should work on to score higher). If you purchase the ESR, then I'll be happy to analyze it for you.
GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
Hi Rich,
As mentioned above, it was not my overall score that was super surprising, instead, it was the individual quant and verbal scores that I couldn't wrap my head around. While I did not feel I did my best in quant, I wasn't expecting to have scored worse than I did on my initial attempt (Q43). Even then, I can't think of a reason why my performance would have dropped below my mock test average of about 46/47. I guess it may have to do with me concentrating primarily on my
error log and getting those questions correct in the last week of my prep that I started forgetting the basics of the other easier topics or question types.
To answer your questions:
1) I started prep exactly two months before my first attempt. I was at home on leave for those two months as I had just finished college and only begun working two months later, in July. I began work a couple of days after my first attempt. I, therefore, took two weeks or so to resume prep. I then went through all the manhattan strategy guides once again in about 3 weeks and began taking mocks after that. Keep in mind I did zero prep for verbal in those 3 weeks; I only concentrated on quant.
Before my first attempt, I would get in about 5/6 hours of prep daily, on average. After beginning work, I would get maybe 1.5 hours a day on avg during the week and about 4 hours a day on the weekends. After the initial 3 weeks of quant revision, I would spend most of my study time on the weekends on taking mocks and then going over my responses the following day.
I work in management consulting and am currently staffed on a project that requires me to work out another city during the week and I only get home on the weekends, so I have much less time to study now. Realistically I'll probably only have time on the weekends to really get a good study session in.
2) I primarily used the Manhattan strategy guides for quant and for RC and SC. I used Powerscore for CR (my favourite resource and also my favourite section on the exam as well).
3) For mocks, I did all 6 manhattan mocks and the two free official prep mocks before my first attempt. I personally did not find the Manhattan mocks, especially the quant section very accurate, but did them to work on my timing. The second time around, I used a friend's outdated official prep software, which was from before the exam question/time reduction and scored a 720 (Q48 V40) on that. I then decided to buy the official prep tests (3 & 4) and also took the free
ExpertsGlobal mock in the middle of taking 3 & 4. I would take no more than 1 mock a week. My scores on all my mocks are as follows:
First attempt:
a) Official Prep 1: 520 (q29 v31) this was with zero prep or understanding of how the gmat worked, what data sufficiency was etc.
b)
MGMAT 1: 570 (q37 v31)
c)
MGMAT 2: 590 (q42 v31)
d)
MGMAT 3: 640 (q42 v35)
e)
MGMAT 4: 670 (q44 v37)
f)
MGMAT 5: 600 (q39 v34) took this mock 2/3 days after
MGMAT 4, so must've been due to burn-out. Learnt my lesson and never did more than one mock in a week again.
g) Official Prep 2: 640 (q44 v35)
h)
MGMAT 6: 670 (q43 v38)
Second attempt:
a) Official Prep Software 1 (Outdated with 36 quant and 41 verbal questions): 720 (q48 v40)
b) Official Prep 3: 680 (q46 v37)
c)
ExpertsGlobal 1: 690 (q46 v39)
d) Official Prep 4: 710 (q49 v39)
I hope this makes it clear why both a v42 and a q39 was very unexpected.
4) My target score is 720. That being said, I would be satisfied with a 700, 710 as well.
5) I plan on applying to schools this year. Round 1 application deadlines for the schools I wish to apply to is in the second week of October and I would ideally like to give the GMAT in time for Round 1.
6) I will be applying to Master's in Management programmes at HEC Paris (my target school) and ESSEC Paris. When meeting with admissions officers at both schools, both were impressed with my overall profile. The HEC rep asked me to target a 700+ on the GMAT whereas her ESSEC counterpart said that a 670+ would be a good score. HEC is a distinct first preference for me given that it is more international than ESSEC is, at least it seems to be from what I have read online about both schools.
I have also applied to ISB as a backup, via their Young Leader's Programme for recent undergrad graduates. The irony is that it'll probably be tougher to get into ISB than either of the French schools, at least from the GMAT perspective. The deadline for ISB YLP was a week ago, so I had to submit my 670 score to them.
Something you might want to keep in mind is that I did cancel my initial score of 660 (q43 v38). So the first ever score these schools will see is my 670 (q3 v42). I'm hoping if I score considerably better in quant in my third (and hopefully final!) attempt, which shouldn't be super tough given my average quant score in my mocks, and maintain a verbal score of 40-42, that can really show major improvement.
I did go ahead and purchase an ESR for my second attempt. I have attached it below. It says I performed terribly in geometry, which does make sense as it was my biggest liability. My biggest weakness the first time around was Algebra but I really put in the effort to work on that for the second attempt. I'll probably have to do the same for geometry this time. A 100% accuracy on Sets & Counting is not odd because a) I am good at P&C and Probability questions because I studied Economics with minors in Statistics for my undergrad, so I was very much in touch with those topics; and b) I don't think I got asked too many of these questions because I wasn't performing really well on this test and Counting questions usually fall under the Hard difficulty level.
Thanks for offering to help me with analyzing my ESR. I look forward to hearing back from you, Rich.
Best,
Lamda
Attachments
ESR 670.pdf [502.47 KiB]
Downloaded 62 times