iliavko
Quant is the section that can be learned up to a Q47 level by virtually anyone without private tuition and it means that this section is fair! So this should be the section that weights most heavily on your score. Can anyone learn English to get say a V45? Haha yes, dream on!.. If you are a native you stand a chance, if you are not you will struggle to V35, not to even mention V45+. However Verbal is the section that weights the most on your final score.
Good discussion here. I have a TON of respect for non-natives who hack away at the verbal. In my experience, it is not true that a Q47 can be achieved by virtually anyone even WITH private tuition. Also, maybe you have a reason for comparing a 47q with a 45v but those are extremely different scores. The 47q is 68th percentile while the 45v is 99th percentile. So yeah, I agree that it's generally much tougher to get the 45 on verbal than the 47 on quant. That's not just for non-native speakers. That's for everyone.
My guess is that MBA admissions people do take into account that someone is a non-native speaker. I had a student this year from Brazil. Really smart guy but at least on test day he couldn't get the verbal past the mid 30's. His Quant score was very solid. All in all he ended up with a 710. With that score he was accepted absolutely everywhere he applied: HBS, Stanford, Wharton, and Sloan. I wouldn't say that is typical for someone with a 710. Was his success due to his being a non-native? No clue. But I would guess that top MBA programs are looking for
some diversity.
Just to wrap up. I agree that it can be tough for non-native speakers to achieve the best of the best verbal scores. But, I'll add that plenty of native speakers are also struggling and that you don't necessarily need a 99th percentile (or even 80th) to be granted admission to the best MBA programs on the planet. Also, although it's clear that you disagree with this (and that's fine) I think the verbal reasoning is at least as important as the quant reasoning in terms of measuring ability. Is it unfair that the test is administered in english? That's a tough question. I'd say it's not but I'd be open to having my mind changed. Does this put non-natives at a disadvantage? I think you'd have a decent argument for that. But I'd argue that admissions people understand this dis-advantage to a certain extent. Will that understanding gloss over a verbal score in the 20's? For top programs, probably not. And, just throwing this out there: How else could the test be administered? I think anything "non-standard" would be very tough to implement.
Would it be better if schools could meet and interview every single candidate? Absolutely. Standardized tests are imperfect and there are plenty of people who don't have amazing GMAT scores who would be amazing MBA students at any of the top MBA programs. Some food for thought: Apparently 51% of the HBS executive MBA program is international students:
https://www.hbs.edu/about/facts-and-figu ... stics.aspx. The number is 40% for Stanford's regular MBA program:
https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/stanford-g ... l-students. So non-native speakers are certainly not being shut out (assuming these international students are ESL).
Happy Studies,
A.
PS: I think there's a big group being left out of this whole discussion. What about native-speakers from disadvantaged backgrounds? These people could be extremely smart and capable but because of their backgrounds have a much lower level of english (and math) than more privileged non-native speakers. Should the test be adjusted for them? Should they get an easier verbal (and math) section or have their scoring adjusted? At some point you get to: standardized tests suck. There are people whose skills are just not properly reflected in the test results.