Hey folks,
I'm Akshat, a founding engineer at a tech startup with a computer science background. I recently scored 675 (Q87, V85) on the GMAT. The story here isn't about my final score - it's about an 8-point jump in Quant from Q79 to Q87 despite being an engineer.
That sentence probably doesn't make sense to most people. Engineers are supposed to be good at Quant, right? Here's what I learned the hard way: being good at math and being good at GMAT Quant are two completely different things.
The Engineer's Problem: Knowing Formulas Isn't EnoughIn my first attempt, I walked in with confidence. Computer science background, solid understanding of mathematical concepts, knew all the formulas. What could go wrong?
Everything.
Here's what I was doing: I'd see a distance-time problem, immediately write down the formula, plug in numbers, and then find myself facing massive calculations with decimals, fractions, and complex arithmetic. I'd grind through it for 4-5 minutes, get an answer, and move to the next question.
The problem? There's a reason GMAT calls it "quantitative ability" and not "mathematics." It's not testing whether you can execute calculations. It's testing whether you can think strategically, identify patterns, and solve problems efficiently.
After my first attempt with Q79, I had a crucial realization: I was solving like an engineer when I needed to solve like a manager. Engineers grind through calculations. Managers find the shortcut.
Starting From Scratch: Building Foundations SystematicallyThe hardest pill to swallow was accepting that, despite my background, I needed to start from the foundation. Not because I didn't know the concepts, but because I didn't know how to apply them the GMAT way.
I went through e-GMAT's Quant course module by module: Number Properties, Word Problems, Algebra, and Advanced Topics. All of them, systematically.
What made the course different from other resources wasn't just concept explanation. The videos showed:
- Tricky variations GMAT throws at you
- Edge cases that catch people off guard
- Tips and shortcuts for solving efficiently
- How to approach questions as puzzles, not calculations
This wasn't "here's the probability formula, now apply it." This was "here's how to become a better test-taker for probability questions."
The diagnostic quizzes before each submodule helped me identify where I was already strong. The PACE engine recommended which topics I could skip and which needed focus. In Number Properties, for instance, I scored 100% on both diagnostic quizzes and skipped most of the foundational content.
This strategic approach saved time while ensuring I didn't miss crucial test-taking strategies.
I actually saved over 45 hours of prep time due to e-GMAT’s PACE feature.
The Transformation: From Calculator to Problem SolverWord problems were where the transformation became most obvious.
Before: See work-rate problem → Apply formula → Get complex calculation → Grind through it for 5 minutes → Get answer.
After: Read question → Take 30 seconds to think → Identify what GMAT is actually testing → Look for the inference or trick → Apply concept strategically → Solve in 2-2.5 minutes.
GMAT doesn't ask you to be a calculator. There's always a hidden trick or inference that makes the solution elegant. The learning content, and especially the solution videos for questions I got wrong, taught me to look for these patterns.
The second major shift was developing a systematic approach. Before e-GMAT, my problem-solving was chaotic - jumping around, trying different things until something worked. The course taught me to:
1. Identify all inferences from the question stem
2. Consider edge cases
3. Apply the framework systematically
4. Verify the answer makes logical sense
This process-based approach worked across all Quant topics, not just specific modules.
Cementing: Building Confidence Module by ModuleAfter completing the learning content, cementing quizzes on Scholaranium were crucial for two reasons.
First, they forced me to apply what I'd learned under timed conditions. Knowing the approach theoretically is different from executing it in 2 minutes under pressure.
Second, they built confidence systematically. After cementing Number Properties with strong accuracy on hard questions, I could move to Word Problems without anxiety about the previous module. Each completed module felt like a solid building block.

The custom quiz feature was particularly valuable. I could create quizzes targeting specific weak areas - 10 hard questions on a particular topic - and drill until the approach became automatic.
By the time I reached sectional mocks, I was consistently scoring Q87-Q88 or higher. The systematic progression from foundation to practice to test simulation built both skill and confidence.
Verbal: Fine-Tuning from a Higher BaselineStarting at V83, my Verbal approach was different from Quant. I didn't need foundation building - I needed to identify weak areas and improve time management.
Custom quizzes in Scholaranium let me filter by question type - CR assumptions, weaken, boldface, and different RC types. I could target exactly what needed work with 5-10 hard questions and track improvement.
Sectional mocks were essential for timing. I could solve questions correctly individually, but under time pressure with 23 questions in 45 minutes, I struggled. The mocks trained my brain to maintain accuracy under real test conditions.

One thing that reduced test-day anxiety significantly: the hard RC passages on Scholaranium matched the difficulty I saw on the actual test. Walking into the exam, I thought, "I've done passages this hard before. I know how to handle this." That familiarity eliminated panic.
NEURON: The OG Question AdvantageNo matter how good third-party questions are, OG questions remain the gold standard. NEURON gave me structured access to official GMAT and OG questions with the same analytics and custom quiz features as Scholaranium.
I used NEURON to understand how GMAT word questions work, what language patterns they use, and how official questions feel different from practice questions. This was crucial for both Quant and Verbal.
My approach: After doing 10 hard questions on a topic in Scholaranium, I'd do 5 hard OG questions on NEURON. This combination ensured I could handle both e-GMAT's rigorous practice questions and official question styles.
The solution videos on NEURON were equally valuable - seeing how to approach official questions efficiently reinforced the systematic methods I'd learned.
Test Day: When Preparation Meets ExecutionHere's something counterintuitive that happened on test day: Quant felt easy. Not because the questions were objectively easy, but because I'd practiced with harder questions on e-GMAT.
Every question I saw, I thought, "I've solved this type before. I know the framework for this." There wasn't a single question that I had no idea how to approach. The systematic preparation meant I had tools for every scenario.
Toward the end of Quant, I got 3-4 easier questions and briefly panicked - "Wait, am I doing questions wrong? Is the algorithm giving me easy questions?" But I stuck to the process, trusted the systematic approach, and ended with Q87.
That's the power of process-based preparation. When you follow the framework, you land on the right answer 9 out of 10 times. Trust it.
The Mindset Shift: GMAT as a Puzzle, Not an ExamThe biggest transformation wasn't technical - it was mental.
I stopped viewing GMAT as an engineering exam where you grind through calculations. I started viewing it as a puzzle where you have all the tools needed; you just need to figure out how to apply them.
GMAT won't ask you to invent formulas or do something you haven't learned. It will word things trickily so you don't immediately see the solution. But the tools remain the same. Once the course gave me the tools, it was just about practicing how to apply them.
This mindset shift changed everything:
- I approached questions with curiosity instead of anxiety
- I looked for elegant solutions instead of brute-force calculations
- I actually started enjoying the prep process
When test-taking becomes puzzle-solving, the entire experience transforms.
From Q79 to Q87 in one attempt proved that with the right approach, significant jumps are possible even when you already have strong foundations. It's about learning how to play the game, not just knowing the rules.
Happy to answer questions about the journey.
Best,
Akshat
Attachment:
GMAT-Club-Forum-r7a5tzw6.png [ 81.71 KiB | Viewed 391 times ]
Attachment:
GMAT-Club-Forum-rfvp1rmr.png [ 74.27 KiB | Viewed 365 times ]
Attachment:
GMAT-Club-Forum-9jffi8hh.png [ 61 KiB | Viewed 364 times ]