GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 19 Oct 2019, 02:46

### 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

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

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 27 Jan 2013
Posts: 238
GMAT 1: 780 Q49 V51
GMAT 2: 770 Q49 V47
GMAT 3: 760 Q47 V48

### Show Tags

01 Aug 2016, 07:58
1
Conclusion: The presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.

(B) In mixed plots, pollinators can transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production.

This choice agrees with the conclusion by supporting the assumption that it is the pollinators that are increasing seed production.

Negation: Pollinators can't transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production.

The negation weakens the argument by attacking the mechanism that the conclusion relies on (the pollinators).

Read the negation and then the conclusion:

Because pollinators CAN'T transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production the presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.

Do these two sentences seem to be working together? I don't think they do. The first seems to contradict the second.

It would sound way better like this:

Because pollinators can transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production the presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.

Happy Studies,

A.
_________________
"It is a curious property of research activity that after the problem has been solved the solution seems obvious. This is true not only for those who have not previously been acquainted with the problem, but also for those who have worked over it for years." -Dr. Edwin Land

GMAT vs GRE Comparison

If you found my post useful KUDOS are much appreciated.

Here is the first set along with some strategies for approaching this work: http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-economist-reading-comprehension-challenge-151479.html
Current Student
Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Posts: 322
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 3.69
WE: Analyst (Consulting)

### Show Tags

01 Aug 2016, 08:10
HerrGrau wrote:
Conclusion: The presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.

(B) In mixed plots, pollinators can transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production.

This choice agrees with the conclusion by supporting the assumption that it is the pollinators that are increasing seed production.

This is not an assumption. The point is that the additional pollinators are increasing seed production. The "usual" pollinators are not necessarily increasing seed production. Even if pollinators cannot transfer pollen from one species to another, simply by increasing their numbers, pollinators can augment seed production. Unless, of course, my understanding of pollination is off-base. Wait, is it?

HerrGrau wrote:
Negation: Pollinators can't transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production.

The negation weakens the argument by attacking the mechanism that the conclusion relies on (the pollinators).

The mechanism is not the pollinators. The mechanism is "attracting more pollinators".

So if the pollinators in the mixed plots already give mixed plots the advantage, the mixed plots do not have to attract more pollinators, and thus the conclusion that the mechanism is attracting more pollinators is not supported.
Manager
Joined: 27 Jan 2013
Posts: 238
GMAT 1: 780 Q49 V51
GMAT 2: 770 Q49 V47
GMAT 3: 760 Q47 V48

### Show Tags

01 Aug 2016, 08:18
I broke down why B is a strengthen not only by showing how it strengthened but by showing how the negation weakened. I didn't add a whole bunch of story to support my analysis (what you are doing and what you should be very careful of doing on CR/RC). I took words from the argument and strung them together. Is there anything in that analysis that you're finding fault with?
_________________
"It is a curious property of research activity that after the problem has been solved the solution seems obvious. This is true not only for those who have not previously been acquainted with the problem, but also for those who have worked over it for years." -Dr. Edwin Land

GMAT vs GRE Comparison

If you found my post useful KUDOS are much appreciated.

Here is the first set along with some strategies for approaching this work: http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-economist-reading-comprehension-challenge-151479.html
Manager
Joined: 27 Jan 2013
Posts: 238
GMAT 1: 780 Q49 V51
GMAT 2: 770 Q49 V47
GMAT 3: 760 Q47 V48

### Show Tags

01 Aug 2016, 08:19
HerrGrau wrote:
Because pollinators CAN'T transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production the presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.

Do these two sentences seem to be working together? I don't think they do. The first seems to contradict the second.

Coming back here again. Any questions on how the first part weakens the second or at least doesn't strengthen the second?
_________________
"It is a curious property of research activity that after the problem has been solved the solution seems obvious. This is true not only for those who have not previously been acquainted with the problem, but also for those who have worked over it for years." -Dr. Edwin Land

GMAT vs GRE Comparison

If you found my post useful KUDOS are much appreciated.

Here is the first set along with some strategies for approaching this work: http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-economist-reading-comprehension-challenge-151479.html
Current Student
Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Posts: 322
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 3.69
WE: Analyst (Consulting)

### Show Tags

01 Aug 2016, 08:34
HerrGrau wrote:
HerrGrau wrote:
Because pollinators CAN'T transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production the presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.

Do these two sentences seem to be working together? I don't think they do. The first seems to contradict the second.

Coming back here again. Any questions on how the first part weakens the second or at least doesn't strengthen the second?

Why does the first contradict the second?

If pollinators cannot transfer pollen from one species to another in mixed plots to augment seed production relative to dandelion-free plots, while seed production is better in mixed plots, the increase in seed production is likely caused by the presence of more pollinators in the mixed plots.

First theory: pollinators in mixed plots do "better"
Second theory: pollinators in mixed plots are more numerous
Manager
Joined: 27 Jan 2013
Posts: 238
GMAT 1: 780 Q49 V51
GMAT 2: 770 Q49 V47
GMAT 3: 760 Q47 V48

### Show Tags

01 Aug 2016, 08:42
HiLine wrote:
HerrGrau wrote:
HerrGrau wrote:
Because pollinators CAN'T transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production the presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.

Do these two sentences seem to be working together? I don't think they do. The first seems to contradict the second.

Coming back here again. Any questions on how the first part weakens the second or at least doesn't strengthen the second?

HiLine wrote:
Why does the first contradict the second?

If the pollinators can't transfer pollen how could they possibly facilitate pollination (within the scope of the argument)? We can agree to disagree here. We're getting to the point of me saying the color is blue and you saying it's green:) That's fine. We can agree to disagree.

A.
_________________
"It is a curious property of research activity that after the problem has been solved the solution seems obvious. This is true not only for those who have not previously been acquainted with the problem, but also for those who have worked over it for years." -Dr. Edwin Land

GMAT vs GRE Comparison

If you found my post useful KUDOS are much appreciated.

Here is the first set along with some strategies for approaching this work: http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-economist-reading-comprehension-challenge-151479.html
Manager
Joined: 27 Jan 2013
Posts: 238
GMAT 1: 780 Q49 V51
GMAT 2: 770 Q49 V47
GMAT 3: 760 Q47 V48

### Show Tags

Updated on: 01 Aug 2016, 08:55
HiLine wrote:
If pollinators cannot transfer pollen from one species to another in mixed plots to augment seed production relative to dandelion-free plots, while seed production is better in mixed plots, the increase in seed production is likely caused by the presence of more pollinators in the mixed plots.

OK - so I understand that you're saying that it's not the greater number of pollinators but something different about the pollinators in the mixed plots. Is that right? In the abstract that's OK. Reasoning is good. But, choice B doesn't provide that "other factor". An example of that "other factor" would be:

1. The mixed plots got more sun which stimulated more pollen.
2. The roots of the two plants interacting somehow stimulates pollen.
3. The dandelions release another chemical that stimulates pollen in the other plant.

A.
_________________
"It is a curious property of research activity that after the problem has been solved the solution seems obvious. This is true not only for those who have not previously been acquainted with the problem, but also for those who have worked over it for years." -Dr. Edwin Land

GMAT vs GRE Comparison

If you found my post useful KUDOS are much appreciated.

Here is the first set along with some strategies for approaching this work: http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-economist-reading-comprehension-challenge-151479.html

Originally posted by AtlanticGMAT on 01 Aug 2016, 08:46.
Last edited by AtlanticGMAT on 01 Aug 2016, 08:55, edited 1 time in total.
Current Student
Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Posts: 322
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 3.69
WE: Analyst (Consulting)

### Show Tags

01 Aug 2016, 08:52
HerrGrau wrote:

If the pollinators can't transfer pollen how could they possibly facilitate pollination (within the scope of the argument)? We can agree to disagree here. We're getting to the point of me saying the color is blue and you saying it's green:) That's fine. We can agree to disagree.

A.

I think we're actually coming closer to agreement. Please do try your best to disprove my explanation; I'd prefer all GMAT questions had only one correct answer each. Not a fan of exceptions.

You mean if the pollinators cannot transfer pollen from one species to another? Pollinators can transfer pollen among individuals within a species. I read the answer choice as pollinators that can transfer pollen between species are better at facilitating pollination than pollinators that cannot. Did I read it wrong?
Manager
Joined: 27 Jan 2013
Posts: 238
GMAT 1: 780 Q49 V51
GMAT 2: 770 Q49 V47
GMAT 3: 760 Q47 V48

### Show Tags

01 Aug 2016, 09:00
HiLine wrote:
HerrGrau wrote:

If the pollinators can't transfer pollen how could they possibly facilitate pollination (within the scope of the argument)? We can agree to disagree here. We're getting to the point of me saying the color is blue and you saying it's green:) That's fine. We can agree to disagree.

A.

I think we're actually coming closer to agreement. Please do try your best to disprove my explanation; I'd prefer all GMAT questions had only one correct answer each. Not a fan of exceptions.

You mean if the pollinators cannot transfer pollen from one species to another? Pollinators can transfer pollen among individuals within a species. I read the answer choice as pollinators that can transfer pollen between species are better at facilitating pollination than pollinators that cannot. Did I read it wrong?

Sounds good. Yes - I think that's the issue. We're told that more pollination means more seed production. So it makes sense that if one species can pollinate the other that the pollination would "augment" seed production. That doesn't mean that the inter-plant pollination is better than the intra-plant pollination.

A.
_________________
"It is a curious property of research activity that after the problem has been solved the solution seems obvious. This is true not only for those who have not previously been acquainted with the problem, but also for those who have worked over it for years." -Dr. Edwin Land

GMAT vs GRE Comparison

If you found my post useful KUDOS are much appreciated.

Here is the first set along with some strategies for approaching this work: http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-economist-reading-comprehension-challenge-151479.html
Current Student
Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Posts: 322
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 3.69
WE: Analyst (Consulting)

### Show Tags

01 Aug 2016, 09:04
HerrGrau wrote:
HiLine wrote:
HerrGrau wrote:

If the pollinators can't transfer pollen how could they possibly facilitate pollination (within the scope of the argument)? We can agree to disagree here. We're getting to the point of me saying the color is blue and you saying it's green:) That's fine. We can agree to disagree.

A.

I think we're actually coming closer to agreement. Please do try your best to disprove my explanation; I'd prefer all GMAT questions had only one correct answer each. Not a fan of exceptions.

You mean if the pollinators cannot transfer pollen from one species to another? Pollinators can transfer pollen among individuals within a species. I read the answer choice as pollinators that can transfer pollen between species are better at facilitating pollination than pollinators that cannot. Did I read it wrong?

Sounds good. Yes - I think that's the issue. We're told that more pollination means more seed production. So it makes sense that if one species can pollinate the other that the pollination would "augment" seed production. That doesn't mean that the inter-plant pollination is better than the intra-plant pollination.

A.

Better in what way? If inter-plant pollination augments seed production, I take that to mean inter-plant pollination results in better seed production than intra-plant pollination.

So doesn't that make answer choice B a valid alternative explanation for the mixed plots to have better seed production?
Manager
Joined: 27 Jan 2013
Posts: 238
GMAT 1: 780 Q49 V51
GMAT 2: 770 Q49 V47
GMAT 3: 760 Q47 V48

### Show Tags

01 Aug 2016, 09:10
2
Yep it does. I can see why that's confusing. But it doesn't have to be compared to the other plot (the non-mixed one). Adding more pollen increases seed production. That's it. No comparison to anything else except the previous state of having less pollen. Why does it have to be that adding more pollen in the mixed plot is different than in the non-mixed plot?

A.
_________________
"It is a curious property of research activity that after the problem has been solved the solution seems obvious. This is true not only for those who have not previously been acquainted with the problem, but also for those who have worked over it for years." -Dr. Edwin Land

GMAT vs GRE Comparison

If you found my post useful KUDOS are much appreciated.

Here is the first set along with some strategies for approaching this work: http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-economist-reading-comprehension-challenge-151479.html
Intern
Joined: 08 Nov 2015
Posts: 31
Schools: Pepperdine '19

### Show Tags

02 Aug 2016, 05:12
1
This is a causal argument. The presence of dandelions causes larspur to give more seeds.
A basic assumption is that the 2 sets of plots here are comparable. Choice E essentially says that the 2 are not comparable.
VP
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 1492
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64

### Show Tags

16 Jul 2017, 22:19
mikemcgarry wrote:
Dear HiLine,
I'm happy to respond. As a huge Beethoven fan, I very much enjoy the icon you have chosen for your representation.

Here's the text of (B). Here's the text of (B).
(B) In mixed plots, pollinators can transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production.
This choice is not suggesting a mechanism for pollen transfer different from the pollinators. The pollinators are still involved. If pollinators are attracted to the mixed plot, as the prompt suggests, then choice clarifies that the pollinators, who have already been attracted, can cross-fertilize the two plants. It is 100% consistent with the original argument and hence strengthens it.

Does this make sense?
Mike

hi Mike, after checking all options, I know E is gonna be the correct answer. Nevertheless, I still have no idea of what the passage discusses about. Can you help me with this?
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4472

### Show Tags

17 Jul 2017, 16:46
chesstitans wrote:
hi Mike, after checking all options, I know E is gonna be the correct answer. Nevertheless, I still have no idea of what the passage discusses about. Can you help me with this?

Dear chesstitans,

I'm happy to respond.

My friend, I am going to challenge you. What you have asked is not an excellent question. A question that basically says, "I'm helpless. Make me understand." is not an excellent question. An excellent question presupposes a high degree of self-responsibility: toward that end, it makes explicitly clear what you understand and what's unclear.

Have you looked up the definitions of all the unfamiliar individual words in the passage? Part of being ambitious as a student is making a point to learn any word you encounter that you don't already know. Do you understand the basic science of pollination? I am talking about not the very technical knowledge (e.g. the molar biology of pollination), but simply what folks learn in grade school about pollination.

Go through the passage finding the definition of every single word you don't know. Remind yourself of the basic science here. Then, tell me exactly what do you understand about the passage and exactly what still confuses you.

You see, when you ask an excellent question such as this, you are forcing yourself to wrestle with the material at a much deeper level. You see, it's relatively easy simply to throw up your hands and say, "I don't understand." It's much hard to engage deeply with material that doesn't come easily to you: even though you don't get answers through that process, your understanding is deepened, and your mind is primed to receive any answer you get at a much deeper level.

Asking excellent questions is one of the habits of excellence. Many students say they want an excellent score (e.g. 700+), but few have the patience & determination & dedication to exercise all the habits of excellent diligently.

Does all this make sense?
Mike
_________________
Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)
Manager
Joined: 18 Feb 2017
Posts: 59
Location: India
GMAT 1: 650 Q45 V30
GPA: 3.35

### Show Tags

02 Aug 2017, 06:18
in strengthening/weakening question,an option that is inconsistent with the premise or support a premise can be a possible answer?
Board of Directors
Status: Stepping into my 10 years long dream
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Posts: 3580

### Show Tags

02 Aug 2017, 06:26
1
JAIN09 wrote:
in strengthening/weakening question,an option that is inconsistent with the premise or support a premise can be a possible answer?

Hi JAIN09 ,

No, that is not correct.

If you are asked to weaken a conclusion, your answer should not be something that is breaking the premise.

Premises are the source of truth and cannot be broken.

The answer should have some relation with the conclusion or the assumption made to draw that conclusion from the given premise.

For this question specifically, conclusion is saying X led to Y.

Assumption was there is not alternate cause. By stating E, we are saying there is something else that led to the conclusion and it was not the given premise.

Hence, E is correct.

Does that make sense?
_________________
My GMAT Story: From V21 to V40
My MBA Journey: My 10 years long MBA Dream
My Secret Hacks: Best way to use GMATClub | Importance of an Error Log!
Verbal Resources: All SC Resources at one place | All CR Resources at one place

GMAT Club Inbuilt Error Log Functionality - View More.
New Visa Forum - Ask all your Visa Related Questions - here.
New! Best Reply Functionality on GMAT Club!
Find a bug in the new email templates and get rewarded with 2 weeks of GMATClub Tests for free
Check our new About Us Page here.
Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2016
Posts: 358
Location: Singapore
Concentration: Strategy, Finance

### Show Tags

02 Aug 2017, 09:02
1
Quote:
In Colorado subalpine meadows, nonnative dandelions co-occur with a native ﬂower, the larkspur. Bumblebees visit both species, creating the potential for interactions between the two species with respect to pollination. In a recent study, researchers selected 16 plots containing both species; all dandelions were removed rom eight plots; the remaining eight control plots were left undisturbed. The control plots yielded significantly more larkspur seeds than the dandelion-free plots, leading the researchers to conclude that the presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.

This is a fantastic Official Question.
Here's the crux of the argument -> Dandelions are non-native and larkspur are native flowers. Bees interact with both of them.
16 Plots divided into 2 Groups
Group 1 - 8 Plots where all Dandelions are removed.
Group 2 (Control Group) - 8 Plots remain as is.
Research Result -> Group 2 has more larkspur seeds than Group 1 => researchers think presence of dandelion helps facilitate pollination.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the researchers’ reasoning?

Quote:
(A) Bumblebees preferentially visit dandelions over larkspurs in mixed plots.

This is a strange one. This would explain why bumblebees interact with Group 2 more than they do with Group 1, but then why would we have larkspur seeds? OUT!

Quote:
(B) In mixed plots, pollinators can transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production.

This seems to strengthen the researcher's conclusion that the presence of dandelion helps with increased pollination of larkspur seeds. This is an opposite of what we are looking for. OUT!

Quote:
(C) If left unchecked, nonnative species like dandelions quickly crowd out native species.

Really GMAT? Then why do we have more larkspur seeds? OUT!

Quote:
(D) Seed germination is a more reliable measure of a species’ ﬁtness than seed production.

We're only talking about seed production so this is completely irrelevant.

Quote:
(E) Soil disturbances can result in fewer blooms, and hence lower seed production.

Here we go. An alternative explanation of what can cause the lower seed production in Group 1, and this does weaken the researcher's conclusion. Their conclusion was based on the primary assumption that both the groups had the same conditions for pollination barring the dandelion flowers in Group 2.

_________________
Put in the work, and that dream score is yours!
Manager
Joined: 11 Jun 2016
Posts: 68
Location: India
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V35
GMAT 2: 690 Q49 V34
GPA: 3.4

### Show Tags

30 Nov 2017, 02:02
mikemcgarry wrote:

I would say that many official CR questions are of the form that if, say, (B) is the OA, then (B) absolutely must play the role asked by the prompt question (strengthener, weakener, etc.), but in other official question, of all five answers, the OA (B) would be the only one that could play this role. Those latter questions are typically much harder questions, and those OAs are exceptionally easy to pass over. I would say this official question is of this latter sort.

Does this make sense?
Mike

It makes complete sense. Infact, during my actual GMAT, sometimes i feel that none of the answer options is either Right or Relevant. I Suppose they are the harder ones like this one in which the OA has been masked

Could you provide more such examples of official or Magoosh questions which are similar to the given one.

Thanks
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4472

### Show Tags

30 Nov 2017, 15:48
KGump wrote:
It makes complete sense. Infact, during my actual GMAT, sometimes i feel that none of the answer options is either Right or Relevant. I Suppose they are the harder ones like this one in which the OA has been masked

Could you provide more such examples of official or Magoosh questions which are similar to the given one.

Thanks

Dear KGump,

I'm happy to respond.

My friend, I don't know whether you understand how rude your request is. It's true that we experts on GMAT Club freely offer our time and our advice to answer specific questions. At the same time, my time is precious, as I am sure is true for all of my colleagues. I have many demands on me, and GMAT Club constitutes only a small part of my day's work. For a single user, especially someone I don't know well, to ask me to search through the question banks and deliver up a specific bouquet of questions for his perusal that meet a particular condition--it's as if someone is saying to me, "You don't know me, but I want you to do an hour of work for me." Your question didn't even acknowledge that there might be effort in fulfilling your request, and this absence gives the request an air of presumption. I am pointing this out because I think it's extremely important that you understand the impact you have on the people who are in a position to help you. All of human life, including the business world, is about connecting with people and relating to them. Not recognizing the demands you are placing on people is tantamount to not showing appreciation for their time and efforts--a particularly unsuccessful strategy. Humility, respect, and gratitude always go much further.

Does all this make sense, my friend?
Mike
_________________
Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)
Manager
Joined: 11 Jun 2016
Posts: 68
Location: India
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V35
GMAT 2: 690 Q49 V34
GPA: 3.4

### Show Tags

30 Nov 2017, 21:53
mikemcgarry wrote:
KGump wrote:
It makes complete sense. Infact, during my actual GMAT, sometimes i feel that none of the answer options is either Right or Relevant. I Suppose they are the harder ones like this one in which the OA has been masked

Could you provide more such examples of official or Magoosh questions which are similar to the given one.

Thanks

Dear KGump,

I'm happy to respond.

My friend, I don't know whether you understand how rude your request is. It's true that we experts on GMAT Club freely offer our time and our advice to answer specific questions. At the same time, my time is precious, as I am sure is true for all of my colleagues. I have many demands on me, and GMAT Club constitutes only a small part of my day's work. For a single user, especially someone I don't know well, to ask me to search through the question banks and deliver up a specific bouquet of questions for his perusal that meet a particular condition--it's as if someone is saying to me, "You don't know me, but I want you to do an hour of work for me." Your question didn't even acknowledge that there might be effort in fulfilling your request, and this absence gives the request an air of presumption. I am pointing this out because I think it's extremely important that you understand the impact you have on the people who are in a position to help you. All of human life, including the business world, is about connecting with people and relating to them. Not recognizing the demands you are placing on people is tantamount to not showing appreciation for their time and efforts--a particularly unsuccessful strategy. Humility, respect, and gratitude always go much further.

Does all this make sense, my friend?
Mike

Hi Mike,

I am really sorry if I implied any such rude behaviour.

What I meant was that if off the top of your head you recalled any such questions. I never expected you to search or put an effort for this. I agree this was presumptous.

I had recently purchased a verbal course and for one of the questions I had asked the faculty to tell the me the inspiration for that question and they told me the official question it was based on. Now I understand that this was a very specific request.

It never occurred to me that my stupid request could have come across to be perceived like this.

Well, I have taken the GMAT thrice and in my second attempt, to my surprise I scored in the 5th percentile in CR and 88th percentile in RC and SC. Otherwise i am generally able to solve all the CR questions at home. I have taken private tutoring sessions as well.
I woke up yesterday and this question was on my mind for some reason. I hadn’t even visited this question for long. and I just searched and read your reply and I got excited.
Maybe this is the reason I just jumped on with my stupid request.

I have huge respect for you. I have read most of your blogs and I really admire the way you teach students not just concepts but habits/practices which should be acquired such as asking excellent questions/ thinking what more Can I do/ levels of understanding.

I am generally the extreme opposite of what i came across as. Again, extremely sorry for have invoking that response in you.

Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3    Next  [ 43 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by