Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
Apr 2912:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
Apr 3001:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
May 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
May 0306:30 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Verbal trouble on GMAT? Fix it NOW! Join Sunita Singhvi for a focused webinar on actionable strategies to boost your Verbal score and take your performance to the next level.
29 Mar 2010, 17:47
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi, I wanted to discuss some of my own findings about the GMAT, and some common misconceptions that circle around this forum (specifically related to retaking the GMAT):
1) IMO, the GMAT is not as accurate at pinpointing your score, as the GMATPrep. 1/3 of the questions on the real GMAT are "experimental" questions that don't count towards your score, whereas the GMATPrep uses all questions you answer to pinpoint your score. If the real GMAT uses less questions to pinpoint your score, by definition, it cannot be as accurate as the GMATPrep, which uses all questions you answer to pinpoint your score.
2) If you walk into the GMAT in the exact same condition each time, with the exact same preparation, and take it multiple times, you will get a range of scores (assuming you get different questions eachs time). If you get a lower score than expected on your first or second try, it's possible that you just are hitting the lower range of your scores (unless you are succumbing to test day anxiety/pressure which is a different issue). Note that each person has a lower range and an upper range for their scores, assuming his/her preparation/condition has not changed during each time they take the GMAT. Over the longer run, if you take the GMAT enough times, a more well defined range of your scores will appear. With respect to the 1/3 experimental questions that don't count towards your score, that in itself can lead to a wider range in scores - what if I get 4 more experimental questions right vs 4 more real questions wrong?
3) Because of 1) and 2), if you take the GMAT a very few number of times, a certain amount of luck is involved. This is just like gambling - if you play roulette and bet on red 2 times in a row and win both times, you may conclude that betting red in roulette wins 100% of the time. Unless you are cheating, we know that is not true in the long run. Thus, if you take the GMAT once and don't get a consistent score to say, GMATPrep, you may simply have to take the GMAT several more times to get a more representative score. If you take the GMAT enough times, just like gambling, luck becomes less and less of a factor in the longer run.
4) IMO, luck can be a significant factor for RC passages. Since we all come from different educational backgrounds, not all RC passages are equal to each different person. Personally, I struggle with astronomy RC passages - such as the "meteor stream" passage on page 41 of the Verbal Review, OG. Another person coming from a stronger Physics background, or just likes to read about astronomy in general, will find that passage much easier to digest than me. I also struggle with passages that involve legal terminology whereas a lawyer would find those passages easy to read. An RC passage that you struggle with can easily set you back on the verbal section. Fortunately, if you take the GMAT enough times, luck becomes less of a factor and the subject matter of RC passages averages out over more samples.
1) IMO, the GMAT is not as accurate at pinpointing your score, as the GMATPrep. 1/3 of the questions on the real GMAT are "experimental" questions that don't count towards your score, whereas the GMATPrep uses all questions you answer to pinpoint your score. If the real GMAT uses less questions to pinpoint your score, by definition, it cannot be as accurate as the GMATPrep, which uses all questions you answer to pinpoint your score.
2) If you walk into the GMAT in the exact same condition each time, with the exact same preparation, and take it multiple times, you will get a range of scores (assuming you get different questions eachs time). If you get a lower score than expected on your first or second try, it's possible that you just are hitting the lower range of your scores (unless you are succumbing to test day anxiety/pressure which is a different issue). Note that each person has a lower range and an upper range for their scores, assuming his/her preparation/condition has not changed during each time they take the GMAT. Over the longer run, if you take the GMAT enough times, a more well defined range of your scores will appear. With respect to the 1/3 experimental questions that don't count towards your score, that in itself can lead to a wider range in scores - what if I get 4 more experimental questions right vs 4 more real questions wrong?
3) Because of 1) and 2), if you take the GMAT a very few number of times, a certain amount of luck is involved. This is just like gambling - if you play roulette and bet on red 2 times in a row and win both times, you may conclude that betting red in roulette wins 100% of the time. Unless you are cheating, we know that is not true in the long run. Thus, if you take the GMAT once and don't get a consistent score to say, GMATPrep, you may simply have to take the GMAT several more times to get a more representative score. If you take the GMAT enough times, just like gambling, luck becomes less and less of a factor in the longer run.
4) IMO, luck can be a significant factor for RC passages. Since we all come from different educational backgrounds, not all RC passages are equal to each different person. Personally, I struggle with astronomy RC passages - such as the "meteor stream" passage on page 41 of the Verbal Review, OG. Another person coming from a stronger Physics background, or just likes to read about astronomy in general, will find that passage much easier to digest than me. I also struggle with passages that involve legal terminology whereas a lawyer would find those passages easy to read. An RC passage that you struggle with can easily set you back on the verbal section. Fortunately, if you take the GMAT enough times, luck becomes less of a factor and the subject matter of RC passages averages out over more samples.
29 Mar 2010, 20:58
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi gmattester,
I feel the urge to reply to a few of your points:
ad1) I doubt the validity of this statement, why would GMAC use an inferior product for the actual test? Agreed, there is a certain number of questions that do not count towards your actual score on the actual GMAT, but those are needed as GMAC needs to refresh it's question pool every 31 days and needs to pretest new questions. However, I have not seen any evidence that GMATprep counts all questions asked. Until you do know both scoring algorithms, this statement is unfortunately unqualified.
ad2) Ok, I agree with you here, you take the exam more often and likely your score will fall in something like a 'personalized' gaussian distribution. But what does that really help you with for the B-school admissions process? If you have taken the exam 3+times, I'd bet you that adcom will question why you have done so. Again, experimental question play no role in any of this!
ad3) Again, what is the relevance if most business schools will tell you that taking the GMAT 3+ times tells them that you lack the ability to prepare efficiently and misjudge your own preparedness. There is no luck involved here, just like roulette: let's say you answered a 650 level question correctly, the program will throw you a 700level question let's say. You are right that question could be discrete probability (which you suck at) or it could be a tricky geometry question (which you are awesome at), so you feel like maybe you get lucky with a question or two, but with a truly adaptive test, it will randomly pick from the pool of questions that are appropriate for that level. Again true, there are certain concepts that will receive more questions than others, but those relative distributions are known, thus you train for them. No luck involved here in my opinion.
ad4) Sure if you run into an RC section that you have background knowledge in it will help you tremendously! I ran into this quite frequently in my prep with RC practice sessions, coincidentally though I did not have this advantage on the real exam. However, in my opinion I just as well could have. So again, in my opinion this was random, but I suppose it could be perceived as luck/bad luck. But let me point out another factor to you, math is a universal language and many people with very limited English skills will be able to perform extraordinarily on the GMAT quantitative section, but they will fail miserably in the verbal question. While you may argue the SC questions are no more than applying the rules of grammar (similar to mathematical principals) to a problem set, you first need to develop a sound understanding of the English language. Something that takes most of us years. Let's not even go into the command of English you need for the RC or CR questions, it is apparent that the average non-native English speaker is at a disadvantage here. Again, Luck will do you no good in this situation, it is practice and practice and more practice.
Brings me to my point Numero Uno:
The GMAT is a very 'trainable' exam, however it does require a certain foundation (!) of elementary mathematical concepts and more importantly a comprehensive (!) command of the English language. In my opinion this is clearly reflected in the overall importance of the verbal score for the composite score where with let's say a xx percentile quantitative score and a yy percentile verbal score with xx<yy you will end up with a higher score compared to a yy percentile quantitative score and a xx percentile verbal score.
I suppose my bottom line is: Having luck/bad luck on the GMAT is a misconception.
I feel the urge to reply to a few of your points:
ad1) I doubt the validity of this statement, why would GMAC use an inferior product for the actual test? Agreed, there is a certain number of questions that do not count towards your actual score on the actual GMAT, but those are needed as GMAC needs to refresh it's question pool every 31 days and needs to pretest new questions. However, I have not seen any evidence that GMATprep counts all questions asked. Until you do know both scoring algorithms, this statement is unfortunately unqualified.
ad2) Ok, I agree with you here, you take the exam more often and likely your score will fall in something like a 'personalized' gaussian distribution. But what does that really help you with for the B-school admissions process? If you have taken the exam 3+times, I'd bet you that adcom will question why you have done so. Again, experimental question play no role in any of this!
ad3) Again, what is the relevance if most business schools will tell you that taking the GMAT 3+ times tells them that you lack the ability to prepare efficiently and misjudge your own preparedness. There is no luck involved here, just like roulette: let's say you answered a 650 level question correctly, the program will throw you a 700level question let's say. You are right that question could be discrete probability (which you suck at) or it could be a tricky geometry question (which you are awesome at), so you feel like maybe you get lucky with a question or two, but with a truly adaptive test, it will randomly pick from the pool of questions that are appropriate for that level. Again true, there are certain concepts that will receive more questions than others, but those relative distributions are known, thus you train for them. No luck involved here in my opinion.
ad4) Sure if you run into an RC section that you have background knowledge in it will help you tremendously! I ran into this quite frequently in my prep with RC practice sessions, coincidentally though I did not have this advantage on the real exam. However, in my opinion I just as well could have. So again, in my opinion this was random, but I suppose it could be perceived as luck/bad luck. But let me point out another factor to you, math is a universal language and many people with very limited English skills will be able to perform extraordinarily on the GMAT quantitative section, but they will fail miserably in the verbal question. While you may argue the SC questions are no more than applying the rules of grammar (similar to mathematical principals) to a problem set, you first need to develop a sound understanding of the English language. Something that takes most of us years. Let's not even go into the command of English you need for the RC or CR questions, it is apparent that the average non-native English speaker is at a disadvantage here. Again, Luck will do you no good in this situation, it is practice and practice and more practice.
Brings me to my point Numero Uno:
The GMAT is a very 'trainable' exam, however it does require a certain foundation (!) of elementary mathematical concepts and more importantly a comprehensive (!) command of the English language. In my opinion this is clearly reflected in the overall importance of the verbal score for the composite score where with let's say a xx percentile quantitative score and a yy percentile verbal score with xx<yy you will end up with a higher score compared to a yy percentile quantitative score and a xx percentile verbal score.
I suppose my bottom line is: Having luck/bad luck on the GMAT is a misconception.
29 Mar 2010, 23:27
Kudos
Bookmarks
ThomasD
Yes, I'll agree with you if GmatPrep doesn't use all the questions to pinpoint your score. If however, GmatPrep does use all questions to pinpoint your score, it will always be more accurate than the actual GMAT, assuming it uses the same algorithm.
ThomasD
What you fail to miss is that if the "700" level question you get is an experimental question and you get it wrong, it has no impact on your score. Vice versa, if it is a question that counts towards your score and you get it right, that will boost your score. Given that 1/3 of the questions are experimental questions, I can easily see your score can fluctuate +/- 30 from your "long term average" if you only take the GMAT a handful of times. Again, this goes back to the original question of whether GMATPrep also counts all the questions towards your score or not.
ThomasD
My point is, for a few samples, luck does play a big role in that you could get lucky and get RC passages that make it easier for you on exam day, or you could unlucky and get RC passages that are just hard for you on test day. If you take it one or two times, luck is more of a factor than if you take it say, 20 times. At 20 times, the subject matter of RC passages will average out themselves - you will get passages that favor you and ones that don't over the long run. This assumes that you enter the GMAT each time with the same condition/preparation (ie. you have not improved nor regressed each time).
BTW, I'm not even discussing what adcoms think of you taking it more than 3+ times. That's a separate discussion of itself.
Quote:
Not sure about that. There is a 90 point difference for my range (from 530 to 620) and my condition/preparation going into both exams was equal both times.
