One proposal for preserving rain forests is to promote the adoption of

Question

One  proposal  for preserving rain forests is to promote the adoption of new agricultural technologies, such as improved plant varieties and use of chemical herbicides, which would increase productivity and slow deforestation by reducing demand for new cropland. Studies have shown that farmers in developing countries who have achieved certain levels of education, wealth, and security of land tenure are more likely to adopt such technologies. But these studies have focused on villages with limited land that are tied to a market economy rather than on the relatively isolated, self-sufficient communities with ample land characteristic of rain-forest regions. A recent  study  of the Tawahka people of the Honduran rain forest found that farmers with some formal education were more likely to adopt improved plant varieties but less likely to use chemical herbicides and that those who spoke Spanish (the language of the market economy) were more likely to adopt both technologies. Non-land wealth was also associated with more adoption of both technologies, but availability of uncultivated land reduced the incentive to employ the productivity-enhancing technologies. Researchers also measured land-tenure security: in Tawahka society, kinship ties are a more important indicator of this than are legal property rights, so researchers measured it by a household’s duration of residence in its village. They found that longer residence correlated with more adoption of improved plant varieties but less adoption of chemical herbicides.   1 
 1. The primary purpose of the passage is to

(A) evaluate the likelihood that a particular proposal, if implemented, would ultimately succeed in achieving its intended result
(B) question the assumption that certain technological innovations are the most effective means of realizing a particular environmental objective
(C) discuss the progress of efforts to encourage a particular traditional society to adopt certain modern agricultural methods
(D) present the results of new research suggesting that previous findings concerning one set of conditions may not be generalizable to another set of conditions
(E) weigh the relative importance of three factors in determining whether a particular strategy will be successful

2 
 2. According to the passage, the proposal mentioned in line 1 is aimed at preserving rain forests by encouraging farmers in rain-forest regions to do each of the following EXCEPT

(A) adopt new agricultural technologies
(B) grow improved plant varieties
(C) decrease their use of chemical herbicides
(D) increase their productivity
(E) reduce their need to clear new land for cultivation

3 
 3. The passage suggests that in the study mentioned in line 27 the method for gathering information about security of land tenure reflects which of the following pairs of assumptions about Tawahka society?

(A) The security of a household’s land tenure depends on the strength of that household’s kinship ties, and the duration of a household’s residence in its village is an indication of the strength of that household’s kinship ties.
(B) The ample availability of land makes security of land tenure unimportant, and the lack of a need for secure land tenure has made the concept of legal property rights unnecessary.
(C) The strength of a household’s kinship ties is a more reliable indicator of that household’s receptivity to new agricultural technologies than is its quantity of non land wealth, and the duration of a household’s residence in its village is a more reliable indicator of that household’s security of land tenure than is the strength of its kinship ties.
(D) Security of land tenure based on kinship ties tends to make farmers more receptive to the use of improved plant varieties, and security of land tenure based on long duration of residence in a village tends to make farmers more receptive to the use of chemical herbicides.
(E) A household is more likely to be receptive to the concept of land tenure based on legal property rights if it has easy access to uncultivated land, and a household is more likely to uphold the tradition of land tenure based on kinship ties if it possesses a significant degree of non-land wealth.

4 
 4. The findings of the study mentioned in the highlighted text, if valid for rain-forest regions in general, suggest that which of the following is an obstacle most likely to be faced by those wishing to promote rain-forest preservation by implementing the proposal mentioned in line 1?

(A) Lack of legal property rights tends to discourage local farmers from investing the time and resources required to successfully implement new agricultural technologies.
(B) The ability to evaluate the wider economic ramifications of adopting new agricultural technologies depends on a relatively high level of formal education.
(C) Isolation from the market economy tends to restrict local farmers’ access to new agricultural technologies that could help them to increase their productivity.
(D) Ready availability of uncultivated land tends to decrease local farmers’ incentive to adopt new agricultural technologies that would reduce their need to clear new land for cultivation.
(E) Traditions of self-sufficiency and reliance on kinship ties tend to diminish local farmers’ receptivity to new agricultural technologies introduced by people from outside the local community

MagooshExpert · Accepted Answer

Hi NandishSS ! Happy to help

For primary purpose questions like this, I like to break the passage down into super simple parts, based on what the author is doing. Let's do that here: -author is presenting a proposal, introducing the topic -author is providing more detail, based on certain studies -author is questioning the relevance of those original studies -author is providing a lot of evidence that contradicts those original studies for specific situations Now, let's look at it all together, visually -- what does the author spend the most time doing? Often, that's a really good indication of the "primary purpose". The majority of the passage is used to provide evidence about specific situations that question the relevance of the original studies to those specific situations. Let's now look back at the answer choices to see which one of those fits the best. The one that matches best is D: present the results of new research suggesting that previous findings concerning one set of conditions may not be generalizable to another set of conditions. Does that make sense? If not, let me know

-Carolyn

AndrewN · Answer

Question 1:

I would be happy to offer to offer some insights into my approach on this question. Before I jump into a passage, I typically scan the first question so that I can go into reading the passage with some sort of frame in mind, apart from main idea/authorial presence concerns. The question:

First off, a  suggest  or  inference  question does  not  give you license to "read between the lines," as my students sometimes tell me. Although that interpretation may be accurate with other reading tasks, on the GMATTM,  inference  means one of two things:

1) What does the passage state, possibly in a slightly different manner (i.e. using synonyms for a few words)?

2) What does the passage state, perhaps forcing you to cobble together information from one sentence or paragraph and information from another, when the two bits are not combined as such in the passage?

Yeah, that is it. The closer you stick to the passage, the more questions you will answer correctly. Stick to the  keywords  of the question stem, and match them to their counterparts in the passage, a simple yet highly effective strategy. Here, our keywords are  security of land tenure  and  Tawahka society . Thus, we have to make sure our answer is accurate on both fronts. We cannot project any information from one key phrase onto the other. With that out of the way, on to our responses.

Like just about anyone else, I hate long-winded answer choices. They present numerous opportunities to get sidetracked. But here, I cannot find anything to argue against. Why? Because the passage states in the penultimate sentence,

Researchers also measured land-tenure security: in Tawahka society, kinship ties are a more important indicator of this than are legal property rights, so researchers measured it by a household’s duration of residence in its village. They found that longer residence correlated with more adoption of improved plant varieties but less adoption of chemical herbicides.

In Tawahka Society, it is clear that kinship ties matter, in terms of land-tenure security. Furthermore, researchers  measured    by how long a household had established residence in its village. The answer choice and the line from the passage match, almost verbatim. What more could you want in an answer?

Note the strong, judgmental language. Quite often, such answer choices take an idea too far, and this one is no different. The passage does  not  indicate that land-tenure security is unimportant. If it did, then what would be the point in the researchers studying land-tenure security? Rather, the passage tells us that another factor, namely kinship ties via duration of residence, is   a more important  indicator  of land-tenure security than are  legal property rights .  More important  does not suggest that the alternative is  unimportant .

I will be honest and admit that I did not even untangle the first part before eliminating this answer choice based on the second part. The latter portion here is twisting words, and no such comparison between duration of residence and kinship ties is made in the passage. Again, the researchers used duration of residence and kinship ties in tandem to measure land-tenure security in Tawahka society. I like to say that if you can argue definitively against  anything  in an answer choice, as long as you are keeping an eye on the passage, then that is enough to see off that answer. I will leave the former part for another time, perhaps. (The clock would have been ticking if I had not already eliminated the answer and moved on.)

The last line of the passage presents information that flies in the face of this statement:

found that longer residence correlated with more adoption of improved plant varieties but  less adoption of chemical herbicides .

If that does not seal the deal, then I am not sure how much more proof you need.

These conditionals, which you can interpret as saying  only if , are getting in the way here, not to mention that this is all pure speculation. The passage presents ways in which the Tawahka society operates, regarding the security of land tenure, by  not  placing an emphasis on  legal property rights . This answer kind of reminds me of the different cases in formal logic in which a statement  if p then q  can be reinterpreted, sometimes with clearly incorrect conclusions, into the  inverse  ( if not p then not q ),  converse  ( if q then p ), and  contrapositive  ( if not q then not p ). We do not need to waste our time sorting out what could be true when the passage tells us what is already going on.

I hope that helps answer your question. Good luck with your studies.

- Andrew

nt2010 · Answer

This how I would go about answering this questions. As I'm reading, I want to make a note of few points mentioned in the paragraph..

. The study phrase gives you multiple combinations such as educated or not, non land wealth, inheritance through kin,.. blah.. I would skim through these scenarios...

Next, I would read the question and go back and re-read the multiple combinations of the study one-by-one and you would come across the following phrase -

Using the two quoted phrase,  you should be able to select D.

Carcass · Answer

tricky and nasty passage, though is short

A

Studies have shown that farmers in developing countries who have achieved certain levels of education, wealth, and security of land tenure are more likely to adopt such technologies.  But  these studies have focused on villages with limited land that are tied to a market economy rather than on the relatively isolated, self-sufficient communities

As you can se you can not generalize the study

B

such as improved plant varieties and use of chemical herbicides,

is the contrary , so C is the exception

C

Researchers also measured land-tenure security: in Tawahka society, kinship ties are a more important indicator of this than are legal property rights, so researchers measured it by a household’s duration of residence in its village. They found that longer residence correlated with more adoption of improved plant varieties but less adoption of chemical herbicides.

pretty much clear

D

Ready availability of uncultivated land tends to decrease local farmers’ incentive to adopt new agricultural technologies that would reduce their need to clear new land for cultivation.

Enhancing the productivity of the land owned and not going to cultivate other lands; indeed the gist of the passage

Hope is clear

narmfarmer · Answer

Question 2  asks what line 1's proposal  doesn't do , line 1's proposal is to preserve rain forests by helping local farmers through a few methods.
a lot of answer choices are word-by-word, so it's quick elimination

A: adopt new technology <- it's covered, the proposal is supposed to promote new technologies
B: grow plant varieties <- it's covered, one of the new technologies is plant varieties+
C: decrease herbicides <- OA, line 1 does mention improved use of chemical herbicides, but it never mentioned whether improved = decreased herbicides, I don't even know what herbicides are
D: increase productivity <- the proposal's promotion of new tech will increase productivity
E: reduce their need to clear new land for cultivation <- the proposal slows deforestation by reducing demand for new cropland

Question 3  is very tricky because it's incredibly wordy and also because OP didn't point out where line 27 is.
I assumed that the study refers to

The question asks what we can imply from this statement. Take note that leaps of logic is prohibited and GMAT wants us to pick the most boring and droning answer.

let's take a look at some answers, we'll scan out some keywords so we don't drown:

refers to land security and household duration, didn't introduce anything out-of-scope, looks like a winner.

I stopped at  land tenure unimportant , kinship is more important than legal property rights (for indicating land security), but they didn't say anything about land tenure being unimportant.

line 27 refers kinship ties as an indicator of  land security , the receptivity is not taken into consideration
some might assume that land security = more reception, but the article didn't say anything about secure farmers adopting new technologies
the only mention of receptivity is based on education, language skills and non-land wealth

see C

there is no mention of any farmer's reception on land tenure, we don't know what the farmers actually liked, the research is only talking about measuring land security

Nevernevergiveup · Answer

4. The findings of the study mentioned in the highlighted text, if valid for rain-forest regions in general, suggest that which of the following is an obstacle most likely to be faced by those wishing to promote rain-forest preservation by implementing the proposal mentioned in line 1?

Case study scenario is assumed to be valid for rain forest regions in general.

A. Lack of legal property rights tends to discourage local farmers from investing the time and resources required to successfully implement new agricultural technologies.

They gave more importance to kinship ties than legal property rights. This is not true.

B. The ability to evaluate the wider economic ramifications of adopting new agricultural technologies depends on a relatively high level of formal education.

farmers with certain level of education are known to adopt new tech but neither ability to evaluate ramifications is mentioned nor high level of formal education. Incorrect.

C. Isolation from the market economy tends to restrict local farmers’ access to new agricultural technologies that could help them to increase their productivity.
 
 having only said this, info in option C cannot not be deduced from passage.

D. Ready availability of uncultivated land tends to decrease local farmers’ incentive to adopt new agricultural technologies that would reduce their need to clear new land for cultivation.

This is mentioned in below sentence in passage.

E. Traditions of self-sufficiency and reliance on kinship ties tend to diminish local farmers’ receptivity to new agricultural technologies introduced by people from outside the local community

self sufficiency may discourage framers to new tech but we don't have reason to say that kinship ties can result in such cases.
people from inside or outside the community is out of scope.

Skywalker18 · Answer

-The author talks about a proposal for preserving rain forests
-The author then describes potential reasons why the proposal might not be accepted in certain regions
- He illustrates the above point with the example of the Tawahka people

1. The author clearly mentions that the proposal will not work under conditions where an ample amount of uncultivated land is available. Hence Option (D) is the best answer choice.

2. the adoption of new agricultural technologies, such as improved plant varieties and use of chemical herbicides, which would increase productivity and slow deforestation by reducing demand for new cropland
Answer C

3. "in Tawahka society, kinship ties are a more important indicator of this than are legal property rights, so researchers measured it by a household’s duration of residence in its village."
The above excerpt indicates that kinship ties are related to the duration of the household's residence it its village. Hence option (A) is the right answer.

4."But these studies have focused on villages with limited land that are tied to a market economy rather than on the relatively isolated, self-sufficient communities with ample land characteristic of rain-forest regions."

The above suggests that an availability of land might prove to be a hindrance for the implementation of the suggested proposal. Hence option (D) is the right answer.

avvbh · Answer

Can you please explain how did we arrived at option C for Ques 2? Why option E is wrong ?

Heisenberg12 · Answer

Increasing productivity leads to a conclusion that more yield per acre could be obtained and therefore, the need to reduce the land for cultivation is implied in it. We need to find an option that clearly states the correct answer, without any doubt.

The author has mentioned importance of "improved plant varieties and use of chemical herbicides" -- This shows that the author has not agreed to reducing the use of chemical herbicides.

KarishmaB · Answer

4) The findings of the study mentioned in the highlighted text, if valid for rain-forest regions in general, suggest that which of the following is an obstacle most likely to be faced by those wishing to promote rain-forest preservation by implementing the proposal mentioned in line 1?

A. Lack of legal property rights tends to discourage local farmers from investing the time and resources required to successfully implement new agricultural technologies.

B. The ability to evaluate the wider economic ramifications of adopting new aricultural technologies depends on a relatively high level of formal education.

C. Isolation from the market economy tends to restrict local farmers’ access to new agricultural technologies that could help them to increase their productivity.

D. Ready availability of uncultivated land tends to decrease local farmers’ incentive to adopt new agricultural technologies that would reduce their need to clear new land for cultivation.

E. Traditions of self-sufficiency and reliance on kinship ties tend to diminish local farmers’ receptivity to new agricultural technologies introduced by people from outside the local community.

This is what the first line says "One proposal for preserving rain forests is to promote the adoption of new agricultural technologies"
The proposal is to adopt new agricultural technologies.

This sentence "but availability of uncultivated land reduced the incentive to employ the productivity-enhancing technologies" connects to (D) perfectly. What confused you was perhaps this - "that would reduce their need to clear new land for cultivation"
This is just some info on new technologies which links to the first part of (D) - ready availability of land. Since land is readily available, new technologies (which help to reduce the need to clear new land) are not needed. When land is limited, these technologies would help since they would reduce the need for new land (if you can increase the productivity of current land using tech, you wouldn't need new land much). When land is available, these technologies would not be required.

A. Lack of legal property rights tends to discourage local farmers from investing the time and resources required to successfully implement new agricultural technologies.

"Household’s duration of residence in its village" was considered, not "legal property rights".

B. The ability to evaluate the wider economic ramifications of adopting new aricultural technologies depends on a relatively high level of formal education.

Rain-forest regions are relatively isolated, self-sufficient communities with ample land - not tied to a market economy. So economic ramifications are irrelevant.

C. Isolation from the market economy tends to restrict local farmers’ access to new agricultural technologies that could help them to increase their productivity.

Rain forest regions are usually economically isolated so this is not a factor that influences whether the farmers use new technologies.

E. Traditions of self-sufficiency and reliance on kinship ties tend to diminish local farmers’ receptivity to new agricultural technologies introduced by people from outside the local community.

Incorrect. Given that "longer residence (reliance on kinship) correlated with more adoption of improved plant varieties but less adoption of chemical herbicides." 
So they are more receptive to some new tech and less receptive to other new tech.

shard87 · Answer

AjiteshArun 
 GMATNinja

Please help.
I have divided this passage in 3 parts, and I would like to know how these 3 para connected to each other.
or I should rephrase my question: why author mentioned these 3 para in this sequence?

1-One proposal for preserving rain forests is to promote the adoption of new agricultural technologies, such as improved plant varieties and use of chemical herbicides, which would increase productivity and slow deforestation by reducing demand for new cropland.

2-Studies have shown that farmers in developing countries who have achieved certain levels of education, wealth, and security of land tenure are more likely to adopt such technologies. But these studies have focused on villages with limited land that are tied to a market economy rather than on the relatively isolated, self-sufficient communities with ample land characteristic of rain-forest regions.

3-A recent study of the Tawahka people of the Honduran rain forest found that farmers with some formal education were more likely to adopt improved plant varieties but less likely to use chemical herbicides and that those who spoke Spanish (the language of the market economy) were more likely to adopt both technologies. Non-land wealth was also associated with more adoption of both technologies, but availability of uncultivated land reduced the incentive to employ the productivity-enhancing technologies. Researchers also measured land-tenure security: in Tawahka society, kinship ties are a more important indicator of this than are legal property rights, so researchers measured it by a household’s duration of residence in its village. They found that longer residence correlated with more adoption of improved plant varieties but less adoption of chemical herbicides.

GMATNinja · Answer

Nice! This is a good breakdown of how this long and winding paragraph really splits up into three key pieces:

There's a proposal to improve productivity and reduce deforestation by promoting adoption of new tech. 
  Studies have shown that a certain kind of farmer is more likely to adopt new tech, but these studies have a limited range of coverage. 
  A recent study show that other kinds of farmers behave differently, in lots of ways, when it comes to adopting new tech.

The structure of the paragraph sets up the author to identify a proposal, point out that studies supporting this proposal are limited, then present a recent study that reveals just how limited those previous studies are.

That's why choice (D) is the best fit for question #1:
 
I hope this helps!

pzgupta · Answer

Can someone please explain to me how A in 3 is an "assumption" based on the passage? 
The passage states "in T society kinship ties are more important indicator of this than any legal property rights". How is this an assumption? This is a fact stated in the passage? What am I missing here?

GMATNinja · Answer

Here's the full portion of the passage that you're analyzing:

The author tells us the following:

In the study, researchers measured land-tenure security. 
  In Tawahka society, kinship ties are a more important indicator of land-tenure security than are legal property rights. 
  Consequently, researchers measured land-tenure security by a household's duration of residents in its village.

This seems like a straightforward presentation of facts, but here's what's NOT being explicitly stated by the author:

Kinship ties determine or create land-tenure security in Tawahka society. We only know that these ties are  a more important indicator than legal property rights . This is a comparison of the relative importance of kinship ties vs. legal property rights. The author has said nothing about the absolute importance of either, with regards to creating land-tenure security. 
  A household's duration of residents in its village is directly related to kinship ties.

Now, here's the full text of choice (A):

Choice (A) identifies these  implicit  assumptions right on the nose:

A household's land-tenure security  depends on the strength  of that household's kinship ties. 
  The duration of a household's residence in its village  indicates the strength  of that household's kinship ties.

The author has already given us all the dots to connect. (A) does nothing more than connect those dots; this choice is basically exposing what we've read between the lines of the passage.

I hope this helps clarify how assumptions might feel perfectly obvious while remaining  unstated by the author .

Ilhomjon98 · Answer

GMATNinja
Please help with questions 4.
I came to D and E but went with E.
the question says if valid for rain-forest regions in general.
the answer choice D is related to only the relatively isolated, self-sufficient communities with ample land characteristic of rain-forest regions.
Hence, I eliminated and went with E.
Could you please explain why E is wrong and D is correct?
thank you in advance!

GMATNinja · Answer

Before we take a look at (D) and (E), we need to be clear that (D) does not relate only to  "the relatively isolated, self-sufficient communities with ample land characteristic of rain-forest regions."  The question TELLS us to consider the study,   "if valid for rain-forest regions in general,"   so EVERY answer choice is related to the rainforest regions in general.

Ok, onto the question...

Question 4 
First, let's take a look at some parts of the passage that would be helpful to answer this question. We're told that one of the results of the study was:

Result 1:  Non-land wealth was also associated with more adoption of both technologies, but availability of uncultivated land reduced the incentive to employ the productivity-enhancing technologies.  
This tells us that:

1) People with a shortage of land were more likely to adopt both new technologies
2) If uncultivated land was available, people were less likely to adopt either technology.

Another result of the study was:

Result 2:  Researchers also measured land-tenure security: in Tawahka society, kinship ties are a more important indicator of this than are legal property rights, so researchers measured it by a household’s duration of residence in its village. They found that longer residence correlated with more adoption of improved plant varieties but less adoption of chemical herbicides.  
This tells us that:

1) The length of time a household had lived in a village was used as a measure of kinship ties
2) A long duration of residence correlated with  more  adoption of improved plant varieties but  less  adoption of chemical herbicides

As we'll see, these two parts of the passage will help us choose between (D) and (E). In this question, we're asked which of the answer choices describes an obstacle most likely to be faced by those wishing to promote rain-forest preservation practices.

Let's look at (E) first:
 
As mentioned above, the second result from the study suggests the  higher the kinship ties  in a community, the  less willing  a farmer will be to use chemical herbicides but the  more willing  they will be to adopt improved plant varieties.

Therefore, it is  not true  that reliance on kinship ties tends to diminish local farmers' receptivity to new agricultural technologies, as mentioned in (E). These farmers are just selective about which technologies they adopt.

This is why (E) is cannot be the correct answer.

(D) tells us:
 
The first result from the study listed above tells us the  "availability of uncultivated land reduced the incentive to employ the productivity-enhancing technologies."  This is very similar to the claim made in (D) and this gives us the justification to keep (D) as our final answer.

I hope that helps!

AliciaSierra · Answer

Hello  AndrewN  - What is Nonland wealth?

AndrewN · Answer

Good question,  AliciaSierra , and a friendly hello. (I think this may be the first time we have crossed paths. If not, then pardon me.) This is a case in which we can define the  non  by examining what is meant by  land wealth . The passage discusses  a recent study of the Tawahka people of the Honduran rain forest  in the context of a  relatively isolated, self-sufficient   with ample land . This stands in contrast to other studies that  have focused on villages with limited land that are tied to a market economy . Together, then, we can conclude that  land wealth  would refer to  property rights  or wealth in land owned, even if those rights are defined differently in Tawahka society. And this means that  nonland wealth  refers to other types of wealth, such as the currency of the  market economy  (i.e. money). You might think that  formal education  is a part of nonland wealth, but it is mentioned instead as an attribute of people who engage in the market economy, as well as some Tawahka farmers, not as a type of wealth itself. We really do not have anything else to lean on in the passage.

I hope that helps. Thank you for thinking to ask me.

- Andrew

woohoo921 · Answer

AndrewN

I have a few questions below:
1. I have the Official Guide 2020 version and noticed that I have only two of the questions that appear on the form (the first being "the passage suggests that in the study..." and the second question being "according to the passage, the proposal mentioned in line 1.."). Is this because the other questions are retired by GMAC? What does it mean when a question is retired (e.g. the GMAC finds fault in it)?

2. For question 467 (the passage suggests that in the study mentioned in line 14 the method for gathering information about the security of land tenure: the Official Guide says "the researchers measured land-tenure security by indirectly measuring the strength of kinship ties". To clarify "indirectly" refers to the researchers using "duration" as an indicator, correctly? Not to overthink this, but what would be a "direct" way to measure kinship ties? Also, where does the word "strength" come in? I do not see "strength" mentioned in the passage... is that where we are drawing the inference by looking at works such as "longer residence"?

3. For question 468 (according to the passage, the proposal mentioned in line 1), I was a bit confused in that each of these items seems to be listed as a separate entity when they all fall under using agriculture technologies or would be a direct result of using agriculture technologies ---> plant varieties or chemical herbs are examples of agriculture technologies--> these then increase productivity and reduce the need to clear new land. I have not quite seen something like this on the GMAT before.

Many thanks in advance

One proposal for preserving rain forests is to promote the adoption of

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

GMAT Reading Comprehension (RC) Questions

One proposal for preserving rain forests is to promote the adoption of

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia