Last visit was: 18 Nov 2025, 21:08 It is currently 18 Nov 2025, 21:08
Close
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
Your Progress

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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
655-705 Level|   Non-Math Related|               
User avatar
parkhydel
Joined: 03 Jun 2019
Last visit: 27 Mar 2025
Posts: 273
Own Kudos:
20,387
 [56]
Given Kudos: 60
Posts: 273
Kudos: 20,387
 [56]
Kudos
Add Kudos
56
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
Sajjad1994
User avatar
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 17,289
Own Kudos:
49,292
 [6]
Given Kudos: 6,179
GPA: 3.62
Products:
Posts: 17,289
Kudos: 49,292
 [6]
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
3
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
User avatar
Apt0810
Joined: 15 Jul 2018
Last visit: 24 Oct 2020
Posts: 327
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 94
Posts: 327
Kudos: 622
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
bM22
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 05 May 2016
Last visit: 17 Jul 2025
Posts: 717
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 1,316
Location: India
Products:
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi sajjad,
Could you post the OE for question 3, I am having trouble deducing how the a small subset of tasks would result in the average going up.
Below is my explanation for the first 2 questions.

1.
A. For at least one trainee, the posttraining score was greater than 3 times the pretraining score.

From the graph we can infer that for 2a, the pre-training score = ~5, and post-training score = ~ 65 (> 3 times the pre-training score)
Since, condition mentioned is for at least one trainee = > >= 1.
So, 1 is enough, but from the graph we can easily interpret that the post training scores for 2b, 2c, 2d, 2e, 2f, 2g, 2g is also greater than 3 times the pre-training scores of the respective trainees.

Answer is Yes.

B. The data for Session 1 exhibit a positive correlation between pretraining and posttraining scores.
yes, since the scores for both the sessions are increasing.

Answer is Yes.

C. For the three sessions, the range of pre-training scores is least for Session 2.
Range of Pre-training scores for session 1: 45-25 = ~ 20
For Session 2: 15-5 = ~10
For Session 3: 43-22 = ~21.
We can see, the range is lowest for session 2.

Answer Yes.


2. For each of the three training sessions, select Successful if, on the basis of the given information, it would be considered successful by PQ&R. Otherwise, select Unsuccessful.

Let's do it for Session 1:
The corresponding average pre-training score = (25+28+30+35+40+40+41+42)/8 = 45.12
=> average (arithmetic mean) post-training score for Session 1: (71 +72+ 77+ 78 + 80 + 80 + 81 + 81)/ 8 = 77.5 (clearly >50% of the average of the pre- training scores.)
=> Training for Session 1 was successful.

For session 2: The wide difference in scores, indicates that the average of the post-training scores is >50% of the average of the pre-training scores.
=> training for Session 2 was also successful.

For Session 3, also the wide difference in scores easily helps us identify the average diff., thus making the training for session 3 also successful.


Thanks.
User avatar
YashYashkratos
Joined: 27 Nov 2022
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 87
Own Kudos:
9
 [1]
Given Kudos: 20
Posts: 87
Kudos: 9
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Can someone please explain the third table (trainees by session)
i do not understand the pre training score order and post training score order.
User avatar
chetan2u
User avatar
GMAT Expert
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Last visit: 15 Nov 2025
Posts: 11,238
Own Kudos:
43,696
 [3]
Given Kudos: 335
Status:Math and DI Expert
Location: India
Concentration: Human Resources, General Management
GMAT Focus 1: 735 Q90 V89 DI81
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 735 Q90 V89 DI81
Posts: 11,238
Kudos: 43,696
 [3]
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
YashYashkratos
Can someone please explain the third table (trainees by session)
i do not understand the pre training score order and post training score order.
­The graphs are exactly the same. It os more like sorting the table in present questions. The pre training score ordered is sorted from lower pre training score to higher pre-training score( check the top edge of the dark blue portion for each employee), and post training score ordered is sorted from lower post training score to higher post-training score( check the top edge of the light blue portion for each employee).
User avatar
PReciSioN
Joined: 17 Dec 2023
Last visit: 14 Apr 2025
Posts: 95
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 47
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 795 Q90 V90 DI88
GMAT Focus 1: 795 Q90 V90 DI88
Posts: 95
Kudos: 77
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
For Q3,

E says - "On the job, the trainees are usually assigned only a small subset of the tasks included in the training battery."

Does this help explain why the employees scored higher in this small subset than in the overall training battery? No.

B - "The tasks that trainees performed most poorly during on-the-job observation are those that the trainees perform least frequently on the job."

This suggests that there is some correlation between infrequent performance and poor performance. Since tasks in the training battery, that are not part of the job, are not performed at all, this could indeed explain why the overall score for training battery was lower than the on-the-job scores.

Could avigutman , Bunuel , chetan2u comment on this please? Thanks.
User avatar
zermatt17
Joined: 14 Jun 2017
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 4
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 79
Posts: 4
Kudos: 4
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Question 1) "For each of the following statements about the scores in Session 1, Session 2, and Session 3, select Yes if the statement is supported by the information provided. Otherwise, select No."

It says "the scores in session 1, session 2, and session 3"

"For at least one trainee, the posttraining score was greater than 3 times the pretraining score." >> should I read it as at least one trainee in one session or in ALL 3 sessions?
User avatar
bb
User avatar
Founder
Joined: 04 Dec 2002
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 42,384
Own Kudos:
82,110
 [1]
Given Kudos: 24,105
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
GPA: 3
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
Posts: 42,384
Kudos: 82,110
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
zermatt17
Question 1) "For each of the following statements about the scores in Session 1, Session 2, and Session 3, select Yes if the statement is supported by the information provided. Otherwise, select No."

It says "the scores in session 1, session 2, and session 3"

"For at least one trainee, the posttraining score was greater than 3 times the pretraining score." >> should I read it as at least one trainee in one session or in ALL 3 sessions?

Hi. You would look for 1 trainee that has improved in ANY session by 3x. So Session 1, 2 or 3 would satisfy that condition.
User avatar
bb
User avatar
Founder
Joined: 04 Dec 2002
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 42,384
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 24,105
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
GPA: 3
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
Posts: 42,384
Kudos: 82,110
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
PReciSioN
For Q3,

E says - "On the job, the trainees are usually assigned only a small subset of the tasks included in the training battery."

Does this help explain why the employees scored higher in this small subset than in the overall training battery? No.

B - "The tasks that trainees performed most poorly during on-the-job observation are those that the trainees perform least frequently on the job."

This suggests that there is some correlation between infrequent performance and poor performance. Since tasks in the training battery, that are not part of the job, are not performed at all, this could indeed explain why the overall score for training battery was lower than the on-the-job scores.

Could avigutman , Bunuel , chetan2u comment on this please? Thanks.

Hi. For Question 3, we are looking for why they scored 99.5 on the "on-the-job observation) and and lower on the battery. If the on-job observation included only a small sub-set of tasks as E says, then maybe they only did 5 things and did them really well on the job while the battery required them to do 10 or 15 tasks and some of them they were not good at, and thus got lower scores. I think you may have read this one backwards.

E is the correct answer. The battery tests a lot more than what they do on the job.

B is irrelevant. We know they got a score of 99.5 on the observation. This tells us nothing about the training battery. Who cares which tasks were scored lower or higher. What they got a 98 on some and 100 on others?
User avatar
bumpbot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 09 Sep 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 38,587
Own Kudos:
Posts: 38,587
Kudos: 1,079
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hello from the GMAT Club BumpBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Moderators:
Math Expert
105355 posts
496 posts