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.
May 2008:00 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
What’s in it for you- Live Profile Evaluation Chat Session with Jenifer Turtschanow, CEO, ARINGO. Come with your details prepared and ARINGO will share insights! Pre-MBA Role/Industry, YOE, Exam Score, C/GPA, ECs Post-MBA Role/ Industry & School List.
Jun 1006:00 AM PDT
-06:15 PM PDT
Register for the GMAT Club Virtual MBA Spotlight Fair – the world’s premier event for serious MBA candidates. This is your chance to hear directly from Admissions Directors at nearly every Top 30 MBA program..
13 Apr 2010, 07:55
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hey, I'm new and just starting to study for the GMAT. I am planning to take it in about a month.
I have a question about timing. I've been reading a lot of online stuff, and I know the consensus is that problems should be done in 2 minutes or less (for quant) in order to qualify as a problem that you can do effectively. I understand the simplicity of this suggestion because 75 mins/37 questions is roughly 2 mins per question.
However this logic completely evades me. It is crazy to me to think you would keep a 2 minute pace per question for 37 questions. Regardless of difficulty, some questions take me 20 seconds, and some take me 8 minutes. I've taken 2 CATs so far, with my most recent being a Kaplan one, scoring a 53 (how is that possible?) on the quant section (missing 4/37). I took 5+ minutes on 5 problems, but 23/37 questions took me under 100 seconds.
I finished with plenty of time, and of course was always checking my time to make sure I was on pace (it's easy to jump ahead of pace in the beginning).
My question is, why is there so much emphasis placed on getting every problem under 2 minutes. It seems much more important to spend the extra 2-3 minutes on a problem doing it carefully and thoroughly, since it's almost guaranteed that other problems can be done faster. Plus, those problems are the ones that can push you into the high 700's, so the effort seems entirely necessary to get in the 770 range.
Just curious if I should really be focused on speeding up my hard problems? Finishing on time has never been my issue, but the emphasis I see put on this makes me wonder.
I have a question about timing. I've been reading a lot of online stuff, and I know the consensus is that problems should be done in 2 minutes or less (for quant) in order to qualify as a problem that you can do effectively. I understand the simplicity of this suggestion because 75 mins/37 questions is roughly 2 mins per question.
However this logic completely evades me. It is crazy to me to think you would keep a 2 minute pace per question for 37 questions. Regardless of difficulty, some questions take me 20 seconds, and some take me 8 minutes. I've taken 2 CATs so far, with my most recent being a Kaplan one, scoring a 53 (how is that possible?) on the quant section (missing 4/37). I took 5+ minutes on 5 problems, but 23/37 questions took me under 100 seconds.
I finished with plenty of time, and of course was always checking my time to make sure I was on pace (it's easy to jump ahead of pace in the beginning).
My question is, why is there so much emphasis placed on getting every problem under 2 minutes. It seems much more important to spend the extra 2-3 minutes on a problem doing it carefully and thoroughly, since it's almost guaranteed that other problems can be done faster. Plus, those problems are the ones that can push you into the high 700's, so the effort seems entirely necessary to get in the 770 range.
Just curious if I should really be focused on speeding up my hard problems? Finishing on time has never been my issue, but the emphasis I see put on this makes me wonder.
13 Apr 2010, 08:02
Kudos
Bookmarks
shammokando
It's just an average. Why would you want to hurry the harder questions if you are completing every question in the allotted time? 2 minutes is just a guide. Some people set benchmarks, i.e., after 10 questions I should be more or less at minute 55. After 15 questions I should be near 45 minutes. Nobody is going to extend a question that takes 30 seconds into two minutes.
13 Apr 2010, 09:38
Kudos
Bookmarks
the "2 minute" rule is a rule of thumb to how much time you should use. If for example by 2 minutes you are still struggling with the question and no end is in sight then it is a good idea to guess and move on. Yes some people will spend like 10 seconds on one question while another question might take 4 minutes. Also, the 2 minute rule applies to different people - if you are doing extremely well on Quant, more questions will be harder and thus "force" you to use more time than you would like. I know one instructor said he tried to save time for later questions because those will be tougher (but then again he scores 99% so...). On my last exam i had to use the "2 minute rule" a couple of times and barely finished the quant section on time - i missed out on answering one question right completely (had to guess) because i was running out of time...
