Senthil7
Thanks Mcelroy!
I gave the Veritas Prep free test today and got a 590(Q43,V29). I am very surprised to see the accuracy levels in verbal since I got 29 correct and 12 incorrect and in quant I got 23 correct and 14 incorrect. I also found the difficulty level to be easy in both quant and verbal. I think I have a serious concern with 29 correct qs. and the overall verbal score to be just V29.
On the other hand, I took a Kaplan free test two weeks back and got a 580(Q43, V26).In this one, in quant I got 17 correct and 20 incorrect and in verbal,I got 23 correct and 18 incorrect.
I think all the prep companies have a varying algorithm to calculate the sectional scores although the overall scores may still be some what ok. Any perspectives?
DmitryFarber dabral and
mcelroytutoringTwo important factors to keep in mind:
1) On the GMAT,
where in the test you answered questions right and wrong matters almost as much, if not more, than how many you got right total.
2) Test-prep companies have an inherent bias toward deflating diagnostic test scores, both in order to lower expectations and to inflate GMAT score improvements.
Regarding #2, let me give you an example. I used to teach/tutor for the Princeton Review, and whenever I taught classes, I noticed that the initial diagnostic test was far harder than the final diagnostic test at the end of class. The effect? It underestimates your initial score and thus makes your overall GMAT score improvement seem more impressive.
Let's say that you are really a 550 GMAT scorer. You take the Princeton practice test, and score a 450. You think, "Gosh, that's low--I better buy the Princeton Review course/tutoring, etc."
You then prepare with Princeton. It improves your score about 50 points. You take the real GMAT and get a 600. Hey, the Princeton Review team improved my score 150 points! Except they didn't--they just artificially deflated your initial diagnostic score.
I will agree that I'd rather have a test-prep company lower my expectations than raise them...but the question is how much of this is intentional and pre-planned?
I have to respectfully disagree with bb that the Kaplan tests are high-quality. In fact, they are pretty bad, in my opinion.
Manhattan GMAT and Veritas and the
GMAT Club tests are definitely better, but still not as helpful or as accurate as the real thing.
I do have to wonder why certain companies are left off the lists of recommended materials here, and other, lesser ones are included. I love GMAT Club and think it's a very democratic place, so I choose to believe that there is no recommendation bias due to embedded corporate interests, but I do have to wonder sometimes. Without a doubt, it is true that everyone has their own motivations for posting here, so keep that in mind.
I will be the first to admit that this applies to me, too. I'm not only posting here out of the goodness of my heart, either--I'm a private GMAT tutor and I find Skype students through GMAT Club, so for me it's a mutually beneficial relationship. Ultimately, self-promotion is OK when done correctly and informatively, but always consider the messenger, and whether the messenger is trying to sell you something.
If you're reviewing concepts in a Manhattan or Veritas or Powerscore book, and they give you an example question or two, then yes, go ahead and try them...the point is not to avoid synthetic questions entirely, just to stick to real questions
if you can. But taking full practice tests full of synthetic questions is to be avoided if possible--the score prediction and algorithm can't be trusted, and neither can the questions themselves.