The CR part was really helpful. After completing the entire CR part - I felt really confident and it became my strongest link. I could solve all levels very easily.RC/SC are moderate. Good for basing a strong foundation.
Maths is okay. If Math is your strong point then Economist course will be redundant. The course starts at a very basic level and is slow paced. However, if you are weak in Math - then this could be a good foundation course.
In all the course was helpful. My score improved from 620 to 720.
The coaches are really helpful and go out of the way to help you.
I bought the ultimate prep package which comes with 70+ point increase guarantee I got a 650 on my first practice test. This was my baseline score.
I had 7 days of free trial before I pay for the course. At the end of the free trial I completed almost 10% of the course and was definitely convinced that it's worth spending.
Overall, the course content and methods explained in both Verbal and Quant were very helpful. I was comfortable with the format and my course progress. However, 25% down the course I took the second practice test and got 640. This got me worried and I decided to use the live strategy sessions with GMAT tutors. I got some good advice from Isaac who helped me improve my time management issues. Although, it took me 2 more GMAT practice test to figure out the most optimal way to manage the time, once I figured my score was consistently over 670.
I scored a 690 on my last practice test with Economist and scored 690 and 710 on 2 mba.com tests. Eventually, on the D day, I got 690 (V33 Q50).
I was able to cover most of the topics (although took me 6 months since I am a busy full-time working professional). The tests were great and similar to the real test. Also, the live sessions were helpful in assessing the practice tests and discussing customized strategies based on the performance.
Overall, my experience with Economist was good. I would recommend this course to people who are busy working professionals and prefer to prepare at their own pace.
Generally a mediocre test taker, I found The Economist's Complete GMAT Prep software to be an excellent platform to learn.
Fully interactive, you begin with courses that include relevant exercises. As you progress and after taking your first practice test, the exercises become harder, and more tailored to your profile.
The lessons and tricks they teach helped me tremendously in my progression.
After one month of practice, I took my first practice test, and got a mere 630, which was quite demoralizing. Yet, after completing half of the course, I began taking practice tests every two weeks, and continuing the course itself. Eventually, I scored 740 on the actual GMAT.
I would recommend this course to anyone who is completely unfamiliar with the GMAT.
The only one drawback, however, is that there is no way to select the topics of the exercises you want to work on. This could have been tremendously helpful in the later stages of my prep. Something I hope they will improve on!
I took the GMAT twice without any prepwork and got a 630 and a 650. Both times I blindly guessed on the last 5-10 questions of the quantitative section because I ran out of time, so I felt like I had room for improvement if I worked more efficiently. The Economist GMAT Tutor uses personalized, rapid fire questions to expose you to all types of questions while gradually raising the difficulty level. I really think the course played a big part in my score improvement. The result speak for itself — I would recommend the course to anyone serious about improving their score.
I took my first practice test after a few hours of class and got a 590, and after I finished my class I got a final 730. I took a 6 month course since I have an irregular work schedule requiring to work overtime. For this reason, I could not study for 2 or 3 months and it was not until the last 3 months that I started studying almost everyday after work and on weekends.
The pros of the course would be :
- It starts from the basics. It is not necessary to be familiar with mathematical concepts or be strong in grammar to follow the course. I loved that the explanations are very detailed and the course does not assume you have prior knowledge.
- Another point I liked was the "ask a tutor" feature. It is possible to ask a tutor whenever you have a question. I did not use this feature a lot but I think it's very important.
- The tutoring sessions are a strong point in this course. you can schedule up to 6 sessions in quant, verbal, IR or AWA sections. I used all my sessions and they proved to be useful. I recommend to take a strategy tutoring sessions after few hours of studying. My tutor Jake gave me several advices on how to study, when to take the practice exams..etc
- Each time you can choose from a selection of 5 subjects from Quant or verbal section.
- It is also very helpful to submit AWA essay for correction. It is basically simple if you know the basics and stick with the provided template.
- Sentence correction !! This section is excellent. Even as a non-native speaker, this section became my strong point in the gmat. The course has extensive explanations and treats all the points and traps you could encounter in the exam.
- Quant section is also very well made. As a "science" person, I kind of knew the concepts in the quants but I forgot some of them. the course explains the basics and gives tricks on how to solve most types of questions you would encounter. and just to clarify, I don't think a person who is good at maths has a great advantage. If you follow the course, you can learn ways to solve these problems fast and different from how you were used to do.
The cons :
- It would be great if they offer a search option to search for the subjects already studied
- It is not possible to come back to previously solved questions (except for the exams). but you can always screenshot an interesting question to review for later
- After finishing the course, you cannot choose which part to review. the review is categorized as per the gmat sections ( Critical reasoning, Data sufficiency etc), but you cannot choose which type of questions to review.
Other comments I would like to add
- The IR section is hard compared with the real exam (at leas in my case). I had a hard time with the multi source reasoning of the Economist. However, the real Gmat exam IR section was not that hard, so the course kind of trains
- Don't hesitate to use the tutor's feature, tutoring sessions, AWA correction
- I don't recommend taking practice exams before finishing around 70% of the course. You can take maybe one exam to see your initial level but not more.
- Personally I think reading comprehension was the hardest part for me, and I think it's very hard to improve quickly. So, I focused on sentence correction, critical reasoning, and quant section.
- The course needs dedication and spending enough time for each subject
Bottom line : I enjoyed this course and it helped me get from a 590 to a 730.
Was this review helpful to you? 1 out of 1 people found the following review helpful
In the first practice exam I took I got a score of 480. After 5 months studying with The Economist GMAT tutor I improved to 730 in the real test.
- You choose when and where to study. I work 9 hours a day I would have hated to have had to go to a class room. I would study sentence correction on my phone on my way to work, Quant and Verbal on my lunchtime at the office and again Quant and Verbal in my pajamas at home.
- The whole experience is similar to the GMAT test. Since you are always in front of a screen, doing timed exercises, when you do the practice exams or the real test, you already it works. No surprises and I guess you get less nervous.
- Superb in sentence correction. Even as a non-native speaker, there is little you can do to improve Reading C and Critical R, but when it comes to SC this tutor makes a difference.
- Good explanations. In Quant and Verbal the explanations to the problems are complete and easier to understand compared to what I have seen in other tutors.
- Top level tutors. The Skype sessions that come with the TE are very useful when you feel weak at a particular subject.
- The only thing I can think of is that when you feel that you want to do exercises of a Quant certain topic (lets say probabilities), the TE does not let you choose that topic. Anyways, you can always go to the GMAT Club forums and get an overdose of the kind of problems you are looking for.
I truly recommend TE tutor. I am sure I could not have gotten 730 without it.
Since I travel a lot for work, I was looking for a GMAT prep program that could accommodate my hectic schedule and my particular style of learning. I prefer to learn by reading and completing exercises on my own, and do not do well in a classroom setting. I also have no patience for videos since I like to skip ahead. Economist GMAT Tutor was perfect since I could zip ahead on lessons I was already familiar with. It has over 5000 practice questions across all the GMAT topics, so I was able to sufficiently practice my weakest topics. My favorite part of the app is the predicted score. The program accurately predicted my performance both times I took the GMAT. The only thing I would improve is that some of the explanations for quant questions did not provide enough stepwise logic. The good thing is that you can "ask a tutor" whenever some of the explanations were vague. Overall, would recommend!
When I took the GMAT the first time, I received (in my opinion) are pretty good score - 630. However, within that 630 my breakdown was extremely uneven; I didn't do well in the Quant section (36th percentile) but I did well in the Verbal (85th percentile). I was unsure whether or not to take the GMAT again, and when looking through other online programs, they all appeared to have a pretty standard/generic curriculum, which was a bit of a turn off for me as I felt I only needed to work on the quant. The biggest draw to the Economist program for me what that it adapts to what you need, based off of your scores on the practice tests and on practice questions throughout the lessons. The program was perfect for me, as it placed most emphasis on the mathematics and through short, easy to comprehend lessons, as well as 6 completely customizable tutor sessions with an actual tutor I was able to bring my score up 21 percentile points!! I hadn't done math at school in at least a couple of years, so for me I really needed a brush up on everything to trigger my memories and the broad spectrum of lessons provided on the program was great - especially as it keeps reviewing the same lessons until you really get it. If you are struggling on a certain question or lesson as well, you have 'Ask-a-tutor' questions, where a tutor will send you back and explanation of the question that will hopefully help you better understand the question and its answer. As well as thoroughly helping me on the Quant section, I also improved significantly on the Verbal section (which was a bonus as I felt I had really been emphasizing Quant and had been neglecting the Verbal). I moved from 85th percentile to 98th percentile; the program does an excellent job of breaking down the critical reasoning, sentence correction, and reading comprehension into step by step methods of thinking and working through the questions, and if you follow their methods step by step, there really is no way to answer a question incorrectly! It's quite impressive, actually. There is also the possibility to submit 5 essays for review by a tutor, who will provide you feedback, though I did not take advantage of these. I put a lot of hours into this program, 145 or somewhere around there, maybe slightly more - but it was well worth it for the 100 point surprise at the end!! Would definitely recommend, as there is also a money-back guarantee if you don't receive a 70 point score increase; though, based off my experience, they probably don't have to give people their money back very often... Excellent opportunity for those looking for a well-rounded score increase with plenty of time to invest into the program.
Overall the Economist GMAT was extremely helpful. I go to a mid-tier public university in the US and am thinking about getting my MBA in 2-3 years. I looked online and this was appeared to be the best resource.
I'll preface by saying I didn't study at all, and the first practice test I took was through the Economist and I got a 550. My quant was in the 30th percentile, but my verbal was already in the 80th.
By the end, my quant was in the 70th percentile and my verbal improved to the 90th percentile. Although the quant is very good, I felt like the questions near the end of the program were too easy and that I needed to find some harder question to push my thinking and expose myself to harder questions.
And overall I thought the Economist sentence correction questions were much easier than the official ones, so if you get the opportunity, I would prep with difficult ones.
Overall a good product and even though my improvement may be an outlier, I should drastically help you.
After scoring a 680 (44Q 39V) with a decent regiment of prep, I decided to sign up for the economist's service, with the score guarantee and adaptive nature as the main draws. While I did not hit the guaranteed score (and 750 is a lofty guarantee), I did fulfill the 90% criteria, taking just over 100 hours of practice to do so. Overall, I found the course to be helpful, with the quant section being extremely strong.
The one area where the course could be improved is the verbal. I purchased the enhanced score report of my test and found that I scored a 51 on the CR section 39 on the RC, but a 34 on the CR. Considering I missed fewer than 12 sentence correction questions across the 5 practice tests I took, I attribute this to the sentence correction content being taught. I would have appreciated if the course was more forthcoming about where its weaknesses are versus the actual test. In order to earn the score guarantee, you're already sinking 100+ hours between the course itself, the tutoring sessions, and practice tests. With that commitment, any non-economist studying I should do should be extremely targeted to make up the deficiencies. I would have liked more of a heads up, I probably could have walked away with a 740 if I had not scored so poorly in that section.