GMAT Club
Economist GMAT Tutor Complete Prep Reviews
    Number of reviews [161]
    Average Rating:       (4.5/5)
 
The Economist GMAT Tutor Course 
Reviews
GMAT prep on your terms: No schedules, no classes and no commute  
  • The course that’s as unique as you are: Focus on your target areas with adaptive online learning   
  • Prepare for the whole test: Unparalleled real-world lessons include all four GMAT sections   
  • Chat 1-on-1 with real tutors: Expert tutors are available via e-mail, phone and video chat
  • Learn on your time: 24/7 online access enables you to study whenever and wherever you want
Save up $399 on The Economist GMAT Tutor courses with GMAT Club

GMAT Course Review
60 point increase in 3 weeks!
September 26 | 2013
reviewer identity verified by score report
     By taniasteyn 0 0
Improvement:

60 Points

Verbal:     
Quant:     
Location: Online

I cannot say enough about how great this tool was for my quant prep. But before I delve into that, let me just say now that I didn't do any of the verbal prep. My verbal score was already in the 45 - 46 range and I didn't feel I needed improvement there.

I had been casually studying for the GMAT since about mid-June focusing only on Quant. After 5 practice tests I saw 0 increase in my score (I scored 40 three times and 41 twice). I finally realized I needed help in this section, but personal tutors were too expensive and the other courses offered (through Kaplan etc.) would not let me go at my own pace/focus only on quant. So I finally signed up for the one week free trial. After a week, I was already seeing results, so I signed up for the full package. I only had 2 weeks left until test day, and in the end I managed to do about 65% of the quant material. I ended up writing the test 3 weeks after starting with the Economist and, after not sleeping the night before, I managed to get a 760, with a 49 in quant.

It was a great tool that allowed me to study on my own schedule (you can set lesson times as short as 5 minutes) and, with the mobile app, it was even more flexible. I loved the interface and the artificial intelligence which tailored the program to your needs. I also made use of the essay feedback option, and it was certainly very useful to have an actual person review my essay and give me written feedback!

The only con I could possibly think of is that you don't have access to "later" material earlier in the course. For example, I wanted to review the IR material, but couldn't get to it without completing the math sections that came before it. But if you have more time than I did, I'm sure you'll have time to be able to complete 100% of the material and this shouldn't be a problem!

I cannot recommend this program highly enough. It's a great way to learn (I find it a happy medium between a class and self guided study with books) and the team at the Economist is very responsive and helpful!

Sign up for the free trial! I invested about 10 hours in that first week and got a really good sense of how useful it would be for me. You have nothing to lose.


Was this review helpful to you? 27 out of 28 people found the following review helpful
   
Comments [1]
1 Commented by avpk729 on January 09, 2015
Tanyasteyn, thank you for this review, i was wondering if i am the only person who is finding this program useful. Im in my trail period and have been wondering if I should invest in the full plan.
To see that you have gained positive result is such a motivating factor.
Congrats on your high score.
GMAT Course Review
reviewer identity verified by score report
     By twehner 0 5
Self-reported Score:

750

Q49

V44

Improvement:

60 Points

Verbal:     
Quant:     
Location: Online

When I started the Economist program, it was 2-3 months after I had taken my first GMAT. For that first test, I studied my way through the Manhattan book series at my own pace and did some of the OG practice problems. I felt like I didn’t achieve my full potential that time around, since my GMAC practice tests were in the 730 ballpark, but my actual test came out a 690.

I started the Economist prep trial software in January out of curiosity, at that point, not entirely intent on re-taking the test at any given time. However, I was drawn into the platform of the program, which combines adaptive teaching (to what extent, I’m not sure) with progress tracking and score prediction. The fact that the program offered a score increase guarantee of 50 points (with conditions, of course) in a certain period of time (in this case, 3 months) felt like the right kind of commitment I needed – finite time-wise with a very specific goal. After the one-week trial period, in which I appeared to have completed around 10% of the program, I decided to go all the way.

I purchased the program in February and got started with a practice exam (my program included 3 of them). I scored 710 on that exam, meaning, I could base my score improvement on that first score (assuming I met the other conditions, one of which is to complete 90% of the course) – 760 guaranteed? Awesome.

Over the next two months, I spent 5-7 hours per week going through the lessons and practice problems. At times it was annoying to have to click through topics I already knew, but the interspersion of practice problems with new topics is a great feature of the program and constantly keeps you practicing and refreshing your knowledge of previously taught topics.

I felt like the verbal section was particularly strong in the program. It teaches really solid rules for sentence correction (I think this made the biggest difference for me) and guidelines for reading comprehension that helped me save a lot of time. When feeding me verbal practice questions, it seemed to give me mostly SC problems, which I suppose mimics the composition of the real test, but it would have been nice, after I had answered 20 consecutive SC questions correctly (no exaggeration) that it would have given me some critical reasoning or reading comprehension questions. Anyhow, I breezed my way through the bulk of the verbal section in the first two months, spending 1/2 to 2/3 of the time that I spent on quant. I noticed my verbal score on the practice tests (I did official and Manhattan practice tests on the side) making marked improvements, from 38-40 to 42-44. At the end of two months, I had finished all of the lessons in the verbal section (between 70-75% completion, as the program tracks it), leaving only practice problems.

Throughout the program, I had mixed feelings about the way quant is taught. As a detail-oriented person, I was a little annoyed that they were teaching ballparking as a fundamental skill. However, this approach is actually very helpful in brushing off seemingly insurmountable problems without over-dedicating. I learned some new approaches to solving quant problems (both problem solving and data sufficiency) that I think were especially helpful. There were not any remarkable ways of re-learning the fundamental math behind the problems, but the repetitive drilling of practice questions helped a lot to get formulas memorized. While this program may not be as strong as others in teaching test-takers to correctly answer the super-difficult quant questions, I thought it did a good job overall in preparing me for the quant section as a whole, considering all the questions, strategy and timing. At the end of the first two months, I had only finished around half of the quant part of the program, despite having spent significantly more time on it.

Throughout the first two months, I used 3 of the 4 tutoring sessions included in the program. The session basically consists of a 45-minute Skype conversation with a tutor to review an area of your choice. I chose the areas that had been weak in practice tests. While we were not able to cover many questions in that time, as compared with the GMAT practice problems, I found it helpful to discuss in detail the elements of the problems and to learn new strategies for dealing with questions. I don’t consider the tutoring sessions to be a crucial part of the program, but it’s definitely a nice bonus to have.

At the start of my third and final month of the program, I took some time to assess what I needed to do to get where I wanted to go. I had a goal of 760 (within the program, anyway) and needed to complete approximately 40% of the quant and 15% of the verbal in order to meet the 90% threshold for The Economist’s score guarantee. I did notice that progress beyond a certain point (somewhere in the 60-70% range) becomes significantly more difficult to achieve. At some points, I would work diligently for an hour, only to get less than one percent progress. I think this has to do with concept mastery, which makes sense. If I hadn’t mastered the concepts, I should only be able to progress so far. Anyway, it is important to note that progress within this program is not linearly correlated with time spent. I spent 35-40 hours on practice sessions (not including practice tests, of which I took about 8 during the same time period) in the third month, and did not come close to the 90% milestone. However, my practice test results were promising – I had scored in the 740-750 range on the last two Economist tests and a 760 on one official (practice) test. I figured I’d go ahead with my early-May GMAT (my prep program ended in April) and see how it goes, with no score guarantee.

I submitted one practice AWA for review and comment (I still don’t think I’ve received any feedback on it, three weeks later). The program supposedly includes 3 AWA reviews, but I didn’t make use of it to any significant degree. I wrote a few AWAs as part of the practice tests I did leading up to the real test, so felt sufficiently prepared.

I did not come across any integrated reasoning sections as part of the GMAT practice prep. I think there is a short section at the end of the quant lessons (which I did not reach). Anyhow, I didn’t worry too much about it, as I had aced IR on my first GMAT.

So, I went in to take my test on May 3, with a reasonable level of confidence. I had meditated the night before and went for a short run a couple hours before test time. I may not have finished the prep program, but I had a solid foundation and was in the right state of mind. I managed to breeze through the essay (and even have time to review – not normal for me). I felt good about my performance on IR, and although I didn’t finish, I wanted to stay focused on the “important” parts. Quant went as smoothly as it could have. For the more conventional problems, I could quickly pull out the needed weapon (their use fresh in my memory from all the drills and practice tests), strike the problem down, and proceed to the next; for the more exotic quant beasts, I was able to gauge within a reasonable amount of time whether I was worthy of the foe or should take a cheap shot and flee (and live to see another day). I think this this ability to assess quant problems before getting knee-deep in them was what I gained most from the program. For the verbal section, it was more like the last few miles of a marathon than a series of battles. In my first GMAT, I faced mental exhaustion in the verbal section, unable to focus after spending so much energy previously. This time, not so – I managed to pace myself through to the end, finishing in the last 10 seconds. With the solid verbal practice that I gained from The Economist’s program, the challenge was just to stay calm and focused.

Half dreading and half elated about what my result could be, I took the maximum amount of time during the survey questions. The result came up, and it was a 750 (49Q 44V). Phew. I’ll take it.

While I didn’t achieve the 760 that I wasn’t guaranteed by The Economist, I am in every way satisfied with my results (minus the drop in IR score, small matter) and I found it a great way to achieve real results in a set amount of time. It is also far more flexible and cost effective than receiving tutoring from a human. That isn’t to say that personal tutoring isn’t valuable, but for the cost of the program, the amount of information and practice I got is phenomenal.


Was this review helpful to you? 19 out of 19 people found the following review helpful
   
Comments [0]
GMAT Course Review
Disconcertingly helpful
May 13 | 2018
reviewer identity verified by score report
     By OllieO 11 3
Verified Score:

740

Q49

V41

Improvement:

60 Points

Verbal:     
Quant:     
Location: Online

My overall progress review is available here:

https://gmatclub.com/forum/680-to-740-native-english-speaker-265496.html

I purchased the Economist GMAT course for 3 months , and genuinely did NOT expect to get a 50 point increase. I thought that I had reached my peak of maths / quant knowledge, and was fully expecting to be asking for a refund after I retook the GMAT. My focus was now 90% on the Economist course, occasionally (and less than I should have) dipping back to OG questions, looking at Magoosh lessons, or doing the odd CAT with MGMAT or Veritas. My theory was that they would not put together the course in that fashion and with that guarantee unless they had faith that their system worked. Clearly it did! I worked 1-3 hrs per day, taking a complete day off every other week or so. The Quant stuff was really good, and I picked up some great techniques and explanations for concepts I'd really struggled with ; the Verbal stuff was "meh" (I never really got into the idea of learning a whole bunch of rules - I'd always done fairly well simply going by what sounded right); I largely ignored IR; and I had little faith in their AWA assessments (one scored me a 3 for an essay which in my mind was at least a 5). The Ask-a-tutor facility was very useful, and the online tutoring sessions depended entirely on who was tutoring at the other end.

Was this review helpful to you?
   
Comments [0]
GMAT Course Review
reviewer identity verified by score report
     By TryHardScoreHigh 1 0
Verified Score:

780

Q50

V48

Improvement:

70 Points

Verbal:     
Quant:     
Location: Online

I used Economist to boost my verbal score through sentence correction. It was very helpful. I ultimately scored V48.

I am a native English speaker and do a lot of proofreading for work. So with minimal studying, my Verbal scores were already around 44. However, I was having trouble getting to the next level.

Many people recommend MGMAT book for SC. I actually think economist is better for native speakers. The economist user experience gives you really quick feedback on your work and easy-to-digest lessons, without diving into many of the technical grammar terms that are not useful for people that grew up speaking English. Instead, the Economist teaches a set of "stop signs" that cue you into the warning signs of a sentence. This method worked for me. (In addition, I drilled SC questions on my own from the OG.)

I wish the Economist would sell the SC section on its own. It's very good. However, I think their quant section is designed a bit more for people that are trying to break high 600s or low 700s rather than gain a really top score. I used Target Test Prep for their quant section, because they go very in-depth on the math material. In contrast, the Economist quant is more focused on a "good enough" review of the math and then teaches you hacks and tips that can get you to a good score quickly rather than a great score a bit more slowly.

Was this review helpful to you?
   
Comments [0]
GMAT Course Review
reviewer identity verified by score report
     By qbecheau 0 0
Verified Score:

740

Q48

V44

Improvement:

110 Points

Verbal:     
Quant:     
Location: Online

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!

Was this review helpful to you?
   
Comments [0]
GMAT Course Review
Great learning experience
June 07 | 2017
reviewer identity verified by score report
     By rawatar 0 0
Verified Score:

740

Q50

V40

Improvement:

130 Points

Verbal:     
Quant:     
Location: Online

I used the Economist GMAT Tutor to prepare and I have to say that it gives a one of a kind & exceptional experience to the process of preparation. The portal to very well designed and organized, making everything simple to consume.

I am a non-native English speaker and started using the Economist portal especially to improve my verbal score. When I started I was around 27-30 range in verbal. That jumped to 40 by the time I took the test (in 4 months).

Eventually, the portal also gave me many hacks for quants which I could use in the practice tests. When used in combination with OGs, The Economist GMAT Tutor can work wonders.

Highly recommended for non-native English speakers!

Was this review helpful to you?
   
Comments [0]
GMAT Course Review
reviewer identity verified by score report
     By KirillKiev 0 0
Verified Score:

680

Q49

V33

Improvement:

70 Points

Verbal:     
Quant:     
Location: Online

My first GMAT score was 510 with strong quant, but very low verbal. In addition to lessons with tutor I decided to purchase Economist GMAT preparation for 3 months.
The structure of the Economist class is very nice – you go through different topics starting from easy staff and moving to harder. The system adapts to your progress and will not propose difficult tasks to you until you deal well and are comfortable with easier tasks.
What I like most about Economist online GMAT preparation is the tips they give to answering the questions. It is not right to rely on your intuition, you need to know the rules and answer exactly what is asked. The tricks that GMAC may use to make you think the wrong answer is right are also discussed, which helped me a lot to improve my score.
Finally, I could improve my score to 680 with quant score stable compared to my first try and very much improved verbal score.

Was this review helpful to you? 1 out of 1 people found the following review helpful
   
Comments [0]
GMAT Course Review
reviewer identity verified by score report
     By warnrl6 0 0
Verified Score:

720

Q48

V41

Improvement:

130 Points

Verbal:     
Quant:     
Location: Online

I decided to apply to Business school 3 months before the application was due. I knew that I wouldn't have time to take the GMAT multiple times and had to ensure the my studying was as efficient as possible. The Economist GMAT course exceeded my expectations. The lessons were concise and easy to understand, and the one-on-one tutoring sessions were extremely valuable.

The best part about the course are all of the practice problems. When you get a question wrong, it not only tells you what the correct answer is, but also why the answer you selected is wrong. You have the opportunity to send an "ask a tutor" inquiry if there are questions that you still don't understand after reading the explanation. I ended up only needing to use about 20 out of 50 available "ask a tutor" inquiries because the explanations provided are so thorough.

After completing the Economist GMAT Prep Course in 2.5 months, I improved my score by 130 points and achieved my target score of 720. I highly recommend the Economist GMAT course!

Was this review helpful to you?
   
Comments [0]
GMAT Course Review
reviewer identity verified by score report
     By Thracerus 0 0
Verified Score:

650

Q42

V38

Improvement:

70 Points

Verbal:     
Quant:     
Location: Online

First of all I have to say that my initial goal was to score 700 points in the GMAT which I did not achieve. In my first, and so far only, official try I scored 650 after scoring not more than 580 in the test exams during preparation. After 2 months of classic studying with books I decided to go for the basic Economist GMAT Tutor option. I thought it might be more time efficient in order to support me for an intensive preparation in the last month before my official GMAT (and it was indeed).

I felt really comfortable working with the desktop version as well as the mobile app e.g. on my way to work. You can choose between 5 minute and 60 minute sessions on either quant or verbal or both combined. Tasks that were not answered correctly can be reviewed instantly and are noted by the software. Then, over time it gives you less of your strong tasks and more new topics with your weak spots frequently in between.

I started with a text exam right away and so the adaptive nature of the software got hold of my strengths and weaknesses pretty quickly. Obviously this is generally a huge advantage of software over classic book learning. Unfortunately I realized that far too late, otherwise I would have spend all 3 months of prep just with the Economist app. On the other hand I does make a lot of sense to work at least with GMAT material from two different companies in order to have a comparison.

Due to the insights from the test exam I focused solely on improving the quantative section, where the Economist app provides a massive amount of excercises. Although I spent three weeks only in the quant section I hardly managed to finish 50% of the quant section.

I am sure that the app it helped me to especially work on my weaknesses and that it deserves a huge part of the credits for my 650. Since I just got accepted to my first BS choice I can say that the 350$ were a good investment. They have different payment plans from which my option was the cheapest. It is valid for three months (one week free trial in advance) and comes with the study material + 3 test GMATs, 1 essay review, 20 ask a tutor questions via a chat interface.

Since then I have always recommended this app to anybody who asked me for GMAT prep recommendations.

Was this review helpful to you?
   
Comments [0]
GMAT Course Review
reviewer identity verified by membership
     By Abla 0 0
Self-reported Score:

690

Q51

V34

Improvement:

80 Points

Verbal:     
Quant:     
Location: Online

The Economist GMAT is the best material to beat the quant section of the GMAT. I am an engineer with a strong mathematics background. However my mathematics knowledge is completely different from the one that is needed for the GMAT quant. In fact I've learned how to do calculus steps by steps and prove difficult mathematics theories, but not how to guess , nor to do basic computations in the most effective way and solve problems in 2 mins. Therefore my results on the quant on the very first simulation tests were frustrating. I then decided to take a course to improve my score. I tried the Economist GMAT tutor for 7 days (there is a week free trial ) and noticed at the very first day that it is the application that I needed. The availability of the apps on Android and Windows devices is very useful. I was able to practice in the train while going to work every day...
The course is computer adapative. You will have the questions on the same topic until you ace it. You cannot move to another chapter if you don't do reasonnably well on the previous. The one to one tutor session via skype is really valuable. I was abe to talk to my tutors who gave me precious advice to strenghen my weaknesses , to manage efficiently the time. They even go through my simulation tests and tell me how to do improve my score.
It proposes a really time saving template to write essays.
I found the verbal courses good too but less effective as I am not a native.
I highly recommend the Economist GMAT to learn the technics to solve the quant problems and the essay.

Was this review helpful to you?
   
Comments [0]



93 Older and Non-Verified Reviews for Economist GMAT Tutor Complete Prep
Economist GMAT Tutor Course Rankings
Overall Score Improvement
89 points
International Student Score Improvement
94 points
Verbal
88%
Quant
90%
Most Reviewed Economist GMAT Tutor GMAT Instructors
Jake Wengroff [1]
    
Save Up to $399
Best GMAT Discounts
+10% coupon code discount
+$250 bonus
Get The Economist GMAT Tutor Promo Code