Economist GMAT Tutor Complete Prep Reviews
    Number of reviews [153]
    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
Get a great deal on The Economist GMAT Tutor courses with GMAT Club

GMAT Course Review
60 point increase in 3 weeks!
September 26 | 2013
27 out of 27 people found the following review helpful
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?
   
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
18 out of 18 people found the following review helpful
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?
   
Comments [0]
GMAT Course Review
Economist GMAT Tutor
January 22 | 2017
reviewer identity verified by score report
     By AX31991 0 0
Verified Score:

750

Q50

V41

Improvement:

60 Points

Verbal:     
Quant:     
Location: Online

I first took the GMAT after some studying on on my own at the end of last summer. I thought I was adequately prepared to hit my target score, but walked out of the testing center disappointed. I realized that I needed to attack the exam with a thorough study plan so that I could reach my target.

I first signed up for the 7 day trial of the Economist GMAT tutor and felt that it would be the complete review I needed. I knew that I would have to space my studying out over multiple months, so I had to rework my first study approach. The course is great in that it allows you to work at your own pace and if you can make time to do an hour or two a day over a couple months, you will have worked your way through the majority of the material. I found that the course helped me identify some of the nuances seen in the harder level questions that can be difficult to understand. Also, the way that the course is designed allows you to stay engaged with the material as long as you are going through it consistently. As you make your way through the course, you will notice that the lessons and questions you are seeing are tailored to the areas that you tend to struggle with more. The tutors and support team are also extremely helpful and respond to questions promptly, the definitely want to see you do well and they strive to make themselves as available as possible.

I found that some of the verbal material was substantially harder than what I consider more common in the official GMAT Prep questions, especially the reading comprehension. But you can feel confident that if you are able to get through the Economist material in this section, you will probably do very well on the actual exam. Also, it is difficult to look back at all the material that you have already covered, although you can find brief summaries of each lesson on the home page.

All in all, I highly recommend the course to people who are disciplined with their study time and are able to devote a sufficient time to get through the majority of the course.

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

740

Q48

V44

Improvement:

100 Points

Verbal:     
Quant:     
Location: Online

I initially sat the GMAT exam with minimal study and scored 640. I quickly realised that I needed to boost my mark in the verbal section of the GMAT which was the weakest component of my score at 33 (69th percentile). Over the following two and a half months I focused on the dreaded sentence correction component of the verbal exam. The Economist GMAT course helped me understand the nuances specific to the GMAT exam, such as the fact that the word 'as' should be followed by a conjugated verb whilst the word 'like' should not.

In addition I also had two 1 hour sessions with the Economist verbal tutor Kasia. Initially I was skeptical of how large a difference a simple 1 hour session could make to my overall score, however my Skype session with Kasia quickly changed my views. During the session she identified several areas I was weak at such as 'Bold' questions in critical reasoning and the conditional rules in sentence correction. She sent me nearly 100 questions with simple explanations specific to my weaknesses to guide my self-study and two highly relevant grammar textbooks along with guidance on which chapters to read. I did all of the questions, reviewed my answers and read the textbooks in detail.

In the exam I scored 44 in the verbal section, which put me in the 98th percentile and lead to an overall score of 740 (97th percentile). I also scored 6/6 in the Analytic Writing Assessment (AWA) and 8/8 in the Integrated Reasoning (IR) section. Consequently I received multiple offers for schools of my choice including one from a business school ranked in the top 5 in the world by the Financial Times and another that offered me a merit scholarship, that discounted my course fees by 50%, saving me thousands of dollars. I highly recommend the Economist's GMAT Course!

Was this review helpful to you?
   
Comments [0]
GMAT Course Review
The adaptive system is unique
December 04 | 2016
1 out of 1 people found the following review helpful
reviewer identity verified by score report
     By mtria011 0 0
Verified Score:

640

Q42

V36

Improvement:

10 Points

Verbal:     
Quant:     
Location: Online

This was my third GMAT re-take. Although I did not pass the 700 barrier I liked the adaptive system of The Economist.
The course would focus on my weak areas and was very easy to use.
I managed to finish the course in 3 months but it was extremely time consuming, so if you are planning to finish it be prepared to invest about 3 hours of (real study time) a day, with a free day during the week.
Reaching the first 80% was easy, but after that every 0.1% took 15 minutes of real study time. They call this "maintenance mode" it does help but at the end I felt I was getting very easy questions instead of focusing on my weaknesses.

Overall I think it is a good investment. I did finish 90% of the class so I got my money back without a problem.
They answered questions very quickly. I did like the one-on-one tutor sessions but I think they could be deeper on content.
I have recommended this class to every person I meet who's studying for the GMAT.

Was this review helpful to you?
   
Comments [0]
GMAT Course Review
Best Thing Out There
November 21 | 2016
reviewer identity verified by score report
     By ihartsough 0 0
Verified Score:

750

Q47

V46

Improvement:

150 Points

Verbal:     
Quant:     
Location: Online

I used the GMAT tutor for about 2 months leading up to my test date. Initially, I had picked up a few review books and tried other computerized programs that aimed to simulate the test's feel and layout. They were not helping as much as I wanted. The Economist product held several differentiating features that helped me learn not only the 'tricks' to specific question types, but review some math and verbal concepts that I was rusty on. Specifically, the GMAT Tutor's ability to dynamically walk through various points of explanation, depending on what I was getting wrong most helped to streamline my study. Material that I demonstrated mastery of immediately wasn't shown to me many times - I was able to concentrate on improving more than just going through the motions. The other feature that stood out was the ability to ask specific questions to the Economist staff about material that I wasn't understanding. Focused, personal responses got me father, faster in my my study.

I didn't take advantage of the essay samples, but I can imagine that they would be useful for others. The only improvement that I could possibly suggest is a more modular approach to the content. I had to study math concepts more than verbal, and it would have been nice to jump around between modules at my discretion, especially close to my test date.

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

650

Q45

V35

Improvement:

N/A

Verbal:     
Quant:     
Location: Online

I decided to go with the Economist after reviewing several courses. Their quant section is good - lots of practice questions, good coverage of content and solid strategies around problem solving. However, I was very disappointed with their verbal section. The sentence correction content and practice questions are not even close to what is tested in the GMAT. The Economist ignores general readability errors and logical errors which are extensively tested in the exam, dangling and missing modifier type questions are not given as much importance and are introduced much later in the course, again concepts that are extensively tested in the exam. Moreover, lot of attention is placed on concepts that aren't really tested in the exam. The verbal comprehension practice questions are vague and don't make sense a lot of times. The critical reasoning practice questions aren't nearly as challenging as the ones you get on the exam, especially once you are past the 80th percentile. My baseline score for verbal was 70th percentile, however after 3 months of intense study and finishing about 90% of the course, my verbal score only went upto 76th percentile in the actual exam. Since I was stronger in verbal, my plan was to get a really high verbal score to balance my overall score. I ended up with a 650 in the exam which is a lot lower than I wanted. I highly recommend that regardless of which company you decide to go with, practice the questions in the official GMAT guide to get a real flavor for types of questions tested in the exam.

Some other cons - you are unable to pick topics that you might want to practice - the software decides what kind of problems and the topics you get. I also personally found it impossible to finish the course in 3 months as once you complete 80% of the course, the program goes into maintenance mode where a high a number of problems are repeated and the progress is slow. They charge you 200$ to extend the program for a month.

Overall I don't recommend going with the Economist as although their quant section is pretty good, you can't buy quant and verbal separately (which some companies offer) and the whole package just isn't worth it.

Was this review helpful to you?
   
Comments [0]
GMAT Course Review
Study Efficiently
August 02 | 2016
reviewer identity verified by score report
     By bterry 0 5
Verified Score:

710

Q48

V40

Improvement:

170 Points

Verbal:     
Quant:     
Location: Online

Over my lifetime of purchases the Economist GMAT Tutor ranks in my highest bracket for product satisfaction.

Initially I was a bit discouraged about the high cost, but I gave the free week trial a test run and loved the software from minute one. I found the program forced you to sit down and study at an intensity level that was equivalent to that of test day. Personally this would not have been possible for me if I was studying independently. With the program I studied about 85 hours total, but they were hardcore focused hours.

I only completed one live tutoring session which was very professional and easily accessible. I did not feel I needed further one on one sessions because the program explained everything very logically.

I did use three of the essay reviews and it was evident that the marker put some thought into the essay and provided insightful comments.

Lastly the program gives you an "estimated score" as you progress through the course. This was very rewarding to see your estimated score rise at the end of a long study session - further motivation.

I initially wrote a 540 without studying. At test day about two months later I wrote a 710! If I had put in the same amount of time without the Economist prep tool I would estimate my score would have been around a 670.

These extra points landed me a huge scholarship at my first choice school - easily paying off my initial sticker shock.
Give the free trial a run, you have nothing to lose.

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

680

Q47

V37

Improvement:

N/A

Verbal:     
Quant:     
Location: Online

I'm a non-native speaker working in finance, and the GMAT for me was the first studying experience since I finished college 5 years ago.
I needed a course that started from the very basics as I felt very unfamiliar with high school maths, and surely the Economist made it worked.

Qbank is also great, and questions are very similar the real GMAT, with c. 1,500 questions and great explanations.

I would recommend this course to anyone about to make its first contact with the GMAT. If you are only looking for a Qbank, I would not recommend this course though, as you would get a lot of theory among the way.

Was this review helpful to you?
   
Comments [0]
GMAT Course Review
GMAT Review
June 17 | 2016
reviewer identity verified by score report
     By LaurenHeuser 0 0
Verified Score:

730

Q47

V42

Improvement:

70 Points

Verbal:     
Quant:     
Location: Online

I was very impressed with The Economist GMAT Tutor. In particular, it helped me develop a principled approach to solving quantitative problems. Prior to taking the course, I would always guess on certain kinds of questions, such as combinatrics, probability or sets. The GMAT Tutor provides methods for approaching these problems.

I was strong in verbal before I started the course, and did not think it would have much to offer, but the verbal instruction on Sentence Correction was critical for helping me to get my score up, as many of the Sentence Correction rules are not intuitive.

As a general matter, the adaptive nature of the course is great for ensuring that you can confront your weaknesses, rather than continually test your strengths. It is also very helpful to be able to complete this course online, on your own time. The course tutors are also excellent.

A few weaknesses of the course are that it provides little instruction or sample questions for Integrated Reasoning. Once a student hits 80% of the course, it takes much, much longer to get to 90% (which is the threshold a student must meet to be eligible for reimbursement). It would have been helpful to know in advance that the pace of course completion slows after the 80% threshold, as this would allow students to better budget their time towards the end of the course. While the course is adaptive, I did find that it focused too much at times on areas that you had established you were strong in. But overall, I was extremely happy that I took the course, and it was well worth the money.

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
93 points
Verbal
88%
Quant
90%
Save $309
Best GMAT Discounts
+5% coupon code discount
+$250 bonus
Get The Economist GMAT Tutor Promo Code