|All Reviews > The Economist GMAT Tutor > The Economist GMAT Tutor Complete Prep Reviews|
Joined: Jan 22, 2017
750 Q50 V41
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.
Joined: Mar 30, 2016
740 Q48 V44
REVIEWER IDENTITY VERIFIED by score report [?]
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!
Joined: May 31, 2016
640 Q42 V36
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.
Joined: Nov 17, 2016
750 Q47 V46
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.
Joined: Oct 14, 2016
650 Q45 V35
REVIEWER IDENTITY VERIFIED by score report [?]
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.
Joined: Jun 13, 2016
710 Q48 V40
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.
Joined: Jan 04, 2016
680 Q47 V37
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.
Joined: Jun 09, 2016
730 Q47 V42
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.
Joined: May 02, 2016
690 Q44 V41
The Economist GMAT Tutor was exactly what I needed. It starts with the basics, which is exactly what I needed because when I stated, I didn't know what I was in for. But it starts you out with small steps and works with you at the pace you can go. And if you are struggling with a concept, it goes back and keeps hammering at those subjects until you get it down. The tutors you get paired with are very helpful. I ended up working with two different tutors over Skype, but I had one tutor who took a real interest in my studies and help me with some strategies where I was weak. I don't know where I was at the beginning of the program (I think it put me around a 450 score as I started) but by the end I was scoring in the high 600. I took two practice tests through the Economist and another one through the GMAC. The Economist scores were really accurate. I got a 670 then a 680. On my real test I got a 690. It got me into my number one choice school with a great scholarship.
Joined: May 01, 2016
600 Q39 V34
This was the only course I used my for my GMAT prep. I did not take any other course or buy other books.
I liked the fact that you can do timed sessions with this course. Often during lunch time or before bed, I would practice a 30-min session. It helped me put in about average of 1hr/day.
They keep track of time you have spent on the course and give you rough projection of what your score might be. My score came within the projected range.
Their AWA section is very good. I used the template they provided and got 6/6 on it.
IR section is not comprehensive. I understand that IR is not factored into one's GMAT score, but it would still have been nice to spend a bit more time on it.