How Long to Spend Analyzing Errors

[GMAT_Ninja]

Hi Stacey,

The last time I wrote to you, I talked about my new strategy for studying. I mentioned that I would do the following:

1. Revisit my error log more often
2. Use the Koprince Method for creating my flashcards (yes I named it after you)
3. I also mentioned that I would break down my errors like a slow motion play by play on ESPN.

How long do you think a student should spend analyzing his or her errors?

I feel as if I need to spend way more time analyzing my errors than doing the problems. I'm in the 90s-100s portion of the GMAC OG13 problems, am starting to get more and more problems wrong, and feel like I found my plateau.

A part of me feels like I need to take a step back and dive deeply into the concepts that I don't get and another part of me is tempted to move on to the higher level questions. (My gut is telling me that moving on might be futile if I don't fully understand the lower level questions, but I also feel like I am wasting my time doing these deep dives).

When I started this new study plan I had the goal of doing and analyzing 30 quant and 30 verbal problems per week. As I move further into the book, I feel like this isn't sustainable.

I am a bit frustrated because I want to hit my target timeline...do you have any advice for me? Are these feelings normal?

I still have hope because I know that the hard questions are really just the medium level questions with a twist and that I might just be experiencing the steep part of the GMAT learning curve.

[StaceyKoprince]

Use the Koprince Method

Ha! Love it.

I feel as if I need to spend way more time analyzing my errors than doing the problems.

Good. You should spend more time analyzing problems than you spent doing them in the first place. WAY more time, in fact. If you aren't regularly spending 3 to 5 times as long as a basic level of review - and much longer on some problems - then you're not learning. I sometimes spend 30 minutes on a single problem.

That analysis involves all kinds of activities - searching out alternate explanations online, figuring out why I made a particular kind of careless error and coming up with some alternate approach to minimize that kind of error in future, looking for shortcuts or ways to save time, drilling some skills that are rusty or weak, looking up things in books / lessons. Reviewing my thought process to see whether I should have made different decisions at various steps - and why, and how.

That's where you're actually learning. You aren't really learning while you do a problem... you're just doing it. You have to do problems in order to learn from them - but don't make the mistake of thinking that doing a problem is the same thing as learning from it. :)

So, does that answer your question? Don't move on uniformly to the even harder ones. Do the deep dives and figure out what you need to figure out in order to answer these problems. Then use that to build your skills for the next level up.

Now, I do have a question for you: are you always approaching your analysis from the point of view of "How do I learn to get this question right?" If so, then you're going to waste time - because, sometimes, your response should be, "I want to get this problem wrong faster."

You're learning a different skill set in order to do that. But your goal isn't to get everything right on the test, so do make sure that you're actually prioritizing what you study and not trying to learn it all. In that case, you'll need like 18 years to study for this test. :)

Use a combination of the above to get what you need from this level and to push yourself to (appropriate) questions on the next level!