Identifying what is being asked

[john]

Hey,

I'm taking the GMAT in about a month, and am currently trying to get my score to 650+ (CAT scores 530, 590, 630, 570 in order, last one from this Saturday). My Quant remains at 40% tops, even after significant time spent studying. I've been going through all of my answers, and think that the problem lies in identifying what is being asked and what method to use to solve it. Once I know that, the questions are not so insurmountable. Does anyone have tools to train this particular problem?

Thanks in advance!

[StaceyKoprince]

Hi, sorry for the delay in responding to your post. For some reason, it was tagged as a problematic post and automatically locked. But we've got it restored now!

A few questions for you. Your first three tests showed steady improvement, but test 4 dropped. What do you think happened there? Were you more tired out than usual? Was that the first time you tried essay and IR? Did you mess up the timing? Etc. (And did both Q and V drop pretty equally? Or did one drop more than the other?)

Next, it sounds like you are ready for this:
http://tinyurl.com/2ndlevelofgmat

What you're talking about in particular is what the above article calls Know the Code: when you see X, you know that you want to do Y. And this article talks about how to train yourself to learn to do that. Take a look and let me know what you think.

By the way, if you want to do a full test review (are you taking our CATs?), follow this:

First, read these two articles:
http://tinyurl.com/executivereasoning
http://tinyurl.com/2ndlevelofgmat

Think about how what you've been doing does and doesn't match up with that and how you may need to change your approach accordingly.
Then, use the below to analyze your most recent MPrep CATs (this should take you a minimum of 1 hour):
http://tinyurl.com/analyzeyourcats

Based on all of that, figure out your strengths and weaknesses as well as any ideas you have for what you think you should do. Then come back here and tell us; we'll tell you whether we agree and advise you further. (Note: do share an analysis with us, not just the raw data. Your analysis should include a discussion of your buckets - you'll understand what that means when you read the last article. Part of getting better is developing your ability to analyze your results - figure out what they mean and what you think you should do about them!)

[PetriL191]

Hey Stacey, thanks for replying. Since my initial post, I've done two more CATs (one of my Manhattan ones and one of the GMATPrep. For some reason, despite practicing 1-2 hours 5 days a week, my Quant scores keep going down (though my Verbal is up to 90% and IR is at 81%, so that's something I guess). This is dragging down my overall score to rather dismal levels (540 in the last GMATPrep software test).

I've read the articles you posted, and based on them (and my understanding of what is expected of me), here're my findings:
1) I need to read the questions more carefully. This problem doesn't come up often (1-2 questions per test), but I've missed a couple easy ones out of simple carelessness. Basic stuff and easily remedied.
2) Timing used to be a problem in my earlier tests, but not so much anymore. I've only recently learnt to let go of questions I really haven't the foggiest where to start.
3) I've been analyzing the questions and redoing the ones I got wrong (prior to analyzing so that I can gauge whether I am actually improving at all), and generally do better the second time around (I know, duh). There are some questions I do not understand however, here's one that particularly baffles me:
What is the remainder when the positive integer n is divided by 6?
1) n is a multiple of 5
2) n is a multiple of 12

According to the software, 2 alone is sufficient. This I don't get, aren't both 12 and 24 multiples of 12 and yet both give a different answer? Or is this a language thing where I don't understand the question?

4) My weakness is definitely Quadratic Equations (0 correct out of 4 in the last 2 exams), but here timing is also an issue. Three are under 2 minutes and only one of those around the 1:45 mark the others at 1:03 and 0:43 (and not even under time pressure, quite the opposite I was running fast). One is way up at 3:06.
5) I do better on DS than PS, but only marginally. Average difficulty wrong are 610 with both, but average right are 580/530 in the favor of DS with comparable times on wrong answers with both and right PS/DS at 2:29/1:29.
6) Other than that, I think if I were to list all of my weaknesses in the Quant section, this would turn into a book . I don't see anything easily fixable in Verbal, that all goes pretty much as well as I could imagine.

[StaceyKoprince]

Starting at the end. You're averaging a minute longer on PS than DS. So you aren't actually doing "better" on PS. You're spending a lot more time...and of course that's going to make a difference. Meanwhile, you're potentially sacrificing DS as a result (possibly causing more errors there due to speed?).

I see this all the time: people spend more time on PS, then rush DS to make up the time and fall into traps and miss things they could've gotten. But DS is awesome because it doesn't make you do all the annoying math that PS makes you do! So stop rushing it just to spend more time on annoying stuff.

General rule: don't artificially rush your strengths in order to devote more time to your weaknesses. If a strength naturally takes less time to solve, great. But don't risk losing that point when you know how to get it.

Those 3 fast quadratics...why were they so fast? Did you know how to do them and make some kind of mistake? Did you know you didn't know how to do them? When you look at the explanation, does it make sense / do you think, "Yes, I can totally learn how to do that?" Or does even the explanation seem like gobbledy-gook?

What you do to remedy the issue depends entirely on the answers to those questions.

Re: the NP problem, what are you using to study? Are you using our books? If so, look at the Test Cases strategy chapter. You'll need to test cases on this problem to see whether you can get a definitive answer.

n = + int
n / 6 = something remainder something

(2) n is a multiple of 12.
Now, test cases. You're only allowed to pick cases that make statement (2) true. (See book for full details on this strategy.)
If n = 12, then 12 / 6 = 2 remainder 0. In this case, the remainder is 0.
If n = 24, then 24 / 6 = 4 remainder 0. In this case, the remainder is 0.
If n = 36, then 36 / 6 = 5 remainder 0. In this case, the remainder is 0.

In fact, in any case you try, the remainder will be 0 if n is a multiple of 12. So this statement is sufficient because it gives a definitive answer: the remainder must be 0 (even though you don't know what n actually is).

My guess is that you were trying to solve for n? And if n could be 12 or 24, that would be two different answers?

That would be the case IF the problem asked for n, but it didn't. It asked for the remainder when n is divided by 6.

So this might be a broader DS issue: you have to make sure that you are investigating exactly what they asked you. Don't make any assumptions / don't fall into the trap of just solving for the variable because that's what we had to do in school.

Next, regarding how to increase your level on the ones that you can't do (and that are more than just careless mistakes or not reading carefully), have you read this yet?
http://tinyurl.com/2ndlevelofgmat

If not, give it a try. Don't try it on every problem. If you read the explanation and you're like, "Uh...what?!?" then just decide how to get that one wrong fast. (ie, how you're going to know to make the decision to move on)

But where there's some opportunity, learn:
- You got it right but took longer than you could have; is there a different, more efficient path?
- You legitimately got it wrong, but the explanation makes complete sense; how can you learn to recognize something similar next time? What skills do you need to learn in order to be able to execute on that solution process, whatever it is? Then go practice / make that happen.

That sort of thing. What do you think about all of that?