Just took the GMAT -- How to improve the second time around?

[rustom.hakimiyan]

Hi Stacey,

I must have read most, if not all your articles about timing, studying level 2, etc. and I have to say -- I found all of them extremely insightful.

A follow up to your articles -- I just took the GMAT and scored a 660 -- Q44, V36, IR3. I think I like the nerves get to me on the IR :/

Onto the crux of the issue -- I'm planning on retaking it as my goal score is a 700+. I realize that the actual GMAT doesn't give a detail breakdown of the test so my question is, how do I improve?

I definitely have an issue with timing as I guessed on the last 3-5 questions on Quant and probably the last 3 on Verbal. I've read all of your timing articles and I have improved but it's obviously still an issue. What should I do here?

Lastly, I've gone through EVERY OG problem along with the Verbal and Quant Review books. I follow up with a very thorough review on each of the problems, especially the ones I get incorrect, and it all makes complete sense post review. Fast forward 10-15 days, when I try to re-do the problem, I only have about a 50% success rate. That obviously means that I'm missing something despite the countless hours i'm throwing at it. I know it's not about quantity, rather quality, and i'll be sure to keep an eye out for that this time around. How do I combat this?

I'm afraid that the past few test's are not indicative of my performance as there was a whole lot of fluctuation. Pretty sure that I was burnt out because my test score dropped from 660(about 6 weeks ago) to 570/580/590. These scores are on the MGMAT test's that I took over the past few weeks. Funny enough, I took a GMAT prep test a couple of days before the exam and my score was 720. I believe that it was severely inflated as I definitely saw a bunch of repeat questions. I'd rather use the 4 hours wisely so I'm thinking about NOT retaking a practice CAT but i'll defer to your judgement here.

Thanks for your help.

[StaceyKoprince]

You've already improved to get to the 660, right? (Congrats, by the way.) Keep doing what you're doing - it's working. :)

You haven't mastered the timing yet, but it's better - you just need to keep pushing it. Part of that is the mindset - you're letting yourself sit too long on certain questions because there's a part of you that's still approaching this as a school test, not a business test. Read the Executive Reasoning article every day until your brain and heart really start to believe it. :)
https://www.manhattangmat.com/blog/inde ... lly-tests/

When you would study the OG problems, what kinds of takeaways would you come up with? How would you record those takeaways so that you could continue to study them? Did you use the "when I see / I'll think or do" format shown in the 2nd Level article? Or something else?

Right now, you probably don't need a practice CAT - it sounds like you have a pretty good handle on your current strengths and weaknesses. You may need something in a few weeks to help you continue to put the timing together and just practice everything.

Let me know more about how you were actually studying those OG problems.

[rustom.hakimiyan]

You've already improved to get to the 660, right? (Congrats, by the way.) Keep doing what you're doing - it's working. :)

You haven't mastered the timing yet, but it's better - you just need to keep pushing it. Part of that is the mindset - you're letting yourself sit too long on certain questions because there's a part of you that's still approaching this as a school test, not a business test. Read the Executive Reasoning article every day until your brain and heart really start to believe it. :)
https://www.manhattangmat.com/blog/inde ... lly-tests/

When you would study the OG problems, what kinds of takeaways would you come up with? How would you record those takeaways so that you could continue to study them? Did you use the "when I see / I'll think or do" format shown in the 2nd Level article? Or something else?

Right now, you probably don't need a practice CAT - it sounds like you have a pretty good handle on your current strengths and weaknesses. You may need something in a few weeks to help you continue to put the timing together and just practice everything.

Let me know more about how you were actually studying those OG problems.

Hi Stacey,

Thanks for the response.

I'll definitely make this article a daily read!

I've been more systematic about the takeaways this time around -- What I currently do is(In PS for example), i'll do springs of 15-20 problems and i'll review them right after. I then review the problem to find a "shortcut" or a "connection" that I didn't know. I'll write that as my takeaway. I've been doing this lately but I'm not 100% sold if I'm gaining a TON of skills from doing these problems. Meaning, I can probably do that problem a lot quicker because of the takeaway but I think it's also because it's in my memory at this point. I'm concerned if I'm going to be able to apply the same theory to future problems.

When it comes to SC -- I go through a few things such as 1) Why was the wrong answer so tempting 2) Why was the answer actually wrong 3) Why did the right answer seem wrong and why was it actually right. I don't necessarily do this analysis on the Quant section for a few reasons:

- In quant, I am never stumped on HOW to approach a problem, it's just so doing it quick enough. Meaning, I can literally solve 99% of the problems if I had time so whenever I guess on quant, it's mainly because I feel as if i'm consuming too much time. Verbal on the other hand is a different story -- there are times when I just don't KNOW what the answer is and therefore the above analysis helps with the takeaways.

Despite doing the above steps, I'm still a little concerned as to how to improve?

Thanks a ton,
Russ

[StaceyKoprince]

Have you ever gone back to old problems to see whether you can apply new takeaways? When you find a shortcut or have an insight, go back and see if you can find another past problem on which it would also apply. (It might not be an exact fit, but it might still give you some ideas.)

Your steps sound good - and I understand the difference you're describing for Q vs. V. On Q, I'd focus more on asking yourself how you know to take a certain step / approach to a particular problem. When you find a shortcut, what should be the clue in future that you should apply this shortcut to some other problem? What kind of set-up do you need to see in order for this particular solution method to work again?

Also, what kind of set-up do you need to see to know you do NOT want to do a problem? A roman numeral inequality with 4 variables and an absolute value tossed in? See ya. I'm outta here. :)

From your earlier post, when you re-do a problem that you thought you learned but then miss it later, why does that tend to happen? Is it because you weren't sure what they were testing? Because you coudln't come up with a plan / solution method? Because you messed up the actual execution? Where does it go wrong?

[rustom.hakimiyan]

Have you ever gone back to old problems to see whether you can apply new takeaways? When you find a shortcut or have an insight, go back and see if you can find another past problem on which it would also apply. (It might not be an exact fit, but it might still give you some ideas.)

I've been doing just this and i'm finding an interesting trend. I'll mention below for the sake of clarity.

Your steps sound good - and I understand the difference you're describing for Q vs. V. On Q, I'd focus more on asking yourself how you know to take a certain step / approach to a particular problem. When you find a shortcut, what should be the clue in future that you should apply this shortcut to some other problem? What kind of set-up do you need to see in order for this particular solution method to work again?

Also, what kind of set-up do you need to see to know you do NOT want to do a problem? A roman numeral inequality with 4 variables and an absolute value tossed in? See ya. I'm outta here. :)

It's interesting -- my score doesn't represent it but on Q, i've internalized most of this and I can just do the problem without even thinking. If I see a NP/Distance/Geo -- I know exactly what I need to do.

One area that i'm struggling A LOT on is word problems. I've been taking my time to get organized and setup on word problems and before I know it -- 2+ minutes are already up and I just decide to move on. I'm debating if my time is well served by doing countless long word problems to speed up the process or just notice this shortcoming and skip them the minute I see them. What do you suggest?

From your earlier post, when you re-do a problem that you thought you learned but then miss it later, why does that tend to happen? Is it because you weren't sure what they were testing? Because you coudln't come up with a plan / solution method? Because you messed up the actual execution? Where does it go wrong?

This is an interesting question -- if I miss make a mistake on a problem that I "thought" I had tackled -- it's usually because I rush to make the sub 2minute mark. I know that I don't need to hit below 2 minutes on every problem but this is usually the trend -- this is especially true for long word problems.

In NP -- I tend to make a careless mistake (didn't check negative etc.). I'm trying to apply the above principles to get deeper so i'm hoping that helps.

In Geometry -- although I know the necessary rules like the back of my hand, I can't seem to APPLY those rules on a complicated issue.

This seems to be multiplied on SC -- I seem to KNOW why the problem was wrong at the time of reviewing it but I am having a really hard time on carrying that lesson over to other problems. Meaning, i'll get the same problem right upon re-review, probably 75% of the time but I don't know how to translate that issue to OTHER problems. How do I tackle this?

To answer your question -- in SC specifically, it's because I don't know what they are testing. Did I miss a SV test because of all the fluff in the middle etc. This is probably the case 50% of the time. The other 50% of the time, it's because of modifiers/parallelism. I'm talking about the 700ish level type of problems. I know that they might be testing a "-ing" or an overall sentence parallelism but i'll get bogged down with that stuff. How should I tackle this?

I'll give an example for to clarify my question(I know that I can't post OG questions here, so I won't post the answer choices) this is more so to get my point across. I hope it's not a problem. If it ease, please feel free to edit and delete that part.

Q: "Trying to find the reason for a discrepancy in the records, he found that the files had been tampered with"

A) - Above underlined
C) - As he was trying ...., he

I picked C because it sounded right. I guess the issue here is meaning but I thought that the form was " As [x], [y]" sounded right. The problem is -- what is the takeaway here? I would say that the takeaway is "meaning" -- does that mean that meaning wins over idioms? This rather abstract takeaway is what's causing the problem in SC.

another example:

Q) "The first time that Larry walked down the ramp, laden with packages" or
"The first time that Larry, laden with packages, walked down the ramp"

I picked the former, which was wrong. I know that modifiers should be placed as close to what they are modifying as possible -- I know this rule very well but I didn't apply it. What does that say? Is it now knowing what the problem is testing?

Thanks again for the detailed thought process!

[StaceyKoprince]

Great - you're really analyzing this stuff now!

There are usually a decent number of quant word problems on the test, so it's worth spending some time here. Soem you may let go, but let's see what we can do.

Have you tried this kind of approach in general:
https://www.manhattangmat.com/blog/inde ... them-real/

And this:
http://www.manhattangmat.com/blog/index ... ms-part-1/

See whether that kind "make it real" thinking can help you lift your story problem performance.

Don't rush on things you know how to do! When you know how to do something, concentrate on getting that point. Don't think "Oh, I'm going to get this point AND save time!" Just get the point. Save time on your weaknesses, not your strengths.

For SC, it can be helpful to learn how to strip the sentence down to its basic core (subjects and verbs) and then look at how the modifiers "hang" onto that core. That helps you catch subject-verb mismatch (or noun-pronoun) when there's a bunch of stuff in between, and - separately - it also helps you to see what's going on with modifier placement or parallelism.

Try this:
http://www.manhattangmat.com/blog/index ... orrection/

For your first question, it isn't that meaning wins over idioms - nothing was wrong with A. Those are just two different (valid) constructions with two different meanings.

Trying to find the reason, he found... means that he went looking for a specific reason for something and he found THAT reason.

AS he was trying... he found implies just that these two things happened at the same time.

As I was looking for my friend Susan, I saw my friend Raymond. I wasn't looking for Raymond - that was a surprise! It just happened while I was looking for something else.

Since, in your sentence, the was looking for and found the actual reason for the discrepancy, you want "Trying to find the reason..., he found that..."

For the second one, the key is to notice the DIFFERENCE. They moved "laden with packages" from one location in the sentence to another. Why? When they move something, check!

It's a modifier, not the core subject/verb, so figure out what it should be talking about and follow the rules for that type of modifier.

In this case, yes, noun modifiers should go as close as possible to the noun - it's okay to have a small gap, but that small gap should just be another noun modifier. eg, The box of nails, which was on the table, cost $2. "which was..." refers to box, and "of nails" is just another noun modifier talking about the box.

Contrast that with your example:
Larry walked down the ramp, laden with packages
a main verb / predicate lies between Larry and the modifier. That's too much!

[rustom.hakimiyan]

Great - you're really analyzing this stuff now!

There are usually a decent number of quant word problems on the test, so it's worth spending some time here. Soem you may let go, but let's see what we can do.

Have you tried this kind of approach in general:
https://www.manhattangmat.com/blog/inde ... them-real/

And this:
http://www.manhattangmat.com/blog/index ... ms-part-1/

See whether that kind "make it real" thinking can help you lift your story problem performance.

Don't rush on things you know how to do! When you know how to do something, concentrate on getting that point. Don't think "Oh, I'm going to get this point AND save time!" Just get the point. Save time on your weaknesses, not your strengths.

For SC, it can be helpful to learn how to strip the sentence down to its basic core (subjects and verbs) and then look at how the modifiers "hang" onto that core. That helps you catch subject-verb mismatch (or noun-pronoun) when there's a bunch of stuff in between, and - separately - it also helps you to see what's going on with modifier placement or parallelism.

Try this:
http://www.manhattangmat.com/blog/index ... orrection/

For your first question, it isn't that meaning wins over idioms - nothing was wrong with A. Those are just two different (valid) constructions with two different meanings.

Trying to find the reason, he found... means that he went looking for a specific reason for something and he found THAT reason.

AS he was trying... he found implies just that these two things happened at the same time.

As I was looking for my friend Susan, I saw my friend Raymond. I wasn't looking for Raymond - that was a surprise! It just happened while I was looking for something else.

Since, in your sentence, the was looking for and found the actual reason for the discrepancy, you want "Trying to find the reason..., he found that..."

For the second one, the key is to notice the DIFFERENCE. They moved "laden with packages" from one location in the sentence to another. Why? When they move something, check!

It's a modifier, not the core subject/verb, so figure out what it should be talking about and follow the rules for that type of modifier.

In this case, yes, noun modifiers should go as close as possible to the noun - it's okay to have a small gap, but that small gap should just be another noun modifier. eg, The box of nails, which was on the table, cost $2. "which was..." refers to box, and "of nails" is just another noun modifier talking about the box.

Contrast that with your example:
Larry walked down the ramp, laden with packages
a main verb / predicate lies between Larry and the modifier. That's too much!

Hi Stacey,

Thanks again for the detailed breakdown. Taking the alternate/shorter approach is a good thought.

For quant -- do you recommend an area where I can learn the "shorter" methods". I know that it's a vague question but at this point(a few months of studying) -- is it worthwhile to learn a new method or is my time better served trying to master the old/existing one? Simple things like the 7/35(tick mark example) is a great way to same time.

Regarding verbal -- is there value is doing the same OG problems over and over again until I get them correct in under 1.5 mins or do you think there's more value in doing SC problems from non-trusted question sources? I obviously try not to recall the problems from memory, rather, I try to tackle them via the methods we learned in teh guides, but it surely doesn't help that I know what to look for in that specific problems.

[StaceyKoprince]

For quant, the official guide solutions will usually show you the "textbook" solutions, but our solutions will typically show you the shortcuts. :)

Do you have access to our GMAT Navigator program? We've got our own solutions (some written, some video) for every OG13 / OG2015 quant problem (and all the SCs and a decent number of CRs and RCs).

It sometimes helps to know the "textbook" solution just so you understand how the math works; that can make it easier to remember the cool shortcuts that make your life easier.

For OG problems you remember, the best value is to figure out how to explain them - as though you had to teach someone else. Eg, for SC, explain (out loud!) what all the splits are, what each one signifies (and when you have a red herring that doesn't really mean anything), and which of the given variations are acceptable vs. unacceptable. Also explain why at least one of the wrong answers looks good (what's the trap? why does it seem good even when it's wrong?) and why someone might eliminate the right answer (what's the trap? how did the test writers make it seem not so good?).

If you can explain all of that out loud, you're in good shape on that problem. If you can't (and, believe me, you will know when your explanation is unconvincing - you'll hear it!), then you know you have some more studying to do re: WHY the answer is what it is. (Doesn't matter that you know what the answer is - that problem won't be on the test. The issue is whether you can figure out why, since that's the thinking you'll have to be able to replicate on the real test.)

[rustom.hakimiyan]

For quant, the official guide solutions will usually show you the "textbook" solutions, but our solutions will typically show you the shortcuts. :)

Do you have access to our GMAT Navigator program? We've got our own solutions (some written, some video) for every OG13 / OG2015 quant problem (and all the SCs and a decent number of CRs and RCs).

It sometimes helps to know the "textbook" solution just so you understand how the math works; that can make it easier to remember the cool shortcuts that make your life easier.

For OG problems you remember, the best value is to figure out how to explain them - as though you had to teach someone else. Eg, for SC, explain (out loud!) what all the splits are, what each one signifies (and when you have a red herring that doesn't really mean anything), and which of the given variations are acceptable vs. unacceptable. Also explain why at least one of the wrong answers looks good (what's the trap? why does it seem good even when it's wrong?) and why someone might eliminate the right answer (what's the trap? how did the test writers make it seem not so good?).

If you can explain all of that out loud, you're in good shape on that problem. If you can't (and, believe me, you will know when your explanation is unconvincing - you'll hear it!), then you know you have some more studying to do re: WHY the answer is what it is. (Doesn't matter that you know what the answer is - that problem won't be on the test. The issue is whether you can figure out why, since that's the thinking you'll have to be able to replicate on the real test.)

I do have access to the Navigator -- that's what I use for most of my studying material. It's interesting because there are a *few* problems that I keep repeating the same mistake on(SC especially) only because it falls into the "grey area" for me.

I'll try the teaching approach and see if that helps.

Thanks again for all your help, Stacey.

[StaceyKoprince]

good luck!

[rustom.hakimiyan]

Hi Stacey,

Back here again :)

So I retook the GMAT on 11/17 and scored a 640. My score split was pretty much identical -- Q44, V34. I felt as though I managed my time pretty well on Quant but on Verbal, I had a big issue -- I ended up at question 20 with 17 minutes remaining. This is especially terrible since I started off tracking time very well.

Wanted to get your thoughts on what I can do to improve? I am going to give it another shot and have already signed up for the test in 4 weeks.

By the time I got to verbal, I noticed fatigue, especially when it came to RC and CR. I managed to get a good amount of sleep, took the practice test in very similar conditions etc -- that's the reason why this is even more surprising to me.

I guess my questions would be:

- what can i do to improve quant? seem's like im hovering around 44.
- what can i do on verbal? i obviously have a lot of room to improve. i managed to do every single OG SC problem many times over and felt very confident. Unfortunately, it's hard to tell how the split was on the actual exam, but i feel as though the biggest problem areas are RC and CR.

I've also read your time management articles:

http://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/blog/ ... nt-part-1/

http://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/blog/ ... nt-part-2/


Looking forward to your response.

Thank you in advance.

P.S: I read your "in it to win it" article and that was really insightful. That article triggered a question that has been nagging me quite a bit: When I took the practice test, I saw some really simple questions which threw me off because I thought "ahh, this mean's I screwed up". I realize that there are some questions that are practice questions(not counted towards to the score). Approximately, on a certain section, how many of those questions are we supposed to see? 1-2? 3-5? 6-10?

It's really interesting, as I type this, I can vividly recall instances where(or is it when? where can't be a metaphorical descriptor so I should probably use "when"? -- i'm still thinking SC :) I ran into questions that were "too simple" in quant but I can't recall such instances in verbal. In Verbal, is it possible to see such "simple" questions in RC, CR, and SC or do they only pop up in SC?

Thanks!

[StaceyKoprince]

Wow - if you had 17 minutes left at question 20 and still got a 34...then the good news is: you can get a much higher verbal score. There's a good chance you can get yourself up into the higher 600s, if not 700, just by fixing that timing problem!

Okay, so mental fatigue builds up during the test and that nervous energy that we all feel during the test adds to it. You'll need to make some better decisions earlier in the test about where NOT to spend time on IR and quant. You're saving that mental effort for verbal.

Keep reading that In It To Win It article every day, or alternate between that one and this one:
http://tinyurl.com/executivereasoning

That will help you get into the right decision-making mindset for the test (and that, in turn, will help you manage your mental energy better).

Also, read this:
http://www.manhattangmat.com/blog/2011/ ... you-crazy/

Try this to help reduce the nervous energy / adrenalin:
https://www.manhattangmat.com/blog/2013 ... mat-score/

I would try to push the verbal side of things first to see how many points you can actually pick up there, because this is your "low-hanging fruit" - you already know how to get a better score there, if you can just fix the timing and mental fatigue issues. Still study quant - you don't want your skills to atrophy - but your first focus is really on pushing verbal. If that doesn't get you to 700, then you can see what else you might be able to tweak on both Q and V to get you there.

They don't publish the number of experimental questions, but we have reason to believe that it's between 5 and 10 questions per section for Q and V.

It's harder to judge difficulty on verbal just by looking at a question, I think. Also, I'll say: some math questions look much easier than they actually are. A question might not test crazy hard math, but it still might have an ingenious trap that catches lots of people who aren't working carefully / thoroughly. The OG contains a decent number of these.

[rustom.hakimiyan]

As always -- thanks for the great advice.

[StaceyKoprince]

You're welcome!