psychology in test taking

[aman_jaspal]

hi, i have rather unusual question, hope it merits attention. i have been involved with gmat preparation for quite sometime now (4 months to be unequivocal). i have been hitting scores in the region of 39-41 in verbal and 42-45 in quant, on various tests. based on my last 4 months of practice, i am being forced to ponder over a rather disheartening revelation that my scores were near about the same even when i started off and they havent gone up as high as might be expected after this thorough a preparation. so i wonder if it has got something to do with 'mental saturation'-is it that it is virtually impossible to cross a certain threshold limit? i dont know if there is a point carrying on practising further as i have gone according to all the guidelines and pieces of advice from learned sources such as the official guide and your very own forums. so the very tough realisation that i am encountering is that additional practice seems to be paying no dividence at all. i feel i have hit a mental cul-de-sac and dont know if i will be able to push up my scores any higher. so kindly advice me to solve this predicament as i seriously dont want to believe that these are the only scores that i can muster....thanks a lot....

[StaceyKoprince]

Hmm. Theoretically, it's probably the case that there are certain levels beyond which each person just isn't going to go (different levels for different people, obviously). On the other hand, most people don't study enough to hit their "threshold."

When people study, it's more likely that you will have "growth spurts" and "plateaus" - periods in which you'll show a lot of improvement and periods in which you'll seem to stagnate. It's not as common to have steady improvement from start to finish.

In general, though, if you haven't seen any improvement after regular study for 4 months (regular = 4-6 days per week), then yes, something needs to change in terms of how you're studying. And if your scores really haven't improved at all since you started studying, then it's likely that your study methods aren't very effective for some reason - I haven't seen very many cases in the past 15 years in which someone literally doesn't make any improvement at all. From the scores you posted, it sounds like you're in the mid-to-high 600s. Have you been in that range since you started and the numbers haven't moved from the start? If so, you would probably benefit some outside assistance (eg, a class or tutor) in terms of how to study. Or have you already made a lot of improvement? Then, you may be closer to your "threshold" - if so, then you'll have to decide whether you want to make some kind of investment in outside assistance or whether you want to accept the level that you're at right now.

Let me know if you have other questions or want to discuss further.

[aman_jaspal]

Thanks for the response Stacy and sorry for posting late. Yes I would like to discuss this very issue only just a little more. There are two questions that you put me. Well I would say I don’t fall in either category- neither that I haven’t made any progress "˜at all’ nor that I have progressed "˜a lot’. Here is how it goes: since I started with the preparations about 4 months ago, I have certainly taken some strides forward in terms of my reading and calculation speed, improving my vocabulary and getting a hang of the sort of logic used in some of the quant and verbal questions, but most pertinently the stamina to focus for long periods of time or simply put-concentration. I feel the factor that has the maximum bearing on my performance is concentration- the ease with which I can keep my focus intact for long periods of time. This might sound fairly obvious, but in my case it is a little complicated. There are some questions which I just cant answer in the given time owing to their difficulty level; however, going by common perception, the simpler ones should all be done correctly if only one can focus hard. This doesn’t always happen with me, as being on my "˜peak focus’ for the entire duration of the test is not all that simple in my case. Therefore taking more and more tests doesn’t do any good to me, as every time it boils down to merely the concentration bit, not so much the ability or clarity with concepts(preparedness). I have gone by the standard teaching methods for such competitive tests and don’t think I am doing much wrong on that front. My scores are determined by how long I am able to think hard and clear-the longer I focus, the better I do. And this is what basically my rather lengthy question pertains to-I feel this very ability to be at peak focus all the time has something to do with inherent ability of a person. The people who do very well on these standardized tests may be the ones who can do this better than others, as I have grown up believing there isn’t much difference between the basic cognitive abilities of any two persons. I maybe wrong and that’s why I seek counseling...what exactly is the differentiator? And when everytime it is just how hard I can think at THAT time, is there a point carrying on preparing any further, as in every test I feel I was able to focus just about the same and don’t know if this is something that can be pushed beyond a level. Thanks.

[StaceyKoprince]

I think I see what you're saying. Yes, I agree, there are some people who can maintain an unreal level of focus for 4 hours - but most people aren't like that. (I'm thinking in particular of the pro tennis players competing at Wimbledon right now. There are always some players who are very talented physically but can't maintain the level of intensity consistently; the ones who end up being the great champions are the ones who can maintain that intensity.)

I'm going to call out a particular sentence in your post:

There are some questions which I just cant answer in the given time owing to their difficulty level; however, going by common perception, the simpler ones should all be done correctly if only one can focus hard.

For the first half of your sentence, you know that you should give up on those at or before the given time limit, yes? Make an educated guess and move on - don't waste time on those. (And you'll always have some questions like this, no matter how good you get.) For the second half of your sentence, I mostly agree, but I would replace the word "all" with the word "most." No matter how well we can focus, we still make some careless mistakes - that's just life. If you try to hold yourself to the "I must never make a careless mistake" standard, well... you're not going to be very happy. :) Instead, we should think about trying to minimize careless mistakes as much as is humanly possible - but that's all.

In order to minimize careless mistakes, we actually need to understand both what mistakes we're making and WHY we're making them. So keep an error log and write down precisely why you get any problem wrong.  Then figure out how you can change your methods or institute new habits in such a way that you will minimize the chances of repeating that type of error in the future. (Could be anything from: "I messed up the formula, so I will drill the formula until I don't mess it up" to "I made a simple math error because I didn't fully write out my work, so I will write out all of my work from now on" to "I overlooked an important qualifying* word in the sentence and therefore misunderstood the meaning, so I will write down and underline qualifying words in the future.")

(* A qualifying word is something like "all of the employees", vs just some, or "he never studied" vs. he did study, but rarely.)

If you spend some time studying why and how you tend to make careless mistakes, you can institute new methods / habits that will reduce your chances of making those same mistakes in the future. That may help with the focus problem you describe, because you're reducing opportunities to make mistakes in the first place.