Hello Everyone,
I took the gmat back in June and scored a dismal 560. I started studying again in Sept, with hopes to take it again in Nov-end.
I have taken two MGMAT practice tests (second one today) with the following scores:
600 - 36Q 36V
600 - 37Q 35V (didn't confirm the last problem, only marked it, so it counted N/A, I believe I also did this on the real GMAT)
I'm obviously not improving, so I am in need of some advice. My knowledge of the math content is pretty good. I am using MGMAT SC so that has improved for me, but could be better. I am currently reviewing the powerscore CR bible with hopes of improving CR. I hope to improve RC with practice. And of course, I'm using the OG with the 40problem/grid matrix.
It seems that once I'm in test mode, I do not apply my strategies well - all is lost - and hence, I do not consider myself a good test taker. When I reviewed my errors on the first MGMAT test, I couldn't believe how easy many of questions I got wrong were. I do not see any particular pattern using the analysis spreadsheets - I'm getting a little bit wrong in every area (PS, DS).
I know that I need to understand why I got problems wrong and how best to fix that error, and I'm trying to do this, but it doesn't seem to be working. My goal is to hit 650 (at least) and I know I can do this, but these practice test scores have surely given me a punch in the face.
Any input would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance!
GMAT Forum
4 postsPage 1 of 1
- guest
- StaceyKoprince
- ManhattanGMAT Staff
- Posts: 9361
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 9:05 am
- Location: Montreal
You need to dig in a bit more deeply - look at the individual question types and content areas in the reports to see what's going on. Also, start an error log. For every problem you get wrong, go back and figure out:
- WHY you got it wrong (as specifically as possible)
- what you could do to minimize the chances of making those errors again in future
- (for verbal) why you eliminated the right answer
- how you're going to remember the above and recognize similar situations in future, so you don't repeat your errors
Record that info in your error log and start doing what you need to do to minimize those types of errors in future!
Also, you report that you find it difficult to concentrate / use your strategies during the test. This often means that you haven't learned your strategies well enough. Tests are nervewracking, and whenever we're in nervewracking situations, we go back to our ingrained habits. If your CAT test-taking strategies aren't ingrained, you will instead fall back on paper-and-pencil test strategies, and you won't perform as well on the CAT.
I'm guessing that you don't abandon ALL of your strategies when you take a test, only some. Try to figure out what those are and go study those areas again. Also, if you haven't already been doing so, start giving yourself "mini-tests" in between full-length tests. Every night, do a 20 or 30 problem set, all at once, with appropriate timing, and then go back and review everything.
- WHY you got it wrong (as specifically as possible)
- what you could do to minimize the chances of making those errors again in future
- (for verbal) why you eliminated the right answer
- how you're going to remember the above and recognize similar situations in future, so you don't repeat your errors
Record that info in your error log and start doing what you need to do to minimize those types of errors in future!
Also, you report that you find it difficult to concentrate / use your strategies during the test. This often means that you haven't learned your strategies well enough. Tests are nervewracking, and whenever we're in nervewracking situations, we go back to our ingrained habits. If your CAT test-taking strategies aren't ingrained, you will instead fall back on paper-and-pencil test strategies, and you won't perform as well on the CAT.
I'm guessing that you don't abandon ALL of your strategies when you take a test, only some. Try to figure out what those are and go study those areas again. Also, if you haven't already been doing so, start giving yourself "mini-tests" in between full-length tests. Every night, do a 20 or 30 problem set, all at once, with appropriate timing, and then go back and review everything.
Stacey Koprince
Instructor
Director, Content & Curriculum
ManhattanPrep
Instructor
Director, Content & Curriculum
ManhattanPrep
- guest
Thanks for your reply Stacey!
After some more digging and reviewing my errors for Q, it seems that I can identify a few weaknesses.
On both CATS, I got DS questions wrong that relate to absolute value (with inequalities) and number properties (GCM, is n/18 an integer, etc.). I also noticed that on both CATS I got questions wrong relating to fractions in the problem (word problems). I need to learn when to plug in numbers and when to solve. Typically, I go directly to solve, but it seems picking numbers is the best/fastest way to go. This, coupled with careless errors I make has really brought my score down.
I'll focus more on these concepts. Any good strategies for attacking these?
After some more digging and reviewing my errors for Q, it seems that I can identify a few weaknesses.
On both CATS, I got DS questions wrong that relate to absolute value (with inequalities) and number properties (GCM, is n/18 an integer, etc.). I also noticed that on both CATS I got questions wrong relating to fractions in the problem (word problems). I need to learn when to plug in numbers and when to solve. Typically, I go directly to solve, but it seems picking numbers is the best/fastest way to go. This, coupled with careless errors I make has really brought my score down.
I'll focus more on these concepts. Any good strategies for attacking these?
- StaceyKoprince
- ManhattanGMAT Staff
- Posts: 9361
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 9:05 am
- Location: Montreal
Good! So part of fixing these areas is why you're making the mistakes you're making. Eg, for absolute values with inequalities: are you forgetting to try the negative possibility (if you're trying numbers) or to solve for the negative option of an inequality (if you're solving inequalities)? Are you forgetting to flip the sign when dividing by a negative? Etc. And the same type of thing with divisibility and other number properties issues.
One thing I find my students struggling with for NP is what I call "theory" problems. The problem is testing out some theory and doesn't use real, problem-specific numbers to do so. Instead, you often have to try multiple numbers (or sets of numbers) to figure out what's going on theoretically. (Your "is n/18 an integer" problem is a classic example.) Are you specifically struggling with these?
And why exactly are you making mistakes with fractions in word problems? Are you translating incorrectly when you try to put the word problem into math? Are you messing up when manipulating (adding, multiplying, whatever)? Etc.
As for plugging in numbers - yes, this is a great technique and can be used multiple times on the test. Here's when you can use the technique: when the problem is talking about a number for something but only with variables or percentages or fractions or in some abstract way. The problem NEVER gives you a real, specific number for whatever you're talking about, either in the problem itself or in the answer choices. So, for example, if you get a problem about the cost of a TV set and it only ever refers to the cost in terms of percentages (it goes up 10% and then it goes down 15%...) and then the answer choices are all in percentages too - then you can pick your own number and just use that to do the problem. (If you're using our books, this is the smart numbers technique in the FDP book.)
Alternatively, you might have a problem that says "what must be true" or "what could be true" or asks a yes/no question on DS. Those number property theory problems I was talking about earlier often use these setups. Look again - if they never give real numbers for whatever they're talking about, but just fractions or percents, then you can try numbers. Most of the time, for "must be true" problems, you actually have to try multiple numbers and what numbers you try will have a significant impact on whether you get the problem right! Draw a number line and label these things: zero, one, negative one. Then draw an arrow from one to the right (to indicate other positive numbers greater than one), an arrow from negative one to the left, and a little line from zero to one and another line from zero to negative one. You've just divided the number line into major categories that have different properties from one another for various NP concepts. Try things from the different categories - whatever you're allowed to try for the problem. Eg, if they tell you x is non-negative, you can try zero, one, integers bigger than one, and fractions between zero and one.
The other giveaway that you can use this technique: there are variable expressions (no equals signs or inequalities signs) in the answers. Then you can pick a number for the variable(s) in the answers and just do the problem with real numbers instead. (If you're using our books, this is the VIC technique.)
One thing I find my students struggling with for NP is what I call "theory" problems. The problem is testing out some theory and doesn't use real, problem-specific numbers to do so. Instead, you often have to try multiple numbers (or sets of numbers) to figure out what's going on theoretically. (Your "is n/18 an integer" problem is a classic example.) Are you specifically struggling with these?
And why exactly are you making mistakes with fractions in word problems? Are you translating incorrectly when you try to put the word problem into math? Are you messing up when manipulating (adding, multiplying, whatever)? Etc.
As for plugging in numbers - yes, this is a great technique and can be used multiple times on the test. Here's when you can use the technique: when the problem is talking about a number for something but only with variables or percentages or fractions or in some abstract way. The problem NEVER gives you a real, specific number for whatever you're talking about, either in the problem itself or in the answer choices. So, for example, if you get a problem about the cost of a TV set and it only ever refers to the cost in terms of percentages (it goes up 10% and then it goes down 15%...) and then the answer choices are all in percentages too - then you can pick your own number and just use that to do the problem. (If you're using our books, this is the smart numbers technique in the FDP book.)
Alternatively, you might have a problem that says "what must be true" or "what could be true" or asks a yes/no question on DS. Those number property theory problems I was talking about earlier often use these setups. Look again - if they never give real numbers for whatever they're talking about, but just fractions or percents, then you can try numbers. Most of the time, for "must be true" problems, you actually have to try multiple numbers and what numbers you try will have a significant impact on whether you get the problem right! Draw a number line and label these things: zero, one, negative one. Then draw an arrow from one to the right (to indicate other positive numbers greater than one), an arrow from negative one to the left, and a little line from zero to one and another line from zero to negative one. You've just divided the number line into major categories that have different properties from one another for various NP concepts. Try things from the different categories - whatever you're allowed to try for the problem. Eg, if they tell you x is non-negative, you can try zero, one, integers bigger than one, and fractions between zero and one.
The other giveaway that you can use this technique: there are variable expressions (no equals signs or inequalities signs) in the answers. Then you can pick a number for the variable(s) in the answers and just do the problem with real numbers instead. (If you're using our books, this is the VIC technique.)
Stacey Koprince
Instructor
Director, Content & Curriculum
ManhattanPrep
Instructor
Director, Content & Curriculum
ManhattanPrep
4 posts Page 1 of 1