GMAT First Attempt & Retake Strategy

[Mufasa]

Hi MPrep Community Experts,

I am an MPrep student and would greatly appreciate your advice and insights given my situation described below. I am looking to quickly recover from my first GMAT attempt, re-build a revision plan focused on improving verbal whilst maintaining quant performance, and get on track towards my target score.

GMAT Preparation:

• Started formally preparing for the GMAT in June 2020


• Enrolled in Manhattan Prep GMAT online course from June to August


• Studied every week using MPrep Quant and Verbal review books and practicing from OG problems


• Revised every day and built an error log. Typically for every 30 min spent doing problems, I spend 1h reviewing them

Practice CAT record (Month, Source, Score & Sub-score):
1. June, MPrep, 620 (Q43, V32)
2. July, MPrep, 630 (Q44, V32)
3. August, MPrep, 630 (Q44, V32)
4. September, Official GMAT Practice, 730 (Q49, V40)
5. September, MPrep, 670 (Q44, V37)

GMAT performance & goals:

• First GMAT attempt last week: 630 (Q47, V30)


• Target score: 730 (Realistic: 700 in 2nd retake, would retake a 3rd time for 730)


• Target re-take date: Late October 2020

I was surprised (and disappointed) at such a low Verbal score (V30), as I did not get the impression that the exam questions were at all easier than those I took on my latest practice tests. Moreover, the score is significantly lower than the scores on the practice CATs I took before the test and my perceived ability level when doing OG problems. During the test, I did not feel like a sub-section went particularly bad, and despite timing was not optimal (had to speed up as I got caught on one long RC Bio passage), I still managed to finish the section without bailing over 2 questions at the end (approx. 7 in total for the section).
I have attached the ESR summaries below (as I can not upload screenshots or the file itself):

General

• Your GMAT Total score of 630 is higher than 65% of GMAT Exam scores recorded in the past three years.


• Your Integrated Reasoning score of 7 is higher than 81% of GMAT Exam scores recorded in the past three years.


• Your Verbal score of 30 is higher than 58% of GMAT Exam scores recorded in the past three years.


• Your Quantitative score of 47 is higher than 60% of GMAT Exam scores recorded in the past three years.

Verbal

• Your Verbal score of 30 is higher than 58% of GMAT Exam scores recorded in the past three years. The mean score for this section is 27.11.


• Your performance on Critical Reasoning questions was equivalent to a score of 30, which is better than 55% of GMAT Exam scores recorded in the past three years. The mean score for this sub-section is 27.59.
  
• Your performance of 75% on Analysis/Critique questions is considered Above Average.
  
• Your performance of 75% on Construction/Plan questions is considered Above Average.


• Your performance on Reading Comprehension questions was equivalent to a score of 29, which is better than 55% of GMAT Exam scores recorded in the past three years. The mean score for this sub-section is 27.17.
  
• Your performance of 60% on Identify Inferred Idea questions is considered Average.
  
• Your performance of 60% on Identify Stated Idea questions is considered Average.


• Your performance on Sentence Correction questions was equivalent to a score of 29, which is better than 54% of GMAT Exam scores recorded in the past three years. The mean score for this sub-section is 27.34.
  
• Your performance of 66% on Grammar questions is considered Above Average.
  
• Your performance of 66% on Communication questions is considered Above Average.


• You completed 36 questions in the Verbal section.


• You responded correctly to 50% of the first set of questions, 57% of the second set of questions, 71% of the third set of questions and 88% of the final set of questions.


• The average difficulty of questions presented to you in the first set of questions was Medium, the average for the second set of questions was Medium-Low , the average for the third set of questions was Medium and was Medium for the final set of questions.


• The average time it took you to respond to the first set of questions presented was 1:49, the average time for the second set of questions was 1:33, the average time for the third set of questions was 1:56 and 1:25 for the final set of questions.

Quant

• Your Quantitative score of 47 is higher than 60% of GMAT Exam scores recorded in the past three years. The mean score for this section is 40.38.


• Your performance on Problem Solving questions was equivalent to a score of 44. Your score is better than 48% of all sub-section scores recorded in the past three years. The mean for all test takers is 40.39.


• Your performance on Data Sufficiency questions was equivalent to a score of 49. Your score is better than 70% of all sub-section scores recorded in the past three years. The mean for all test takers is 40.32.


• Your performance on Arithmetic questions was equivalent to a score of 50. Your score is better than 84% of all sub-section scores recorded in the past three years. The mean for all test takers is 40.55.


• Your performance on Algebra/Geometry questions was equivalent to a score of 41. Your score is better than 39% of all sub-section scores recorded in the past three years. The mean for all test takers is 40.23.
  
• Your performance of 75% on Geometry questions is considered Above Average.
  
• Your performance of 85% on Rates/Ratio/Percent questions is considered Strong.
  
• Your performance of 66% on Value/Order/Factors questions is considered Above Average.
  
• Your performance of 75% on Equal./Inequal./Alg. questions is considered Above Average.
  
• Your performance of 75% on Counting/Sets/Series questions is considered Above Average.


• You completed 31 questions in the Quantitative section.


• You responded correctly to 71% of the first set of questions, 86% of the second set of questions, 71% of the third set of questions and 71% of the final set of questions..


• The average difficulty of questions presented to you in the first set of questions was Medium, the average for the second set of questions was Medium,
• the average for the third set of questions was Medium High and was Medium High for the final set of questions.


• The average time it took you to respond to the first set of questions presented was 1:36, the average time for the second set of questions was 1:59, the average time for the third set of questions was 2:22 and 2:08 for the final set of questions.

Any of the following items would greatly help me to re-focus on revision and prepare for a retake:

• Experience and outcomes of similar cases you may know about


• Thoughts on potential causes/diagnosis of what may have happened above (I can provide the ESR and further test impressions if needed)


• Advice on how to build a re-take revision strategy, given that I am comfortable with Quant but need substantial improvement in Verbal


• References on how to resume and re-structure Verbal practice for improvement

Your help is much appreciated! Many thanks in advance.

Best,

Pedro

[StaceyKoprince]

Hi! First: If you took our course (it sounds like you did), then you're eligible for a free Post-Exam Assessment (if you haven't done one already). You'll meet (online) with an instructor to debrief from test day and come up with a plan to re-take the test. If this applies to you (or your just not sure whether it does), please send an email to gmat@manhattanprep.com to request the Post-Exam Assessment (or to ask whether you're eligible).

Ok, now I'm responding to your post in the order in which you posted information.

Practice test scores: The official practice test score was quite a jump compared to the other ones and your MPrep taken in the same month didn't also jump as much as the official one did. Some people find the official practice test easier than the real thing and it sounds like that might have been the case for you, unfortunately.

Official score: Your Quant score held up—not quite as high as the official practice Quant, but still higher than on ours. So that's great.
Verbal is a different story, obviously. We'll have to figure out what happened there.

Re-take date: End of October is a month away. Agree that 630 --> 730 is not super-realistic. Even 700 is a stretch for that timeframe, though hopefully we can figure out what went wrong on V and fix it.

ESR:
Nice IR score
Hmm, the Verbal question-type data isn't very helpful. It's basically about the same for everything.
Oh, but the quadrant data is useful. Relative to someone hoping to score a 35+ on V, you definitely underperformed during the first quadrant (particularly as you start the test at a medium level—that is, sub-35-level—problem). So your performance in the first quadrant actually pulled your score down (and we can see that from the average diff of the second quadrant—medium-low). You did a little better in the second quadrant, but still not substantially better. You did lift in the second half of the test—but you spent half the test at a low enough level that it was tough to recover from that. You're not going to lift into the upper 30s from there.

So the question is why the first half of the test was such a struggle. Did you do Q-V or V-Q for your test order? Could it have been an issue of starting "cold" and needing to warm up (if it was the first section) or of needing to switch your brain from Q to V (in the second section)? Was there anything in the testing room that was distracting you? How were your nerves / anxiety? You mentioned getting caught up in an RC Bio passage—was that in the first half? Do you remember anything else like that in the first half? (Imagine, eg, that you got caught up in a few things, then rushed on others to make up the time...and that led you to missing easier problems due to careless mistakes.) That kind of thing.

Your average timing data per quadrant looks fine. But can you tell me more timing data? When you look at the live report (not the PDF that you download) and scroll your mouse over the timing pie charts, you can see the average time you spent on correct vs. incorrect questions in each quadrant. Can you go get that data and tell it to me, just so we see whether there's anything within that detail that could add to the picture?

Quant
This data is much more clear—the strengths and weaknesses are obvious. Although, of course, you already got 50 out of 51, so you're really just looking to maintain. Most of your lift is going to have to come from V.

If you haven't yet done your PEA, go sign up for that right now. You'll be able to have a much more in-depth (and live!) conversation with whomever you're paired with (it won't be your course instructor, on purpose—we want you to get a second opinion). And do share your ESR with that instructor.

[Mufasa]

Hi Stacey,

Many thanks for your reply.

I have emailed the MPrep team and asked for a PEA to debrief thoroughly, however I was seeking to gain various perspectives on how to approach the re-take. Given that the PEA scheduling takes at least 1 week and I have limited study days left, I posted to resume studying ASAP. Responding to your points:

Practice CATs:
I definitely found the official GMAT mocks substantially easier than the MPrep ones, and somewhat easier than the real GMAT. However, I still think that both scores in the latest MPrep and the official practice CATs show that I am capable of performing much better in Verbal.

Re-take and target score
On the re-take and the target score, I agree on setting a realistic goal to land around 700 by end of October. Question here - would you recommend taking the test twice (mid-October and end of October) or only once at the end of the month?

ESR:
Verbal:
The underperformance in the first quadrant came as a surprise for me. I remember bailing one CR (eval. argument) and maybe another SC question but I did not have the impression of struggling through most questions, or finding them harder/easier than usual. In response to your questions:

• Test section order: I took the Quant-Verbal-IR&AWA (this is the section I have taken all my practice CATs and the one I am most comfortable with, as doing the Quant section first helps me build some confidence whilst getting it out of the way).
  I think the issue you propose of having to switch the mindset from Quant to Verbal might have impacted performance (maybe subconsciously on the first quadrant, I was underperforming without noticing).


• Energy level and concentration: Throughout the section, I did find myself with a lower energy level and mentally tired w.r.t. Quant, (where I had a high concentration level throughout the section).


• Nerves/anxiety: higher than in Quant (which I only really experienced at the start) and more persistent. I thought about my potential score several times and was eager to finish/know my score.


• Distractions: I found myself far less comfortable with the yellow pad vs. Quant (where the yellow pad technique dividing each sheet in 4 helps me organize the space for each qu, improving focus levels on each qu, and helps me keep track of time). On Verbal, I found doing 9 qus per page was too tight in space and having to make notes with no organization made me lose concentration. Also, tracking time was more difficult.


• Lags in particular questions: The passage I was caught up on (Bio is my worst topic, as the jargon makes it difficult for me to understand what is conveyed by the text) was in the 3rd quadrant (as it was the 3rd RC). I remember spending between 9-11 min on that passage alone (4 qus). I do not recall something like this on the 1st/2nd quadrant in particular (maybe an SC or CR question).


• Granular timing data (per quadrant):
  Avg. time correct: 1) 1:11 2) 1:33 3) 1:03 4) 1:32
  Avg. time incorrect: 1) 2:26 2) 1:32 3) 4:09 4) 0:37
  Avg. percentile (estimated difficulty level) correct: 1) 40% 2) 41% 3) 55% 4) 57%
  Avg. percentile (estimated difficulty level) incorrect: 1) 70% 2) 45% 3) 55% 4) 60%

Quant:
Would you say the ESR data per topic and skill is accurate to ID strength and weaknesses?
I actually thought I performed better on PS vs. DS, however the ESR shows otherwise. Do you have any suggestions as to how to revise for Quant for the retake to maintain or even improve the score from 47 to >49, given that my main focus will surely be on the Verbal section?

Thanks again for the support!

Best,

Pedro

[StaceyKoprince]

I realize I misspoke last time—I said you had a Q50 but you scored Q47. So yes, we can try to pick up a few more points there. (I mixed your scores up with the other post I made that day—that student had a Q50 and also underperformed on V. Sorry about that!)

What would be your goal in taking the official test in mid-Oct? I can think of two possibilities:
(1) Just want to see whether you get lucky and get the score, and then you're done with it.
(2) Want to use it as a dry run / more experience to help reduce the impact of test / performance anxiety.
(3) ...?

1 and 2 are fine reasons, though for #1, I'd want to be careful that you aren't counting on it too much and then demoralized, which could impact your study for the rest of the month. So I'd only do #1 if you think you can genuinely just take a "let's see, maybe I'll get lucky!" approach and you can leave it at that.

There is a potential drawback. The GMAT limits you to 8 tests lifetime and 5 tests in any 12-month period. Was the one that you just took your first official test? If so, this would be #2 and #3, which would still leave you two more to take in the coming months. So that's ok. But if you've taken it more than once already in the past 12 months then we've got to be more careful.

Hmm. I wonder whether you spent a bit too much mental energy on Quant. Even when you're scoring up near 50, you still need to bail on a small number of problems—not just to keep on time but to make sure that you're not mentally tiring yourself out. Do you remember spending extra time on problems that were really hard / finding yourself struggling on some of the problems? If so, it's likely that that was part of why you felt low-energy on V. Next time, you'll need to make sure that you recognize when a problem isn't worth it because it's going to take too much time OR mental energy and let it go.

You may want to do some mindfulness training to help with test anxiety.
Stress management:
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/blog/2013/05/09/stressed-out-meditate-to-lower-your-anxiety-and-boost-your-gmat-score/

The above article links to some free resources from UCLA. One of our teachers also recorded the below guided practice (15 minutes) for our students:
https://soundcloud.com/user-91744640/15-minute-guided-mindfulness-practice

There's also this program:
http://www.10percenthappier.com/mindfulness-meditation-the-basics/
It has a free 1-week trial and is then paid, but I've had several students who have really liked it, so that's another option.

For V, some options to adapt the yellow pad:
– One thing to try is just to lay the yellow pad longways (landscape layout) vs. the traditional portait layout. It's the same size paper, but for some reason I've found it easier to use / keep track of everything that way.
– Whether you do landscape or portrait, if you want more organization, you could also divide the page into 4 areas: one for tracking answers, and one each for the three question types to take notes. (You'll presumably want more space for CR and RC than for SC, so the 4 areas won't be equal in size.)

Do you think it would be better for you to track time on Verbal more granularly—not every 9 questions / 16 minutes, but every 4-5 questions? It's still the case that we have the 4 RC passages to contend with, but you could try breaking each 9-minute grouping into two sub-groups of 4 and 5 that you do across two pages rather than one. In that case, I'd assume you're going to do groups of 8 minutes. In each pair, you're going to do either 4 or 5 questions, but which number you do depends on whether you start an RC passage in that sub-group. Something like this:

Group 1 (9 questions)
(4 or 5) 56 min left. If no RC, do 5 in this group and 4 in next (because will probably have RC there). If RC, do 4 in this group and 5 in next.
(4 or 5) 48 min left

Group 2
(4 or 5) 40 min left. Ditto RC.
(4 or 5) 32 min left

Group 3
(4 or 5) 24 min left. Ditto RC.
(4 or 5) 16 min left

Group 4
(4 or 5) 8 min left. Ditto RC.
(4 or 5) 0 min left

You can do the above on two pages—but if laying it out landscape helps you to keep a grouping to one page, you could still use the above to help track your time more granularly if that also helps.

I would guess that high average time for quad 3 incorrect was due to that RC passage. Presumably, you spent a lot of time on the readthrough + first question and that one was probably incorrect and really kicked up the average.

For quad 1, your avg time incorrect was twice your average time correct—and you don't remember one particular passage or question being a problem there. That could be explained by something like getting the SC right but missing the CR/RC. But it could also be that you got caught up in some harder problems and that could have contributed to both rushing on some others and making careless mistakes and tiring you out later in the section. The difficulty data tends to support the latter hypothesis.

So there may be a trend in both Q and V of not letting go / getting stubborn on some harder ones and then having that hurt you elsewhere in that section and in the later section (in the case of Q --> V). If so, you need to work on your exec mindset / letting things go. I've bailed on problems on every single GMAT I've ever taken and I've scored in the 99th percentile every time I've tried to except once. (Sometimes, I'm not trying to. I'm sometimes trying to get other scores for research purposes.)

If you maintain your Q47, you'd have to get up to about V39 to get into the 700 range. Your practice tests show that V39 is a reasonable goal, but you are going to have to improve your exec reasoning / be willing to let the hard stuff go in order to get there.

If you can get to Q49, you've got more flexibility on V—maybe V36 would get you to 700. So then if you could get Q49, V39, you'd be closing in on your 730 ultimate goal.

For Q, at that level, the real distinction typically isn't that you know more math. Rather, it's that you're able to think super flexibly about complicated problems. I would get our Advanced Quant guide, if you haven't already. Talk to our student services team—you can get the ebook for free or a physical book for a small fee (less than it actually costs) plus shipping. And I would also consider getting the Advanced OG; it's got 150 Q and 150 V problems that are a good representation of the hardest questions on the real test.

For V, it may be that you've got some weaknesses to address before you use the Advanced OG. Analyze the two practice tests you took in Sep to see what you need to review from your existing materials before you try Advanced OG problems.

Being able to score 37+ consistently on V almost always really hinges on being able to distinguish between the correct answer and the 1-2 most tempting wrong answers. (Don't think about those problems where you were totally lost / couldn't narrow down. Those are bail problems. You're going to pick up your points on the ones where you legitimately narrowed to 2 or maybe 3 but picked wrong.)

To get better at that, you need to analyze the answers in this way:
(1) Why was the wrong answer so tempting? Why did it look like it might be right? (be as explicit as possible; also, now you know this is not a good reason to pick an answer)
(2) Why was it actually wrong? What specific words indicate that it is wrong and how did I overlook those clues the first time?
(3) Why did the right answer seem wrong? What made it so tempting to cross off the right answer? Why were those things actually okay; what was my error in thinking that they were wrong? (also, now you know that this is not a good reason to eliminate an answer)
(4) Why was it actually right?

I'd go back and do that first with the problems on your most recent practice tests as well as any recent OG problems you've done. When you start to feel really comfortable with (a) the analysis itself and (b) what you're learning from that analysis, then try new problems and then put them through the same analysis.

And of course follow up on that analysis. This usually means two things:
(1) Going back into your books / lessons for any touch-ups that you need—reviewing grammar rules or particular CR/RC question sub-types or whatever
(2) Distilling your analysis into actionable takeaways: "When I see <particular clue that will appear in a different-but-structurally-similar problem on the real test>, I will <take a certain action, examine a certain part of the problem, perform a certain type of analysis>."

To your last questions, I think that the Quant ESR topic data is accurate / useful to use (just remember that it is a snapshot of that day and may not capture everything). I think the Verbal ESR topic data is less useful in general and definitely in your case. There's no useful data there in terms of question type or topic area. :/

Finally, it's super common for people to think they're doing better on PS than DS for two reasons:
(1) On DS, you know that, if you make a mistake, that will just lead to one of the other answers. And you know that whatever you do, you will get one of the 5 answers. So you're never totally sure that you're right.
(2) On PS, you forget that they know the most common mistakes we make and they build those traps into the answers. So you assume that, if you get an answer that's among the answer choices, you must have gotten it right. But that's not actually accurate.

So believe the data: You are fantastic at DS. Trust yourself there!

[Mufasa]

Hi Stacey,

Thanks for the advice in your reply. I noticed the comment on Q50 and I also related it to another post I read

Test in Mid-Oct (discarded)
The goal of testing twice in October would be more #2 of the reasons you outlined - to gain further experience under exam conditions and learn if some test-taking strategies work better for me, especially in Verbal. Despite I have only taken the test once, I have discarded this option as I see a higher ROI if I invest my time on reinforcing my knowledge and practice in Verbal for a single more solid attempt at the end of the month. There is little I will be able to capitalize in just 2 weeks.

Stress & Anxiety
To reduce test-taking anxiety, I have broken down my major >730 goal into two steps - the first being to reach between 680-700 at the end of October, maintaining similar levels in quant (Q47-48) and lifting the verbal score above V35. If I secure such levels, I will be in a much better position to make the second jump towards the higher score, without putting such unrealistic pressure on me and making study time this month more effective.
I'll take a look at the links you provided to see if they can further reduce nervous feelings on test-day.

Mental Energy and Concentration Levels

Hmm. I wonder whether you spent a bit too much mental energy on Quant. Even when you're scoring up near 50, you still need to bail on a small number of problems—not just to keep on time but to make sure that you're not mentally tiring yourself out. Do you remember spending extra time on problems that were really hard / finding yourself struggling on some of the problems? If so, it's likely that that was part of why you felt low-energy on V. Next time, you'll need to make sure that you recognize when a problem isn't worth it because it's going to take too much time OR mental energy and let it go.

With regards to your point on energy levels, there were maybe 2-3 quant problems where I remember spending a long time trying to figure them out, but actually only because I was 8 min ahead at one point in quadrant 3. If it contributed to lower energy and concentration on verbal, it would have been minor.
Given that the section order that works best for me is always Q-V-IR/AWA, are there any tips you would suggest to re-set my mindset after taking down the quant section before I move on to verbal (maybe something I can leverage in the break)?

Bailing

For quad 1, your avg time incorrect was twice your average time correct—and you don't remember one particular passage or question being a problem there. That could be explained by something like getting the SC right but missing the CR/RC. But it could also be that you got caught up in some harder problems and that could have contributed to both rushing on some others and making careless mistakes and tiring you out later in the section. The difficulty data tends to support the latter hypothesis.

I agree with your hypothesis, this is the most likely cause of what we can see from the timing data in the ESR.
However, I do not think I am avoid bailing at any instance - for example, on verbal, if I see a very long CR argument or an Evaluate the Argument question, I will bail straight away. There are other instances though, where the problem will bee a candidate for bailing but I still attempt it and spend >2 min on it. I find it slightly easier to recognize and bail on tough problems on quant vs. verbal, where I only have some clear candidates (e.g. Eval Argument on CR).

My question here is: how do you recognize "bail" problems (in all CR/SC/RC)? Is it by noticing a specific question type, feeling confused after I read the question/argument/answer choices/sentence, noticing a long argument/sentence underline/answer choices... i.e. what features make a problem a "bail" candidate in Verbal across the three sections? It would be very helpful to know how I can get better at recognizing such problems.

Further, would you ever recommend bailing on a whole RC passage? Say if, after reading the first paragraph, I did not understand the main topic discussed or the flow of information, and I notice it is complex and long and has a lot of technical jargon. That would mean I have to give up 3-4 questions straight - a risky trade-off only justified if I would spend >10 min in that passage only to slightly increase my chance of getting them right, given that my understanding would be limited. How would you suggest to navigate such a situation to minimize time spent and maximize accuracy without wildly guessing?

Yellow-Pad Technique
Your tip to use a landscape orientation and smaller 8 min time buckets sounds interesting, definitely something to test in my next practice CAT. This way I could have more space and keep track of time (which I primarily lose when doing RC) more thoroughly.

Verbal Timing by Sub-section
I noticed the following on the average timing per question type on Verbal from the ESR:

• CR: 1.21min, brought down because of 2 questions bailed and was pushed at the end to answer the last 2 in <1.30min


• SC: 1.09min, tried to do SC quickly when I caught up issues and had to rush towards the end


• RC: 2.54min, disproportionately long. I find an important weakness for me is reading for purpose and structure - I struggle retaining information and linking it together to derive the main point of GMAT RC passages unless I read slowly (>4min read), take detailed notes or read through parts of a passage more than once. That, in turn, takes up too much time and it becomes a question of time vs. accuracy, one of which is compromised. Therefore for RC I must improve my reading & retention skills, to better understand the point and structure of passages after a first, effective read.
  Any tips on how to improve & practice reading and understanding skills are much appreciated.

Action Plan Ahead

Quant
Thank you for pointing out the resources. Questions here are:

• How would you suggest splitting study time between quant and verbal to at least maintain the Q47 score and improve from V30-V35?


• Would you suggest studying all Quant topics (including ones I had discarded, such as Probability & Combinatorics) for the retake if I were to aspire to improve my quant score?

Verbal

To get better at that, you need to analyze the answers in this way:
(1) Why was the wrong answer so tempting? Why did it look like it might be right? (be as explicit as possible; also, now you know this is not a good reason to pick an answer)
(2) Why was it actually wrong? What specific words indicate that it is wrong and how did I overlook those clues the first time?
(3) Why did the right answer seem wrong? What made it so tempting to cross off the right answer? Why were those things actually okay; what was my error in thinking that they were wrong? (also, now you know that this is not a good reason to eliminate an answer)
(4) Why was it actually right?

The above analysis of answer choices seems useful and quite similar to what I have been doing when I review the OG or CAT problems I have done. It is a great suggestion to get comfortable with the above 4 questions with questions I have recently done. However, I have noticed that I tend to get takeaways which are either too generic (e.g. "look out for answer choices which make assumptions on inference questions") or too specific to the passage/argument in context, so I find it hard to apply the takeaways to future questions.
Do you have any advice on how to make takeaways more actionable and applicable to future questions? Or maybe provide a link to an example of how the above analysis is actually applied to one question? That would be very useful to visualize how the review becomes applicable to future problems.

(2) Distilling your analysis into actionable takeaways: "When I see <particular clue that will appear in a different-but-structurally-similar problem on the real test>, I will <take a certain action, examine a certain part of the problem, perform a certain type of analysis>.

An example of this principle in practice would GREATLY help.

Many thanks once again for your help and support!

Take care

[StaceyKoprince]

I agree that your time is better spent by taking this month to study and then taking it vs. taking it twice. I also agree with your plan to have a two-step goal (first 680-700, then 730). I think it's good to have this "incremental goal" plan with everything we do, not just for the GMAT.

there were maybe 2-3 quant problems where I remember spending a long time trying to figure them out, but actually only because I was 8 min ahead at one point in quadrant 3. If it contributed to lower energy and concentration on verbal, it would have been minor.

I'm not sure that I agree that it would necessarily have been minor. It's good that it wasn't adding to the time pressure (which then stresses you out and so tires you out mentally), but it's still the case that you were using up a finite resource. You don't recover mental energy in the very short breaks we get on this test.

Try this sometime: Spend 4 minutes (or however long) working on a problem that you don't know how to do or don't know how to do well. See how your brain feels after. On another day, spend the same amount of time doing problems you think are fine—not super easy but not hard either. Again, how does your brain feel after?

I don't have any scientific evidence, but when I have tried this, I feel more tired in the first case, even though the amount of time is the same. Your brain is working a lot harder (and feeling frustrated, by the way) and that builds up over time. It may still be the case that it didn't affect you much during verbal—but I think there's at least a chance that it could have. So that's something I would just think about as well. (Besides, if you don't know how to do the Q problem in a max of about 3 minutes, chances are spending even more time isn't going to get you there!)

When you take your break, do make sure to have something to eat and drink. Have some kind of fresh fruit juice or coconut water to get some fructose into your bloodstream quickly. That can get up into your brain and give you a little mental boost / energy spike. It won't last for the rest of the test but it will help in the next section.

Do some kind of physical movement. Stretch, roll your neck around, touch your toes, do some jumping jacks, whatever works for you. Take lots of deep breaths. Get lots of oxygen into your blood and your blood flowing up to your brain!

If you use any of the mindfulness meditation material, do one of your short mantras—30 or 60 seconds. Think of a song you really like and sing it / hear it in your head. (Not out loud, of course... ) Or visualize a place or an activity that you love—something that energizes you.

Re: bailing on V, yes, it's harder to recognize than on Q. The following are all possible signals:
– Specific question types on CR and, to a lesser extent, on RC (less useful overall, since most questions fall into one of three categories). Alternatively, I just can't identify the question type in the first place.

– Certain visual characteristics on SC, eg, the whole sentence is underlined. If the underline is super short (~5 words or fewer), I won't spend more than 1 minute on that problem. (There's just not much to work with and these tend to be hard...agonizing back and forth between answers isn't going to help!)

– SC: I read the original sentence and don't understand some or all of the underlying meaning. I'll usually try to read it a second time to make sure that I wasn't just reading too quickly and skipped a word, but if I still don't get it...forget it. (At this point, I'm not saving much time off of the average SC time by bailing—but I am saving a lot of time if you take the theory that I'd likely spend 2+ min on this since I can't even understand the sentence...)

– RC: I don't understand a certain paragraph or part of a passage, so there's a decent chance that I'll bail on questions about that part. Alternatively, I don't understand what the question is asking. I can't find the "proof" sentence or text in the passage—I don't know what part of the passage it's asking about.

– CR: I'm not following the argument or it's a type of content that I really don't like. (eg, Some people really dislike the quant-based CRs.)

It's possible to need to bail on an entire RC passage, yes, in the circumstances that you describe. I will say that when I hit a really hard passage, the first thing that I try to do is pull back a little—I literally try to understand *less* about that passage. I go only for the main ideas and skim even more over the details and jargon. Pretend that someone wants you just to classify this passage based on its overall topic and nothing else. You can skip/skim the detail if that's your goal.

If you're able to get that big picture, you can answer a main idea or big picture question. You *might* be able to use that big picture understanding to get rid of some wrong answers on detail questions—answers that contradict the main idea. I wouldn't spend a ton of time on detail questions, but this is possible.

Note that the problems for one RC passage are all chosen at the beginning, when the passage is first given to you. So you're not risking the "get it wrong, get an easier one, get it wrong, get an easier one" spiral on RC. It's not great to get 3-4 wrong in a row, of course, but if you came into this passage doing well (which...you probably did, because that's probably why the passage is so hard!), then you will have 3-4 harder questions. So getting them wrong won't hurt your score as much as it usually would to get 4 wrong in a row.

The other thing to do, of course, is to pick the same letter for each one: B-B-B-B. Increase the odds that you'll get lucky on one.

It's more likely that you'll have what I describe in the 4th bullet above—you don't understand part of the passage but there other parts are ok, in which case you answer the ones you can and don't worry about the questions that ask about the annoying part of the passage. But yes, if you get a terrible passage overall, it's fine to bail on the whole thing.

For the RC read, I'd like you to try an exercise. Do it first with passages you've already read. Go through and mark every single sentence (or part of a sentence, if it's complex / long) as either:
– big picture or detail
– same direction or contrast / twist / new (that is, does this sentence follow the same major line of thought as the previous one or does it represent any kind of difference—contrast, change of direction, new idea, etc.)

I don't want you to be able to understand or explain every line—just categorize it. Pretend that your boss has asked for this and wants it in a couple of minutes and literally only cares about the classifications of each sentence, nothing else.

If you can get good at this, it will help you enormously with that first read-through, because it will help you to ignore the stuff that doesn't matter (detail, same direction) and focus only on the stuff that does (big picture, contrast / twist / new).

Re: Q vs. V, you'll obviously need to spend more time on V than Q. I'd say something like 2 or 3 V study sessions for every Q study session.

You do *not* need to add in discarded Q topics in order to get from 47 to 49. I still have bail categories / things that I don't do on the real test. Two points is not a huge difference—but you do need to get a bit better at decision-making (not getting sucked into stuff that doesn't have good odds for you or that will take too long / use up too much mental energy) and you likely need to improve on what I call test-taking strategies. These include estimation, testing cases, working backwards, smart numbers, using logic to solve story problems, etc. Being able to do this on a few more problems will leave you time and mental energy to tackle even harder ones. And, of course, you need to work on minimizing careless mistakes as much as humanly possible.

Re: takeaways, let's take this example of yours:

look out for answer choices which make assumptions on inference questions

Agreed that that's too generic. "Look out for X" is basically the same as when you make a careless mistake and just tell yourself, "Don't do that."

"When I see an inference question, I will jot down the word "must" to remind myself that the correct answer is something that must be true / must be able to be concluded from the evidence."
"When I'm crossing off answers on inference questions, I will cross off any answers that could be true but don't have to be true—ie, any answers for which I'd have to make any kind of assumption about something they didn't tell me in order to conclude that it had to be true."

So I turned what you said into a concrete action (jot down a word) and I laid out what that action / word would remind me to think about. It's basically setting me up to pause long enough to consciously recall what the trap looks like on this question type. If I do that just before I start crossing off answers, chances are good that I'll be able to hold that standard in mind and use it while reviewing the answers. (That's why step 3 of our CR process, by the way, is to pause and state the goal.)

The flip side is making it too specific—and, yes, that's a real danger. One way around that is to think about another problem you previously did that had a similar issue or characteristic and try to formulate the takeaway to work across both problems. Another way is to consciously think, "If I saw something similar to this but on a different problem, what would that look like?"

It wouldn't be the same topic, so (eg) if it's SC, the words would change, which means I have to know the part of speech or some other way to articulate the *type* of word. I don't want to use the specific words. (Also, if it's SC, write your own example of the construction or clue using some totally different topic—about cats or cheese or whatever.)

If it's CR/RC, I might need to know the purpose of the piece of information (this is a premise supporting the conclusion or this is an example of a concept discussed earlier in the passage) or the function of the word (this is signaling a contrast). If it's something like the latter, I would think about what other synonyms / similar words could be used (however, yet, though, but, surprisingly, ...). I wouldn't be trying to come up with a comprehensive list of contrast words and I *wouldn't* write: "When I see the word however, I'll figure out what the two pieces of contrasting info are." Instead, I would write something like "When I see a contrast word (however, but, ...), I'll figure out what the pieces of contrasting info are." I've now abstracted out the concept (contrast word) and I've removed the word "two"—because maybe *this* problem had 2 pieces of contrasting info but the next problem could have more.

(Oh, and there's another thing to do. Ask yourself how they could change this problem? If you can reasonably brainstorm that they could have done something this way vs. that way, then don't work that something into your takeaway as a "fixed" characteristic.)

Here's another: "When the passage gives me an example of something, I'm not going to pay much attention on the first read-through beyond noting that it is a supporting example (or a contrasting example or whatever). If I get a question about it, then I'll read the example more carefully."

SC: "When I see a split between comma –ing and comma which, I'll jot down M for modifier and try to figure out what the modifier is referring to. If a plain noun, use comma which. If an action / subject-verb pairing, use comma –ing." (Again, the jotting down thing is making your brain take half a second to pause and plant this idea in your brain.)

I have a bunch of older posts on our blog (2018 and earlier) where I take one problem from the free official practice tests and deconstruct/analyze it, so feel free to go back and browse through those if you think that'd be helpful. I won't necessarily write out a "When I see..." sentence in that form, but the general takeaways should (hopefully!) be clear.

[Mufasa]

Hi Stacey,

Many thanks once again for your reply and useful advice. You have answered all the questions I had in a very helpful manner.

I especially appreciate your suggestions to improve reading for purpose and structure in RC, recognizing "bail" signs in verbal problems and deriving actionable takeaways when reviewing problems. I see these three as being the game-changers if I manage to master them. I will use the advice over the coming weeks and test the takeaways on new problems to consolidate knowledge (maybe refining/adjusting them as needed).

P.S: I had the PEA with Ryan Starr and it was really helpful in re-building a study plan for the retake (he also recommended similar exercises for RC reading, eager to try them out).

I look forward to keeping in touch!

Take care and thanks,

Pedro

[StaceyKoprince]

Great! (And yes, Ryan's great. )

Good luck—let me know how it goes!

[Mufasa]

Hi Stacey,

I just wanted to update you after taking the GMAT for the second time yesterday - I am very glad (and surprised, explained later in this post) to say that, above my own expectations, I scored a 730 (Q49, V41, IR5 AWA pending).

Before I debrief on my experience, I wanted to give a special mention to both Jamie Nelson (my MPrep course instructor) and Ryan Starr (PEA expert) for providing very useful and actionable advice that served as the basis on which I developed my own GMAT study plan and sub-section strategy. Much appreciated help and a big thank you to both!
Also, special thanks to you too Stacey for your debriefs, tips and advice on this thread, they were also very useful (I am particularly grateful for the RC strengthening exercises you recommended, kudos to that!)

Regarding the score, it was a very positive "surprise" because of 2 main reasons:

1) On the 4 practice CATs (2 MPrep, 2 free GMAT Prep) I took during the 4 weeks before my first and second attempt, my scores were: 630, 670, 680, 640 (max Q48 and V37 on a section-level). Not a single practice test above 700.

2) The conditions under which I took the test were far from smooth:

• I almost arrived late.


• I was stressed the morning before the exam because of other matters.


• The room where I took the test was noisy.


• My timing on Q was very odd: I rushed until Q16 and felt I was getting very easy questions, and I was 12 min ahead when I had 8/9 questions left.


• Worse of all... I exceeded my break between the Q and V sections by 3 min! So I had to put with doing verbal in 62 min... something which could have hurt my score A LOT given how time pressured I am particularly on V.

Despite the above, I felt especially inspired on V, accepted the fact that I had 3 min less (bailed on a CR and a SC qu quickly not to feel so time-pressured), and, for the first time, I felt convinced that my answers to most of the CR, SC and RC questions that came up were correct. (Also ironically, for the first time, I finished V on time).

Either way, a journey with a good result. My question now is: given how comfortable I currently feel with the GMAT material and strategies, what do you think of re-taking it again (say, in 2-3 weeks) to try and bump-up the score even more?
My rationale behind this is, because competition is so fierce for a place at top business schools, an above-average GMAT score may serve as a differentiator, and the GMAT is one of the little aspects of the application that I can control (to a certain extent). Since the content is still fresh in my mind, I was thinking of fitting some prep and another CAT in the coming weeks and giving it another go, hopefully under "smoother" conditions on test day (and definitely taking care not to exceed any breaks!).

Looking forward to your thoughts and thanks once again for the support,

Pedro

[StaceyKoprince]

Woohoo! That's fantastic—congratulations!!

I think this was the key:

Despite the above, I felt especially inspired on V, accepted the fact that I had 3 min less (bailed on a CR and a SC qu quickly not to feel so time-pressured),

Yes! This test is always trying to get you off your best footing (just like real life) to see how you'll deal with it, and you did exactly what you should have done. Took a deep breath, accepted the facts sitting in front of you right now, and found the best way to deal with the situation. That's exactly what a great business person is able to do as well.

At this point, you have nothing to lose, so if you want to try again to see what happens, go for it. I would go into it with the idea that you're just...kicking the ball at the goal one more time to see whether it goes in. But you're not putting huge pressure or expectations on it. Basically, have that same attitude that you described above—whatever happens, happens, and you'll just make the best decisions you can from moment to moment. Not a bad plan for life either...especially life right now!