710

beatthegmat · Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 3:08 pm Post subject: 710

Posting on behalf of guest user 'A':

***

Hi people,

This is a bloody awesome group. On numerous occasions over the last two months of my prep time, I have drawn inspiration from the joys and the rants of people that have written here. I have experienced, at least to a limited extent, the road to near perfection, the joys of scoring high, the uncertainties of scoring in the middle, the insecurities of people that think the GMAT is all encompassing and could make or break your life, and finally, the frustrations of people that simply can't figure it out. I would like to give back some of what I got out of you guys by sharing some of my own experiences.

Some of my own background
I have a pretty strong quantitative background having been educated in Engineering, and advanced degrees in Physics and Rocket Science. My verbal background is only so-so; I did a lot of fiction growing up, but never paid attention to grammatical nuances. So at best, I only have a good ear for the right stuff. To make things worse, I was educated in the English system and have only been in the US for four years; hence some effort was needed to adjust to the American rhetoric (and no, I still haven't picked up Strunk's Elements Smile

Approach
From my experience with the GRE (although things are different with MBA admissions), I knew that the GMAT wasn't make-or-break-your application. While I appreciate the passion of some of the people that went all the way to score very high, I chose to approach the problem in a slightly different way. Given the amount of time I spend on my full time R&D job (>55 hrs/week) and my girlfriend (and biking, and gym, and.... Smile

, I decided to put just enough effort to score slightly above the mean of the normal distribution for most top-10 schools (which happens to be between 700-720).

Prep period
I took GMATprep #1 right away and scored a 680 (47Q, 35/36 in V, can't remember) - so I knew I was there. I checked out a bunch of books from the library (ARCO, Barron's, GMAT-800, Kaplan training material, OG-11) and started going through all of them at a leisurely pace- somewhere along the way, I lost focus, and momentum. I took a couple more practice tests and did really badly (620 in GMATprep #2, and 630 on a Princeton Review test), but I guess it was my ego that led me to believe that these scores were not true indicators of what I would score on the actual GMAT exam, and that I would have no problems figure it out in the real situation.

First inning
Things got worse in the final week before the exam when I realized with a sinking feeling that I could not answer many of the harder problems. To top it all, on the day of the exam, I forgot to take my passport to the testing center, and had to run back to my place to get it. I did badly in math, much to my chagrin. I only got easy questions (as I obviously messed up some of my first questions) and rushed into making some silly errors. My timing was way off and I finished my math section with 15 minutes to spare! I ended up with an unenviable 660 (Q44-72%, V36-84%), although my AWA turned out to be a saving grace at 6.0.

Sililoquey
Time to soul search. I went online to understand what others in my situation were doing. After all, I said to myself, the GMAT score was only a component of the whole application packet, and the tail of the distribution at the top schools started at around 630. I even found a forum consisting entirely of 600-somethings that managed to get into the top schools. I slept over it, and I guess it was my ego again (definitely not what people on forums such as this said about retaking tests) that made me decide that the score I got might have reflected my preparation, but not my true abilities.

I called GMAC and asked for another appointment at the earliest.

Prep again
This time, I decided to take it easy, but maintain focus throughout. Clearly my problematic areas were CR and RC (and I needed some practice in the data sufficiency, which I regard as *$%$#% pestilential). I did only 30-40 problems a day, but concentrated on quality. I guess I learnt to take a step back and detach myself from the problem, so that I could attack it in an unbiased matter, and it was this approach that gave me the final boost.
During the last three days leading to the exam, I took the three CAT tests and scored as follows:

GMATprep #1: 720 (49Q, 40V)
Kaplan CAT#4: 610 (??)- didn't need to pay any attention to this score.
GMATprep #2: 710 (48Q, 39V)

Second inning
There! I had stabilized my scores and was all set. Everything went like clockwork in the actual exam- I saw a lot of tough questions that I knew I didn't get right, but I wasn't worried as I knew I was doing okay. I ended up with a 710 (49Q, 39V), which is exactly what I wanted to get: not too high, not too low.

Lessons learned
1. The GMAT is not a big deal- you don't need to live like a monk to score in the 700s: all it takes is a strengthening of the foundations in English grammar, and basic math (damn! I wish we had calculus on the exam Smile

2. Concentrate on quality rather than quantity during prepping. It is too easy to gloss over a thousand problems and feel good about it, but nothing will come out of all that if you don't exactly know what you are doing.

3. Time the exam right- in my experience, not having enough time to do a good job on all the answers is actually better than being left with too much time remaining in the end.

4. You've heard this before, but let me repeat: Kaplan is good. GMAT-800 is good, Barrons sucks, OG is the bible, ARCO is okayish with an excellent math section, GMAT CAT in 24 hrs has an excellent Verbal section, Princeton Review is excellent if you are aiming in the 600s (we all love Joe Bloggs)

5. Do at least four practice essays- two of each kind.

What I make of the scores
In my opinion, it is best to aim for consistency in percentiles. Admission directors at more than one good school have been quoted as saying that their cutoffs are in the percentiles, and there's some explaining to do if the applicant scores significantly below the 80th percentile, either in Verbal, or in Math.

Okay, so how much is 50 points worth?

This is strictly my (cold) opinion: if you want to really use this table to influence your decision to retake, do so at your own risk. I think this is a useful exercise to go through, as I'm not aware of anyone else doing it, and I found myself looking for such a table myself when I was doing my soul searching.

510:
510 is a score, a non-zero score (I'm not making fun of anyone here!). Demonstrates to the school that the applicant is willing to go through the trouble of taking the GMAT. This score will work if the schools needs a GMAT score, any score to do the paperwork.

560:
All right, the candidate has gone through a certain amount of preparation, and may be bogged down by a certain aspect (V/Q). People that get stuck around this number need a step up in the quality of preparation, a certain amount of improvement in the fundamentals (training courses, books), and a spa vacation (just kidding!). Definitely retake if you are looking at established schools.

610:
We are getting serious here. Fundamentals are probably okay, but some specific aspect isn't (ratios?/geometry?/SC?). Try and focus on the problem area and keep on doing it.. Competent score if you are applying to a third-tier/local school, worthy of consideration at some second-tier schools, but unless you are a super-star of some kind, you don't stand a chance in the top 10.

660
My first score- this is in the 'uncertain' region. As I mention above, there will be a bunch of questions asked, and justifications given, if you are to be admitted to a top school. I guess the question is not so much about your basic abilities, as long as your academic credentials are solid, but more about your inability to do well on standardized tests. You can bitch about it (just like I did) and say that you are simply a poor standardized test taker, but that excuse has been heard a million times and evaluators are probably tired of it by now.
If you are insecure about your score, go ahead and retake if you think you can do better. Keep in mind that the questions will only get harder from here on. It's kinda easy to get stuck at this score over repeated attempts, but don't worry: you haven't lost your mojo! All I can say is that there have been people that have gotten away with a score in this region, but there will be a lot of uncertainty throughout the application process (assuming again, that it is only the top schools that interest you) and my personal take on it is that, this anxiety is simply not worth it. So yes, I would recommend retaking.

710
Nirvana! Well, not quite, but in my opinion, good enough to not be a factor during admissions. Should I retake and get a 760? Go ahead, but ask yourself what would the 760 convey (compared to the 710) to the evaluator.

780-800:
The applicant is dorky and nerdy and geeky and is just a jerk (just kidding Smile

I'm so envious of some of you guys!).

Anyways, this is the second longest email that I have ever written. I have poured my heart out: hope all this helps some of you out there!

Good luck!
A

Stele · Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 5:48 pm Post subject: Re: 710

Guest · Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:52 pm Post subject:

What a fantastic score and post! Thanks!

Guest · Guest

Well Stele,

Stele · Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 3:24 am Post subject:

Except you're not competing against the run-of-the-mill ivy league guy. You're probably competing against a fairly ambitious one. And I think Oxbridge is probably the only pair of schools that really hold credence in people's minds (in the States) in terms of foreign schools. Once again, most people in the Top 10 programs are from the top undergrad programs in the States. What my point is, everything else being equal (including the GMAT score), a non-Top undergrad school grad will lose against an Ivy or equivalent grad. And since the latter group is what drives the median scores at the top programs, it's probably necessary to beat those scores by a significant margin in order to have a shot.

BTW, if you had a 89/89 percentile split, your score would have been higher. My split was 89/85 and I got a 720.

Guest · Guest

Hi Stele,

Actually, my split was 89Q/88V- (for some reason I thought it was 89/89" beg pardon), and my total (710) is 93rd percentile.

What was your overall percentile? It's wierd how these numbers can somewhat vary.

A

Stele · Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:40 am Post subject:

I don't think there is a 88 percentile Verbal score. 40V corresponds to 89 percentile and 39V to 85 (I think, I really don't feel like digging out the pdf they sent me).

720 is 95 percentile.

Guest · Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:45 am Post subject:

Stele · Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 11:47 am Post subject:

If you have taken the GMATs, then they will give you their percentile tables. I don't think those change very much, at least very little within a few years' timeframe.

Guest · Guest

Yay! I got a six on my AWA again!!!

Steele,

All right, wise guy, here's a screenshot of my report.
http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002942443363165773

Of course an 88th percentile is possible in Verbal- I can't think of any logical reason why not, as long as there are enough samples (people taking the test) to make the overall frequency distribution fine enough, and the associated reporting resolution thresholds coarse enough.

Please be a little more careful about making misleading blanket statements based on purely empirical evidence.

A

Stele · Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:17 am Post subject:

Blanket statements on...what? Ok, I made a mistake in recalling what the percentiles were and I lost that code to check my pdf, and btw those are the same tables I got (and everyone else who took it recently), but that doesn't mean the percentiles fluctuate at all. The reason you got a 710 is because a higher Verbal score is given greater weight than a higher Quant score. Probably because a lot of foreign test-takers push the Quant percentile into the stratosphere and then crash and burn on the Verbal.

jelt · Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:54 am Post subject: Re: 710

It's great that you know where you stand, I'd just like to point out that there probably isn't a 'run-of-the-mill' ivy leaguer. Yale for instance has something like a 10% admissions rate for undergraduates, which is even lower than HBS' 15%. I honestly do see it as it's really these guys' to lose. Having said that, of course, if you're a bum who did nothing through college, then of course coming from Yale isn't going to help you much.

Anyway foreign schools are great, it shows your international diversity.

Stele · Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 7:59 am Post subject:

Undergrad admission rates aren't comparable to graduate school admission rates. The pool of people being compared is highly different, even though the MBA is probably one of the more saturated graduate degrees out there.

And there are definitely run-of-the-mill Ivy kids out there. You try to stay within the top 5-10 percentile of your high school class and do some sports and you're in. And the SATs are a joke. Not really hard to get in as long as a person has some self-discipline. Also helps if you're black or hispanic, lol.

jelt · Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 8:45 am Post subject:

Somehow I don't think it's as easy as you think. I've seen loads of extremely capable people who got dinged with this kind of profile. Let's put it this way. It's the same reason why so many mckinsey/goldman sachs etc people get into the top MBA programmes- because people know that these schools (the ivys) are not easy to get into in the first place, and so the top 20% at these schools are probably close to being the absolute top in the entire USA.

it's like this, really- 0.10 chance of getting in * 0.20 chance of being in the top 20 percent = top 0.02 of all applicants to say yale. Now assuming that only the top 1% in the US even bother to apply to Yale, that's another 0.02 * 0.01 = 0.0002 of the entire USA. times 10 for 10 ivy league schools, and that's maybe 0.002. That's a pretty darn elite population, at least where one measure is concerned (performance at undergraduate level), and includes the maybe 2000 students each year who are the top 20% of each of the ivy league schools. Considering that Harvard + Wharton + Stanford accept less than 2500 students each year, it's a lot easier to see why many more of the 'run-of-the-mill (top 20%)' ivy league students get in than students from any other school.

Stele · Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:39 am Post subject:

To be honest, I didn't really read all of what you wrote because of all the fuzzy numbers, but I do feel like pointing out a couple of things which may or may not apply to your post even.

-There are only 8 Ivy League schools and not necessarily all (or half) of them are ranked in the Top 10 nationally. Ex. Brown and Cornell are probably the weakest schools. School influence is slowly shifting away from the Ivies. In the eyes of many IBanking recruiters, they're (i.e. Brown and Cornell) actually a tier lower than the cream of the crop target schools.
-Many recruiters from Goldman and McKinsey come from Ivy backgrounds so that's what they like to recruit. It's probably more of a nepotism thing than anything else. So if you meet that criteria, it's not nearly as competitive.
-A lot of high school students that fit the Ivy profile don't even apply to Ivy school for financial and family reasons.
-A lot of students that don't fit the Ivy profile get in because of family connections.
-Your numbers are extremely fuzzy.