Lisa Anderson wrote:Dear Stockmoose,

Congratulations on your score! I'm not sure it is worth your time to retake the test at this point if you are trying to hit second round deadlines. Of course, a higher score will not hurt you if you are confident you can increase your score. But you are close to the average for your target schools, have a high GPA, and have unique work experience that you can leverage to your advantage. I think your time at this stage will be better spent on putting together stellar application packages. It will be important for you to "connect the dots" for the admissions committees on how your previous experience, MBA, and future goals fit together. Likewise, it is critical for you to make a compelling case for your potential as a future business leader.

Best of luck,
Lisa

Lisa,

Thanks for your input. Assuming I don't have the time to both study to re-take the GMAT and make the Rd 2 deadlines, I'm wondering what your opinion is on taking a GMAT re-test blindly. Meaning, I don't study at all and take the test again in a month. If I score considerably lower, it won't make any difference, right? From what I've read, the schools only consider your highest GMAT score. Do you think this is a prudent option? I had been scoring in the 710-740 range on my prep tests, so there's a chance I could break 700 on a re-test (although, less likely if I don't study for the entire month).

My worry is that 5 months from now, I'll get my responses back from Harvard and UCLA, and my low GMAT score will be the deciding factor in why I got rejected. At that point, I'd basically have to start from scratch to re-learn all the gmat material and try again. I hate that my score is so borderline. In any other year, it would've been a 700 based on the raw numbers. But instead, it's a 690, and I feel that even though it's statistically equivalent to a 700, Harvard and UCLA are unlikely to see it that way.

What are your thoughts?