BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
Live EA class + 6 months of EA OnDemand
  • Expert-led weekly online sessions
  • EA Masterclass access between classes
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

GMAT in 30-40 days...Realistic Goal?

Expert replies
by sabroski » Mon Feb 07, 2011 9:40 am
Ok, I don't usually post to these things but I need to know if my goals are realistic or a pipe dream. I've only been studying for about a week now and I have taken the GMATPrep tests (2.5 times)...I only did the quant section the first time (kids were running around driving me crazy)! My goal is to score about 600 on the actual test (above the 50th percentile in each section). That may seem a liittle low compared to others on the board, but I'm trying to be realistic. I took the GMAT in 2004 and got a 530 after about 2 weeks of kind-of studying, but I was also a recent college grad. Now, I've been in the workforce and away from academics since 2004, so I'm a little worried. I have the official GMAT review guides (12th Edition & 2d Edition Quantitative Review) and multiple website resources. My weakness really seem to be in the quant section (probability, combinations, work problems and mixtures). I'm under a little bit of a time line that is work related so I'd like to test in about 30-40 days...is getting ~600ish a reasonable goal? I work 8-12/day, 5 days a week and have a wife +3 kids...so the time management part is on me.

Test version 1 (Quant Only)...31 Jan 11
Quant Score: 38
# Q's missed: -15

Test version 2...2 Feb 11
Quant: 44 (15 Q's missed)
Verbal: 38 (11 Q's missed)
Total: 670 (I'm just thinking I guesses a lot...this score just seems to high for me!)

Test version 1...6 Feb 11
Quant: 36 (17 Q's missed)
Verbal: 35 (11 Q's missed)
Total: 600

Thanks!

Mark
Join the discussion
Source: — GMAT Strategy |

by rishi raj » Mon Feb 07, 2011 9:37 pm
I don't see a reason why you shouldn't be able to get a 600+ given the fact that you're already doing well. I think a good way to prepare is not only to focus on your weak areas but to work on your strong area. So if you think that you're good at Verbal, you may want to relegate it . Rather you should capitalize on your strength as taking your score higher in an area where you're fairly good is ,in my opinion, an easier task than in area in which you're bad at. So instead of dividing your time 80:20 between Quant and Verbal,you may want to keep it 65:35 or 60:40 but certainly not less than that.
Join the discussion