-
Target Test Prep 20% Off Flash Sale is on! Code: FLASH20
Redeem
How to Analyze an IR Two-Part Question
This is the latest in a series of How To Analyze articles that began with the general How To Analyze A Practice Problem article (click on the link to read the original article).
This week, were going to analyze a specific IR question from the Two-Part prompt category. First, give yourself up to 2.5 minutes to try the below GMATPrep problem.
An architect is planning to incorporate several stone spheres of different sizes into the landscaping of a public park, and workers who will be applying a finish to the exterior of the spheres need to know the surface area of each sphere. The finishing process costs $92 per square meter. The surface area of a sphere is equal to 4[pmath]r^2[/pmath], where r is the radius of the sphere.
In the above table, select the value that is closest to the cost of finishing a sphere with a 5.50-meter circumference as well as the cost of finishing a sphere with a 7.85-meter circumference. Make only two selections, one in each column.
After trying the problem, checking the answer, and reading the given solution (if any), I then try to answer the questions listed below. First, Ill give you what Ill call the standard solution (that is, one we might see in an Official Guide book if this were an official guide problem a correct solution but not necessarily one that shows us the easiest way to do the problem). Then well get into the analysis.
Standard solution: The formula for circumference is C = 2r. We can use this to calculate the radii of the two spheres (note that the problem asks us to find the closest values, so we can estimate):
5.50 m circumference sphere: 5.5 = 2r. (5.5/2) = r. (Use calculator) r = 0.876 (approx.).
7.85 m circumference sphere: 7.85 = 2r. (7.85/2) = r. (Use calculator) r = 1.25 (approx.).
Next, the problem tells us that the formula for surface area is SA = 4[pmath]r^2[/pmath]. We can plug in to calculate the surface area of each sphere:
5.50 m circumference sphere: r = 0.876. SA = 4 [pmath](0.876)^2[/pmath]. (Use calculator) SA = 9.63
7.85 m circumference sphere: r = 1.25. SA = 4 [pmath](1.25)^2[/pmath]. (Use calculator) SA = 19.625
Finally, we can multiply each surface area by $92 per square meter to find the cost required to finish each sphere:
5.50 m circumference sphere: cost = (SA)(cost per square meter) = (9.63)(92) = $886
7.85 m circumference sphere = (19.625)(92) = $1,805
The correct answers are $900 for the first column and $1,800 for the second column.
1. Did I know WHAT they were trying to test?
- Was I able to CATEGORIZE this question by topic and subtopic? By process / technique? If I had to look something up in my books, would I know exactly where to go?
The question is an IR Two-Part prompt. The question prompt is pretty distinctive: the answer choices are presented in table form and I have to select two of them. This problem is wordy, but its not a verbal problem it definitely falls on the quant side of the fence.
- Did I COMPREHEND the symbols, text, questions, statements, and answer choices? Can I comprehend it all now, when I have lots of time to think about it? What do I need to do to make sure that I do comprehend everything here? How am I going to remember whatever I've just learned for future?
I got the question right but I spent way too much time doing it nearly 4 minutes. The math was tedious and I had to use the calculator repeatedly. Reading the standard solution really didnt help much that is pretty much what I did, but its just so much work! I can already tell that Im going to have to try to figure out a more efficient way to do this one (see section 2, below).
- Did I understand the actual CONTENT (facts, knowledge) being tested?
This part was fine I think. I knew the formula for circumference. They gave me the surface area formula, and I did put everything together okay. It just took me too long.
2. How well did I HANDLE what they were trying to test?
- Did I choose the best APPROACH? Or is there a better way to do the problem? (There's almost always a better way!) What is that better way? How am I going to remember this better approach the next time I see a similar problem?
When I was solving, I remember thinking one thing was annoying: at one point, I divided by and then a few steps later I had to multiply by again. Maybe theres a way I couldve cut out that step altogether. Im going to go play around with just the formulas and see what happens.
Lets see, first I had C = 2r and the point here was that I had to solve for the radius: C/2 = r. My next step was to plug that r into the surface area formula:
SA = 4[pmath]r^2[/pmath]
SA = 4[pmath](C/2pi)^2[/pmath]
[pmath]SA={4pi C^2}/{4pi^2}[/pmath]
Oh, wow, check it out! Im going to be able to cancel out some stuff and make this way easier!
SA = [pmath]C^2/pi[/pmath]
Thats amazing. All I have to do is square the circumference figure and divide by . Lets see, first Im going to square 5.5. Thats about 30 (since [pmath]5^2[/pmath]= 25 and [pmath]6^2[/pmath]= 36). Also, I can estimate not only because the problem told me I could (by asking for the closest number) but also because of those answer choices. Look how far apart they are! Okay, now divide by 3 (close enough were estimating!) and the surface area is 10. The cost per square meter is $92, so the approximate cost is $920. Only one answer is close. Wow I just did that whole thing without having to use my calculator once!
Lets do the other one. I need to square 7.85 which is almost 8. [pmath]8^2[/pmath]= 64, so lets say [pmath]7.85^2[/pmath]= 60. Divide by 3 to get 20. Then, 20 $92 is about $1,800 (because 2 9 = 18).
So a little work up front made my life immensely easier in the end. How would I know to do this next time? Well certainly, first, Im going to write down the two formulas (circumference and surface area) side-by-side. That will let me notice that they both have r variables and pi symbols. Next, the problem literally tells me that I can approximate (closest to), plus the answers are really far apart. But when I look at the formulas separately, there doesnt seem to be any reasonable way to approximate for instance, to find the radius for the first sphere, Id have to divide 5.5 by 2 and by 3, or 5.5 / 6 which is smaller than 1 should I estimate to 1 or would I have to use 0.9? Hmm, this seems messy maybe theres some algebra manipulation I can do first yes, yes, there is.
Thats how Id get myself to realize that I should combine those two equations up front. That might take about 45 to 60 seconds, then Id use another 45 to 60 seconds to do the algebra, and now Ive got 30 to 60 seconds left to do the last bit of math, which has now become so easy that I dont even need the calculator.
- Did I have the SKILLS to follow through? Or did I fall short on anything?
I had the math skills, yes, but not the test taker savvy skills to realize that I shouldve done some algebra simplification before I started to plug and chug. I need to retrain myself to look before I leap in other words, to see how I can simplify things before I just dive right in.
- Did I make any careless mistakes? If so, WHY did I make each mistake? What habits could I make or break to minimize the chances of repeating that careless mistake in future?
I didnt on this one, although I could certainly imagine that it would have been easy to do so!
- Am I comfortable with OTHER STRATEGIES that would have worked, at least partially? How should I have made an educated guess?
Certainly, the smaller sphere should cost less, so I wouldve kept that in mind if Id had to guess. Alternatively, I couldve worked backwards starting from the answers but Im thinking that would be too time consuming on this one, because I have 6 answers and have to find values for 2 spheres.
- Do I understand every TRAP & TRICK that the writer built into the question, including wrong answers?
Actually, from the way that they wrote this, I do think that they were trying to get me to just start plugging and chugging (and wasting a bunch of time). Next time I have the urge to hop on the calculator immediately, Im going to make sure to write stuff out first and see whether thats really my best course of action.
3. How well did I or could I RECOGNIZE what was going on?
- Did I make a CONNECTION to previous experience? If so, what problem(s) did this remind me of and what, precisely, was similar? Or did I have to do it all from scratch? If so, see the next bullet.
- Can I make any CONNECTIONS now, while I'm analyzing the problem? What have I done in the past that is similar to this one? How are they similar? How could that recognition have helped me to do this problem more efficiently or effectively? (This may involve looking up some past problem and making comparisons between the two!)
They got me to default to pulling up the calculator and chugging away. Now that Ive seen this, though, Im going to be prepared for next time (see below).
- HOW will I recognize similar problems in the future? What can I do now to maximize the chances that I will remember and be able to use lessons learned from this problem the next time I see a new problem that tests something similar?
The key thing here, I think, was the two formulas that shared a variable that, coupled with the fact that they told me I could estimate, yet it didnt seem reasonable at all (at first) to estimate. Those two things together are a really good clue that perhaps the two formulas can be combined and simplified, and then I will actually be able to estimate (and possibly entirely avoid using the calculator in the first place!).
And thats it! Note that, of course, the details above are specific to each individual person such a write-up would be different for every single one of you, depending upon your particular strengths, weaknesses, and mistakes. Hopefully, though, this gives you a better idea of the way to analyze an IR problem. This framework also gives you a valuable way to discuss problems with fellow online students or in study groups this is the kind of discussion that really helps to maximize scores.
* GMATPrep question courtesy of the Graduate Management Admissions Council. Usage of this question does not imply endorsement by GMAC.
Recent Articles
Archive
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009