Quitting has to be one of the GMAT strategies to succeed, but how do you truly implement the strategy? Do you quit when you hit 3 minutes? In that case you wasted 3 minutes. Wouldn't it be nicer if you had known in the first 30 seconds of reading the problem that you will have to quit on the problem end of the day? If you had figured this out in the first 30 seconds and quitted the problem, you would have saved 2.5 minutes. If I read a question and find that it is talking about completely unknown concept, then quitting in first 30 seconds is very easy. But that never happens to high scorers; they are more or less familiar with almost every concept that is being tested. Then, do you quit in first 30 seconds/1 minute when you can't come up with a real plan to solve the particular question even if you know the overarching concept being tested? But, weren't you in the situation numerous time in which you did not really have clear way to solve the problem in the beginning, but once you started moving things around (even without any clear plan for the particular problem) in the beginning and suddenly you got that "Ah" moment and solved the problem. Now if you quit every time when you don't have a clear idea in the first minute about your plan to solve the question, you might be quitting too many problems that you could have gotten correct had you stayed with them for another 30 seconds. I don't want to quit every problem that looks unsolvable in the first 30 seconds and have lots of extra time remaining at the last as well. But, if you spend minute or two moving variables around and mixing and matching waiting for that "Ah" moment, you might be spending your precious time for the "Ah" moment that might never come. How do you balance that? Quitting a problem helps, but I don't think quitting a problem at 3 minutes mark when you are stuck provides much advantage on timing. Truly amazing would be to quit at one minute mark on a problem that you will be stuck even at the 3 minutes mark. But, how do you know beforehand? Ron, would you please provide your thoughts on this dilemma. Do you have any guidelines on how to implement the quitting strategy on question by question basis? I know the strategy is "quit when you are stuck." But, high scores never feel like they are stuck in any question until it's too late (~3 min mark); you always feel like you are seeing that light at the end of the tunnel because you are so familiar with the concept.
Thanks,
B
My GMAT(new version) Prep Strategy - Comments Invited!
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
hi bond777,
first, just a suggestion -- if you write a long post like this, please divide it into paragraphs next time. thanks. (i can't speak for other moderators, but i have a very hard time reading unbroken "walls of text".)
1/ admit to yourself when you are stuck
2/ if you are stuck, then quit.
frankly, if you get to the point where 3 minutes have passed, then there's a 99.99% chance that you aren't doing #1 here -- in other words, that you aren't being honest with yourself about when you are stuck.
see, a lot of the problems on this test are hard, but none of them are really very long. if you get that far -- except perhaps on a very, very long word problem -- then, in all likelihood, you've actually been stuck for a couple of minutes already.
here's a test: imagine that someone came up behind you, tapped you on the shoulder, and asked you, "what's the PURPOSE of the step you're doing?"
if you have a concrete answer to this question, then you should keep working.
if not, you should quit.
this might happen after a minute or two -- or it might happen after 20 seconds. whenever it happens, though, you should quit.
you will always know the concepts, but that doesn't mean you can always solve the problems.
i think you are placing too much emphasis on concepts here, and not nearly enough on problem solving.
think about sudoku puzzles, for instance. in those puzzles, the only "concept" is the idea of counting numbers from 1 to 9 ... but that doesn't mean that sudoku puzzles are easy.
first, just a suggestion -- if you write a long post like this, please divide it into paragraphs next time. thanks. (i can't speak for other moderators, but i have a very hard time reading unbroken "walls of text".)
well, again, you basically just need 2 things:Bond777 wrote:Quitting has to be one of the GMAT strategies to succeed, but how do you truly implement the strategy? Do you quit when you hit 3 minutes? In that case you wasted 3 minutes.
1/ admit to yourself when you are stuck
2/ if you are stuck, then quit.
frankly, if you get to the point where 3 minutes have passed, then there's a 99.99% chance that you aren't doing #1 here -- in other words, that you aren't being honest with yourself about when you are stuck.
see, a lot of the problems on this test are hard, but none of them are really very long. if you get that far -- except perhaps on a very, very long word problem -- then, in all likelihood, you've actually been stuck for a couple of minutes already.
you just need an awareness of whether you are or aren't getting anywhere productive.Wouldn't it be nicer if you had known in the first 30 seconds of reading the problem that you will have to quit on the problem end of the day? If you had figured this out in the first 30 seconds and quitted the problem, you would have saved 2.5 minutes.
here's a test: imagine that someone came up behind you, tapped you on the shoulder, and asked you, "what's the PURPOSE of the step you're doing?"
if you have a concrete answer to this question, then you should keep working.
if not, you should quit.
this might happen after a minute or two -- or it might happen after 20 seconds. whenever it happens, though, you should quit.
all of the actual concepts on this exam are pretty basic, so, yes, you are right about this.If I read a question and find that it is talking about completely unknown concept, then quitting in first 30 seconds is very easy. But that never happens to high scorers; they are more or less familiar with almost every concept that is being tested.
yes.Then, do you quit in first 30 seconds/1 minute when you can't come up with a real plan to solve the particular question even if you know the overarching concept being tested?
you will always know the concepts, but that doesn't mean you can always solve the problems.
i think you are placing too much emphasis on concepts here, and not nearly enough on problem solving.
think about sudoku puzzles, for instance. in those puzzles, the only "concept" is the idea of counting numbers from 1 to 9 ... but that doesn't mean that sudoku puzzles are easy.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
this doesn't happen very often. it definitely doesn't happen often enough for quitting to become a bad idea.But, weren't you in the situation numerous time in which you did not really have clear way to solve the problem in the beginning, but once you started moving things around (even without any clear plan for the particular problem) in the beginning and suddenly you got that "Ah" moment and solved the problem.
]Now if you quit every time when you don't have a clear idea in the first minute about your plan to solve the question, you might be quitting too many problems that you could have gotten correct had you stayed with them for another 30 seconds. I don't want to quit every problem that looks unsolvable in the first 30 seconds and have lots of extra time remaining at the last as well. But, if you spend minute or two moving variables around and mixing and matching waiting for that "Ah" moment, you might be spending your precious time for the "Ah" moment that might never come. How do you balance that? Quitting a problem helps, but I don't think quitting a problem at 3 minutes mark when you are stuck provides much advantage on timing.
so, i think i'm seeing the biggest problem here. namely, i think you are thinking that "quit" means "leave the problem and guess".
that's not what it means!
"QUIT" just means "QUIT WHAT YOU ARE DOING RIGHT NOW".
in other words -- most of the time, "quit" does not mean "make a guess".
instead, "quit" means "TRY ANOTHER METHOD of solving the problem".
this is especially true for quant problems.
if you're working on a multiple-choice problem, there are a ton of other things you can try after "quitting". for instance, if you were doing algebra, then you should try working backward from the answer choices, or plugging in your own values for unknowns, or estimating, or whatever.
on a data sufficiency problem, if you were previously using algebra/theory, then you can try enumerating and evaluating a list of individual cases (and trying to prove "insufficient").
etc.
if you are not currently using alternative methods to solve the problems, then there's your problem right there.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
Sorry about the improper formatting!
Ron, thank you for putting so much time teaching us about this!
Now, when does "quit" actually means "leave the problem"? Considering the time constraint, you cannot really try multiple alternative ways but just couple, right?
On the question of having a clear path of what you are doing and why you are doing, doesn't the second post more closely correspond to #1 (having a clear path) in the 1st post rather than #2? For me "real plan" in 2nd post means you exactly know your steps; you exactly know what you are doing first, second, third, fourth and so on... #2 in 1st post means you don't have step by step path but you are putting the information together to make sense out of it. If you are observing a problem and forming an intuition as you go, how do you know when to quit (go for alternative route or just leave)? When do you know that the intuition that you are forming from the information provided is not taking you towards solving the problem?
1st post "here's a thought experiment: let's say you are about to visit a country with which you're completely unfamiliar (just a random visit, not a business trip with billions of dollars at risk). would you rather ...
... 1/ read everything you can about the place/culture/people before you go, and try to remember what you've read as you go through your travels?
... 2/ just go there, wander around, observe stuff, and form an intuition as you go?
see, this isn't just a gmat thing -- the problem is that you're probably at #1 here, too. your challenge is nothing less than to turn around the entire way your mind works, so that your default reaction to this situation is, to some significant extent, #2 instead of #1."
2nd Post "Then, do you quit in first 30 seconds/1 minute when you can't come up with a real plan to solve the particular question even if you know the overarching concept being tested?
yes."
Thanks,
B
Ron, thank you for putting so much time teaching us about this!
Now, when does "quit" actually means "leave the problem"? Considering the time constraint, you cannot really try multiple alternative ways but just couple, right?
On the question of having a clear path of what you are doing and why you are doing, doesn't the second post more closely correspond to #1 (having a clear path) in the 1st post rather than #2? For me "real plan" in 2nd post means you exactly know your steps; you exactly know what you are doing first, second, third, fourth and so on... #2 in 1st post means you don't have step by step path but you are putting the information together to make sense out of it. If you are observing a problem and forming an intuition as you go, how do you know when to quit (go for alternative route or just leave)? When do you know that the intuition that you are forming from the information provided is not taking you towards solving the problem?
1st post "here's a thought experiment: let's say you are about to visit a country with which you're completely unfamiliar (just a random visit, not a business trip with billions of dollars at risk). would you rather ...
... 1/ read everything you can about the place/culture/people before you go, and try to remember what you've read as you go through your travels?
... 2/ just go there, wander around, observe stuff, and form an intuition as you go?
see, this isn't just a gmat thing -- the problem is that you're probably at #1 here, too. your challenge is nothing less than to turn around the entire way your mind works, so that your default reaction to this situation is, to some significant extent, #2 instead of #1."
2nd Post "Then, do you quit in first 30 seconds/1 minute when you can't come up with a real plan to solve the particular question even if you know the overarching concept being tested?
yes."
Thanks,
B
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
ok, so i'm starting to see the real issue here, which is that you're looking for "rules" for everything.Bond777 wrote:Now, when does "quit" actually means "leave the problem"?
this is not something you can keep doing indefinitely. if you want to kill this thing, at some point you're going to have to develop an intuition that you can go ahead and rely on.
at the end of the day, you should definitely know whether you're making meaningful progress -- and, if you aren't, you should quit.
it's like driving a car: either you're lost or you're not. if you're sufficiently honest with yourself, you'll immediately know which.
if you quit as soon as you are honestly stuck, you will have plenty of time to try everything you can think of trying.Considering the time constraint, you cannot really try multiple alternative ways but just couple, right?
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
nah, you shouldn't expect to "see" all the way through the problem, like some chessmaster who can think five or six moves ahead. that's awfully limiting -- it will work on problems that are really easy, but it will go down in flames as soon as there's some significant degree of challenge in the problem.On the question of having a clear path of what you are doing and why you are doing, doesn't the second post more closely correspond to #1 (having a clear path) in the 1st post rather than #2? For me "real plan" in 2nd post means you exactly know your steps; you exactly know what you are doing first, second, third, fourth and so on...
it's sort of like having a "clear path" in heavy fog -- you can see a step or two ahead, but that's about it.
still, even though you can't see the precise particulars of the path more than a couple of steps away (because the fog is too thick), you still have a sense of (a) exactly where your next step or two is going, and (b) generally where you think your overall path is headed.
the same thing goes for these problems. if you are looking for some super-specific guidelines, then, sorry, no such animal.
again, you're not going to be able to make a "rule" for this. (if you're not convinced, go ahead and try -- it might even help you develop the same spirit of experimentation that you need to solve these problems.)If you are observing a problem and forming an intuition as you go, how do you know when to quit (go for alternative route or just leave)?
to get past a certain point, you're going to develop an honest gut feeling of "i'm getting somewhere with this" vs. "i'm not getting anywhere with this".
yes, there will be some small percentage of exceptions. like, on a few % of the problems, you might have some lightbulb turn on after you've stared at the problem forever.
but, that's not going to happen nearly often enough to justify the persistence. (again, if you aren't convinced until you experiment with this a little bit, then go ahead and experiment; that's the whole point of doing homework and practice tests in the first place.)
as stated above, that's ultimately an intuition, too.When do you know that the intuition that you are forming from the information provided is not taking you towards solving the problem?
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
Ron,
Thank you so very much for sharing your wisdom; your teaching is really making a difference. I took the real test and my quant score went up from 46 to 49 just by internalizing some of your posts (few are listed below) and not by cramping more questions.
I really wanted to get to 50/51 in quant and I am confident that I have the capacity. Now, from your experience what is the difference between a Q49 test taker and Q50/Q51 test taker? In the test in which I received 49, I don't remember leaving a question (other than two) in which I was not confident about my answer. I thought I got 35 out of 37 questions correct. I still ended up with 49 and that means I missed a ton. What's my prep strategy should be now to get to that coveted Q50/Q51 level?
Now, let's delve into verbal part. I really screwed up in timing in verbal and ended up with 37 even though I scored in the 40-44 range in the practice tests.
After reading your posts multiple times, I exactly knew what to do in Quant. Such as this:
here's a test: imagine that someone came up behind you, tapped you on the shoulder, and asked you, "what's the PURPOSE of the step you're doing?"
if you have a concrete answer to this question, then you should keep working.
if not, you should quit.
This was so helpful that I start asking myself the question "Do I know what I am doing?" to myself at around 1 minute mark. It sound so simple but it can make a day and night difference on your timing.
Now I need similar thing for verbal. I really need to get this verbal timing under my control. What kind of strategy would you suggest that would help me to quit the problem in time? As you said in your post "quitting means quit what you are doing and try alternate approach," is there similar statement you can make for verbal?
Quitting in Verbal: When do I tell myself "you should quit on this problem now?" Just like your example of "somebody tapping the shoulder and asking question," can I have something like "if you found yourself reading three answer choices more two times without having any clue of what could be the ans "its time to quit that SC"?" Or can I say "even after reading multiple times for a minute, if you could not follow the logic in the CR, you should just quit the question"?
I know you don't want us to make rules on these kinds of things, but I found myself going in circle again and again with few ans choices wasting my time; sometime, even after spending 2 minutes into the question, I become more clueless than I was when I first saw the question (especially in SC and sometime in CR). I need some kind of loop breaker to apply to myself so I can come out of that loop and not waste time and still get the wrong answer.
I know some of your posts below are applicable for the whole test, but I think those are mostly appropriate for Quant. Would you please share some of your teachings similar to the below posts that are more applicable to verbal? Is there something we can formulate for verbal similar to the very last post listed?
Some of the excerpt from your valuable posts:
************************************************************
well, again, you basically just need 2 things:
1/ admit to yourself when you are stuck
2/ if you are stuck, then quit.
frankly, if you get to the point where 3 minutes have passed, then there's a 99.99% chance that you aren't doing #1 here -- in other words, that you aren't being honest with yourself about when you are stuck.
************************************************************
you just need an awareness of whether you are or aren't getting anywhere productive.
here's a test: imagine that someone came up behind you, tapped you on the shoulder, and asked you, "what's the PURPOSE of the step you're doing?"
if you have a concrete answer to this question, then you should keep working.
if not, you should quit.
this might happen after a minute or two -- or it might happen after 20 seconds. whenever it happens, though, you should quit.
************************************************************
you will always know the concepts, but that doesn't mean you can always solve the problems.
i think you are placing too much emphasis on concepts here, and not nearly enough on problem solving.
think about sudoku puzzles, for instance. in those puzzles, the only "concept" is the idea of counting numbers from 1 to 9 ... but that doesn't mean that sudoku puzzles are easy.
************************************************************
so, i think i'm seeing the biggest problem here. namely, i think you are thinking that "quit" means "leave the problem and guess".
that's not what it means!
"QUIT" just means "QUIT WHAT YOU ARE DOING RIGHT NOW".
in other words -- most of the time, "quit" does not mean "make a guess".
instead, "quit" means "TRY ANOTHER METHOD of solving the problem".
************************************************************
at the end of the day, you should definitely know whether you're making meaningful progress -- and, if you aren't, you should quit.
it's like driving a car: either you're lost or you're not. if you're sufficiently honest with yourself, you'll immediately know which.
honestly, there are really only two things you need to manage time properly:
1/
be brutally honest with yourself about whether you are stuck.
-- if you are just staring at the problem, you're stuck.
-- if you are just pushing variables around the page, or just thinking in random circles about a verbal problem, then you're also stuck. (this is what most people aren't honest with themselves about)
it's like driving a car: if you are pulled over by the side of the road, hopelessly lost, and just sitting there, then you're lost... but, if you are driving around in random directions, then you're also lost.
2/
if you're stuck, QUIT. like, right now.
-- if you can think of something else to try, try it.
-- if you can't, then guess and move on.
honestly, that's it -- those two things are all you need to manage time properly.
****************************************************************************
This bolded part helped me so much that in my last real test I never had to worry about the time for a second (in quant). I was just following these two so good that my timing was perfectly in line with what was expected; I know it does not have to this way, but every time I looked at the clock (such as after 10th or 20th or 25th questions) I was not more than a minute off from the numerical time guideline.
Thank you very much for your insightful inputs.
B
Thank you so very much for sharing your wisdom; your teaching is really making a difference. I took the real test and my quant score went up from 46 to 49 just by internalizing some of your posts (few are listed below) and not by cramping more questions.
I really wanted to get to 50/51 in quant and I am confident that I have the capacity. Now, from your experience what is the difference between a Q49 test taker and Q50/Q51 test taker? In the test in which I received 49, I don't remember leaving a question (other than two) in which I was not confident about my answer. I thought I got 35 out of 37 questions correct. I still ended up with 49 and that means I missed a ton. What's my prep strategy should be now to get to that coveted Q50/Q51 level?
Now, let's delve into verbal part. I really screwed up in timing in verbal and ended up with 37 even though I scored in the 40-44 range in the practice tests.
After reading your posts multiple times, I exactly knew what to do in Quant. Such as this:
here's a test: imagine that someone came up behind you, tapped you on the shoulder, and asked you, "what's the PURPOSE of the step you're doing?"
if you have a concrete answer to this question, then you should keep working.
if not, you should quit.
This was so helpful that I start asking myself the question "Do I know what I am doing?" to myself at around 1 minute mark. It sound so simple but it can make a day and night difference on your timing.
Now I need similar thing for verbal. I really need to get this verbal timing under my control. What kind of strategy would you suggest that would help me to quit the problem in time? As you said in your post "quitting means quit what you are doing and try alternate approach," is there similar statement you can make for verbal?
Quitting in Verbal: When do I tell myself "you should quit on this problem now?" Just like your example of "somebody tapping the shoulder and asking question," can I have something like "if you found yourself reading three answer choices more two times without having any clue of what could be the ans "its time to quit that SC"?" Or can I say "even after reading multiple times for a minute, if you could not follow the logic in the CR, you should just quit the question"?
I know you don't want us to make rules on these kinds of things, but I found myself going in circle again and again with few ans choices wasting my time; sometime, even after spending 2 minutes into the question, I become more clueless than I was when I first saw the question (especially in SC and sometime in CR). I need some kind of loop breaker to apply to myself so I can come out of that loop and not waste time and still get the wrong answer.
I know some of your posts below are applicable for the whole test, but I think those are mostly appropriate for Quant. Would you please share some of your teachings similar to the below posts that are more applicable to verbal? Is there something we can formulate for verbal similar to the very last post listed?
Some of the excerpt from your valuable posts:
************************************************************
well, again, you basically just need 2 things:
1/ admit to yourself when you are stuck
2/ if you are stuck, then quit.
frankly, if you get to the point where 3 minutes have passed, then there's a 99.99% chance that you aren't doing #1 here -- in other words, that you aren't being honest with yourself about when you are stuck.
************************************************************
you just need an awareness of whether you are or aren't getting anywhere productive.
here's a test: imagine that someone came up behind you, tapped you on the shoulder, and asked you, "what's the PURPOSE of the step you're doing?"
if you have a concrete answer to this question, then you should keep working.
if not, you should quit.
this might happen after a minute or two -- or it might happen after 20 seconds. whenever it happens, though, you should quit.
************************************************************
you will always know the concepts, but that doesn't mean you can always solve the problems.
i think you are placing too much emphasis on concepts here, and not nearly enough on problem solving.
think about sudoku puzzles, for instance. in those puzzles, the only "concept" is the idea of counting numbers from 1 to 9 ... but that doesn't mean that sudoku puzzles are easy.
************************************************************
so, i think i'm seeing the biggest problem here. namely, i think you are thinking that "quit" means "leave the problem and guess".
that's not what it means!
"QUIT" just means "QUIT WHAT YOU ARE DOING RIGHT NOW".
in other words -- most of the time, "quit" does not mean "make a guess".
instead, "quit" means "TRY ANOTHER METHOD of solving the problem".
************************************************************
at the end of the day, you should definitely know whether you're making meaningful progress -- and, if you aren't, you should quit.
it's like driving a car: either you're lost or you're not. if you're sufficiently honest with yourself, you'll immediately know which.
honestly, there are really only two things you need to manage time properly:
1/
be brutally honest with yourself about whether you are stuck.
-- if you are just staring at the problem, you're stuck.
-- if you are just pushing variables around the page, or just thinking in random circles about a verbal problem, then you're also stuck. (this is what most people aren't honest with themselves about)
it's like driving a car: if you are pulled over by the side of the road, hopelessly lost, and just sitting there, then you're lost... but, if you are driving around in random directions, then you're also lost.
2/
if you're stuck, QUIT. like, right now.
-- if you can think of something else to try, try it.
-- if you can't, then guess and move on.
honestly, that's it -- those two things are all you need to manage time properly.
****************************************************************************
This bolded part helped me so much that in my last real test I never had to worry about the time for a second (in quant). I was just following these two so good that my timing was perfectly in line with what was expected; I know it does not have to this way, but every time I looked at the clock (such as after 10th or 20th or 25th questions) I was not more than a minute off from the numerical time guideline.
Thank you very much for your insightful inputs.
B
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
Hi Bond777, thanks for your response. Sometimes it seems like I'm just yelling into the ether, but it's posts like yours that make the time spent here worthwhile.
On the other hand, if someone has several scores of q48/49 yet hasn't managed to break 50, then what's usually missing is strategic diversity.
meaning, the student is usually too focused on trying to use "textbook approaches" to the problems, and isn't making enough use of alternative methods such as backsolving, plugging in numbers, testing cases on DS, and estimating answers.
I've given a partial outline in this post:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/thought-i-d- ... tml#632012
Basically, the idea is that you want to (a) focus exclusively on one method at a time, until you've achieved total comfort with it-where "total comfort" means "i'm just as comfortable with that method as i am with algebra/other traditional methods"-and then try to integrate it in with your other problem-solving techniques.
for instance, let's say you're working on an assumption problem. if you are not getting very far by looking at the passage and trying to find weaknesses in the reasoning, then you can QUIT that approach, and then try the "negating the answer choices" method (an alternative method). I'd say that's basically analogous to quitting, say, algebra and trying plug-in-numbers.
If you're doing boldface CR and you get stuck in trying to identify the role of each statement directly, QUIT and try processes of elimination. For instance, forget trying to define the roles so explicitly, and instead just realize which side of the argument each boldface statement is on. Then eliminate the choices that put that statement on the wrong side of the argument.
Etc.
Basically, if I had to summarize this whole idea all at once, I'd summarize it like this: Never cover the same ground twice.
If a certain thought process didn't work the first time, then, well, it's probably not going to work the second (or third or fourth) time, either. So try doing something different-different in at least some important way.
Before quitting the question, though, I'd add in one more step: Step back and make sure you're considering the passage from a "planet earth" point of view, rather than an "academic" point of view.
Too many people-especially those who have been studying this stuff for way too many hours-fall back easily into the "academic" point of view, in which they forget that CR passages are normal human arguments from the real world, flaws and all, and instead try to concentrate on "classifying" or "categorizing" the statements in the argument. That kind of thinking directly impedes intuition and true understanding-so, if it's there, you have to snap out of it and get back into a more "conversational"/"real world" frame.
So, before quitting the problem, ask yourself, "Have I slipped into trying to use formal logic to analyze this?"
If the answer is yes, then take a deep breath, go back to it, and try to transform the passage into a "lunchtime conversation" or "something I just read in a magazine". Neither of which you would ever dream of trying to classify into categories-and both of which you'd understand, and be able to critically evaluate, quite easily.
"Stuck" is a universal phenomenon-it's the idea of just not knowing where to go, or the feeling of just doing random things without any real goal. There's nothing particular to math or verbal about that feeling; it's the same feeling whenever and wherever you encounter it. You could encounter it on math, on verbal, in a relationship, at work, in traffic, anywhere.
If you are stuck, QUIT.
there it is.
in SC, "QUIT" doesn't have to mean moving on right away. for instance, if you aren't getting anywhere with the splits in the answer choices, then you can QUIT looking at the splits, and then go down the following "checklist" of major SC topics:
* Do I see parallelism?
* Do I see any subject/verb issues?
* Do I see any pronouns, anywhere? (Including pronouns in the non-underlined part!)
* Do I see any modifiers that are moved around?
* Do I see any modifiers that alternate with other modifiers (among different choices)?
* Are there any choices with an absurd meaning, regardless of whether they are grammatically sound?
If you can get through this entire checklist without finding anything, then you should probably just guess and move on.
The only really important variable is the time constraint-i.e., if this were an untimed test, then everything you've quoted here would be horrible advice. (E.g., relationships don't normally come with severe time constraints, so "quit if it's not working right away" is, well, s***ty advice there. On the other hand, if someone hypothetically has some disease that gives them a 2-year window to have children, then now we've got a time constraint, and suddenly this stuff becomes good advice. Lol.)
The difference between one score of q49 and one score of q50/51 is probably statistical randomness.Bond777 wrote:I really wanted to get to 50/51 in quant and I am confident that I have the capacity. Now, from your experience what is the difference between a Q49 test taker and Q50/Q51 test taker?
On the other hand, if someone has several scores of q48/49 yet hasn't managed to break 50, then what's usually missing is strategic diversity.
meaning, the student is usually too focused on trying to use "textbook approaches" to the problems, and isn't making enough use of alternative methods such as backsolving, plugging in numbers, testing cases on DS, and estimating answers.
You should practice the alternative methods described above.In the test in which I received 49, I don't remember leaving a question (other than two) in which I was not confident about my answer. I thought I got 35 out of 37 questions correct. I still ended up with 49 and that means I missed a ton. What's my prep strategy should be now to get to that coveted Q50/Q51 level?
I've given a partial outline in this post:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/thought-i-d- ... tml#632012
Basically, the idea is that you want to (a) focus exclusively on one method at a time, until you've achieved total comfort with it-where "total comfort" means "i'm just as comfortable with that method as i am with algebra/other traditional methods"-and then try to integrate it in with your other problem-solving techniques.
you can make some analogous statements, yes.After reading your posts multiple times, I exactly knew what to do in Quant. Such as this:
here's a test: imagine that someone came up behind you, tapped you on the shoulder, and asked you, "what's the PURPOSE of the step you're doing?"
if you have a concrete answer to this question, then you should keep working.
if not, you should quit.
This was so helpful that I start asking myself the question "Do I know what I am doing?" to myself at around 1 minute mark. It sound so simple but it can make a day and night difference on your timing.
Now I need similar thing for verbal. I really need to get this verbal timing under my control. What kind of strategy would you suggest that would help me to quit the problem in time? As you said in your post "quitting means quit what you are doing and try alternate approach," is there similar statement you can make for verbal?
for instance, let's say you're working on an assumption problem. if you are not getting very far by looking at the passage and trying to find weaknesses in the reasoning, then you can QUIT that approach, and then try the "negating the answer choices" method (an alternative method). I'd say that's basically analogous to quitting, say, algebra and trying plug-in-numbers.
If you're doing boldface CR and you get stuck in trying to identify the role of each statement directly, QUIT and try processes of elimination. For instance, forget trying to define the roles so explicitly, and instead just realize which side of the argument each boldface statement is on. Then eliminate the choices that put that statement on the wrong side of the argument.
Etc.
Basically, if I had to summarize this whole idea all at once, I'd summarize it like this: Never cover the same ground twice.
If a certain thought process didn't work the first time, then, well, it's probably not going to work the second (or third or fourth) time, either. So try doing something different-different in at least some important way.
Both of those sound like good advice.Quitting in Verbal: When do I tell myself "you should quit on this problem now?" Just like your example of "somebody tapping the shoulder and asking question," can I have something like "if you found yourself reading three answer choices more two times without having any clue of what could be the ans "its time to quit that SC"?" Or can I say "even after reading multiple times for a minute, if you could not follow the logic in the CR, you should just quit the question"?
Before quitting the question, though, I'd add in one more step: Step back and make sure you're considering the passage from a "planet earth" point of view, rather than an "academic" point of view.
Too many people-especially those who have been studying this stuff for way too many hours-fall back easily into the "academic" point of view, in which they forget that CR passages are normal human arguments from the real world, flaws and all, and instead try to concentrate on "classifying" or "categorizing" the statements in the argument. That kind of thinking directly impedes intuition and true understanding-so, if it's there, you have to snap out of it and get back into a more "conversational"/"real world" frame.
So, before quitting the problem, ask yourself, "Have I slipped into trying to use formal logic to analyze this?"
If the answer is yes, then take a deep breath, go back to it, and try to transform the passage into a "lunchtime conversation" or "something I just read in a magazine". Neither of which you would ever dream of trying to classify into categories-and both of which you'd understand, and be able to critically evaluate, quite easily.
Again, at the end of the day, it's really a matter of "Know when you are stuck."I know you don't want us to make rules on these kinds of things, but I found myself going in circle again and again with few ans choices wasting my time; sometime, even after spending 2 minutes into the question, I become more clueless than I was when I first saw the question (especially in SC and sometime in CR). I need some kind of loop breaker to apply to myself so I can come out of that loop and not waste time and still get the wrong answer.
"Stuck" is a universal phenomenon-it's the idea of just not knowing where to go, or the feeling of just doing random things without any real goal. There's nothing particular to math or verbal about that feeling; it's the same feeling whenever and wherever you encounter it. You could encounter it on math, on verbal, in a relationship, at work, in traffic, anywhere.
If you are stuck, QUIT.
there it is.
in SC, "QUIT" doesn't have to mean moving on right away. for instance, if you aren't getting anywhere with the splits in the answer choices, then you can QUIT looking at the splits, and then go down the following "checklist" of major SC topics:
* Do I see parallelism?
* Do I see any subject/verb issues?
* Do I see any pronouns, anywhere? (Including pronouns in the non-underlined part!)
* Do I see any modifiers that are moved around?
* Do I see any modifiers that alternate with other modifiers (among different choices)?
* Are there any choices with an absurd meaning, regardless of whether they are grammatically sound?
If you can get through this entire checklist without finding anything, then you should probably just guess and move on.
As I wrote above, nothing here is any more germane to math than it is to verbal (or relationships, or driving, or work, or etc.)I know some of your posts below are applicable for the whole test, but I think those are mostly appropriate for Quant. Would you please share some of your teachings similar to the below posts that are more applicable to verbal? Is there something we can formulate for verbal similar to the very last post listed?
The only really important variable is the time constraint-i.e., if this were an untimed test, then everything you've quoted here would be horrible advice. (E.g., relationships don't normally come with severe time constraints, so "quit if it's not working right away" is, well, s***ty advice there. On the other hand, if someone hypothetically has some disease that gives them a 2-year window to have children, then now we've got a time constraint, and suddenly this stuff becomes good advice. Lol.)
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
see, now, that's awesome.This bolded part helped me so much that in my last real test I never had to worry about the time for a second (in quant). I was just following these two so good that my timing was perfectly in line with what was expected; I know it does not have to this way, but every time I looked at the clock (such as after 10th or 20th or 25th questions) I was not more than a minute off from the numerical time guideline.
Now, you should just hope that everyone else on this board ignores everything I'm saying, thus giving you the edge.
|:
Oh yeah, and, one more thing:
Here's the thing: Especially in high-level DS, there is surprisingly little correlation between this kind of "confidence" and the actual correctness/incorrectness of an answer. I.e., most people who are "confident" about most of their DS answers will, almost inevitably, get lots of those problems wrong.In the test in which I received 49, I don't remember leaving a question (other than two) in which I was not confident about my answer.
The following problem is an illustration of what I'm talking about here. Try it; I'll explain where I'm going with this in the next post. (Don't scroll down until you've tried the problem.)
Of the 120 children in a certain school, 75 are currently studying Spanish. How many of the students in the school are currently studying French?
(1) The number of students in the school who are studying both French and Spanish is equal to the number of students in the school that are studying neither French nor Spanish.
(2) 65 of the students in the school are studying Spanish but are not studying French.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
Ok, so here's the deal with the last problem: The solution is A, but the vast majority of people who attempt the problem-including high scorers-pick C and are quite "confident" about that choice.
(Quick summary: Make the double-set matrix chart thingy. Then you have 45, 75, 120 in the last row [or column] for No Spanish, Spanish, and Total. Put x in "both" and put x in "neither". Then fill in the chart. You'll get expressions containing x in two of the other squares, but in the one box that you actually care about-the "French/Total" box-the x's will all cancel and you'll get the constant number 45.)
Now here's the point:
When high scorers get DS problems wrong, they don't get them wrong for any reason they can detect during the process. I.e., they don't get "stuck", or make math mistakes, or whatever. Instead, high scorers mostly miss DS problems because they have the wrong goal from the very beginning.
If you picked A for that problem, congrats, nice job.
If you-like most people-picked C, then that means you were already wrong before you even touched the paper with your pen. I.e., selecting C here means that your initial thought process was "I have to find ALL the numbers in the chart", or, equivalently, "If there are any x's in that chart at all, then it's not sufficient."
Oops.
You care about exactly one of the nine boxes in the chart. As long as there's a number in that one box, the other boxes can contain all the variables in the world and you won't care.
you can see how this plays into the whole "confidence" thing. If you have the wrong goal, then it's easy to be "confident" about a solution that's ultimately wrong. In fact, ironically, it may even be easier to feel confident about such solutions, because those solutions (with the wrong goal) are usually less demanding and more "straightforward" than the real solution!
So, yeah, there it is.
"Confidence in your answers" is probably not too bad as a metric when it comes to the multiple-choice questions, since there's no ambiguity about the goal of those questions. On the other hand, when it comes to DS, it's best to completely ignore any "confidence" you may feel about your answers.
(Quick summary: Make the double-set matrix chart thingy. Then you have 45, 75, 120 in the last row [or column] for No Spanish, Spanish, and Total. Put x in "both" and put x in "neither". Then fill in the chart. You'll get expressions containing x in two of the other squares, but in the one box that you actually care about-the "French/Total" box-the x's will all cancel and you'll get the constant number 45.)
Now here's the point:
When high scorers get DS problems wrong, they don't get them wrong for any reason they can detect during the process. I.e., they don't get "stuck", or make math mistakes, or whatever. Instead, high scorers mostly miss DS problems because they have the wrong goal from the very beginning.
If you picked A for that problem, congrats, nice job.
If you-like most people-picked C, then that means you were already wrong before you even touched the paper with your pen. I.e., selecting C here means that your initial thought process was "I have to find ALL the numbers in the chart", or, equivalently, "If there are any x's in that chart at all, then it's not sufficient."
Oops.
You care about exactly one of the nine boxes in the chart. As long as there's a number in that one box, the other boxes can contain all the variables in the world and you won't care.
you can see how this plays into the whole "confidence" thing. If you have the wrong goal, then it's easy to be "confident" about a solution that's ultimately wrong. In fact, ironically, it may even be easier to feel confident about such solutions, because those solutions (with the wrong goal) are usually less demanding and more "straightforward" than the real solution!
So, yeah, there it is.
"Confidence in your answers" is probably not too bad as a metric when it comes to the multiple-choice questions, since there's no ambiguity about the goal of those questions. On the other hand, when it comes to DS, it's best to completely ignore any "confidence" you may feel about your answers.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
words of wisdom, Ron! thank you.lunarpower wrote: Now here's the point:
When high scorers get DS problems wrong, they don't get them wrong for any reason they can detect during the process. I.e., they don't get "stuck", or make math mistakes, or whatever. Instead, high scorers mostly miss DS problems because they have the wrong goal from the very beginning.
So, yeah, there it is.
"Confidence in your answers" is probably not too bad as a metric when it comes to the multiple-choice questions, since there's no ambiguity about the goal of those questions. On the other hand, when it comes to DS, it's best to completely ignore any "confidence" you may feel about your answers.
-
bellcurve
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 37
- Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:07 am
- Thanked: 1 times
Ron,
My greatest gratitude to you; I was finally be able to make a 99%ile score in the real GMAT. Your teachings and your immense wisdom is making a big difference in the GMAT world.
Just to give a perspective to whoever reads this thread, my real GMAT score after months of studying when I first took the GMAT back in 2004 was 540 (46Q, 28V). Then with much more studying, I was able to get to 630, good enough to be admitted to a fairly ranked MBA program.
This time around I thought my ceiling was around 650 because I thought I did everything I could when I took the test years back. After reading quality English for a while and after studying for a year, I was able to make it to the 700 (Q48, V37) mark. Again, all along your teaching was instrumental.
Even though the score was better than what I could have asked for at the begging of my study session, I became greedier and also became more aware of what I could do. I gave another six months or so to the GMAT, read almost every one of your post in Manhattangmat forum and Beatthegmat forums, and took the test again. This time I was able to take the score to 710 (Q49, V37).
Studying lessor and lessor when you get closer and closer to the test just sounded very counter intuitive to me because I always prepared right before the tests and did well every time. I did hear from you that this test is unlike any tests in schools, but I was very nervous about not studying. This time I followed what you said and went against my own will; I took a three week vacation to Europe in the middle of the preparation program. After not thinking about the word GMAT for complete three weeks, I took a Kaplan practice test few days after I got back and scored 760, highest score that I ever scored. I studied very little for another couple weeks and took myself away from anything that has to do with GMAT for a whole week (7 complete days) right before the actual test. When the score popped 760 (Q49, V44) in the screen on the D-day, I was in the different world. Verbal score of 44 for a guy who failed elementary level ESL (English as a Second Language) classes when he first came to US, even after he had a bachelor degree from his home country, is truly unimaginable.
I think two things came into play here.
1. The power of a well-rested brain
2. The value of the common and intuitive sense in the test
I had this personal rivalry with the GMAT and I conquered with your help. I owe you big time; thank you for everything. I hope everybody who wanted to do well read this thread from beginning to the end.
(All except one score mentioned above are real GMAT scores and not practice ones.)
By the way, Bond777, to whom you answered every little question of his, is also my Avatar.
My greatest gratitude to you; I was finally be able to make a 99%ile score in the real GMAT. Your teachings and your immense wisdom is making a big difference in the GMAT world.
Just to give a perspective to whoever reads this thread, my real GMAT score after months of studying when I first took the GMAT back in 2004 was 540 (46Q, 28V). Then with much more studying, I was able to get to 630, good enough to be admitted to a fairly ranked MBA program.
This time around I thought my ceiling was around 650 because I thought I did everything I could when I took the test years back. After reading quality English for a while and after studying for a year, I was able to make it to the 700 (Q48, V37) mark. Again, all along your teaching was instrumental.
Even though the score was better than what I could have asked for at the begging of my study session, I became greedier and also became more aware of what I could do. I gave another six months or so to the GMAT, read almost every one of your post in Manhattangmat forum and Beatthegmat forums, and took the test again. This time I was able to take the score to 710 (Q49, V37).
Studying lessor and lessor when you get closer and closer to the test just sounded very counter intuitive to me because I always prepared right before the tests and did well every time. I did hear from you that this test is unlike any tests in schools, but I was very nervous about not studying. This time I followed what you said and went against my own will; I took a three week vacation to Europe in the middle of the preparation program. After not thinking about the word GMAT for complete three weeks, I took a Kaplan practice test few days after I got back and scored 760, highest score that I ever scored. I studied very little for another couple weeks and took myself away from anything that has to do with GMAT for a whole week (7 complete days) right before the actual test. When the score popped 760 (Q49, V44) in the screen on the D-day, I was in the different world. Verbal score of 44 for a guy who failed elementary level ESL (English as a Second Language) classes when he first came to US, even after he had a bachelor degree from his home country, is truly unimaginable.
I think two things came into play here.
1. The power of a well-rested brain
2. The value of the common and intuitive sense in the test
I had this personal rivalry with the GMAT and I conquered with your help. I owe you big time; thank you for everything. I hope everybody who wanted to do well read this thread from beginning to the end.
(All except one score mentioned above are real GMAT scores and not practice ones.)
By the way, Bond777, to whom you answered every little question of his, is also my Avatar.
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
For some reason, I thought I had answered this post.bellcurve wrote:Ron,
My greatest gratitude to you; I was finally be able to make a 99%ile score in the real GMAT. Your teachings and your immense wisdom is making a big difference in the GMAT world.
...
I think two things came into play here.
1. The power of a well-rested brain
2. The value of the common and intuitive sense in the test
I had this personal rivalry with the GMAT and I conquered with your help. I owe you big time; thank you for everything. I hope everybody who wanted to do well read this thread from beginning to the end.
(All except one score mentioned above are real GMAT scores and not practice ones.)
By the way, Bond777, to whom you answered every little question of his, is also my Avatar.
One word: Congratulations. And thanks for the feedback.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
-
cd86
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 12:27 am
- Thanked: 1 times
- GMAT Score:650
Ron,
you said "yes, there will be some small percentage of exceptions. like, on a few % of the problems, you might have some lightbulb turn on after you've stared at the problem forever.
but, that's not going to happen nearly often enough to justify the persistence."
For me this lightbulb turns on after staring at the question for a while, does that mean one has 'concept' issues? If the solution to a problem does occur to the mind doesnt it mean you know the concept but somehow werent able to recollect it at that moment? Maybe the brain wasnt agile enough?
Most of the time while practicing (hence relaxed) I get all sorts of tough questions correct..but during the exam I simply hit a wall, especially in the verbal section. I am confused as to what is there to 'learn' any longer.I really dont feel there is anything new to learn.
I have started to feel that there must be some basic difference between the brains of people who are able to focus 100% and never falter by making silly mistakes or are able to nail comlex CR questions 2.5 hours into the test and my brain.How do i learn to focus like that?
I have planned to counter my silly mistakes problem and focus issue by doing 37 quant and 41 verbal questions everyday just to practice endurance.Will this practice turn on the lightbulb more often and faster?
Thanks a lot.
you said "yes, there will be some small percentage of exceptions. like, on a few % of the problems, you might have some lightbulb turn on after you've stared at the problem forever.
but, that's not going to happen nearly often enough to justify the persistence."
For me this lightbulb turns on after staring at the question for a while, does that mean one has 'concept' issues? If the solution to a problem does occur to the mind doesnt it mean you know the concept but somehow werent able to recollect it at that moment? Maybe the brain wasnt agile enough?
Most of the time while practicing (hence relaxed) I get all sorts of tough questions correct..but during the exam I simply hit a wall, especially in the verbal section. I am confused as to what is there to 'learn' any longer.I really dont feel there is anything new to learn.
I have started to feel that there must be some basic difference between the brains of people who are able to focus 100% and never falter by making silly mistakes or are able to nail comlex CR questions 2.5 hours into the test and my brain.How do i learn to focus like that?
I have planned to counter my silly mistakes problem and focus issue by doing 37 quant and 41 verbal questions everyday just to practice endurance.Will this practice turn on the lightbulb more often and faster?
Thanks a lot.
GMAT/MBA Expert
- lunarpower
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
- Thanked: 2256 times
- Followed by:1535 members
- GMAT Score:800
part of the problem here may be this -- i.e., there may be an issue in how you're thinking about "concepts".cd86 wrote:For me this lightbulb turns on after staring at the question for a while, does that mean one has 'concept' issues? If the solution to a problem does occur to the mind doesnt it mean you know the concept but somehow werent able to recollect it at that moment? Maybe the brain wasnt agile enough?
the whole point of RC and CR is that they don't require any "knowledge". therefore, your use of the word "recollect" here is troublesome, because you shouldn't ever have to "recollect" anything on these problems.
all you have to do is ...
... understand the goal of the problem
... determine which words are relevant
... read the words
... understand what they say
... answer the question.
the point is not that this process is necessarily "easy"; often it's not. however, if you are approaching CR and RC in a way that makes sense, you should never have to "recollect" anything.
correct; there's no "learning" in CR/RC (unless you don't know enough words in the english language, but then that's a whole separate issue). that's the whole point of those two sections: you don't have to "learn" or "remember" anything.Most of the time while practicing (hence relaxed) I get all sorts of tough questions correct..but during the exam I simply hit a wall, especially in the verbal section. I am confused as to what is there to 'learn' any longer.I really dont feel there is anything new to learn.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron
--
Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi
--
Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.
Yves Saint-Laurent
--
Learn more about ron

















