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.

PowerScore Critical Reasoning Bible - Proper method?

Expert replies
by bond0007 » Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:43 pm
Hello guys, I would appreciate some help with this.

My worst area is CR. I did the MGMAT book, but didnt have much luck. Their method of drawing a T diagram took up much time and I ended up spending 3-5 minutes per question.

I have the CR bible and I'm not quiet sure how to best use their method. So from what I have read, they say to Read the Stimulus first, and figure out the conclusion. Then the question type allows you to split into 3 families ( Prove,Help, Weaken), and then paraphrasing the answers etc..

So basically im not sure if I need to be writing some type of notes when I do a CR problem, just as i would with MGMAT?
Also for the people that have done both books, which is more helpful?

thank you!!
Join the discussion
Source: — GMAT Strategy |

by bond0007 » Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:51 pm
also should I be timing myself on the practice questions in the book?
Join the discussion

by sch » Mon Jul 26, 2010 6:42 am
Ive read Power Score first and then moved to Manhattan guides. For my self, I found Power Score so much more superior that I never even finished MG CR RC guides. Infact, I used to draw a summary sentences for RC questions. After reading Power Score, however, I took their comment to heart, which stated that there is no need for diagrams (except for one question type) as your brain can retain info from short passages accurately for a 3 min span. Moreover, I bought into an idea that RC - CR sections are related and have only stylistic difference between them. So, gone were the diagrams for RC! Result? I could now afford to read RC passages carefuly the first time and re-read necessary parts to answer specific questions. My RC and CR accuracy is now on par (my RC skills were far inferior to CR before adopting this approach).

For CR, the Power Score helped me a great deal too. I went over it once, and my accuracy went up by 10 percent. Thats 10 percent increase before memorizing all the question types! My experiance with MGMAT on this subject is pure dissapointment. The drills for diagrams, re-phrasing and making notes for both RC and CR took too long, overly complicated and absolutely unnecessary (rest of the MGMAT guides I hold in high regard though).

That is my experiance regarding this subject. Everyone is different, so someone may have diferent experiance regarding Power Score vs MGMAT CR and RC.
Join the discussion

by bond0007 » Mon Jul 26, 2010 8:02 am
sch wrote:Ive read Power Score first and then moved to Manhattan guides. For my self, I found Power Score so much more superior that I never even finished MG CR RC guides. Infact, I used to draw a summary sentences for RC questions. After reading Power Score, however, I took their comment to heart, which stated that there is no need for diagrams (except for one question type) as your brain can retain info from short passages accurately for a 3 min span. Moreover, I bought into an idea that RC - CR sections are related and have only stylistic difference between them. So, gone were the diagrams for RC! Result? I could now afford to read RC passages carefuly the first time and re-read necessary parts to answer specific questions. My RC and CR accuracy is now on par (my RC skills were far inferior to CR before adopting this approach).

For CR, the Power Score helped me a great deal too. I went over it once, and my accuracy went up by 10 percent. Thats 10 percent increase before memorizing all the question types! My experiance with MGMAT on this subject is pure dissapointment. The drills for diagrams, re-phrasing and making notes for both RC and CR took too long, overly complicated and absolutely unnecessary (rest of the MGMAT guides I hold in high regard though).

That is my experiance regarding this subject. Everyone is different, so someone may have diferent experiance regarding Power Score vs MGMAT CR and RC.
Wow thanks a ton for that writeup. I have a very short attention span/Add and its very hard for me to retain something like a RC passage, but I think that remembering the CR is a bit more doable for me.

I have to say that I agree about the MGMAT math + SC stuff being great, but the CR/RC got me in trouble with my verbal score.
Join the discussion