GMAT Strategy

Do we have any recommended range of percentage accuracy of getting OG Hard Level questions (from OG, Verbal/Quant Review, GMAT Prep Ques bank) while practicing that can assure a good score of at least 700?

Doing so will really not help you much in gauging your performance level all that accurately. Taking a section specific diagnostic test (such as given in the official books like the OG12/13/10 or test prep books such as kaplan premier) or taking a diagnostic CAT will be a much better indicative of your performance level. I for one got an accuracy of 85% or better in all three of the verbal sections of the OG and my overall score on my diagnostic CAT was 34 ( way below my expectations) .. On reviewing the major factor to the low score was FATIGUE and mental drain that had taken its toll by the time i got to the Verbal section (my strength). I would recommend doing the OG and Prep material as a LEARNING tool to prepare all the aspects of the GMAT and leave the DIAGNOSTIC part strictly to the CAT's and other mock tests.

Yes, you are correct!! Actually overstated my conclusion as 'can assure a good score of at least 700', whereas I should be saying that can assure a score in particular section only from accuracy perspective, rest things intact. Considering the other factors on the G-day, I think a percentage range would essentially define it.

Moreover, I am struggling a lot only in RC, so just analyzing different prospects.

For most of the GMAT (quant (PS) , SC) we have to have a reasonable understanding and practice of Certain well laid out rules and methods. Other sections need Ability to Logically reason (CR,RC,DS)however what i feel sets the GOOD SCORERS apart from the AVERAGE scorers is the STRATEGY they employ..This is a long test, and we must follow the most efficient path to solving each question so that we are not drained out halfway through the test (and get a poor score at the end)..The GMAT essentially tests HIGH SCHOOL level QUANT and Verbal so it isnt unreasonable to expect most College graduates to get the syllabus and toics DOWN , but its the way they put that knowledge to use which is most important ..

Try to get an idea of what you are getting wrong in RC. For example when i started my prep (RC) i was consistently getting inference questions wrong. Once i spotted the pattern i was able to go hard on them and pick a couple of sources to go over this specific weakness (a couple of books, and some online articles). Although RC is harder to improve upon (reading skills and "strategic reading" is built up gradually over time) then say SC, following certain STRATEGIES or RULES helps especially when you are DRAINED after doing a the Essay, IR and quant sections. It helps to follow certain rules and guidelines (build your own if you do not like what some of the text books say)for RC so that you stay focused and do everything according to plan.

For example, I like the MGMAT strategy of taking HEADLINE notes (like say headlines of a news story) of every paragraph, with greater emphasis on the first para..I rarely go over the notes i have made (usually 3-4 lines at the most for most RC passages) but MAKING NOTES helps me stay focused while reading the passage..It is not uncommon to READ a passage subconsciously and with a less than ideal concentration level (and not realize it), Writing HEADLINES down for me meant that i was always Concentrating 100% on what i was reading and not wandering off subconsciously.. For CR i loved the way we can Break most questions into SUB CATEGORIES and then figure out what are the COMMON traps that the test makers set for that category. For example in Must be true/inference questions the test makers usually use , REVERSE ANSWERS, EXAGGERATED Answers, OUTSIDE INFORMATION, HIDDEN TRAPS (what the Logic bible refers to as SHELL GAME ANSWERS) etc so we can eliminate a lot of answer choices if we know what the test makers usually try to model the wrong answer choices on..This is extremely useful if say we cannot find the correct answer , or we have 2 contenders and we need to choose the best one out of the two.. So use your OG questions to DEVELOP STRATEGY and then HIT the CAT's for an estimate of where you stand (and how much you need to improve:-) )

Thanks vomhorizon for the effort to write down detailed explanation!!

Try to get an idea of what you are getting wrong in RC. For example when i started my prep (RC) i was consistently getting inference questions wrong. Once i spotted the pattern i was able to go hard on them and pick a couple of sources to go over this specific weakness (a couple of books, and some online articles).

When I started my GMAT preparation, I was scoring very poor on the Verbal. Using certain rules and strategies, I have recovered well in SC and CR, however did not see any improvement on the RC at all.
I have similar situation as your's on the Inference questions in RC, and also face problems on Detail questions as well. Literally, I am not able to track any pattern on this area. Can you please zoom in on any strategy here? I am relatively very good at reading and getting the Global perspective of the passage (almost 95% accuracy), but fail to connect the dots in the passage
necessary for inferences, and considering inference as major part of the RC affects a lot. Also most of the times, I am confused between words in different answer choices, so could not effectively differentiate what is the intended meaning in passage. Always end up guessing and selecting the wrong of the last 2 choices. Furthermore, this guessing situation consumes much of my time.

As an example, consider the below passage and inference ques -
It is assumed that American hostility against the Chinese began in 1882 with the Chinese Exclusion Act. Signed into law by President Chester Arthur, the act allowed Congress to suspend immigration of both skilled and unskilled Chinese workers for a ten-year period following a widespread economic depression. It should be noted that one of the many damaging consequences of this economic crisis had been the escalation of hostilities against foreign workers. Historians aside, few grasp the intricacies of the changing policies or the corresponding social developments that combined to produce a subtle and deep-seated discrimination against the Chinese that would sustain itself well into the 20th century. In order to understand both these intricacies and the fluctuations that characterized U.S. treatment of the Chinese, it is important to examine what initially motivated the government to accept this particular immigrant group.

Government attitudes toward the Chinese derived from a variety of considerations. Since immigrant laborers were mostly young, illiterate, and healthy, they provided a massive source of tax income without burdening government infrastructure (education and healthcare, for example). This fact was not lost on United States politicians. Knowing that their constituents required cheap labor to staff construction projects (particularly in the Western regions of the United States), these politicians readily welcomed Chinese immigrants into the country during the period following the Civil War and the dissolution of the Southern slave-plantation system. Repealing the century-old formal exclusion of Chinese immigration, the Burlinghame Treaty of 1868 established friendly relations between China and the United States. By granting China "Most Favored Nation" status, the treaty recognized China's control over its own territory, allowed Chinese consuls to preside over ports in the US, protected Chinese Americans from persecution directed towards their religious persuasion, and allowed them specific privileges-with the exception of naturalization. Mandates such as these encouraged immigration, a practice which was fueled in China by war, starvation, and political corruption.

By 1880, the Chinese immigrant population in the US was well over 70,000. Based on the agreement of 1868, promising employment opportunities seemed available on paper but often evaporated when workers, lured by three-year contracts and charismatic recruiters, became mired in the challenges associated with actually procuring these positions. These expectant laborers faced unbearable transport conditions and were often subjected to unfair wages (which, in fact, were often denied to them by way of shadily outlined food-and-housing schemes). Able neither to return to China nor to naturalize properly, such immigrants were forced to live in an environment of harsh discrimination, where they often perished from disease and starvation. Following the waning of the Gold Rush craze and the intensification of competition for mining jobs, the Chinese found themselves to be the objects of considerable resentment from their white peers. This widespread feeling culminated in the passage of the Exclusion Act.


According to the passage, which of the following is true about the initial government acceptance of Chinese immigrant workers?
(A) It was motivated by the desire to alleviate immigrant burden to government infrastructure.
(B) It was designed to resolve the confusion of immigrant workers who were unable to return to China or naturalize properly in the States.
(C) It was fueled in the States by diminishing tax revenues.
(D) It was in part motivated by the constituents' need for cheap manpower.
(E) It was driven by the desire to provide promising, but ultimately competitive employment opportunities.

I ended up confused between C and D, and chose the incorrect one, which differed only by 1 Killer Word.

Like i said , it helps to know what the "tricks the testmakers have up their sleaves" when formulating Must be true questions/inference questions...

Why were you confusing between the answer choices?

Yes, I was trapped. I felt both are correct, and came to know about the Killer word 'diminishing' only when I read explanation. This usually happens with me on all questions where I feel both answers are correct.
And then time pressure adds to it!! Aaarrggghhhh!!

they provided a massive source of tax income without burdening government infrastructure (education and healthcare, for example).

Knowing that their constituents required cheap labor to staff construction projects (particularly in the Western regions of the United States), these politicians readily welcomed Chinese immigrants into the country during the period following the Civil War

A lot of the times mistakes are made in RC because we do not read the passage with the highest possible concentration levels, or we read it too fast and don't comprehend it entirely..These subtle variations in languages can easily trap one if he/she is not extra cautious in reading and comprehending the passage (i have fallen many a times for such traps only to learn to spend a bit of more time reading and understanding the passage)...

I usually spend the recommended time limit of around 2-3minutes on long passages, and since I was getting the gist of the passage (as observed in Global questions), I thought my comprehension was pretty good. But your point does make sense as we tend to not comprehend entirely.
Thanks !!

The original purpose of this thread though remains unanswered - percentage accuracy??
I will let some one else to chime in on that part.

Under test pressure (as in actual GMAT tests) those that have scored around the 80-85th percentile usually get 65% accuracy (from what i have read). So if you are answering say 700 level questions while simulating test conditions you should technically look for similar accuracy (provided you sit for the same duration, ie write your essays for 30 minutes, spend 30 mins on IR, then two 75 minute sessions of 700 level questions). How does the accuracy translate to say the last 30 OG questions? I don't think anyone will be able to give you a FIRM PERCENTAGE figure on that because their is no real way to A) gauge the exact difficulty of the last 30 OG questions B) no real way to replicate GMAT like conditions other than taking CAT's which are structured in the exact same way..

Moreover i have also found the OG not as good a source for 700+ questions than it is for say 600 level questions because a lot of the tough questions in the OG ( some from the last 30 or 40 in a section) are NOW considered to be of moderate difficulty level. Maybe these questions are old and when they appeared on the test they may have been considered tough but now most people will put them in a moderate difficulty category.. Many have pointed to this fact in the the Quant sections (especially PS), and personally the Critical reasoning questions i am seeing in the GMAT PREP are tougher then those given in the OG13 (Got a 90+% accuracy in CR in the last 40 questions)..In quant i can safely say that the no. of TRUE 700+ questions is not as much (as we would like for it to be a sufficient source of practice )therefore most recommend tougher materials. RC is one aspect where difficulty is rather similar and accuracy has to do more with a person's INTEREST IN THE PASSAGE, FAMILIARITY WITH THE TOPIC, and GENERAL STRATEGIC READING SKILL..personally i consider the RC material on the OG enough to get good practice before G Day as one has to develop a successful strategy and then get enough practice in applying that strategy, and i believe the OG gives enough passages and questions to hone in one's skills.