This is a question I get all the time - "how can I go from a very good score to an EXCELLENT score?" To put it in a nutshell: very high scorer has to have mastery of the content. A excellent scorer has to have mastery of the TEST!
To used a really dated reference... think of the GMAT as The MATRIX. The 48Q student sees the question on the screen, and tries to solve it correctly. A 51Q student doesn't just see the question on the screen - he/she sees through the Matrix to the inner workings of the test!
Here's the thought process of a student who can see through the Matrix:
- "I know the concept being tested"
- "I recognize this structure from several other questions"
- "I know what the test writer's objective was"
- "I know the kind of traps involved in this sort of question"
- "I know a shortcut that will let me skip steps"
Another major factor that distinguishes the 48Q student from the 51Q student is that the 51Q student doesn't make careless mistakes (or doesn't make nearly as many). You could be an absolute genius, but if you're making careless computation or algebra errors, you're not going to get the score that you want. To minimize these errors, you need to know what patterns of errors you're prone to. Here's an article that outlines how: https://www.manhattangmat.com/blog/index ... -studying/
Getting to a deep understanding of the test and minimizing your flaws will require a great deal of work. You will have to see hundreds of problems to develop that pattern recognition. But just doing the work isn't enough! You also have to review each problem really thoroughly, and think critically about the reason this question exists, in this format, with these answer choices, etc. It requires stepping back from the question itself, and making connections.
What is the difference between 48Q scorer vs 50/51Q scorer?
This topic has expert replies
Source: Beat The GMAT — GMAT Strategy |
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
ceilidh.erickson
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2095
- Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:22 pm
- Thanked: 1443 times
- Followed by:247 members
-
bellcurve
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 37
- Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:07 am
- Thanked: 1 times
Ceilidh,
Thank you for your response. So, the question approach wise, what is the difference between the two test takers?
After you read the question, do you sit back (pause) for 5/10 seconds and ask those questions? Or you ask the questions/make a framework simultaneously as you read the question? If the question is long, do you write the relationships in terms of equations as you read or wait until you get to the end of the question? When you have some idea about the question, do you just get into it using whatever method comes first in your brain and move to the next when that method fails? Or you think about what method might be faster and then use the method that you think is a faster?
From your experience, how does a 51Q scorer approach the Qs?
Thank you for your response. So, the question approach wise, what is the difference between the two test takers?
After you read the question, do you sit back (pause) for 5/10 seconds and ask those questions? Or you ask the questions/make a framework simultaneously as you read the question? If the question is long, do you write the relationships in terms of equations as you read or wait until you get to the end of the question? When you have some idea about the question, do you just get into it using whatever method comes first in your brain and move to the next when that method fails? Or you think about what method might be faster and then use the method that you think is a faster?
From your experience, how does a 51Q scorer approach the Qs?
-
Brian@VeritasPrep
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 1031
- Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:23 pm
- Location: Malibu, CA
- Thanked: 716 times
- Followed by:255 members
- GMAT Score:750
I love the question and definitely agree with Ceilidh and the Matrix analogy. If I can just tack on a few things:
1) Not all 48s and 51s are created equal - for some people it's about minimizing mistakes; for others it's about seeing a little deeper into the test; for others it's about a smarter pacing strategy. So some of that improvement is bound to be personal - why are YOU getting questions wrong?
One of the reasons I wanted to jump on this thread is that the difference is seldom "chase more math rules" but I think that's what a lot of people do. They're trying to remember those next couple triangle ratios past 7-24-25, or they're scrounging the forums for shortcut tricks when really they need to do some self-analysis and figure out what 2-3 things are holding you back.
2) Probably the biggest difference is that Matrix-level understanding of the test that Ceilidh mentioned. And my favorite application of that is what we call the Shrumbuster, named after one of my colleagues (who posts here under Scott@VeritasPrep). The Shrumbuster setup is pretty classic;
**Step One: the question satisfies your intellect with something you see as "hard"
**Step Two: you've let your guard down because you think you've found "what makes it hard" and that's where the question sneaks one last trick past you.
**Point Three: that last trick is usually something that you'd never, never miss under moderate-question circumstances (you forgot to consider a negative value, you answered in the wrong units, etc.), but because that "beware of traps" part of your mind has already been satisfied, it won't catch the trick.
Now, this is just one application of where higher-scorers tend to have that expert vision into what's *really* going on in the question, but I think it's an important one in that it doesn't really signify "harder material" in the sense that we've come to know it from Honors and AP classes - it's just a deeper test of reasoning. (and for more on Shrumbusters, I encourage you to check out this blog post: https://www.veritasprep.com/blog/2012/12 ... difficult/)
3) Higher scorers tend to be more careful.
This cuts a couple ways - like Ceilidh mentioned, higher scorers make fewer silly mistakes, often because they have a sixth sense about which types of setups leave them prone to mistakes. So some of that comes from just being more thorough with calculations and that kind of thing.
Careful also comes from having that "fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me" mentality - careful test-takers typically have a checklist, either mental or physical written right on their noteboard, of those mistakes they've made a few times on practice tests and homework questions, and they're just safeguarded against making them ever again.
And careful comes from a good feeling about when to be careful. And here's what I mean about that - if you're a high-40s scorer and you get the answer C to a Data Sufficiency question within 20-30 seconds, you should know that there's a high likelihood that C is not the answer. At that point, you have to know what to check for - are you making an assumption that you can't? Could you have gotten more value out of one of the statements? This article can shed a little more light on that: https://www.beatthegmat.com/mba/2010/12/ ... knight-way
So...there are quite a few things that differentiate 48s from 51s, but hopefully these posts here are helpful in pointing you in the right direction to close that gap!
1) Not all 48s and 51s are created equal - for some people it's about minimizing mistakes; for others it's about seeing a little deeper into the test; for others it's about a smarter pacing strategy. So some of that improvement is bound to be personal - why are YOU getting questions wrong?
One of the reasons I wanted to jump on this thread is that the difference is seldom "chase more math rules" but I think that's what a lot of people do. They're trying to remember those next couple triangle ratios past 7-24-25, or they're scrounging the forums for shortcut tricks when really they need to do some self-analysis and figure out what 2-3 things are holding you back.
2) Probably the biggest difference is that Matrix-level understanding of the test that Ceilidh mentioned. And my favorite application of that is what we call the Shrumbuster, named after one of my colleagues (who posts here under Scott@VeritasPrep). The Shrumbuster setup is pretty classic;
**Step One: the question satisfies your intellect with something you see as "hard"
**Step Two: you've let your guard down because you think you've found "what makes it hard" and that's where the question sneaks one last trick past you.
**Point Three: that last trick is usually something that you'd never, never miss under moderate-question circumstances (you forgot to consider a negative value, you answered in the wrong units, etc.), but because that "beware of traps" part of your mind has already been satisfied, it won't catch the trick.
Now, this is just one application of where higher-scorers tend to have that expert vision into what's *really* going on in the question, but I think it's an important one in that it doesn't really signify "harder material" in the sense that we've come to know it from Honors and AP classes - it's just a deeper test of reasoning. (and for more on Shrumbusters, I encourage you to check out this blog post: https://www.veritasprep.com/blog/2012/12 ... difficult/)
3) Higher scorers tend to be more careful.
This cuts a couple ways - like Ceilidh mentioned, higher scorers make fewer silly mistakes, often because they have a sixth sense about which types of setups leave them prone to mistakes. So some of that comes from just being more thorough with calculations and that kind of thing.
Careful also comes from having that "fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me" mentality - careful test-takers typically have a checklist, either mental or physical written right on their noteboard, of those mistakes they've made a few times on practice tests and homework questions, and they're just safeguarded against making them ever again.
And careful comes from a good feeling about when to be careful. And here's what I mean about that - if you're a high-40s scorer and you get the answer C to a Data Sufficiency question within 20-30 seconds, you should know that there's a high likelihood that C is not the answer. At that point, you have to know what to check for - are you making an assumption that you can't? Could you have gotten more value out of one of the statements? This article can shed a little more light on that: https://www.beatthegmat.com/mba/2010/12/ ... knight-way
So...there are quite a few things that differentiate 48s from 51s, but hopefully these posts here are helpful in pointing you in the right direction to close that gap!
Brian Galvin
GMAT Instructor
Chief Academic Officer
Veritas Prep
Looking for GMAT practice questions? Try out the Veritas Prep Question Bank. Learn More.
GMAT Instructor
Chief Academic Officer
Veritas Prep
Looking for GMAT practice questions? Try out the Veritas Prep Question Bank. Learn More.
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
ceilidh.erickson
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2095
- Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:22 pm
- Thanked: 1443 times
- Followed by:247 members
I think it's actually really important to read the question fully, then take a step back after reading to consider these issues. If you try to do too much while you're reading - like writing down algebraic equations - you've effectively locked yourself into one particular solution path. You might not have needed algebra at all! Read the whole thing, then take a moment to consider all possible solution paths, guessing strategies, traps, etc. Then you can ask yourself "which one seems fastest/most effective for this question?" One big mistake is to dive right into solving, and only try another strategy when the first one has already failed. At that point, you've probably already spent over 2 minutes, and you're starting from scratch! It's better to lay out all your options first, then pick the best one.bellcurve wrote:Ceilidh,
Thank you for your response. So, the question approach wise, what is the difference between the two test takers?
After you read the question, do you sit back (pause) for 5/10 seconds and ask those questions? Or you ask the questions/make a framework simultaneously as you read the question? If the question is long, do you write the relationships in terms of equations as you read or wait until you get to the end of the question? When you have some idea about the question, do you just get into it using whatever method comes first in your brain and move to the next when that method fails? Or you think about what method might be faster and then use the method that you think is a faster?
From your experience, how does a 51Q scorer approach the Qs?
When you're reviewing questions that you've already done (and you should spend significant time reviewing each question, whether you got it right or wrong), ask yourself - is there any other way I could have solved this? Were there any built-in traps that I didn't notice?
I think Brian is right with the "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me" idea. You need to make sure that you're not falling into the same traps over and over!
Ceilidh Erickson
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education
