Consider this HYPOTHETICAL scenario :

1) Too many GMAT takers from India.
2) Incidentally Indians "generally" perform well on the quant section and Americans on verbal section.
3) Test makers skew the algorithm to improve American applicants' chances.
4)The skewed algorithm gives out only "too easy" or "too tough" questions to Indian test takers "taking the test in India", thus giving them the low score.
5) Indian test takers "taking the test in India" get low scores on verbal section (even if they claim to have done really well on it).
6) Indian test takers "taking the test in India" end up getting low overall scores and thus hurt their chances of making it into the TOP universities.

Is this true?
Not necessarily.
Possible?
YES, far fetched but possible!
Who am I ?
Just another Indian test taker "taking the test in India" this October.
How am I going to deal with this ( if this is true at all ) ?
Give my BEST shot (Have I got an option?)
Why am I writing this ?
Just Sharing my thoughts.

IanStewart-

What if GMAC was pressured by an outside force (ie, state department) to increase difficulty for Indian gmat candidates. A heavy influx of very qualified Indian professionals with high gmat scores could beat many Americans at getting admitted into the best American business schools. In an effort to keep the best talent in America, the government can and does intervene from time to time. The state department and other government agencies have been known to work like this before. Actually, things similar to this happen quite frequently, but are never reported and kept very secret.

Im not saying this is the case, Im just wondering, at all, if this might be a possibility?

Seems like a pretty crazy conspiracy theory to me, honestly...

Ian Stewart wrote:
No, absolutely not. I can guarantee that test-takers in India are seeing the same test, and their scores are calculated in the same way, as test-takers in other parts of the world. Indeed, if you read GMAC research reports, they go to great lengths to ensure that the test is fair for test-takers from all parts of the world. On your real test, some of the questions you see are 'experimental', and are inserted so that GMAC can determine how difficult these questions are, and then use them as 'real' questions on a future test. GMAC also, however, analyzes how well US and non-US citizens perform on each question, and if there is any substantial difference, the question is rewritten or discarded.

GMAC also cannot choose to make the test harder. The difficulty level of the test is determined by GMAT test-takers, not by GMAC. When you answer your experimental questions on your real test, you are helping to determine the difficulty level of these questions.

Thanks Ian .. This is definitely reassuring..

caligmat wrote:Seems like a pretty crazy conspiracy theory to me, honestly...

agreed. one more way to blame the "system" and external factors instead of focusing on possible internal factors.

Ive searched every avenue that I can and this rational helps me focus and have a good head going into the test. Some people are saying verbal is easier and some are saying its insanely hard.
I dont know what to believe; Im just hoping somehow, I wont see the verbal section as exceedingly difficult. Ive prepared like everyone else and worked especially hard on SC. What I said might sound conspiracy like; blaming outside factors but that is actually a borrowed idea. Whether verbal is hard or not Ill know tomorrow!

I took it 2 weeks ago, and found the verbal from OG11 seemed pretty much in line with the actual test. CR seemed a bit tougher, but that could just be my familiararity with the subject discussed..

Okay, I took the test TODAY. Wrestled it hard and did all I could. I did excellent in math (48) and got a 35 in verbal. Compared to OG and GMAT prep, I found RC and CR to be somewhat more difficult, but I found SC to be damn hard. I spent days and days studying SC and although I am Very happy with my score (690) I felt like I did all I could to study SC and it only helped a little.
So in my opinion, yes, verbal has become harder, if only substantially, and SC for me was very hit-or-miss. I did every question I could find and I am not convinced what GMAC has releases is sufficient to study for the current difficulty level of SC.

Okay, I took the test TODAY. Wrestled it hard and did all I could. I did excellent in math (48) and got a 35 in verbal. Compared to OG and GMAT prep, I found RC and CR to be somewhat more difficult, but I found SC to be damn hard. I spent days and days studying SC and although I am Very happy with my score (690) I felt like I did all I could to study SC and it only helped a little.
So in my opinion, yes, verbal has become harder, if only substantially, and SC for me was very hit-or-miss. I did every question I could find and I am not convinced what GMAC has releases is sufficient to study for the current difficulty level of SC.

I gave the GMAT 1 month back and score 610 (47Q,27V) .Score in verbal was low as i was not confident about Rc's.., moreover i skipped my 3rd RC also

Prepared hard for 1 month...apart from maintaining the performance in other sections, i put my level up for RC's...Gave the test yesterday....scored 600 (49,24)...Shocked!!!...As i thought i am performing well....I was very confident about Rc's this time....skipped 2 CR's...and for 3 CR's i was not 100 % sure about the ansers...SC's were also a bit tough.....
Overall i found the verbal tougher than my previous attempt...
Earlier, i had the direction to improve my score as i knew that i didn't perform well in RC
Now, i Don't have the direction...am doomed

Yes, of course some people are going to think that the actual exam is easier, but I'd have to say that the real exam is way harder (in my opinion of course). Firstly, I'd say that the math practice questions are very close to what you'll see on the actual test. The Verbal is another story. A lot of people will say that the harder questions are "experimental" questions, but how so if all of the questions are difficult in the verbal section? Also, some will say, "an adaptive test is supposed to be hard because it measures your true ability." I call that BS. I've scored 99%ile and above on at least 3 Kaplan exams, and 89%ile and above on all of my Gmat Prep exams. One would expect a margin of error, but from averaging 90%+ to 50%ile. That is just ridiculous. I'd say that the reading comp and sentence correction questions are very hard, and I haven't seen many questions that compare. The SC questions are really tough because there are always two to three answers that are close. Not only that, but SC also has a lot of unorthodox structures that test style/usage. Kaplan is way too easy if anyone really wants to know. I'm not sure why so many people have problems with the Kaplan exams. The questions are very straight forward. The real Gmat is not as nice.

I think that GMAC has no need to commit the 'conspiracy' stated above. Don't forget that GMAT is only one of the many criteria used by the B-schools.

I'm sure that the admission committee fully realise the advantages that any group of students may have. If anything than the admission committee can be 'biased' or selective themselves - there's no need for GMAC to be involved. It's all down to your 'competition pool'.