linaseta

Hello, I have my test in 1.5 days... Havent had that much time to prepare, prob 1.5 months. Last week i took a sample test and scored Q158, V156 (Manhattan), that is before reviewing all the material and learning it (or the second pass). But after reviewing and taking a test pretty much every day for the last 4 days, the max ive been able to score is still 158-160. This is because every time i improve in a weakness area... I come back and kill the first section with 2-3 wrong... but then... the second section is ABSOLUTELY BRUTAL!.. which scales back down my score...to the starting point. So even tho i know i have improved a lot in knowledge and time management progressively in 4 days, my scores are stuck due to the nature of adaptive testing. So this leads into one question I JUST NEED TO KNOW, because it makes no sense to me. If the new GRE assigns equal weighs to all questions... (easy questions are worth just as much as hard ones), what is the point of being adaptive at all? Traditionally adaptive testing means harder questions are rewarded with more points, therefore creating an incentive in WANTING to get to the harder questions... but if all questions are worth the same, what is point??? If that is the case, theoretically, isnt it a better strategy to just do average in the first section so the second is easy enough, so i can kill it... like 15/20, then 18/20... rather than doing 18/20, then 12/20?!?! how is it scored? I know it would be hard to control what you get right for sure in the real test. But I just want to understand the logic of an adaptive exam that DOESNT reward hard questions.... Any insights? i really need to refine my strategy in one day's time! thanks in advance