When to take your "official" practice tests?

[TheDude]

Hi Everyone,

I am signing up to take the GRE for 2011 application dates around the middle of September. I've been really afraid to take a real Practice GRE in full. Why? Primarily, because I hadn't taken any math, aside from Behavioral Statics, in 6 years. I know I need to heavily review all of the math concepts and any practice test would be silly. I've also been working REALLY hard on getting my manuscript published before fall as that seems to be the biggest thing I should focus on for grad school. Thusly, I haven't even looking at much of the verbal section. I have been studying math frequently every day and every week in June. I am half way done my full math review.

Well, last night I had the brilliant idea at 2 am that I should just try some questions from a practice test for the verbal section. I did that whole portion of the test. My score was atrocious... in the 400's! I barely knew many of the words, and if it wasn't for the reading comprehension and sentence completion I'd have been even worse! So at that point I started thinking, "Maybe I'm just dumb...let's take some math questions." I took half the math section and quit because my eyes were shutting. I did pretty well on half the questions I answered- "480." To conclude I don't feel like the math section will be a lot to worry about if I keep doing what I'm doing. However, I vastly underestimated the verbal section. It should be noted this was a Barron's test. I knew I'd need to practice AW and practice reading comprehension, but trying to memorize 3500 words just seemed like the most inefficient use of time.

So now what? I still haven't taken my Official practice test where I have reviewed all my math and started to review Verbal. I am going to give myself to the end of July and pick my studying up from 2 hours a day to 4 hours a day. I figure by then I'll really know my math weaknesses and can target them through August and September. Verbal will just have to be a continual thing. I am shooting to get a 500 something in Verbal and a 700 something in quant. I'm not far off from that in quant, if I keep in mind I only did half the questions. If I'm being really honest I'd love to get in the 600s for the verbal section.

Did anyone else have a fear of when they should take the practice test on official grounds keeping in mind you had not had math in years and needed to review it all?

Is this plan reasonable?

Are the vocab lists essential...did they show up on the test?

Should I just target reading comprehension?

THe very first GRE question you wrote...were your first scores atrocious and did you see improvement? I am talking pre you taking a course or doing a book then taking a practice tests. When you were in the "let's get a feel for it" stage.

Lastly, when is the latest I can take the GRE if I am applying in DEC/JAN? I want my official list of schools in hand and for those institutions to be open to accept new applications so I don't waste my free fee waivers on sending my scores to schools. I'd like to know if I still suck in September I could have 1 more month to raise scores if something goes wrong.

Looking for inspiration.

Edited June 28, 2010 by musicforfun

[Branwen daughter of Llyr]

I can't help you much with the math, since I didn't focus on it at all while studying for the test (and it's a miracle I scored 670 on the quant section), but for the verbal:

MEMORIZE THE WORDS. At least half the verbal section is comprised of analogies and antonyms, which you cannot succeed in without a large, high-brow vocabulary. I suggest using Barron's Essential 800 Words for the GRE and Kaplan's Advanced verbal if aiming for above a 700V. DO NOT rely on the reading comp - you need the vocab. My first verbal score was 600 - I then studied for 4 weeks (3.5 hours a day) and raised my verbal to 720. But don't just memorize words - read a lot of "thinking" magazines - The Economist, The New Yorker, etc. You'll be surprised how much it helps you.

Each school accepts certain last dates for GREs, depending on their application deadlines. But November/December appear to be the accepted last months for the GRE, when applying for the fall.

Edited June 28, 2010 by Branwen daughter of Llyr

[TheDude]

Thanks so much. I guess I just wanted to hear that upping the Verbal score was possible. Like I mentioned it was 2 am when I took that. I forgot to mention that I have used the Power Prep software practice questions for antonyms and analogies, I always get over 60% of those. It isn't great, but it certainly isn't reflective of the 400 something score. I found the Big Book online for download which doesn't have any Quant, but does have a slew of Verbal tests. I am going to retake in the morning tomorrow to get a better barometer of where my verbal is at without study. I also picked up the Kaplan GRE Vocab app for the iPhone, which is essentially flash cards of synonyms, word usage and definitions for 500 of the most used words. That should make things more efficient. I did 2 practice sentence completion and reading comprehension sets in the Barron's book today- 20 questions each. In reading Comp I hit about 16/20 and in sentence completion I had a 19/20 on both. I don't think that is my weaknesses, so I will focus on the vocab.

I am not worried about the Quant at all. Like I said I didn't finish the test because I basically fell asleep at my desk. I had a little over half the questions for Quant answered and had a 480. I finished it out this afternoon and had mid 600s, but it was an easier Quant section that didn't have probability and my other weaknesses. I am barely done my math review...so I think I can pull a 700 out of that by just taking test after test.

It seriously wasn't the ideal condition to whimsically think "Gee, it is 2 am let's do some GRE questions from the test and see where I am at." I told myself I was going to be more disciplined about review until July before I really tried a full test.

Thanks so much for your advice. I will hit the flash cards hard.

[DrFaustus666]

I agree with everything Branwen said and would add that it's really important to understand how the analogies work:

Read the relevant sections of whatever guide you use and pay close attention. (Basically, you construct a sentence in your mind and substitute in that sentence the pairs listed in the test.)

But the really tricky part is, on the hardest questions, the questions that will propel you into the 700 and above range, SOME of the questions rely on secondary or even tertiary meanings of words:

Example: rook ( a chess piece? but did you know? it's also a kind of bird in Britain) .... the correct answer might refer to the lesser known meaning of a word.

So, in addition to understanding analogies like the back of your hand, study primary and secondary meanings of words!

Edited June 28, 2010 by DrFaustus666

[TheDude]

Just an update:

Under normal conditions I wrote another Verbal section. I scored a 580. That isn't great, but I'd like to think with vocab practice, which I've started this week, I'd be able to get that 100 pts higher. Do you think that is a feasible goal or too lofty?

The analogies kill me.

[Branwen daughter of Llyr]

Just an update:

Under normal conditions I wrote another Verbal section. I scored a 580. That isn't great, but I'd like to think with vocab practice, which I've started this week, I'd be able to get that 100 pts higher. Do you think that is a feasible goal or too lofty?

The analogies kill me.

It's possible. I raised my verbal score by 120 pts with 4 intensive weeks of studying (I HAD to get above 700).

[DrFaustus666]

It's possible. I raised my verbal score by 120 pts with 4 intensive weeks of studying (I HAD to get above 700).

I raised mine by 280 points, by reading, reading, reading, and reading over a period of 29 years. No kidding. No particular studying done.

First score was 520, in 1976. Second was 800 in 2005.

--- Which fact alone refutes the assertion I've found in some of the test preparation books, that says the GRE is equivalent to an IQ test and thus each person has an internal limit, beyond which no amount of studying will carry him or her.

[milestones13]

I raised mine by 280 points, by reading, reading, reading, and reading over a period of 29 years. No kidding. No particular studying done.

First score was 520, in 1976. Second was 800 in 2005.

--- Which fact alone refutes the assertion I've found in some of the test preparation books, that says the GRE is equivalent to an IQ test and thus each person has an internal limit, beyond which no amount of studying will carry him or her.

Actually, it depends on the aspect of intelligence. There are two well established types of intelligence -- fluid and crystallized. The verbal section of the GRE is lagely a measurement of crystallized intelligence (except for analogies that also require fluid intelligence). Crystallized intelligence can be thought of as the knowledge and skills that have been accrued throughout a life time whereas fluid intelligence is how well one solves novel problems independent of learned info. A test of the latter would be Raven's progressive matrices. The two, taken together, are largely what makes up a person's functioning intelligence. Fluid intelligence typically declines with age and crystallized intelligence can grow conintually (contingent on one's education). Vocabulary testing is known to be good test of crystallized intelligence (though it's not a good measure of fluid intelligence). So, the guides omit this information mainly because they don't want to get into it and confuse people. ETS and the test companies know what the deal is regarding this and are likely clear about what it is they want to test....ETS, though while publicly claiming the GRE is not an IQ test, also informs test takers on their website that their score will not likely move much from one test to the next (tacitly indicating one's IQ is what it is and so performance is not going to improve substantially. They even warn test takers their scores might go down).

This is hardly the case across the board, obviously. ETS is making assumptions based on the normal/vanilla applicant. Mainly because they're testing crystallized intelligence this allows a non math person to improve their quant score 300 points and a word-cramming non native speaker can do the same on the verbal side. ETS makes the assumption that intellectual limitations have been hit by all equally in preparing for the test (but obvously there is huge variation in how long people prepare for it -- some don't prepare at all while others take a year to prepare). ETS also assumes that, given the test taking population being what it is (college en route to grad school), fluid intelligence has already largely been invested in the areas tested (verbal and quant) so that they believe the GRE will also indirectly test previous fluid as well as crystallized ability. This is probably why ETS maintains test scores should remain static or reliable (because fluid intelligence is traditionally thought to be static or fixed) from one test to the next. While I'm sure they are armed with the numbers in order to support this as true, it's not true for the high achieving, the underachieving, the non native speaker, and sundry other anomolous test takers out there (anomolies, at least, in ETS's world).

In your case, though, your move to an 800 V over those years is a reflection of intelligence investment theory, which is normal and even expected for a highly intelligent, curious, and educated person...though 800 is an obviously extremely rare/high score to be reached.

[DrFaustus666]

In your case, though, your move to an 800 V over those years is a reflection of intelligence investment theory, which is normal and even expected for a highly intelligent, curious, and educated person...though 800 is an obviously extremely rare/high score to be reached.

Thank you for your reply. I found your entire post highly interesting and read it through four or five times before replying.

Thank you also for your compliment. I think "curious" is the operative word in my case BTW. I've always read everything I could get my hands on, and find myself frustrated with PBS's and NPR's documentaries: not ENOUGH information, coverage is not in-depth enough for me.

I also know I'm an extreme outlier, if for no other reason than I'm over 50 years old, while most GRE takers are in their early to mid twenties.

Questions for you, if you don't mind taking more time: Does the difference between fluid and static intelligence reflect why I've not been able, despite a year's diligent studying and some informal tutoring from PhD-Engineer friends, to make such a marked improvement in my Quantitative score?

My most recent score in Quant has only come up to 690; just after BA graduation in the 70's I scored 560 on Quant.

My point being, is the Quant test more a test of fluid intelligence (which declines with age, and which, if I understand you correctly, is less malleable in any event)?

I need a very high Quant score in addition to the Verbal, in order to pursue a multidisciplinary PhD I'd like to do, probably after retiring from my current job. Is there no hope for me to score in the upper-700s in Quant?

Thanks in advance for any further thoughts you might have on the subject.

[milestones13]

My point being, is the Quant test more a test of fluid intelligence (which declines with age, and which, if I understand you correctly, is less malleable in any event)?

I need a very high Quant score in addition to the Verbal, in order to pursue a multidisciplinary PhD I'd like to do, probably after retiring from my current job. Is there no hope for me to score in the upper-700s in Quant?

Thanks in advance for any further thoughts you might have on the subject.

Disclaimer: I am not a psychologist or any sort of expert on the brain, just a dude on the internet. I'm in my 30's, haven't taken the GRE yet (taking it in August) and so while I may not resolve your ambiguities on this matter, Doctor F, perhaps I can be of some help...even if I fall short of performing "demonstrations magical."

Your first question: what does the quantitative test measure? It measures executive functioning mostly -- mainly working memory. Working memory is the ability to hold multiple things in mind while doing a task and still being able to sequence/manipulate information you're holding in your short term mental storage bin before it gets lost forever. Psychologists have found that working memory is very closely linked to fluid intelligence (which is the ability to draw out distinctions between items on the fly, usually inductively -- essentially pattern recognition ability). So, yes, quant does tap both of these -- especially executive functioning because solving any multistep problems invariably involves working memory. To a lesser extent, quant measures processing speed -- the ability to do a bit of mental math without using pen and paper. This helps also. Quant also very much measures crystallized intelligence -- area of a circle (easy) the formula for permutations (less easy) and the steps to solve a problem, which come about more by practice than any magical noetic prowess. Unlike the verbal section though the quant section does not correlate well with standard intelligence tests -- fluid or crystallized, and is largely content driven (high school math review test)...still, it's tricky. ETS seems to want to design it as an IQ test...."ha, ha, got you. X can also be negative...Answer is D. Sorry, dumb ass!"But the trick element is something the academic tests like SAT and GRE have invented...and this is not a measurement of fluid intellingece or executive functions but just seems to be an amorphous gauge of how "sharp" the test taker is or what a sucker they are. Altogether risible stuff, imo.

But, that's just a critique of the test. Back to your goal. Yeah, working memory and fluid intelligence peak in the 20's -- which is why a smartass twentysomething can wake up hung over and go to the testing ctr and knock out 1400 or 1500...this gets harder for the 30+ somethings to do. Quant scores on the GRE have been shown to go down with age while verbal tends to stay constant -- the reason for this might be executive functions and, to a lesser extent, fluid intelligence. But it may also be because high level language is used more than quantitative skills for educated people who have been out of college for a while. I don't know enough to say what the exact reason is...but, I would advise you to get to work on improving your working memory. This is absolutely possible to do now. It's not a panacea or any sort of replacement for knowledge...but sharpening your working memory will help your focus to work through any problems, writing an argument, whatever. High levels of working memory will lead to better performance in pretty much everything that involves high level mental focus. The task to practice is called Dual N Back, which has been shown to increase both working memory and fluid intelligence in college students (which is unprecedented). There are many free installments you can play. Here are a few (I won't favor one over the other but will let you choose. Advise you to do research on these before you pick what I offer or any versions you can find on your own -- there are more).

Here: http://www.soakyourhead.com/

Here: http://cognitivefun.net/

Here: http://brainworkshop.sourceforge.net/

The other thing I would recommend is taking creatine...which is scientifically proven to boost mental performance (although it's typically associated with physical performance).

http://rspb.royalsoc.../1529/2147.long

You know the rest. Eat a good diet, sleep, protein, yada yada....what I suggest are two things you might not know. The caveat is that even though these two brain boosting methods have been documented in respected scientific journals (one of which was double blind placebo), they are not considered mainstream interventions yet...only on the vanguard...so, take it as thou whilst.

And yes, from the arcane knowledge I've derived on the matter, there is indeed great hope for you to land in the upper 700's for quant -- 800 is within your ken! But, as you know Faustus, none of what I suggest is a magical substitute for the sweat of study itself. For that, you have resources far greater than what I can offer (exeunt stage left).

[DrFaustus666]

Thank you so much, Milestones, for taking so much time and for putting so much effort into answering my questions. I shall look up the techniques you suggest for increasing working memory, which indeed IS the problem I have with the Quant problems. I say this in retrospect, it hadn't occurred to me until you pointed out the relationship between executive functioning, short-term memory, and the Quant portion of the test.

I have not looked at your profile, I don't know if you're male or female, but if you're a male, my heartiest handshake and thanks for taking so much time to elucidate this subject; if you're a woman, a big platonic hug and kiss on the cheek.

John

p.s.,

Good luck in all your endeavors, too. As I said, I haven't looked at your profile, but I'm sure from reading your posts that you'll do wonderfully in whatever career path you take--and I'll even be so so bold as to suggest academia to you--my sense is that you'd be a great teacher, mentor, adviser, and colleague in some top-notch university.

Take care,

John

[milestones13]

Not at all, thanks for the kind words. One thing to add is I realize you need a higher quant score, but as I said both sides of the GRE are connected with test specifc strategies that have very little to do with what I've mentioned in terms of working memory or intelligence. This is especially true for the quantitative section, which likes to reward short cut smarts that are more or less specific to standardized tests. I suppose it might have some carry-over into real life in terms of being wary of making unwarranted assumptions, which does have some general applicability. That said, figuring out how test makers think is a fairly limited skill and it's sort like being a cab driver knowing how to go from A to B in the quickest way possible. Smart. But smart-specific to being a cabbie. What I'm suggesting with working memory training I think will be of far greater use to you (or anyone) when the GRE is over.

As for the GRE, working memory will help you when you miss the short cuts and have to do the leg work...which is how many people, who are very good at math, but are not good at standardized tests, can miss out on all the shortcuts and still score 800 on the quant without much of a problem. But for a non math person, or someone who short-circuits when doing for multistep stuff, it's not easy at all to do and it's easy to run out of time. Ideally, you want to learn the tricks as much as possible.

I'll break silence on impartiality on the installations I've suggested and say that I use this the third option of the dual n backs I listed: anecdotally, I train with that program regularly and I have found an enormous gain from it in pretty much all areas of intellectual functioning. Good luck, and if you have any questions let me know. Bear in mind it is a not a simple game but a dual task that is very challenging to get a hold of at first so you have to be patient with it because you're tracking two things -- auditory and visual data -- at once. But there is a substantial payoff by working out on it -- especially for those of us past our 20's -- that I will tell you.