Errors in GRE study books

[sarakeet]

OK I've been seeing lots of topics on here about studying for the new GRE, it being somewhat mysterious and stuff. I've been using Cracking the New GRE from The Princeton Review so far, and I'm getting kind of annoyed... and also thought some people who have been asking about various guides might like a heads up.

I've been working through the math section and leaving verbal alone until I get through a little more word study... Today I was going over the problems I got wrong on the "Comprehensive Math Drill" that starts on p. 318. I just checked it over quickly last night and x-ed the wrong ones. Anyway on number 4, answer section on p. 394 gives the answer as B... but then when you read through the explanation it says, "That means OR=6/5, and Quantity A is greater." Glaring error.

I've also noticed a few other mistakes/poor edits, which unfortunately I didn't mark down at the time, but in a couple of places it seemed pretty clear that they had not edited info about the old exam to reflect the new exam, or they repeated a paragraph they had printed on the previous page, etc... Anyway I guess the main problem with this is that it now has me wondering about problems for which the explanations given didn't make sense to me... Are they wrong too? (I'm thinking specifically of the geometry problem on p. 294, if anyone wants to help!)

Eh maybe all study guides have errors like this...? I've got Barron's to go through next. I'd love it if people could post any they find though, just for the benefit of others!

[GardeningGrad]

Ha! They put in those errors to make sure you're paying attention... at least that's how I rationalized it when I found multiple errors in each of the THREE GRE prep books I used. I like Princeton Review the best, though. It's all about the practice, and if you know the errors are there, all the better.

good luck!

[ktel]

That's so frustrating. Nothing worse than finding a bunch of mistakes and then you start second guessing all of the answers. Thanks for the heads up

[YaHa]

I found a bunch of errors in the Quantitative reviews. Barrons and Kaplan, as well as Nova's math book all had mistakes. I didn't prepare for Verbal at all so I don't know about those practice tests/reviews but I doubt they are error-free.

Edited July 8, 2011 by YaHa

[adrenochromelog]

RE the geometry question on p.294:

I think the explanation is OK; it comes in two steps:

1. In the original diagram the angles look equal. Therefore the answer cannot be that m is greater than n, or vice versa, since it is possible to draw an accurate diagramme of the triangle where this is not the case.

2. If AC and AB were extended as they are in the second diagramme (and they can be because no lengths are given on the original one) m would be larger than n. Therefore the answer cannot be that m and n are equal because it is possible to draw an accurate diagramme of the triangle where this is not the case.

But there are two things that bother me here. First, step 1 rellys on the accuracy of the diagramme. It is pretty obvious here that corner C is about 60 degrees, and that m and n are about equal, so maybe here this is OK. However, this seems like a bad tactic to promote since as far as I am aware, on the test diagrammes may be totally inaccurate.

The second thing has to do with the second diagramme, given to show how n might be greater than m. Here, D is clearly much closer to A than to C. However D is ment to be the same distance from both A and C. As such, this diagramme makes n look much larger compared to m than it could actually be. This makes it look like the answer to the question is based on an inaccurate re-drawing of the triangle.

Maybe a better explanation would say: if corner A is an accute angle n is larger than m. If A is an obtuse angle n is smaller than m. Therefore the relationship cannot be determined. Does that seem right? Good luck on the exam.

[smsica]

***EDIT***CLARIFYING: This is for Math Workout for the New GRE 2nd edition by Princeton Review (ISBN 15558-9692)

I've found three, but the first one I didn't mark, however the other two as of page 174 are the following:

p129&131 Quant Comp problem:

w, x, y, & z are consecutive, positive, even integers and w < x < y < z

QA: 2(w+x) +2 QB: y + z - 2

-----

My answer: QA is greater

Because: tried 2,4,6,8 AND 12,14,16,18

----

Their answer: cannot be determined

Because: 2,4,6,8 AND 20,22,24,26 "...Quantity A is greater, so eliminate answer choices ( and ©. Now try greater numbers, like 20,22,24, and 26. Quantity A becomes 2(20+22) +2, or 86, while Quantity B is 24+26-2, or 48. Quantity A has become greater, so there is no definitive solution. The answer is (D)." *Deductive skills FAIL*

----

AND

p172&173 Q7 Using a pie chart:

How many people who were polled in October identified themselves as members of Party Y.

----

My answer: 687 (Unlisted)

Because: 38% of 1810 polled according to October chart on p172

----

Their answer: © 603

Because: "The November pie is on the far right and 45% of the 1340 people said they belonged to party Y..."

*QUESTION WRITE/ANSWER INCOMPATIBLE*

Unless I'm completely and utterly just wrong.

Edited September 12, 2011 by smsica