Obscure quantitative concepts on the test

[cunninlynguist]

I took the revised GRE yesterday and was really surprised with some of the quantitative questions. One of the quant sections was experimental, although I can't reasonably discern which one, as all three were a bit weirder than I had anticipated. It was annoying -- I was aiming to score a point or two higher based on my practice test results.

For the benefit of future test-takers, what unexpected problems or concepts appeared on your test?

-- Parabola

-- Venn diagram

-- Venn diagram w/ percentages (!)

-- Combination / permutation hybrid

And, if you saw any such concepts, did you see them in your prep materials beforehand at all?

[LMac]

I took the GRE yesterday as well and had one wacky Quant section. It was my first and I was just praying that it was experimental (but seriously threw me off my game). I ran out of time before I'd made it through. Was hoping to score a few points higher as well, as my practice test scores were indicating so. Maybe it'll be reflected in the percentiles once those are released?

[midnight]

My experimental quant didn't have anything too strange aside from a much trickier graph and chart analysis than I'd seen in practice or elsewhere on the test.

I don't recall seeing Venn diagrams or parabolas on any of the practice materials. The closest I got to a Venn diagram on the test was a question about intersection between two sets, but the sets were not in diagram form.

I have to admit that I'm kind of digging that the GRE is integrating more stats-related problems into the question bank. I had a lot of probability, perm/combo, mean/median/mode/range, and standard dev questions in practice and on the test.

Edited November 22, 2012 by midnight streetlight

[iowaguy]

Cunn - I had most of what you describe on my quant test as well, particularly the 2nd harder section (I had 3 verbal sections, one of which was of course experimental, so I know both quant were actual test sections). I also had a couple of difficult fill-in-the-blank statistics questions.

Parabolas, Venn diagrams, & permutations/combinations are all covered in the ETS math review:

http://www.ets.org/s/gre/pdf/gre_math_review.pdf

Of course, even ETS says that their own math review is not all-inclusive, that there might be some material on the test that is not covered in their review!?!

[okProteus]

Those of you that had the above concepts - particularly parabolas (!!) - did you score high? Do you think the computer-adaptive test program threw a hard question at you because you were doing so well.

[iowaguy]

If you score well on the first section, you will receive harder questions on the 2nd section. On my test, my 1st quant section was significantly easier than the 2nd. But it is on a section basis, not question-by-question (like the old GRE was).

[okProteus]

Ah, so it only adjusts difficulty between sections, not within them? Didn't know that.

In that case, did anyone experience these concepts (parabolas, permutations/combinations, etc.) on their first quant section, or only on either the second one (or the one you suspected to be experimental, if there were three)?

Essentially I'm trying to figure out if someone like me, with a ceiling of maybe 162, is likely to experience these things, or if they are something only the elite quant test-takers are likely to encounter.

Edited November 26, 2012 by dwdptok

[LMac]

My most difficult Quant section was the first of three. I can only guess it was my experimental section?

I didn't see Venn diagrams, but a lot of multistep permutations. Ended up with a 159Q. I was averaging 163-164 in my practice tests so that was a bummer

[33andathirdRPM]

My experimental section was pretty obvious. The first question involved making a statement about a given sequence a_n.

[Seeking]

Does the pattern of the new GRE Quant questions mean the ETS wants to make it more difficult for the candidates in Quant-intensive disciplines to get through the Grad-School? 

 

(Are there any ETS people reading this?)

Edited January 15, 2013 by Seeking

[midnight]

Does the pattern of the new GRE Quant questions mean the ETS wants to make it more difficult for the candidates in Quant-intensive disciplines to get through the Grad-School? 

 

(Are there any ETS people reading this?)

 

I don't think so. The questions aren't harder per se, just more varied.

 

I'm not a STEM person, but I can't imagine having too much trouble with the GRE quant if I were--but that's only conjecture on my part!

[Seeking]

I am not from a Quant-intensive field. But I could get a lot of questions on the older GRE-Quant right without much advance practice. Now I find them very difficult on the new GRE and here I see people from Quant-intensive disciplines saying they find it difficult.

 

My personal perception is that new GRE-Verbal has become somewhat easier than before, while Quant has become much tougher.

[midnight]

Oh, interesting.

 

I took the old and the new version of the GRE. I thought the verbal was easier as well (IMO analogies required more brain power and vocab knowledge than anything on the current test), but I found the quant to be about the same level of difficulty or even a bit easier. My quant score improved significantly upon retake, but I simply may have been better prepared for my second time taking the test.

 

I do think the new GRE format is much friendlier and more intuitive than the adaptive-by-question previously used, especially when it comes to quant.