Although the idea that the first 10 questions are the most important in the GMAT is a reasonable and tempting one, I tend to believe that it isn’t the case. I have this opinion for two reasons.
Firstly, it’s easier for me to envision a scoring system that works consistently during all the test instead of a system that uses the first questions to determine your overall score and the last questions to “fine tune” your score. It simply makes no sense for me. Let’s imagine this: A and B are taking the test. A performs better than B in the first 10 questions and will get harder questions from that point on. However, A starts to pick the wrong answers to much more questions than B. Is it reasonable to think that A deserves a better score because of his/her initial performance? I don’t think so.
Secondly, when I was practicing with the prep test provided by GMAC, once I lost completely the time (something like 5-6 quanti questions remain unanswered). What happened? My score decreased significantly, to an extent that put me in another “level”. It seems consistent with the idea that all questions have the same weight: as I had many “wrong” questions, they were increasingly easier and my score were increasingly decreased.
The time you take to respond the questions doesn’t seem to influence your score, but the order of the correct/incorrect questions seems to be important. Think about a decision tree: you start in the middle; if you respond correctly you go to a higher position and, if you respond incorrectly, you go to a lower position. Right-Wrong puts you in a better position than Wrong-Right because missing a difficult questions makes you lose less than missing an easier question. The opposite is also valid: a right answer to an easy question helps you less than a right answer to a more difficult question.
Fortunately, I got a good score the first time I took the exam and hadn’t to take it again :)
Post Comments