A few months back, I wrote a post that mentioned my lower-than-expected GMAT score. As I promised late last week, I have a few more thoughts I’d like to share.
First, for those of you unfamiliar with the process of getting into business school, GMAT stands for Graduate Management Admissions Test. It is administered by private testing centers where you can take any number of Computer Adaptive Tests, including admissions exams and certification tests. The GMAT is owned and run by the Graduate Management Admission Council, which desires to be
the leader in the discovery and evaluation of talent, through assessments, for management education and practice around the world
I am at least glad they threw in the parenthetical caveat, though I am confident these folks think a lot more is determined by standardized assessments than I. Granted, I didn’t get the score I expected, so I will admit to a little bit of a bias here. With that disclaimer out of the way…
It is my view that the GMAT tests very little actual knowledge, but rather, the ability to learn how to take that specific test. Sure, it has the standard reading comprehension questions and some relatively straightforward sentence correction problems (well, straightforward to me because sis and I were sent to Grammar Boot Camp for a decade), but the quantitative section is the tricky part.
Now, if you know me, you’re likely thinking the following:
Wait a minute, the guy with the engineering degree thinks the math section is tricky?
Well, yeah. Kind of. I mean, it doesn’t seem like it should be that difficult. It’s largely made up of geometry and algebra questions. Going into test preparation, I thought:
In my life I have taken five calculus courses, a differential equations course, a statistics course, and three calculus-based physics courses. While my sister was taking electives like Flower Arranging and Organic Gardening, I was taking electives called Steel Design, Concrete Design, and Hydrology – all heavily based in quantitative analysis. I worked professionally as an engineer and passed two eight-hour certification tests (without studying) to become a registered professional. I can do me some math.
Well, it turns out that I didn’t account for a few things.
Thing 1: The GMAT is linear; my brain is not.
All of my successes in quantitative endeavors have been on paper tests, not computer tests. On a paper test, my mind is free to wander. If I don’t like the first question, I don’t answer it right away. In fact, on the Principles and Practice of Engineering (PE) exam, I skipped over the first 11 questions before I found the one I wanted to start with. Why does this matter? I’m no expert, but I think it’s just how I’m wired. I like to start by answering what I know that I know without thinking. Then, I move to things I think that I know, but need to spend a few minutes noodling on. Finally, I go back to the things that I’m not quite sure about and need to really dig into. This allows me to stay confident and keep a good pace. I save the most time-consuming questions and the most time for the latter portion of the test.
Well, the GMAT is on a computer, which does not allow for such creative divergence. It gives you a question and says, “answer or die”. Not really. It just makes you answer each question in a specific order. “Answer or die” is simply the way my brain interprets not being able to skip around. I’m sure that with a more significant time invesment, I could adapt to the computer system, but apparently four weeks wasn’t enough to reprogram 32 years of taking tests my way.
Thing 2: The GMAT feels like doing math with a bomb on your desk.
The GMAT allows 75 minutes for 37 quantitative problems. That’s just over 2 minutes per question, and for someone with the self-proclaimed worst case of undiagnosed ADD ever, that’s just not enough time. Seriously, it was well known in my major that I took breaks during every test. I would put my pencil down, stretch, stare at the ceiling, and clear my head several times during an exam. I might even put my head down for a bit. I never ran out of time. I did the same thing on the PE, where I had 6 minutes per question. The GMAT is the equivalent of lighting the fuse of a stick of dynamite and putting it next to my computer monitor as soon as I pick up my pencil. I can’t stop to think, because I can see the fuse burning with a pace reminiscent of Sherman v. Georgia, which means I’m actually behind before I ever really start.
Thing 3: The GMAT is too cool to use “normal” problems.
The GMAT folks have created their own little source of evil called data sufficiency. In fact, the GMAT is the only test in the history of the universe to use this type of question. Seriously. Look it up. I am not exaggerating. These questions are very strange in that they don’t ask you to find an answer to a problem, but instead ask if you have all the information you need to correctly determine the answer. Curious? Click here for some samples.
The problems aren’t really super hard to get used to, but because it is a Computer Adaptive Test, the problems get progressively more difficult as you answer more of them correctly. Harder questions = extra steps. Extra steps = more time. As we learned in Thing 2, I was out of time before I ever sat down. Throw in the fact that these questions come randomly assorted with the standard problems where you actually find answers (not good for ADD) and you have successfully created the only quantitative test I have ever taken where I failed to score in one of the highest percentile rankings.
Again, I am a little bitter because the quantitative section of the test got the better of me. If we (me and the GMAT) were two boxers, I’d be the guy that took the champ all 12 rounds, but was too exhausted to lift my gloves during the final round. So, I couldn’t land or block any punches, took 37 shots to the face in the final 3 minutes, and lost by unanimous decision.
If you were trying to determine entry to the boxing hall of fame based on that fight alone, you’d say that the guy that came up short in the fight isn’t going to get in. Understandable, if that’s the only data point you have. For me, a PhD program is the hall of fame of intellectual pursuits. Judging me on the GMAT alone is akin to judging a boxer by only his last fight. There is a total body of work to be considered. When you take that into account, the scales tilt at least to even, if not in my favor.
So, while I’m disappointed I didn’t score a knockout against the GMAT, I am happy when professors ask me my score because it gives me a chance to qualify the data, something the score report can’t do. Instantly, I am able to give context and a view into my total body of work. Plus, after talking to me for 15-20 minutes, hopefully they believe I am not an idiot, but that I am, in fact, a contender.
III
A Few Things Worth Mentioning 