### Know the GMAT Code: Story Problems

*Did you know that you can attend the first session of any of our online or in-person GMAT courses absolutely free? We’re not kidding! Check out our upcoming courses here.*

How are the GMAT test writers going to hide information in plain sight and get you to fall into traps? Read more

### Here’s What to Do When You Don’t Know What to Do on the GMAT

You’re staring at a GMAT problem that you just don’t understand. There’s a minute left on the clock. *What do you do?* Read more

### Three things to love about GMAT Roman numeral problems

I. Roman numeral Quant problems aren’t a whole lot of fun.

II. A lot of my students choose to skip them entirely, which is much smarter than wasting five minutes wondering what to do!

III. However, it’s possible to turn this rare and tricky problem type into an opportunity.

Read on, and learn why many GMAT high-scorers love Roman numeral problems. Read more

### Avoiding Calculations on GMAT Data Sufficiency

*Did you know that you can attend the first session of any of our online or in-person GMAT courses absolutely free? We’re not kidding! **Check out our upcoming courses here**.*

The beautiful thing about GMAT Data Sufficiency is that we’re allowed *not* to do all of the calculations that a Problem Solving problem might require. Still, leave it to the GMAT to try to suck you into doing more than you need to do in order to get to the answer.

Normally, I just toss you into a problem and then we discuss, but today I’m going to warn you: the GMATPrep® problem that I’m about to give you is going to do its best to make you waste time. As you try this problem, ask yourself, “Do I *really* need to do that calculation? Is there an easier way?”

Try this problem from the GMATPrep free exams. Read more

### Here’s why you might be missing GMAT Data Sufficiency problems – Part 2

*Did you know that you can attend the first session of any of our online or in-person GMAT courses absolutely free? We’re not kidding! Check out our upcoming courses here.*

In our previous article, we divided the logical errors that test-takers make on Data Sufficiency questions into two types:

**Type 1:** You thought that something was sufficient, but it was actually insufficient.

**Type 2:** You thought that something was insufficient, but it was actually sufficient.

We already covered the most common reasons for Type 1 errors to occur and a few good ways to avoid them; now, let’s cover Type 2 errors. Read more

### Here’s why you might be missing GMAT Data Sufficiency Problems – Part 1

*Did you know that you can attend the first session of any of our online or in-person GMAT courses absolutely free? We’re not kidding! Check out our upcoming courses here.*

Let’s talk about GMAT Data Sufficiency.

Specifically, let’s talk about getting GMAT Data Sufficiency (DS) problems wrong. And I don’t mean those problems that you missed because of careless math errors, or because of concepts you hadn’t learned yet. No, I’m talking about the missed DS problems that make you want to bang your head against the wall: *How on Earth did I not get that?*

There are two reasons you might have this experience: Read more

### GMAT Data Sufficiency Ratio Stories — Part 1

How are you with story problems? Most math concepts can be presented in story form on the test and the GMAT test writers do like to get wordy with us. You’ve got a double task: you have to translate the words into math and then you still have to do the math! How can we get through these as efficiently as possible?

Try the GMATPrep® problem below and then we’ll talk about it. Give yourself about 2 minutes. Go!

### The Importance of Getting to No on the GMAT — Part 1

Recently, a colleague of mine shared this very interesting puzzle published by the New York Times. (Thanks, Ceilidh!)

Go ahead and try it. I’ll wait. After you’ve tried the puzzle, you can read the short article that goes with it.

What did you learn about how humans tend to think? More important, what did you learn about how *you* think?

That tendency to look for the *no*, or to try to disprove something, is a trait shared by scientists, devil’s advocates, and great standardized test takers. You can learn to make this your natural reaction, too!

### Everything you need to know about the New Official Guides, Part 3

I have now done every last one of the new quant problems in both new books—and there are some really neat ones! I’ve also got some interesting observations for you. (If you haven’t yet read my earlier installments, start here.)

In this installment, I’ll discuss my overall conclusions for quant and I’ll also give you all of the problem numbers for the new problems in both the big OG and the smaller quant-only OG.

## What’s new in Quant?

Now that I’ve seen everything, I’ve been able to spot some trends across all of the added and dropped questions. For example, across both The Official Guide for GMAT® Review (aka the big book) and The Official Guide for GMAT® Quant Review (aka quant-only or the quant supplement), Linear Equation problems dropped by a count of 13. This is the differential: new questions minus dropped questions.

That’s a pretty big number; the next closest categories, Inequalities and Rates & Work, dropped by 5 questions each. I’m not convinced that a drop of 5 is at all significant, but I decided that was a safe place to stop the “Hmm, that’s interesting!” count.

Now, a caveat: there are sometimes judgment calls to make in classifying problems. Certain problems cross multiple content areas, so we do our best to pick the topic area that is most essential in solving that problem. But that 13 still stands out. 🙂

The biggest jump came from Formulas, with 10 added questions across both sources. This category includes sequences and functions; just straight translation or linear equations would go into those respective categories, not formulas. Positive & Negative questions jumped by 7, weighted average jumped by 6, and coordinate plane jumped by 5.

Given that Linear Equations dropped and Formulas jumped, could it be the case that they are going after somewhat more complex algebra now? That’s certainly possible. I didn’t feel as though the new formula questions were super hard though. It felt more as though they were testing whether you could *follow directions*. If I give you a weird formula with specific definitions and instructions, can you interpret correctly and manipulate accordingly?

If you think about it, work is a lot more like this than “Oh, here are two linear equations; can you solve for *x*?” So it makes sense that they would want to emphasize questions of a more practical nature.

### GMAT Data Sufficiency Strategy: Test Cases

If you’re going to do a great job on Data Sufficiency, then you’ve got to know how to Test Cases. This strategy will help you on countless DS problems.

Try this GMATPrep® problem from the free exams. Give yourself about 2 minutes. Go!

* “On the number line, if the number *k* is to the left of the number *t*, is the product *kt* to the right of *t*?

“(1) *t* < 0
“(2) *k* < 1”
If visualizing things helps you wrap your brain around the math (it certainly helps me), sketch out a number line:

*k* is somewhere to the left of *t*, but the two actual values could be anything. Both could be positive or both negative, or *k* could be negative and *t* positive. One of the two could even be zero.

The question asks whether *kt* is to the right of *t*. That is, is the product *kt* greater than *t* by itself?

There are a million possibilities for the values of *k* and* t*, so this question is what we call a theory question: are there certain characteristics of various numbers that would produce a consistent answer? Common characteristics tested on theory problems include positive, negative, zero, simple fractions, odds, evens, primes—basically, number properties.

“(1) *t* < 0
This problem appears to be testing positive and negative, since the statement specifies that one of the values must be negative. Test some real numbers, always making sure that *t* is negative.

Case #1:

Testing Cases involves three consistent steps:

First, choose numbers to test in the problem

Second, make sure that you have selected a valid case. All of the givens must be true using your selected numbers.

Third, answer the question.

In this case, the answer is Yes. Now, your next strategy comes into play: try to prove the statement *insufficient*.

How? Ask yourself what numbers you could try that would give you the opposite answer. The first time, you got a Yes. Can you get a No?

Case #2:

Careful: this is where you might make a mistake. In trying to find the opposite case, you might try a mix of numbers that is invalid. Always make sure that you have a valid case before you actually try to answer the question. Discard case 2.

Case #3:

Hmm. We got another Yes answer. What does this mean? If you can’t come up with the opposite answer, see if you can understand why. According to this statement, *t* is always negative. Since *k* must be smaller than *t*, *k* will also always be negative.

The product *kt*, then, will be the product of two negative numbers, which is always positive. As a result, *kt* must always be larger than *t*, since *kt* is positive and *t *is negative.

Okay, statement (1) is sufficient. Cross off answers BCE and check out statement (2):

“(2) *k* < 1”
You know the drill. Test cases again!
Case #1:

You’ve got a No answer. Try to find a Yes.

Case #2:

Hmm. I got another No. What needs to happen to make *kt* > *t*? Remember what happened when you were testing statement (1): try making them both negative!

In fact, when you’re testing statement (2), see whether any of the cases you already tested for statement (1) are still valid for statement (2). If so, you can save yourself some work. Ideally, the below would be your path for statement (2), not what I first showed above:

“(2) *k* < 1”
Case #1:

Now, try to find your opposite answer: can you get a No?All you have to do is make sure that the case is valid. If so, you’ve already done the math, so you know that the answer is the same (in this case, Yes).

Case #2: Try something I couldn’t try before. *k* could be positive or even 0…

A Yes and a No add up to an insufficient answer. Eliminate answer (D).

The correct answer is (A).

Guess what? The technique can also work on some Problem Solving problems. Try it out on the following GMATPrep problem, then join me next week to discuss the answer:

* “For which of the following functions *f* is *f*(*x*) = *f*(1 – *x*) for all *x*?

“(A) *f*(*x*) = 1 – *x*

“(B) *f*(*x*) = 1 – *x*^{2}

“(C) *f*(*x*) = *x*^{2} – (1 – *x*)^{2}

“(D) *f*(*x*) = *x*^{2}(1 – *x*)^{2}

“(E)

#### Key Takeaways: Test Cases on Data Sufficiency

(1) When DS asks you a “theory” question, test cases. Theory questions allow multiple possible scenarios, or cases. Your goal is to see whether the given information provides a consistent answer.

(2) Specifically, try to disprove the statement: if you can find one Yes and one No answer, then you’re done with that statement. You know it’s insufficient. If you keep trying different kinds of numbers but getting the same answer, see whether you can think through the theory to prove to yourself that the statement really does always work. (If you can’t, but the numbers you try keep giving you one consistent answer, just go ahead and assume that the statement is sufficient. If you’ve made a mistake, you can learn from it later.)

* GMATPrep® questions courtesy of the Graduate Management Admissions Council. Usage of this question does not imply endorsement by GMAC.

*Studying for the GMAT? Take our free GMAT practice exam or sign up for a free GMAT trial class running all the time near you, or online. And, be sure to find us on Facebook and Google+,LinkedIn, and follow us on Twitter!*