aalupyaaz

I am not sure if PP2 is tougher than PP1 or not but one thing I would like to suggest is that give powerprep as many times as you can. Dont leave it for last moment thinking that it will determine how much are you going to score in actual GRE. Reason - majority of questions are different when you re-give PP...almost 80% Hence, you get to see more and more real GRE like questions. I gave PP thrice and pattern of scores was like follows - PP1 - (Q790,V600),(Q770,V480),(Q790,V590) PP2 - (Q690,V480),(Q790,V510),(Q770,V590) Well, my exam is tomorrow - yes, less than 12 hours to go and I am **** scared!! Anyway, hope it helps.

"We learn through direct experience; to accept a theory without experiencing it is to learn nothing at all." -------------- Learning is a process of knowing unknown. Though a direct experience can be a more realistic and a surer way of learning, I tend to disagree that accepting a theory without experiencing is to learn nothing at all. It is not possible to have a first hand experience of everything. For example, we can not go back to past to experience evolution of earth. We rely on facts and theories proposed by people who have been researching. We learn and educated ourselves from these proposed facts and theories. In fact, lot of research is done keeping already well established theories as basis. It would be unwise to try questioning them and attempt to experience in order to learn. In schools, children are taught about nuclear reactions and other similar complex processes. It is not possible to give them a hand-on experience or even simulate. But at least they become more "aware" by assimilating theories and explanations. Often, one needs to go through training before he/she can directly try a first hand experience. For example, one has to learn swimming in order to be able to swim. A direct attempt to swim in deep can prove fatal. Doctors go through a rigorous training and examination before they are certified and allowed to treat patients. They learn from treasure of books and their teachers' experiences and then implement their learnt theories on patients themselves. Life is too short to 'live' everything. It’s the experiences of others that enlighten us of different aspects of this enigmatic life. We read books, watch movies and are on a constant lookout for things that are beyond once ability to experience. We learn to cope with ups and downs of life by observing our elders and listening to adages that the wise have left for us. Admittedly, there are certain things that can not be learned without experiencing them. I would have never learnt to ride a bicycle without giving it a try and falling and getting hurt. A baby can't learn to walk before he falls. But generalizing that learning without experiencing is to "learn nothing at all" shall be wrong. Experience can polish a learned. At the same time, an ignorant can become an expert with experience. But, it would be fallacious to claim that learning without experiencing is to learn nothing at all. One can't supplement the other but they surely complement each other.

The economic minister in his proposal argues that emulating Bellegea's strategy to promote tourism by an ad campaign will prove beneficial to country's economic growth. He proposes a similar campaign for Paraterra in order to increase income for people and preserve the natural environment. However, his proposal stands unconvincing and problematic on several grounds. To begin with, the minister fails to consider factors other than tourism like trade that may have accounted for Bellegia's economic prosperity. Also, conditions that prevail in Bellegia may not be true for Parattera. Perhaps, unlike Bellegea, Paraterra may not have sufficiently rich natural environment to attract tourism. The minister fails to consider other alternatives to strengthen Paraterra's lagging economy. Moreover, increase in number of foreign visitors arriving on the main airport does not prove that there has been a rise in total number of foreigners visiting Bellegea. Visitors might have come for reasons other than tourism. Similarly, hike in per capita income of people of Bellegea could have been because of decrease in population last year. The minister's unsubstantiated assumption that ecotourism drive will ensure conservation of natural environment is unsound. Other concrete measures like strict laws and assurance of their compliance would be required. Lastly, minister's claim that current director of Bellegea's National Tourism Office will be equally effective for Paraterra is indefensible. It’s quite possible that it might be his entire team and not him alone responsible for Bellegea's success. Also, Bellegea's director might not be familiar with Paraterra's political and economic scenario. In sum, the minister's proposal is unconvincing as it stands. To stregthen it, the minister must evaluate all possible factors responsible for Bellegia's growth and realistically compare Bellegea's conditions with that of Paraterra's. He should also show the study the overall increase in foreign visitors to Bellegea and analysis of per capita income in comparision with population. To make the proposal more convincing, the minister should show how the campaign will preserve Parattera's natural environment and should also explore other ways for the same. Finally, the minister will have to give more information on abilities of director of Bellegea's National Tourism Office and his acquitance with conditions of Paraterra. He should also consider other suitable people for this job who might prove more efficient.

Here is another one to review...thanks "We learn through direct experience; to accept a theory without experiencing it is to learn nothing at all." -------------- Learning is a process of knowing unknown. Though a direct experience can be a more realistic and a surer way of learning, I tend to disagree that accepting a theory without experiencing is to learn nothing at all. It is not possible to have a first hand experience of everything. For example, we can not go back to past to experience evolution of earth. We rely on facts and theories proposed by people who have been researching. We learn and educated ourselves from these proposed facts and theories. In fact, lot of research is done keeping already well established theories as basis. It would be unwise to try questioning them and attempt to experience in order to learn. In schools, children are taught about nuclear reactions and other similar complex processes. It is not possible to give them a hand-on experience or even simulate. But at least they become more "aware" by assimilating theories and explanations. Often, one needs to go through training before he/she can directly try a first hand experience. For example, one has to learn swimming in order to be able to swim. A direct attempt to swim in deep can prove fatal. Doctors go through a rigorous training and examination before they are certified and allowed to treat patients. They learn from treasure of books and their teachers' experiences and then implement their learnt theories on patients themselves. Life is too short to 'live' everything. It’s the experiences of others that enlighten us of different aspects of this enigmatic life. We read books, watch movies and are on a constant lookout for things that are beyond once ability to experience. We learn to cope with ups and downs of life by observing our elders and listening to adages that the wise have left for us. Admittedly, there are certain things that can not be learned without experiencing them. I would have never learnt to ride a bicycle without giving it a try and falling and getting hurt. A baby can't learn to walk before he falls. But generalizing that learning without experiencing is to "learn nothing at all" shall be wrong. Experience can polish a learned. At the same time, an ignorant can become an expert with experience. But, it would be fallacious to claim that learning without experiencing is to learn nothing at all. One can't supplement the other but they surely complement each other.

what you think of this one? thanks..have my GRE day after tomorrow! "We learn through direct experience; to accept a theory without experiencing it is to learn nothing at all." -------------- Learning is a process of knowing unknown. Though a direct experience can be a more realistic and a surer way of learning, I tend to disagree that accepting a theory without experiencing is to learn nothing at all. It is not possible to have a first hand experience of everything. For example, we can not go back to past to experience evolution of earth. We rely on facts and theories proposed by people who have been researching. We learn and educated ourselves from these proposed facts and theories. In fact, lot of research is done keeping already well established theories as basis. It would be unwise to try questioning them and attempt to experience in order to learn. In schools, children are taught about nuclear reactions and other similar complex processes. It is not possible to give them a hand-on experience or even simulate. But at least they become more "aware" by assimilating theories and explanations. Often, one needs to go through training before he/she can directly try a first hand experience. For example, one has to learn swimming in order to be able to swim. A direct attempt to swim in deep can prove fatal. Doctors go through a rigorous training and examination before they are certified and allowed to treat patients. They learn from treasure of books and their teachers' experiences and then implement their learnt theories on patients themselves. Life is too short to 'live' everything. It’s the experiences of others that enlighten us of different aspects of this enigmatic life. We read books, watch movies and are on a constant lookout for things that are beyond once ability to experience. We learn to cope with ups and downs of life by observing our elders and listening to adages that the wise have left for us. Admittedly, there are certain things that can not be learned without experiencing them. I would have never learnt to ride a bicycle without giving it a try and falling and getting hurt. A baby can't learn to walk before he falls. But generalizing that learning without experiencing is to "learn nothing at all" shall be wrong. Experience can polish a learned. At the same time, an ignorant can become an expert with experience. But, it would be fallacious to claim that learning without experiencing is to learn nothing at all. One can't supplement the other but they surely complement each other.

"We learn through direct experience; to accept a theory without experiencing it is to learn nothing at all." -------------- Learning is a process of knowing unknown. Though a direct experience can be a more realistic and a surer way of learning, I tend to disagree that accepting a theory without experiencing is to learn nothing at all. It is not possible to have a first hand experience of everything. For example, we can not go back to past to experience evolution of earth. We rely on facts and theories proposed by people who have been researching. We learn and educated ourselves from these proposed facts and theories. In fact, lot of research is done keeping already well established theories as basis. It would be unwise to try questioning them and attempt to experience in order to learn. In schools, children are taught about nuclear reactions and other similar complex processes. It is not possible to give them a hand-on experience or even simulate. But at least they become more "aware" by assimilating theories and explanations. Often, one needs to go through training before he/she can directly try a first hand experience. For example, one has to learn swimming in order to be able to swim. A direct attempt to swim in deep can prove fatal. Doctors go through a rigorous training and examination before they are certified and allowed to treat patients. They learn from treasure of books and their teachers' experiences and then implement their learnt theories on patients themselves. Life is too short to 'live' everything. It’s the experiences of others that enlighten us of different aspects of this enigmatic life. We read books, watch movies and are on a constant lookout for things that are beyond once ability to experience. We learn to cope with ups and downs of life by observing our elders and listening to adages that the wise have left for us. Admittedly, there are certain things that can not be learned without experiencing them. I would have never learnt to ride a bicycle without giving it a try and falling and getting hurt. A baby can't learn to walk before he falls. But generalizing that learning without experiencing is to "learn nothing at all" shall be wrong. Experience can polish a learned. At the same time, an ignorant can become an expert with experience. But, it would be fallacious to claim that learning without experiencing is to learn nothing at all. One can't supplement the other but they surely complement each other. ---------- Please review. thanks

Please rate and review my first argument. Thanks The following appeared in a proposal from the economic minister of the country of Paraterra. "In order to strengthen its lagging economy, last year the government of the nearby country of Bellegea began an advertising campaign to promote ecologically sound tourism (ecotourism). This year the number of foreign visitors arriving at Bellegea's main airport doubled, and per capita income in Bellegea increased by ten percent. To provide more income for the population of Paraterra and also preserve the natural environment of our tiny country, we too should begin to promote ecotourism. To ensure that our advertising campaign is successful, we should hire the current director of Bellegea's National Tourism Office as a consultant for the campaign." ------------------------------ The economic minister in his proposal argues that emulating Bellegea's strategy to promote tourism by an ad campaign will prove beneficial to country's economic growth. He proposes a similar campaign for Paraterra in order to increase income for people and preserve the natural environment. However, his proposal stands unconvincing and problematic on several grounds. To begin with, the minister fails to consider factors other than tourism like trade that may have accounted for Bellegia's economic prosperity. Also, conditions that prevail in Bellegia may not be true for Parattera. Perhaps, unlike Bellegea, Paraterra may not have sufficiently rich natural environment to attract tourism. The minister fails to consider other alternatives to strengthen Paraterra's lagging economy. Moreover, increase in number of foreign visitors arriving on the main airport does not prove that there has been a rise in total number of foreigners visiting Bellegea. Visitors might have come for reasons other than tourism. Similarly, hike in per capita income of people of Bellegea could have been because of decrease in population last year. The minister's unsubstantiated assumption that ecotourism drive will ensure conservation of natural environment is unsound. Other concrete measures like strict laws and assurance of their compliance would be required. Lastly, minister's claim that current director of Bellegea's National Tourism Office will be equally effective for Paraterra is indefensible. It’s quite possible that it might be his entire team and not him alone responsible for Bellegea's success. Also, Bellegea's director might not be familiar with Paraterra's political and economic scenario. In sum, the minister's proposal is unconvincing as it stands. To stregthen it, the minister must evaluate all possible factors responsible for Bellegia's growth and realistically compare Bellegea's conditions with that of Paraterra's. He should also show the study the overall increase in foreign visitors to Bellegea and analysis of per capita income in comparision with population. To make the proposal more convincing, the minister should show how the campaign will preserve Parattera's natural environment and should also explore other ways for the same. Finally, the minister will have to give more information on abilities of director of Bellegea's National Tourism Office and his acquitance with conditions of Paraterra. He should also consider other suitable people for this job who might prove more efficient.

Thanks ertda, I do see what you are trying to say. I will take care in my coming essays.

I am myself a novice in AWA with just one essay old ;) , I would beg your pardon to comment on cheery-ting's well decorated essay. I must appreciate the language used. At the same time, I feel the same point is repeated again and again. It would have been great if para 2 and 3 would be consolidated into one. Also, para 3 is repitition of same point expressed previously. Instead, an additional example would do wonders. Please correct me if I am wrong. thanks

"People make the mistake of treating experts with suspicion and mistrust, no matter how valuable their contributions might be." Man is different from other animals for his power of questioning and reasoning. This does not mean that he is a cynic. It is humane to have that synthesis of trust and caution. For ages, teaching has been considered a noble profession. Teachers have been worshiped. Even today, parents send their children to schools keeping full faith in teachers who are going to mould their offspring's future. What they seek is "good" education for their children. This should not be wrongly interpreted as skepticism towards teacher's proficiency. I tend to disagree that people always treat experts with suspicion and mistrust. Government, representative of people, fund some of the finest brains for researches. It is because of their phenomenal vision and contribution, that we have soared great heights that once seemed invincible. It is just that authorities keep a check to assure right direction and allocation of resources. Depending on the area of problem, it can be quite natural for people to be extra cautious to ensure that they get the best. Nothing is more precious than health. Undoubtedly, a patient will feel more secure in hands of a doctor whom he trusts. This does not mean he asseses other doctors as inferior or incompetent. Factors like personal past experience can prove more substantial than expert's contributions or fame. It is natural for a patient to confirm the ability of doctor as the stakes are too high for a blind gamble. Nonetheless, sufficient room should be given to doctors so that they don't feel compelled and do their job willingly. Unreasonable questioning of expert's expertise can worsen the case. Admittedly, an expert's contribution may be significant but that does not imply he is beyond mistakes. To err is human and no amount of knowledge can make an expert fullproof of failures. Thomas Alva Edison failed a thousand times before he could successfully invent a bulb. To sum up, its only the perfect blend of sufficient space for the expert and at the same time, assurance from the expert to keep people's faith intact - that can create favorable and conducive conditions for positive results. ------------------ Please review and RATE my essay. I am quite nervous. My GRE is on Aug 29 (yes this monday!!) and this is my first essay. Criticism and suggestions for improvement are most welcome. Pleae reply soon. thanks

"People make the mistake of treating experts with suspicion and mistrust, no matter how valuable their contributions might be." Man is different from other animals for his power of questioning and reasoning. This does not mean that he is a cynic. It is humane to have that synthesis of trust and caution. For ages, teaching has been considered a noble profession. Teachers have been worshiped. Even today, parents send their children to schools keeping full faith in teachers who are going to mould their offspring's future. What they seek is "good" education for their children. This should not be wrongly interpreted as skepticism towards teacher's proficiency. I tend to disagree that people always treat experts with suspicion and mistrust. Government, representative of people, fund some of the finest brains for researches. It is because of their phenomenal vision and contribution, that we have soared great heights that once seemed invincible. It is just that authorities keep a check to assure right direction and allocation of resources. Depending on the area of problem, it can be quite natural for people to be extra cautious to ensure that they get the best. Nothing is more precious than health. Undoubtedly, a patient will feel more secure in hands of a doctor whom he trusts. This does not mean he asseses other doctors as inferior or incompetent. Factors like personal past experience can prove more substantial than expert's contributions or fame. It is natural for a patient to confirm the ability of doctor as the stakes are too high for a blind gamble. Nonetheless, sufficient room should be given to doctors so that they don't feel compelled and do their job willingly. Unreasonable questioning of expert's expertise can worsen the case. Admittedly, an expert's contribution may be significant but that does not imply he is beyond mistakes. To err is human and no amount of knowledge can make an expert fullproof of failures. Thomas Alva Edison failed a thousand times before he could successfully invent a bulb. To sum up, its only the perfect blend of sufficient space for the expert and at the same time, assurance from the expert to keep people's faith intact - that can create favorable and conducive conditions for positive results. ------------------ Please review and RATE my essay. I am quite nervous. My GRE is on Aug 29 (yes this monday!!) and this is my first essay. Criticism and suggestions for improvement are most welcome. Pleae reply soon. thanks

I am not sure if this question fits in this thread...but anyway, this is from power prep 2. From set of 6 letters A, B, C, D, E & F, there are 20 different 3 letter subsets that could be selected. Column A The number of 3 letter subsets that include letter F Column B 10 Answer is C HOW???

Hi Friends, This thread is indeed a great releif for strugglers of probability like me. Well, I just wondered if we gave a following approach for problem # 1. P(3 or 5) = P(3) + P(5) - P(3 and 5) multiples of 3 = {3,6,9,12,15,18} Therefore, P(3) = 6/20 multiples of 5 = {5,10,15,20} Therefore, P(5) = 4/20 multiples of both 3 and 5 = {15} Therefore, P(3 and 5) = 1/20 therefore, P(3 OR 5) = 6/20 + 4/20 - 1/20 = 9/20 Ans. Whotsay?? Also, aint ace considered as a face card? If so, there are 4x4 = 16 face cards and thus the probability of getting a face card would be 16/52 = 4/13 ???

I am told that its common to expect probability and mean, mode, std deviation etc in GRE though its not there in Kaplan, Princeton, etc. Can you please tell me what sort and level questions to expect? Well, one that I got in powerprep is as follows - a total bouncer! From the even numbers between 1 and 9, two different even numbers are to be chosen randomly. What is the probability that their sum will be 8? Options - 1/6, 3/16, 1/4, 1/3, 1/2 Correct answer - 1/6 HOW??? :eek: Thanks Shobhit

I am in for 'unpredictable'. The only other choice that comes close is 'difficult' but somehow....we need a word close to 'suprising'