AbhinavTripathi

Harry, I'll suggest to start writing emails to the professors of UBC which have similar academic/research interests as you, that might help you make a decision. About GRE score, as I have said earlier it is not for selection, it is only for rejection, and your GRE score is enough to avoid rejection and no GRE score(even 340) is adequate enough to ensure selection. All the best Abhinav

Hi harry, I'll suggest you to explore your interest first. Search for programs rather than universities. For me I have a research background in computational material science and Control Systems. So, I'll be applying for the following universities:- 1. University of Illinoi: Robotics: Ambitious 2. University of Minnesota: MATSE: Almost ambitious 3. University of Pennsylvania: GRASP Robotics program: extremely ambitious 4. Purdue: Control System or Material Science: Almost safe 5. Ann Arbor Michigan : NanoRobotics: Extremely Ambitious 6. TAMU : Computational Mechanics: Almost Safe 7. UT Austin : Nanomaterials : Ambitious 8. ETH Zurich : Nanorobotics : Masters(Safe) and Phd ( extremely ambitious) I have a GPA of 8.88, relevant work experience of 2 years, graduate from IIT Patna, relevant research internship and strong recommendations. But above all, SOP matters the most, so you must focus on your SOP. You have a GRE score which won't be a reason for rejection at any university. And an astronomical GRE score never gives you an ambitious university admit. So, start exploring. Cheers! Abhinav

Hello Spandana, Your methodology of preparation depends on how much time you have for your exam. It is also necessary to understand the structure of the exam. So for verbal preparation I can give you following important points: 1. Reading Comprehensions have the same weight-age as Sentence Equi + Text Compl. So you need to hone your reading skills, which surely can't be improved much in say three months or so.Even after that lets not lose hope and prepare for the best. Go to sites where you find relevant articles, so stop visiting hindu.com or toi. The site I found most interesting is Arts & Letters Daily - ideas, criticism, debate . Read at least three relevant articles daily. You'll get a whole lot of words there too. You can also go to wordpundit.com/GRE where they have sorted out some important articles for daily reading. 2. There is surely going to be two critical reasoning RC. They, if practiced thoroughly( and they can be practiced even in a single week, giving half an hour each day), can give easy marks. So attack those critical reasoning RCs. 3. About Vocabulary: It is very important to prepare relevant words only and that too not just their dictionary meaning but their contextual meaning. How to do that? There is a site you might be aware of- http://www.vocabulary.com- make an account there, search for lists (many students have prepared lot of GRE lists there). Practice there, you'll at least get firm hold of 500 important words in one month. You can also go to dxschool blog where you can download important preparation material such as- Kaplan 1014 practice questions, Princeton Review word list etc. But these all stuffs can be too dangerous too because of their size. I suggest attack some 1500 words and prepare them firmly. 4. Practice SE and TC from these books. Go to major test.com/GRE (Google it) and take SE and TC tests. Go to wordpandit.com/GRE(Google it) and practice. Practice, Practice and Practice........ Always practice in time frame. Hope you found my pedantic suggestions palatable enough......:) Cheers! Abhinav

Hi folks, Just gave GRE..it was kind of a nightmare. I fumbled on the verbal part. I had read somewhere(most probably by Magoosh), that if in a verbal section there is no large paragraph, it is for sure a fake section and under that impression my concentration level involuntarily dropped and it got difficult to comprehend. For verbal : get a strategy about what part to attempt first, for me it was the large RC. For such prioritizing you must do Mock tests. Even if you give three different mock test from the same source you'll be able to decide what part to attempt first. For quant: Its not as easy as one thinks. Getting a 170 is very possible if you don't make silly mistakes, as I did. Again mock tests, I'll suggest that during mock tests at your home you can reduce the time limits and purposely get into a rush. For example a quant practice at 25 minutes per 20 questions will more efficiently elicit your weaknesses rather than a 35 minutes per 20 questions. All the best! Cheers! Abhinav Tripathi

Thanks.....I think your explanation clears some fog. Abhinav

OK.. first important stuff is that I am a complete novice and not a great writer too. My analysis is as follows: As a whole, your argument is quite interesting and cogent. Grammar is good, Vocab is good, reasoning is good and structure is good too. But few things can be improved upon: 1. You have given three points in three paragraphs. You have build upon the first one accurately, you have rushed through the second and third is too large. You can shorten the third one. 2. The second paragraph can lead to more points, like after cost comparison you could have talked about building of private hostels, student-specific homes due to influx of more students and thus refuted the author's point that town's accommodation rents' trend is ever increasing. 3. I do not know very much about the conclusion, but what I think is that a conclusion must recapitulate/summarize all the points and then judgement should come. You have directly given the judgment that there is inadequate evidence. As the GRE readers will read our essay only once, it is necessary to have a binding introduction and conclusion. These points are totally personal and might be inaccurate too. Just ponder upon them and then decide whether these are actually pertinent or not. Cheers Abhinav

Thanks Emichele. You have given some very important points. I'll be surely working on it. My sentence structuring is poor and yes use of 'verticals' is something totally 'instinctive' the 30 minute deadline made me do that.:encouragement: Cheers Abhinav Tripathi

The director, accustomed to unquestioning loyalty, was chagrined when she discovered that her directions had been ____ by the chief executive. A. underscored B. misinterpreted C. undermined D. misplaced E. substantiated F. subverted I had interpreted chagrined as being embarrassed. And according to that the answer I believe should be suggesting that some directions/actions of her might be misconstrued and thus her loyalty was beclouded. I couldn't get a logical reasoning of the actual answer. Thanking You in Advance Abhinav

“In a recent citywide poll, fifteen percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city’s art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city’s art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city’s funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television.” The argument draws a tenuous cause-effect relation between public television viewership and arts' museum footfall. The conclusion drawn is thus a blurred one. The author wrongly portends the fall in the attendance of city's museum due to fund cutting in visual arts programs of public television. The author initially claims that 15% hike in audience of visual arts programs and increase in footfall of museum are directly related. A fifteen percent hike may be attributed to increase in overall population of the city which is not at all mentioned in the argument. If the increase in overall population is, say, 30%; then 15% increment is a low one. The increment in footfall of museum- whose percentage is not mentioned- may be due to advertising of arts in print media - papers, magazines, artist columns- or the burgeoning internet access which might have developed a sense of curiosity among the residents about arts. The argument doesn't analyze the other verticals which might lead to an increase in attendance of city museum. Furthermore, it is errant to conclude that if the access to arts program on public television is constricted, the museum will have a decrease in number of people visiting it. If we prudently analyze and interview the visitors of the museum it may more clearly reflect the authenticity of author's surmise. It is most probably that most people visiting the arts museum are art aficionados, ardent admirers of art, relatives of artists, journalists, students of art. To conclude that an individual not even remotely related to arts will end up in a museum after watching an arts program is very unlikely. So, if the people watching the arts program and the people visiting arts museum are not same, then it is of least importance to the museum if the public television curbs its budgets for arts' program. On the other hand even if person is too addicted to an arts' program, and has never visited an arts museum will be raring to go to a museum to satiate his arts' craving once the arts' program is stopped. Thus, increasing the attendance of the museum. The number of students enrolled in an arts program of a nearby university may also play a very important role to examine the argument. An increment in that number from states and countries where such arts program is never aired might counter the argument on its face value. An establishment of a new arts school might also have increased the footfall of the museum. The decision of the corporate is always on the lines of profit and loss they incur. It is very likely that there are more profitable programs than visual arts programs which are forcing them to cut the funding. And hence it might be false that people are actually more interested in arts program than other programs. It will be capricious to buttress the conclusion of the author without looking into the details mentioned above. The increment in attendance may not be totally attributed to the arts program and thus the decrement of it on the basis of cost funding is very improbable. There might be other factors as mentioned above whose interplay may actually increase or even decrease the footfall.

GRE4, Before commenting I must admit that I am a complete newbie and might be be lacking in basic rudiments of essay-writing. Your essay is very comprehensive and has gone full-length to include all possible logical assertions. The one thing you must work upon is using more refined vocab. For example in your last sentence " resist siding with either Dr. Fiel or Dr. Karp", you might use a better word which sounds more formal. There are some other similar instances in your essay. It might be better to avoid using sentences like "we cannot conclude and it is not clear to us" because you are not here representing a group or something, you can in turn use "it cannot be concluded, it is not clear". Hope my suggestions are relevant to you. I would be glad if you can asses my essay too. Cheers! Abhinav My essay: The argument challenges the observation based study and posits an alternative study-interview based- touting it as more accurate. It claims that the conclusion of Dr. Field's experiment of observing children of island of Tertia to determine their rearing history is not consistent with the results of his/her interview based experiment with the children of same group of islands. The author not only questions the inconsistency, he also holds his study paradigm superior. The argument to succeed on logical terms must answer some very relevant questions. The first study to examine the veracity of the argument includes assessment of the differences in characteristics of both kinds of study. Observation type might not be interactive based study unlike interview based, it is more likely that observation based study characterizes instinct based behavior as the subject might not be aware of the observation. Interview based study may more precisely look into the history of individuals as it can be discussed with the subjects unlike in observation based study. Interview based- if done individually- may not evoke behavioral patterns when the subject in a social group, which might be done very accurately in observation type studies. Overall it is also necessitated that the verticals on which the conclusion of rearing are to be drawn must be crystal clear. Continuing on the differences, if the interview study is more enlightening, it must be mentioned what the interview questions were? How the questions were aligned to the rearing of an individual? The questions which will extract maximum about the upbringing of a child must be centered on the history of individual and his emotional/social proximity to other adults than his/her biological parents. The answers to these questions may elicit a pattern among all children. The determination of this pattern is more important than individual objective answers of yes/no. Interview based study, if is true, it must explain how did it assess the individual response when he/she is in a group? Being in a social group since childhood might have carved some characteristics in the psyche of a subject which even he might be unaware of and can't put it in an expressive manner in an interview. He might have been around adults and his nearness to them might not be peculiar to him as it is a custom among his peers to mingle up to that extent. These answers can only be attained in an observation type study. The interpretation of the answers of interview questions/discussions should also be pondered upon. Let’s take an example, two subjects A and B was asked a question- Does someone in your village loves/cares for you as much as your parents do? Answers might be different, similar or same. A might just answer 'yes', B might answer 'no, but once my uncle C saved me or scolded me or gave me a chocolate'. The point is whether the answer to these questions when analyzed individually/subject wise gives a clear picture in the context the study is oriented to. Children are seldom in a solemn, serious disposition and might answer waywardly/indistinctively. Forcing conclusions out of these answers might vitiate the whole study. At the end, it is important to assess the differences in the type of results and orientation the two distinct styles of survey are having. Interview based might be used very potentially if the questions are bespoke to discerning rearing history, while the conclusions of observation based study might be much more relevant and pertinent to behavior in groups and in determining the differences in upbringing of children which even the children may be unaware of.

Dear Adil, I, myself a complete novice would like to appreciate that you have achieved the verticals which an issue task demands. 1. Expressing your view 2. Backing it with examples 3.Mentioning the situations where it might fail 4. Concluding The organisation is impressive. But you have not elaborated much, and your examples are not enough. You should think of more instances where your argument bolsters your position, it could have been extra-curricular activities should be made compulsory or something different. You need to show variety for your response. Your conclusion is very small, although it fits the concise nature of the rest of your essay, but still the conclusion has to be the most interesting. It should bind your reader, by the time the reader reaches your conclusion he has your examples and assertions jumbled in his mind. Always frame a conclusion that structures those jumbled examples and assertions. The GRE readers do not give a lot of time to a single piece of writing, so your conclusion has to be the pith of your argument. Thanks Abhinav

"Important truths begin as outrageous, or at least uncomfortable, attacks upon the accepted wisdom of the time." The above statement considers the important truth as unacceptable to the existing wisdom and terms it as outrageous. It becomes important here to establish what the brand of important truth is. There are several findings that invite scorn from a large part of the intellectual society. The theories and experiments that defy the existing establishments always meet resistance. These truths are important as they bring about a change in the whole perspective and yes they seem somewhat offensive or outrageous. The earth is round was not wholly accepted and the person professing it was sometimes considered lunatic. The sun doesn't revolve round the Earth instead the earth revolves round the Sun (if seen from an inertial frame of reference). These were bold assertions until they were proved by their supporters. They did hit the respect of the accepted wisdom and seemed impossible. Such truth which brings about such swerving of beliefs/concepts is always difficult to assimilate to the general masses and sometimes intellectual coteries. The Illuminatis faced plenty criticism from the religious communities as they opposed their purported god theories by reasons. Such reasons are lambasted first, conjectured second and understood at last. There can be other truths which might be evenly important and face no obstacles at all. Such rare important truths do exist and as our society is progressing towards a more supine nature, these truths are gaining footfalls. A solution to the global warming might be a very important truth, it will initially face mild opposition but will surely sink in if proved to be a potential. A full-proof treatment of refractory diseases as cancer, AIDS etc. will invite lauds from all parts of the society lest after initial doubts. The efficacy of important truths may always be questioned but the eventually it is the significance of it that will remain. These truths are not restricted to experiments, proof, analogies and beliefs, they are widespread and their reactions diverse. In a poor country stricken by debts, which policy shall be framed to the eradication of it? How to tackle bilateral ties? How to resolve boundary conflicts? How to manage a stubborn neighbor? The solution to these problems is sometimes opposed to the general belief. People like Gandhi would profess conciliatory behavior and people like Hitler will adopt aggressive methods for the same problem. Both of these people were mavericks and their ideologies are pondered upon in classrooms of the best institutes. Mavericks always face both criticism and support, thus the important truth they flaunt always has resistance but the magnitude might be different. Truths if important and attacking the existing belief might be branded as offensive and unacceptable by many but there exists some important truths which are not always subject to such attacks. It is the essentiality of the truth which if understood at first-hand face less resistance. The treatment of cancer today holds much more vitality than the earth being round during the Pythagoras period. On the other hand important truths deserve these specious reactions as they must be established, with no stones unturned and the truth must hit the head of the nail to bring out the change in the inertia of our society.

Disinclined as it explains their uninteresting attitude towards production