user2

I have been a regular 'reader' in the forum. The forum is a great help in GMAT preparation because one can learn from the bad and good strategies of others in GMAT preparation and in writing the GMAT. A day before my GMAT, I spent the whole day reading the experiences of people who had already taken the test. The view that one should concentrate on making no mistake in the first 10 questions influenced me. However, the influence of this view combined with the nervousness of taking the test did not turn out to be too good. The first 10 Questions in Quant were damn simple.. However, I became extra cautious and spent extra time validating the answers of those simple questions. I would have solved the 10 questions in 8-9 minutes but I spent 10-15 minutes extra on these questions just to validate and revalidate the answers. As the level of difficulty of the questions began to increase after around 15th question, I realized that I might run out of time because I had spent (rather wasted) extra time on the first 10 questions .I began to panic a bit once I realized this. I was cursing myself and the Test magic forum (Its human tendency to blame others for their faults) for the strategy of being extra cautious on the first 10 questions. Panic dulls the brain!! I realized that during the test. I had to make a few guesses as time was running out . During the break I told myself that although I have ruined my chances of a good score , I must try to make the best out of the Verbal section . In Verbal , I was not extra cautious on the first 10 questions . With time in hand , I was enjoying the Verbal Section . Writing GMAT was fun during the Verbal section . In the end , as expected , my Quant was sc***** . Verbal was Ok Quant 47( In all of my practice tests, my quant score was atleast 50 ) Verbal 38 Overall 700 Luckily , 700 with 5 years of experience can be considered a decent score. However , I am planning to apply just in IIM Ahmedabad next year . I have my fingers crossed as 700 might not be a good score for IIM A. I wrote this post just to highlight the point that write the GMAT in the same way as you write ur practice tests . I had not followed the startegy of being extra cautious in practice tests but followed that in the GMAT and got sc****:doh: There are so many things that I had to miss during the last 2 months of preparation that I am glad its over . Now its back to gym , squash and my weekend patiala pegs of whisky with friends . Raman

For 2 I think the answer is C From 1, trhe possible values on N 3,7,11,15,19,23,27,31,35,39,43,47,51, etc From 2 Possible values are 4,7,10,13,16,19,22,25,28,31,34,37,40,43,46,49, etc The only common ones are Prime

Analysis of an Argument The dieticians in our public schools supervise the ordering, preparation and serving of lunches and sometimes breakfast to school children. The state should implement a program of continuing education for these people. If dieticians were required to attend a three-day workshop each year, covering topics such as recent developments in nutritional theory and new methods of food preservation, as a condition of employment, the quality of the food eaten by school children would be greatly improved. How persuasive do you find this argument? Explain your point of view by analyzing the line of reasoning an the use of evidence in the argument. Discuss also, what, if anything, would make the argument more persuasive or would help you better to evaluate its conclusion. The argument that the quality of food eaten by the school children will improve if the dieticians were required to attend a three day workshop each year is not entirely logically convincing, since it ignores certain crucial improvements. Firstly, the argument assumes that the dieticians will prepare, order and serve food according to what they have been taught in the training. It is possible that the dieticians attend the mandatory training and not implement what is taught in the training. Secondly, the argument assumes that the dieticians need the training to become aware of recent developments in nutritional theory and new methods of food preservation. It is possible that most of the dieticians are already aware about these recent developments. The argument might have been strengthened by providing statistical evidence, such as the result of a test conducted to rate the knowledge of the dieticians about the recent developments in nutritional theory and new methods of food preservation, suggesting that the dieticians need the training. Thirdly, the conclusion is vague because that it does not quantify what constitutes quality of food. The argument might have been strengthened by stating that the quality of food is measured by its nutritional value, quality of preservatives in it (etc, etc) Moreover, the argument suggests that implementing recent developments in food theory and new methods of food preservation leads to increase in food quality. This may not be the case always .For example, the new methods of food preservation taught during the three-day workshop could lead same quality of food as the existing ones do but be more cost effective. Fourthly, the conclusion states that the quality of the food eaten by school children would be “greatly” improved. There is no evidence to suggest that the improvement in quality will be large enough to be termed as “great”. However, this is not a major flaw in the argument. The use of the word “greatly” would not be justified if the proposed training program leads o a slight improvement in quality of food served to the school children. Finally, the argument does not provide evidence to suggest the three-day duration of the workshop is sufficient. However, it is not a major flaw in the argument. The argument might have been further strengthened by stating that the designers of the training program have suggested that the three-day training program is sufficient. Because the argument leaves out several key issues, it is not sound or persuasive. If it included the items discussed, the argument would have been more through and convincing.