Lets GRE

December to January batches- enrollments open

Weekday - weekend programs.

Call 9884123808 or 044-42068494 and book your seats.

Visit www.gresmartstart.com for more info

Hey all you GRE takers. I recently appeared for the revised GRE. Here is some useful information that might ease some of your apprehensions about the new pattern and question types.

1. The Argument and Issue topics were from the predisclosed list of 250 topics. The Argument topic was:

A recent survey among 300 men and women concluded that productivity is inversely proportional to the number of sleeping hours. The lesser you sleep the more your productivity and the more you sleep the lesser your productivity. As a result a company should recruit people who sleep less no of hours.

2. The 2 sections of Verbal Reasoning included 4 reading comprehension passages. Only one passage had 3 paras followed by 3-4 questions. The others were one para with maximum of 1-2 questions.

3. The one para passage was mostly followed by a reasoning question like strengthen the argument, weaken the argument.

4. One question type repeated was to contextually decipher the meaning of a highlighted word in the passage.

5.A total of 8-12 text completion and sentence equivalence questions were asked.

Here again the contextual usage of the word was necessary.

6. The two sections of Quantitative reasoning were surprisingly simple. With 5 minutes extra on my hand I could easily check and go through my answers.

7. The question types were skewed towards Algebra and Solid Geometry with a few questions on basic probability and mean, mode and median.

8. The new question type of numeric entry was not complex decimal answers but simple numbers.

Overall the entire pattern tests you on your critical thinking abilities with limited time on your hands. Few tips for your preparation:

1. 3 months of planned preparation

2. Build your conceptual foundation, if your concepts are weak, your entire understanding will be weak.

3.Read as much as you can. While reading, understand the overall essence of the passage. Look for thought continuity clues, thought reversal clues, word definition clues and cause and effect clues ( some of the clues to crack the text completion question)

4.Review basic concepts of Arithmetic, Algebra and Geometry.

5. Reason with numbers. Think behind the underlying the logic of each question. Spend time to understand why the other options are wrong.

6. Start with section tests. Time yourself.Dont get into the habit of taking untimed tests.

7. Take atleast 6 full length practice tests.

All the best.

1. ARRANGMENT
N terms can be arranged in N! factorial ways, if each position can be occupied by one term.
N terms can be arranged in N^M where. Each position can be occupied by 1 term or 2 terms or ……     N terms.  M stands for the number of positions to be filled.

2. COMBINATION
M terms can be selected from P terms in PCm ways.
In certain situations it is required to first choose the terms and then arrange the terms. i.e. PERMUTATION.

3. Permutation = combination x arrangement.

4.When N objects are distributed among P positions such that each position can get any number     of objects (zero, one, two ……N) then the number of ways of arranging the items is N+P-1Cp-1

5.When N objects are distributed among P positions such that each position can get atleast one     objet (one, two ……N) then the number of ways of arranging the items is N-1Cp+1

5 crucial points while solving a probability based problem.
1.Calculate the numerator {Nos. of foverable terms} and the denominator {Total number of terms}     separately using the concepts of arrangement, permutation and combination.
2.TAKE IT PERSONAL : Always imagine you are arranging / selecting the items. The action of taking     the object and placing it in the relevant position is the key.
3.When two or more items are picked it is easier to compute the probability of picking one     element at a time than computing the probability of picking many items at a time.
4.When A and B are selected relate the respective probabilities with multiplicataion. When either     A or B is selected relate the respective probabilities with addition.
5.When the multiple outcomes are possible the probability of atleast one of them happening is computed by calculating the reverse probability = 1 – probability of event not happening.

GRE- verbal reasoning - short para

There are short passages in the VR section of the GRE that tests more reasoning than verbal skills. You have to reason out logical relationship between statements. In ‘boldface’ arguments you are given a paragraph comprising claims, evidence to support claims, at times counter evidences and counter claims.

Study the example below.

Museums that house renaissance oil paintings typically store them in environments that are carefully kept within narrow margins of temperature and humidity to inhibit any deterioration. Laboratory tests have shown that the kind of oil paint use in these paintings actually adjusts to climatic changes quite well. If, as some museum directors believe, paint is the most sensitive substance in these works, then by relaxing the standards for temperature and humidity control, museums can reduce energy costs without risking damage to these paintings. Museums would be rash to relax those standards, however, since results of

preliminary tests indicate that gesso, a compound routinely used by renaissance artists to help paint adhere to the canvas, is unable to withstand significant variations in humidity.

In the argument above, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A. the first is an objection that has been raised against the position taken by the argument, the second is the position by the argument.

B. the first is the position taken by the argument the second is the position that the argument calls into question.

C. the first is a judgement that has been offered in support of the position that the argument calls into question; the second is a circumstance on which the judgement is in part, based.

D. the first is a judgment that has been offered in support of the position that the argument calls into question; the second is that position.

E. the first is a claim that the argument calls into question; the second is the position taken by the argument.

Strategy:

1. Read the overall para closely.

2. Take one bold statement at a time, analyse how this statement impacts the entire argument, including the other statement in bold.

3. Take the other statement in bold; analyse the impact of this statement in the argument in general.

4. You are not merely to establish relationship between the two statements in bold.

We can see in the above para that the first bold statement supports the second bold statement. The second statement is opposed later ( museums would be rash…) the supporting statement comes  in the form of a judgment.  ‘Paint is the most sensitive substance’ is a judgment, which serves as the evidence on which the claim is made.

We eliminate options B and D because the first is not the claim ( conclusion); the first is not an objection.  C and D both correctly refer to the first as a judgment, but in C the second is considered a situation on which the first is based, which is an incorrect relationship.  So the answer is D.

To ace the reading comprehension section you need to be a critical reader. Easier said than done.

Test aspirants usually skim(passively glance at a passage picking up few points here and there)through a passage. Then they take a look at the question. All the options seems correct. You are back to square 1.

Critical reading involves 3 levels of understanding and evaluation
First:Grasp the overall idea or the main point of the passage along with the general organization
Second:subject the specific details to greater scrutiny and explain what something means and why it was introduced.
Third: Evaluate what the author has written, what further conclusions can be drawn and judge whether the argument is good or bad.
Let me take you through one passage and lets critically read that passage.

First go through the passage:
According to Shaw mere diversity and disagreement on what is considered morally right is not enough reason to claim that there is no objective truth, nor a standard by which we can try to arrive at it and so there is no reason to worry about the claims of the relativist. I do not fully agree with Shaw’s disputation against the diversity argument for meta-ethical relativism although I do agree that the diversity argument does not entirely rule out the possibility of objective morality. I simply do not feel that this is the argument’s whole intention in the first place. Rather it is claiming that we as a global nation will never grasp this objective truth which does raise the question of whether there can be such a thing, and with this I do agree.

It is reasonable to see how moral truth can be considered different for different groups. Shaw outlines different theories which intend to weaken the relativist’s argument, including those of Naturalism, Intuitionism, and Emotivism, which I might add, are all themselves flawed in some way, but no real conclusion is reached as to how perfectly they prove to fault relativism. But then I ask why a rational person would spend any time defending or relying on something that he cannot fully understand, based on the fact that relativism cannot completely rule out the possibility of objectivity. Moral Relativism states that there are no objective truths or morals, but that these are conditional and dependent on a number of factors. It has two main claims: a) ‘there are no universally valid standards’ and b) ‘the validity of moral standards is dependent on cultural acceptance (Conventionalism) or personal choice or commitment (Subjectivism).’ Shaw is trying to undermine the meta-ethical diversity theory on the basis that just because we cannot see it does not mean that it’s not there. When we discuss diversity in ethics we do not only look at diversity at this present time, but also look back to the past and debate about how we should go about deciphering a new, universal moral system.

Now lets read critically
(According to Shaw mere diversity and disagreement on what is considered morally right is not enough reason to claim that there is no objective truth, nor a standard by which we can try to arrive at it and so there is no reason to worry about the claims of the relativist.) <—- shaws claim ( I do not fully)<—–author doesn’t agree agree with Shaw’s disputation against the diversity argument for meta-ethical relativism although( I do agree)<—–author agrees that the diversity argument does not entirely rule out the possibility of objective morality. I simply do not feel that this (is the argument’s)<—–attacking shaws argument whole intention in the first place. Rather it is claiming that we as a global nation will never grasp this objective truth which does raise the question of whether there can be such a thing, and with this I do agree. )<—–author doesn’t agree with whose claim: relativist’s or shaw’s

It is reasonable to see how moral truth can be considered different for different groups. Shaw outlines different theories which intend to weaken the relativist’s argument, including those of Naturalism, Intuitionism, and Emotivism,<—–why does the author introduce these things which I might add, are all themselves flawed in some way, but no real conclusion is reached as to how perfectly they prove to fault relativism. But then I ask why a rational person would spend any time defending or relying on something that he cannot fully understand, based on the fact that relativism cannot completely rule out the possibility of objectivity. <—–explains shaws argument Moral Relativism states that there are no objective truths or morals<—– relativists claim, but that these are conditional and dependent on a number of factors. It has two main claims: a) ‘there are no universally valid standards’ and b) ‘the validity of moral standards is dependent on cultural acceptance (Conventionalism) or personal choice or commitment (Subjectivism).’ Shaw is trying to undermine<—–explains shaws flaw the meta-ethical diversity theory on the basis that just because we cannot see it does not mean that it’s not there. When we discuss diversity in ethics we do not only look at diversity at this present time, but also look back to the past and debate about how we should go about deciphering a new, universal moral system. <—–attacks shaws claim with counter argument
—————————-
My comments are marked in red.

Did you notice :There are 3 perspectives being put forth in the passage: relativists, shaw and author. Did you understand how the passage was constructed? What is the claim? What is the argument?What is the counter argument which is presented and so on…… This is a sneak peak into critical reading. To ace the exam read every passage critically and trust me if you don’t have it in you. You can be taught to read critically in under 15hrs.

Text completion: these are questions from the ETS website

Directions: For each blank, select one entry from the corresponding column of choices. Fill all blanks in the way that best completes the text.

Let’s see how
There are clue words/phrases in the incomplete text. First identify those.

1. It is refreshing to read a book about our planet by an author who does not allow facts to be (i)_______  by politics: well aware of the political disputes about the effects of human activities on climate and biodiversity, this author does not permit them to (ii)______ his comprehensive description of what we know about our biosphere. He emphasizes the enormous gaps in our knowledge, the sparseness of our observations, and the   (iii)______, calling attention to the many aspects of planetary evolution that must be better understood before we can accurately diagnose the condition of our planet.

Blank  (i)                  Blank (ii)                  Blank (iii)

a. overshadowed     d. enhance              g. plausibility of our hypotheses
b. invalidated          e. obscure               h. certainty of our entitlement
c. illuminated          f. underscore          i. superficiality of our theories
�
obscure and overshadow go together. The author is praised for not doing these two.
Gaps and sparseness make our knowledge not deep enough.
2. Vain and prone to violence, Caravaggio could not handle success: the more his (i)__________ as an artist  increased, the more (ii)__________ his life became.

 Blank (i)                Blank (ii)
a.  temperance    d. tumultuous
b. notoriety         e. providential
c. eminence        f . dispassionate

we need contrast ideas, the first blank, a positive word, the second blank a negative word
eminence and tumultuous.

3. In parts of the Arctic, the land grades into the landfast ice so _______ that you can walk off
the coast and not know you are over the hidden sea.

a. permanently
b. imperceptibly
c. irregularly
d. precariously
e. relentlessly

fail to know is imperceptible

PS; taka a set of paras and mark words/phrases that signal the  use of other words.

GRE smartstart invites you to a unique interactive workshop on ‘How to crack the Reasoning-based GRE‘

31st July @ 10.00 am. Call on 9382935608, 42068494 to register.

Special weekend batch starting July 31st for outstation students.

Call us on 044 4206 8494, +91 93829 35608 for further details.