Bookmark this on Delicious
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Monday, December 19, 2011
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
"100 points more" GMAT workshop Dec 11– registration form
Who should attend:
if you are a
Repeater- You want to improve your score by atleast 100 points
First timer- You want to know what it takes to cross the 700 barrier in the GMAT
then do attend this workshop
Topics covered:
1. Strategies to boost your score in problem solving,data sufficiency,sentence correction and critical
reasoning sections.
2. 5 must do before taking the exam
3. 5 pitfalls which must be avoided at all costs during the exam
in addition
each of you will get a customized study plan in accordance to the number of days left before you take the exam
Do inform your friends who would be interested in the program.
Fill in the form and book your seat immediately
Saturday, December 3, 2011
Which business schools have produced the most entrepreneurs?
I got this information through a certain website though i could share it with you all...
Which business schools have produced the most entrepreneurs?
A recently published LinkedIn study examined the backgrounds of members who identify themselves as startup founders and came up with the leading schools for entrepreneurs.
The results dramatically differ from the two most-cited yet deeply flawed rankings of leading entrepreneurial programs by Princeton Review and U.S. News & World Report. By sifting through its more than 120 million member profiles, LinkedIn has produced the ideal “put up or shut up” analysis. It’s the kind of data that calls out schools that have made entrepreneurship a marketing or promotional vehicle vs. those that have produced actual startup entrepreneurs.
LinkedIn membership data shows these five schools produced the most startup founders:
• Stanford,
• Harvard,
• MIT Sloan,
• Berkeley’s Haas School, and
• Dartmouth College’s Tuck School.
The next five are Wharton, Columbia, Babson, Virginia Darden, and the Johnson School at Cornell University.
Why the results are surprising
Babson, which has long been number one in both rankings, does no better than eighth place. Tuck, which fails to make the U.S. News list of 27 schools or the Princeton Review list of 25 schools, is firmly in the top five.
Columbia Business School, which doesn’t make the Princeton Review list and comes in at 19th on U.S. News, has the seventh largestnumber of startup founders in LinkedIn’s database. Chicago Booth, which is ranked second by Princeton Review, doesn’t make the LinkedIn list at all. Neither does Michigan, Brigham Young, or the University of Arizona, all schools in Princeton Review’s top five.
A side-by-side comparison (below) of the LinkedIn list with the two other rankings tells the story well. Seven of LinkedIn’s top ten schools don’t even warrant a mention in the Princeton Review ranking. LinkedIn’s number one school, Stanford, ranks a mere eighth on the Princeton Review list. Two of LinkedIn’s top ten schools don’t make the U.S. News list even though it rates 27 schools.
LinkedIn Rank & School U.S. News Rank Princeton Review
1. Stanford 2 8
2. Harvard Business School 4 NR
3. MIT Sloan 3 NR
4. California-Berkeley (Haas) 6 NR
5. Dartmouth (Tuck) NR NR
6. Pennsylvania (Wharton) 5 NR
7. Columbia Business School 19 NR
8. Babson 1 1
9. Virginia (Darden) 14 7
10. Cornell (Johnson) NR NR
Source: LinkedIn study, U.S. News, and Princeton Review
Of course, not every entrepreneur may have a LinkedIn profile and even those that do may not fall within the parameters of the professional network site’s methodology. LinkedIn counted members who identified themselves as founders or co-founders of U.S. companies created after 2000, with a LinkedIn company profile, and that currently has between two and 200 employees. LinkedIn excluded small law, consulting and real estate firms, as well as LLCs. Using these guidelines, LinkedIn came up with a pool of more than 13,000 entrepreneurs for its survey.
The LinkedIn ranking is not based on raw numbers, but rather on “how ‘over-represented’ those schools are among entrepreneurs,” according to Monica Rogati, a senior data scientist at LinkedIn who did the analysis. “This levels the playing field for small schools, as you have noticed but it makes it less surprising, which is why I wanted to mention it.”
This compares with U.S. News, which simply asks b-school deans and MBA directors, to rank schools on the basis of their entrepreneurship programs—even though they have no direct knowledge of those programs. Princeton Review, meantime, may as well pull its results out of a hat. Its methodology is so unclear and unspecific that it is hard to say exactly how the ranking is put together. It supposedly attempts to measure “academics and requirements,” “students and faculty,” and “outside the classroom.” (Our critique of the ranking was published last year.)
That’s why the new LinkedIn list has more gravitas–because it is based on real results—not what a few deans think about programs for which they no knowledge or some voodoo methodology by an organization that refuses to properly disclose how it comes up with a ranking.
Which business schools have produced the most entrepreneurs?
A recently published LinkedIn study examined the backgrounds of members who identify themselves as startup founders and came up with the leading schools for entrepreneurs.
The results dramatically differ from the two most-cited yet deeply flawed rankings of leading entrepreneurial programs by Princeton Review and U.S. News & World Report. By sifting through its more than 120 million member profiles, LinkedIn has produced the ideal “put up or shut up” analysis. It’s the kind of data that calls out schools that have made entrepreneurship a marketing or promotional vehicle vs. those that have produced actual startup entrepreneurs.
LinkedIn membership data shows these five schools produced the most startup founders:
• Stanford,
• Harvard,
• MIT Sloan,
• Berkeley’s Haas School, and
• Dartmouth College’s Tuck School.
The next five are Wharton, Columbia, Babson, Virginia Darden, and the Johnson School at Cornell University.
Why the results are surprising
Babson, which has long been number one in both rankings, does no better than eighth place. Tuck, which fails to make the U.S. News list of 27 schools or the Princeton Review list of 25 schools, is firmly in the top five.
Columbia Business School, which doesn’t make the Princeton Review list and comes in at 19th on U.S. News, has the seventh largestnumber of startup founders in LinkedIn’s database. Chicago Booth, which is ranked second by Princeton Review, doesn’t make the LinkedIn list at all. Neither does Michigan, Brigham Young, or the University of Arizona, all schools in Princeton Review’s top five.
A side-by-side comparison (below) of the LinkedIn list with the two other rankings tells the story well. Seven of LinkedIn’s top ten schools don’t even warrant a mention in the Princeton Review ranking. LinkedIn’s number one school, Stanford, ranks a mere eighth on the Princeton Review list. Two of LinkedIn’s top ten schools don’t make the U.S. News list even though it rates 27 schools.
LinkedIn Rank & School U.S. News Rank Princeton Review
1. Stanford 2 8
2. Harvard Business School 4 NR
3. MIT Sloan 3 NR
4. California-Berkeley (Haas) 6 NR
5. Dartmouth (Tuck) NR NR
6. Pennsylvania (Wharton) 5 NR
7. Columbia Business School 19 NR
8. Babson 1 1
9. Virginia (Darden) 14 7
10. Cornell (Johnson) NR NR
Source: LinkedIn study, U.S. News, and Princeton Review
Of course, not every entrepreneur may have a LinkedIn profile and even those that do may not fall within the parameters of the professional network site’s methodology. LinkedIn counted members who identified themselves as founders or co-founders of U.S. companies created after 2000, with a LinkedIn company profile, and that currently has between two and 200 employees. LinkedIn excluded small law, consulting and real estate firms, as well as LLCs. Using these guidelines, LinkedIn came up with a pool of more than 13,000 entrepreneurs for its survey.
The LinkedIn ranking is not based on raw numbers, but rather on “how ‘over-represented’ those schools are among entrepreneurs,” according to Monica Rogati, a senior data scientist at LinkedIn who did the analysis. “This levels the playing field for small schools, as you have noticed but it makes it less surprising, which is why I wanted to mention it.”
This compares with U.S. News, which simply asks b-school deans and MBA directors, to rank schools on the basis of their entrepreneurship programs—even though they have no direct knowledge of those programs. Princeton Review, meantime, may as well pull its results out of a hat. Its methodology is so unclear and unspecific that it is hard to say exactly how the ranking is put together. It supposedly attempts to measure “academics and requirements,” “students and faculty,” and “outside the classroom.” (Our critique of the ranking was published last year.)
That’s why the new LinkedIn list has more gravitas–because it is based on real results—not what a few deans think about programs for which they no knowledge or some voodoo methodology by an organization that refuses to properly disclose how it comes up with a ranking.
Which business schools have produced the most entrepreneurs?
I got this information through a certain website though i could share it with you all...
Which business schools have produced the most entrepreneurs?
A recently published LinkedIn study examined the backgrounds of members who identify themselves as startup founders and came up with the leading schools for entrepreneurs.
The results dramatically differ from the two most-cited yet deeply flawed rankings of leading entrepreneurial programs by Princeton Review and U.S. News & World Report. By sifting through its more than 120 million member profiles, LinkedIn has produced the ideal “put up or shut up” analysis. It’s the kind of data that calls out schools that have made entrepreneurship a marketing or promotional vehicle vs. those that have produced actual startup entrepreneurs.
LinkedIn membership data shows these five schools produced the most startup founders:
• Stanford,
• Harvard,
• MIT Sloan,
• Berkeley’s Haas School, and
• Dartmouth College’s Tuck School.
The next five are Wharton, Columbia, Babson, Virginia Darden, and the Johnson School at Cornell University.
Why the results are surprising
Babson, which has long been number one in both rankings, does no better than eighth place. Tuck, which fails to make the U.S. News list of 27 schools or the Princeton Review list of 25 schools, is firmly in the top five.
Columbia Business School, which doesn’t make the Princeton Review list and comes in at 19th on U.S. News, has the seventh largestnumber of startup founders in LinkedIn’s database. Chicago Booth, which is ranked second by Princeton Review, doesn’t make the LinkedIn list at all. Neither does Michigan, Brigham Young, or the University of Arizona, all schools in Princeton Review’s top five.
A side-by-side comparison (below) of the LinkedIn list with the two other rankings tells the story well. Seven of LinkedIn’s top ten schools don’t even warrant a mention in the Princeton Review ranking. LinkedIn’s number one school, Stanford, ranks a mere eighth on the Princeton Review list. Two of LinkedIn’s top ten schools don’t make the U.S. News list even though it rates 27 schools.
LinkedIn Rank & School U.S. News Rank Princeton Review
1. Stanford 2 8
2. Harvard Business School 4 NR
3. MIT Sloan 3 NR
4. California-Berkeley (Haas) 6 NR
5. Dartmouth (Tuck) NR NR
6. Pennsylvania (Wharton) 5 NR
7. Columbia Business School 19 NR
8. Babson 1 1
9. Virginia (Darden) 14 7
10. Cornell (Johnson) NR NR
Source: LinkedIn study, U.S. News, and Princeton Review
Of course, not every entrepreneur may have a LinkedIn profile and even those that do may not fall within the parameters of the professional network site’s methodology. LinkedIn counted members who identified themselves as founders or co-founders of U.S. companies created after 2000, with a LinkedIn company profile, and that currently has between two and 200 employees. LinkedIn excluded small law, consulting and real estate firms, as well as LLCs. Using these guidelines, LinkedIn came up with a pool of more than 13,000 entrepreneurs for its survey.
The LinkedIn ranking is not based on raw numbers, but rather on “how ‘over-represented’ those schools are among entrepreneurs,” according to Monica Rogati, a senior data scientist at LinkedIn who did the analysis. “This levels the playing field for small schools, as you have noticed but it makes it less surprising, which is why I wanted to mention it.”
This compares with U.S. News, which simply asks b-school deans and MBA directors, to rank schools on the basis of their entrepreneurship programs—even though they have no direct knowledge of those programs. Princeton Review, meantime, may as well pull its results out of a hat. Its methodology is so unclear and unspecific that it is hard to say exactly how the ranking is put together. It supposedly attempts to measure “academics and requirements,” “students and faculty,” and “outside the classroom.” (Our critique of the ranking was published last year.)
That’s why the new LinkedIn list has more gravitas–because it is based on real results—not what a few deans think about programs for which they no knowledge or some voodoo methodology by an organization that refuses to properly disclose how it comes up with a ranking.
Which business schools have produced the most entrepreneurs?
A recently published LinkedIn study examined the backgrounds of members who identify themselves as startup founders and came up with the leading schools for entrepreneurs.
The results dramatically differ from the two most-cited yet deeply flawed rankings of leading entrepreneurial programs by Princeton Review and U.S. News & World Report. By sifting through its more than 120 million member profiles, LinkedIn has produced the ideal “put up or shut up” analysis. It’s the kind of data that calls out schools that have made entrepreneurship a marketing or promotional vehicle vs. those that have produced actual startup entrepreneurs.
LinkedIn membership data shows these five schools produced the most startup founders:
• Stanford,
• Harvard,
• MIT Sloan,
• Berkeley’s Haas School, and
• Dartmouth College’s Tuck School.
The next five are Wharton, Columbia, Babson, Virginia Darden, and the Johnson School at Cornell University.
Why the results are surprising
Babson, which has long been number one in both rankings, does no better than eighth place. Tuck, which fails to make the U.S. News list of 27 schools or the Princeton Review list of 25 schools, is firmly in the top five.
Columbia Business School, which doesn’t make the Princeton Review list and comes in at 19th on U.S. News, has the seventh largestnumber of startup founders in LinkedIn’s database. Chicago Booth, which is ranked second by Princeton Review, doesn’t make the LinkedIn list at all. Neither does Michigan, Brigham Young, or the University of Arizona, all schools in Princeton Review’s top five.
A side-by-side comparison (below) of the LinkedIn list with the two other rankings tells the story well. Seven of LinkedIn’s top ten schools don’t even warrant a mention in the Princeton Review ranking. LinkedIn’s number one school, Stanford, ranks a mere eighth on the Princeton Review list. Two of LinkedIn’s top ten schools don’t make the U.S. News list even though it rates 27 schools.
LinkedIn Rank & School U.S. News Rank Princeton Review
1. Stanford 2 8
2. Harvard Business School 4 NR
3. MIT Sloan 3 NR
4. California-Berkeley (Haas) 6 NR
5. Dartmouth (Tuck) NR NR
6. Pennsylvania (Wharton) 5 NR
7. Columbia Business School 19 NR
8. Babson 1 1
9. Virginia (Darden) 14 7
10. Cornell (Johnson) NR NR
Source: LinkedIn study, U.S. News, and Princeton Review
Of course, not every entrepreneur may have a LinkedIn profile and even those that do may not fall within the parameters of the professional network site’s methodology. LinkedIn counted members who identified themselves as founders or co-founders of U.S. companies created after 2000, with a LinkedIn company profile, and that currently has between two and 200 employees. LinkedIn excluded small law, consulting and real estate firms, as well as LLCs. Using these guidelines, LinkedIn came up with a pool of more than 13,000 entrepreneurs for its survey.
The LinkedIn ranking is not based on raw numbers, but rather on “how ‘over-represented’ those schools are among entrepreneurs,” according to Monica Rogati, a senior data scientist at LinkedIn who did the analysis. “This levels the playing field for small schools, as you have noticed but it makes it less surprising, which is why I wanted to mention it.”
This compares with U.S. News, which simply asks b-school deans and MBA directors, to rank schools on the basis of their entrepreneurship programs—even though they have no direct knowledge of those programs. Princeton Review, meantime, may as well pull its results out of a hat. Its methodology is so unclear and unspecific that it is hard to say exactly how the ranking is put together. It supposedly attempts to measure “academics and requirements,” “students and faculty,” and “outside the classroom.” (Our critique of the ranking was published last year.)
That’s why the new LinkedIn list has more gravitas–because it is based on real results—not what a few deans think about programs for which they no knowledge or some voodoo methodology by an organization that refuses to properly disclose how it comes up with a ranking.
Friday, November 18, 2011
Great Lakes institute of management makes great strides.
A GLIM-mer of hope for the B-school -starved Chennai, Great Lake’s meteoric rise in business education, with an international feel, is a blessing to the city. Other than institutes such as LIBA and IFMR , Chennai does not have many B schools of repute. Now Great Lakes is filling that gap. And duly. With a bouquet of courses to suit both freshers and executive with work experience, and with one other campus in Gurgaon, a corporate hub, Great Lakes is fast becoming one of the sought after destinations for top MBA aspirants.
Ensconced on ECR, closer to the IT hub, and in the manufacturing capital of South India,Great Lakes’ industry interaction is one of its trump cards. Besides, it offers industry- relevant management courses for working professionals, the PGWPM; PGWPM-energy, prepares professionals for the largest sector- energy.
New 2yr PGDM
Great Lakes is introducing 2-year PGDM( equivalent to MBA) program beginning academic session July 2012, according to a press release. The program is open to candidates with 0- 2 yrs of experience, the seats available being 120. Now freshers too can have the Great Lakes advantage. A unique feature of the program is the tie up with colleges abroad for student and faculty exchange, and semester- abroad component, defining further, its motto – global mindsets, Indian roots. PGDM specializations will comprise- operations, finance, strategy, IT and System and , International Business.
The reputed 1 year PGPM program already offered by the institute, has an intake of 300 students per year. To seek admission to PGPM (1year), PGDM (2yr) programs applicant can take CAT/XAT/GMAT exams. Cut-offs and other details can be obtained from the institute website.
Contributed by
Dr. Vijayakumari
GMAT trainer @ GMAT superia-semantics
Ensconced on ECR, closer to the IT hub, and in the manufacturing capital of South India,Great Lakes’ industry interaction is one of its trump cards. Besides, it offers industry- relevant management courses for working professionals, the PGWPM; PGWPM-energy, prepares professionals for the largest sector- energy.
New 2yr PGDM
Great Lakes is introducing 2-year PGDM( equivalent to MBA) program beginning academic session July 2012, according to a press release. The program is open to candidates with 0- 2 yrs of experience, the seats available being 120. Now freshers too can have the Great Lakes advantage. A unique feature of the program is the tie up with colleges abroad for student and faculty exchange, and semester- abroad component, defining further, its motto – global mindsets, Indian roots. PGDM specializations will comprise- operations, finance, strategy, IT and System and , International Business.
The reputed 1 year PGPM program already offered by the institute, has an intake of 300 students per year. To seek admission to PGPM (1year), PGDM (2yr) programs applicant can take CAT/XAT/GMAT exams. Cut-offs and other details can be obtained from the institute website.
Contributed by
Dr. Vijayakumari
GMAT trainer @ GMAT superia-semantics
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
GMAT fast-track for the test season
A GMAT program designed for the busy you
Workshop-based higher order interactives
-Exhaustive SC concepts
-inductive -deductive logic for CR
-inferential reading
-Higher order problem solving
-Data sufficiency
Program director- Dr Vijayakumari-Chief GMAT trainer
Watch a preview
Duration:30 hrs from Nov 15th to Dec 15th
Call 044-42068494 or 9884123808 to book your seat
Workshop-based higher order interactives
-Exhaustive SC concepts
-inductive -deductive logic for CR
-inferential reading
-Higher order problem solving
-Data sufficiency
Program director- Dr Vijayakumari-Chief GMAT trainer
Watch a preview
Duration:30 hrs from Nov 15th to Dec 15th
Call 044-42068494 or 9884123808 to book your seat
www.gmatsuperia.com
Saturday, October 22, 2011
GMAT CR tips
GMAT CR tip
be aware of the most common ways in which reasoning can go wrong. this will help spot them in CR arguments as well as
guard against these errors in your essay writing.
some of those ways are
- confusing cause and effect
- using unpresentative statistics
- employing faulty analogy
- drawing hasty generalisation
more of these you may get at our website- www.semanticslearning.com
be aware of the most common ways in which reasoning can go wrong. this will help spot them in CR arguments as well as
guard against these errors in your essay writing.
some of those ways are
- confusing cause and effect
- using unpresentative statistics
- employing faulty analogy
- drawing hasty generalisation
more of these you may get at our website- www.semanticslearning.com
GMAT sentence correction tips
GMAT sentence correction tip
check each sentence for semantics( meaning conveyed) and syntax( the grammatical structure and conformity).
syntax is altered to convey the meaning aptly, not the other way around.
in addition to these two, terseness is important- being economical with words
caution: if being terse, ie reducing words, lead to ambiguity, length is welcome.
here are two eg.
eg. 1.
ambiguous: Piaget noted that in children a repertoire of skills is acquired during preschool period and need further
strengthening through organized learning experienced at school.
what needs strengthening is ambiguous, so we need to repeat some words
Piaget noted that in children a repertoire of skills is acquired during preschool period and these skills need further
strengthening through organized learning experienced at school.
eg 2- a wordy sentence
The houses were mostly well built in construction, but the interior furnishing within the house left much
to be desired.
economical
the houses were mostly well- built, but the interiors left much to be desired.
check each sentence for semantics( meaning conveyed) and syntax( the grammatical structure and conformity).
syntax is altered to convey the meaning aptly, not the other way around.
in addition to these two, terseness is important- being economical with words
caution: if being terse, ie reducing words, lead to ambiguity, length is welcome.
here are two eg.
eg. 1.
ambiguous: Piaget noted that in children a repertoire of skills is acquired during preschool period and need further
strengthening through organized learning experienced at school.
what needs strengthening is ambiguous, so we need to repeat some words
Piaget noted that in children a repertoire of skills is acquired during preschool period and these skills need further
strengthening through organized learning experienced at school.
eg 2- a wordy sentence
The houses were mostly well built in construction, but the interior furnishing within the house left much
to be desired.
economical
the houses were mostly well- built, but the interiors left much to be desired.
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Road map to worlds top universities
Topics covered
1.Deadlines of top colleges
2.Study options abroad- countrywise breakup
3.MBA options for fresher's
4.How to finance your studies abroad?
5.Indian banks scenario
6.Admission process for MS
7.Approx costing info to do MS abroad
8.Finance certificates
9.Funding options
10.Scholarship options for indian students
11.Contact our resource personal
For more info email to enquiry@semanticslearning.com
Watch the presentation
1.Deadlines of top colleges
2.Study options abroad- countrywise breakup
3.MBA options for fresher's
4.How to finance your studies abroad?
5.Indian banks scenario
6.Admission process for MS
7.Approx costing info to do MS abroad
8.Finance certificates
9.Funding options
10.Scholarship options for indian students
11.Contact our resource personal
For more info email to enquiry@semanticslearning.com
Watch the presentation
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
US and European grad schools- Admission services workshop
semantics invites you to
“Roadmap to the world’s best Universities & colleges- Admission services workshop”
Date: Oct 15th Time: 5:00pm
Venue: Semantics,#34 Jumbulingam St, Nungambakkam,Chennai -34, off Valuvarkottam high road, opp
canara bank, Nungambakkam. Ph: 044-42068494
To register: sms name and email id to 9884123808 or 044-42068494
Workshop includes:
Special session on:
•Navigating complicated admission procedures of the Top 100 universities of the world
•Guidance on SOP’s, Recommendation letters
•Scholarships
•Visa counselling and more
Special offers on admission services packages
Profile of the speaker
DR. DEBJANI BANERJEE:
Admission counselor for various organisations including Career Plan and IMS. Has excellent track record of placements in the most reputed institutions in US, UK and Singapore. A PhD in English, Dr. Banerjee brings rich experience in teaching and administration at US universities and colleges in UK in order to help her students plan their careers. She uses her skills as a published writer to help her students present their profile and their strengths. She has taught in various international classrooms and in e-learning environments and this varied experience underpins her work as a global education expert.
Dr.Debjani heads the Admission Assistance Cell (AAC) at Semantics.
Bookmark this on DeliciousSaturday, October 1, 2011
5 most crucial points while solving. Permutation combinations
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.
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.
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.
Bookmark this on DeliciousFriday, September 30, 2011
Thursday, September 15, 2011
GMAT sentence correction- tips
GMAT sentence correction: Think beyond grammar
Fine, you know the GMAT SC jargon – tense error, pronoun error, subject verb disagreement. Good. Useful. But you must think beyond grammar to do justice to the range SC questions.
One of such errors is ambiguity. That is something is not clear. To make clear the meaning conveyed. So keep track of meaning also while checking a sentence for errors.
Illustration - real GMAT qns
1. Incorrect: In mammals, a lifetime’s supply of egg cells are produced during fetal development and remain dormant until maturity.
Here remain dormant is ambiguously used; one may ask what remain egg cells or development? In such cases, we need to repeat the word, cells, since these remain dormant until maturity. The verb is agrees with the singular sub lifetime’s supply.
Correct … is produced during fetal development and the cells remain dormant until maturity.
2. In 1869, anxious to balance its population of 8,000 men and 2,000 women, the Wyoming legislature extended voting rights to women in Wyoming.
A. its population of 8,000 men and 2,000 women, the Wyoming legislature
B. their population of 8,000 men and 2,000 women, the Wyoming’s legislature
C. the state’s population of 8,000 men and 2,000 women, the Wyoming legislature
D. a state population of 8,000 men and 2,000 women, the legislature in Wyoming
E. its population of 8,000 men with 2,000 women, the Wyoming’s legislature
So since you know that singular pronouns agree with singular nouns, its agrees with Wyoming legislature. But grammar alone wont rescue us here.
Look at the meaning, can Wyoming legislature have population? No the population belongs to the state, C is clear and exact. D, would mean any state’s population, not necessarily Wyoming’s.
Moral of the story
Attention to detail…is very important..keep looking out for similar errors; match grammar with meaning.
Bookmark this on Delicious
Fine, you know the GMAT SC jargon – tense error, pronoun error, subject verb disagreement. Good. Useful. But you must think beyond grammar to do justice to the range SC questions.
One of such errors is ambiguity. That is something is not clear. To make clear the meaning conveyed. So keep track of meaning also while checking a sentence for errors.
Illustration - real GMAT qns
1. Incorrect: In mammals, a lifetime’s supply of egg cells are produced during fetal development and remain dormant until maturity.
Here remain dormant is ambiguously used; one may ask what remain egg cells or development? In such cases, we need to repeat the word, cells, since these remain dormant until maturity. The verb is agrees with the singular sub lifetime’s supply.
Correct … is produced during fetal development and the cells remain dormant until maturity.
2. In 1869, anxious to balance its population of 8,000 men and 2,000 women, the Wyoming legislature extended voting rights to women in Wyoming.
A. its population of 8,000 men and 2,000 women, the Wyoming legislature
B. their population of 8,000 men and 2,000 women, the Wyoming’s legislature
C. the state’s population of 8,000 men and 2,000 women, the Wyoming legislature
D. a state population of 8,000 men and 2,000 women, the legislature in Wyoming
E. its population of 8,000 men with 2,000 women, the Wyoming’s legislature
So since you know that singular pronouns agree with singular nouns, its agrees with Wyoming legislature. But grammar alone wont rescue us here.
Look at the meaning, can Wyoming legislature have population? No the population belongs to the state, C is clear and exact. D, would mean any state’s population, not necessarily Wyoming’s.
Moral of the story
Attention to detail…is very important..keep looking out for similar errors; match grammar with meaning.
Bookmark this on Delicious
GMAT tips to score more..
Ten ways to score poorly in GMAT! If you are rich enough for retakes, that is
1. I know math, so no need to go thru the same old arithmetic, algebra, geometry stuff
2. Tones of free downloads on your pc..what is relevant, what is not, even God may not know..
3. Just official guide, what else, nothing official about it…
4. I will join for the costliest, longest duration course in town…let them get me the score, no need to study at home..
5. I wont do the essays while practicing, only math and verbal mock exams will do
6. I speak and write good English, so verbal is going to be a cake walk, no less
7. I need just one month for preparation, after all I had high grades in college.
8. Do as many tests as possible, in fact 90 percent of my preparation time should be spent on tests. concepts? What concepts?
9. My friend said GMAT was easy for him, no tough qns ( hey, what was your friend’s score?)
10. Out of five tests I did, one test I scores above 650. So I will give the test as planned. I believe in luck!
PS Good luck
Bookmark this on Delicious
1. I know math, so no need to go thru the same old arithmetic, algebra, geometry stuff
2. Tones of free downloads on your pc..what is relevant, what is not, even God may not know..
3. Just official guide, what else, nothing official about it…
4. I will join for the costliest, longest duration course in town…let them get me the score, no need to study at home..
5. I wont do the essays while practicing, only math and verbal mock exams will do
6. I speak and write good English, so verbal is going to be a cake walk, no less
7. I need just one month for preparation, after all I had high grades in college.
8. Do as many tests as possible, in fact 90 percent of my preparation time should be spent on tests. concepts? What concepts?
9. My friend said GMAT was easy for him, no tough qns ( hey, what was your friend’s score?)
10. Out of five tests I did, one test I scores above 650. So I will give the test as planned. I believe in luck!
PS Good luck
Bookmark this on Delicious
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)