Learning GRE Vocab can be funnier than a circus clown with a Narwhal balloon. We bet you’ll never forget the meaning of the GRE vocab word DISPARATE when you conjure the image of Bozo and John and the different career paths they have chosen!
What jokes, tricks, and images do you use to remember your GRE vocab? Instagram, Vine, or tweet them with the tag #GREVocab and share the fun! You can check out these GRE Vocab Flash Cards to find a word worth knowing for the GRE. And, as always, you’re welcome to join one of our free practice tests to help you get the best GRE score possible.
Last year, I wrote a series of entries about the critical reasoning problems that were recently added to the GRE. Since it’s been a while, let’s revisit that question type — and check out another aspect of critical thinking that confounds many of you.
Here’s a type of problem that’s caused no end of consternation to a lot of my students:
Residents of this state are obligated to renew their driver’s license in two circumstances only: if they accumulate six or more points in moving violations, or if they obtain citizenship in another country. Clarice, who is a citizen of only this country, has been involved in only one accident, which added three points to her license. Therefore, Clarice has no reason to renew her driver’s license at this time.
The argument above depends on which of the following assumptions?
I’m not going to show you the answer choices because the essence of this problem needs to be taken care of long before you ever look at a single choice. When I ask my students for the assumption, I invariably hear answers such as the following:
- “The author assumes that Clarice didn’t receive points from sources other than accidents.”
- “The author assumes that Clarice wasn’t already a citizen of some other place.”
- “The author assumes that Clarice didn’t do something else that would make her have to renew her license.”
All of these wrong answers fall for the same trap: thinking in the way that the test makers want you to think. The test makers say, “Hey! Look at these conditions. Clarice didn’t meet any of them. So, there’s no reason for her to renew her license.” And a lot people look at that line of reasoning and say, “Aha! I bet Clarice DID meet one of those conditions, in some sneaky way.” Then they start drumming up clever ways to force poor Clarice to retake her driver’s exam.
This is what I like to call going down the wrong rabbit hole. The test makers show you a rabbit hole, saying basically, “Hey, you! Think about THIS.” And so you think about whatever “this” is, and you think about it really hard, and the problem is that you shouldn’t have even started thinking along those lines in the first place.
Let’s back up a bit.
Consider this argument:
Boris isn’t obligated to exercise. Therefore, there is no reason for Boris to exercise.
Or how about this one:
There is no law mandating that Boris be kind to his mother. Therefore, he should be a jerk to her.
How do those arguments sound? Terrible, you say?! But why? If I’m not required to do something, doesn’t that mean I have no reason to do it?
Here, again, is the argument about Clarice, but condensed to the essentials:
Clarice isn’t required to renew her driver’s license. Therefore, she has no reason to renew her driver’s license.
It’s tricky to spot the error the first time someone throws you an argument like this, because renewing a driver’s license is boring and lame, so your brain fills in the gap in the argument: “The only reason anyone would ever renew their license was if they had to.” But that’s not necessarily true: that’s an assumption. Maybe Clarice gets a tax credit for renewing her license, or renewing the license will get some of her points taken away, or renewing the license provides some other benefit to something completely unrelated. We don’t know.
Remember this nugget of logical wisdom when you take the GRE: just because a person isn’t required to do something, doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t or they won’t!
When a GRE quantitative problem features multiple ratios, many of you suffer headaches. This is because the “math” way of solving the problem is brutal, and students who don’t use logic will dive head-first into a morass of ugly substitutions, mistakenly assuming that the GRE is a math test. Here’s the kind of problem I’m talking about:
In a particular mixed candy bag, the ratio of Skittles to M&M’s is 4 to 5, while the ratio of Reese’s Pieces to M&M’s is 9 to 7. What is the ratio of Skittles to Reese’s Pieces?
The “math” way to do this problem is to set up two equations, solve one for M&M’s, and plug that value into the other one. If that sounds painful, that’s because it is. Don’t do this. Make a simple table instead:
S | M | R
4 : 5
7 : 9
Take a moment to confirm that you understand where the numbers above are coming from. They’re just a translation of the information in the word problem.
The question asks for the ratio of S to R. Can you just say it’s 4 to 9? No way. The value connecting them — the M — is different. It’s 5 in one ratio and 7 in the other. So, rewrite the ratios to make the M term the same in both, creating a kind of “bridge.”
Multiply the first ratio by 7: 7×(4:5) = 28:35
Multiply the second ratio by 5: 5×(7:9) = 35:45
Next, check out your new table:
S | M | R
28 : 35
35 : 45
Now you can just “walk across the bridge,” as it were — the ratio of S to R is simply 28:45. Try this technique on your next multiple-ratios problem and let us know how it goes!
One of the most important things to realize about GRE reading comp – nay, the most important thing – is that the details don’t matter. As you read each paragraph of a passage, you need concern yourself with one thing, and one thing only: What the author’s purpose was in writing each paragraph, and his purpose in writing the passage.
You need to take notes while reading passages, but not the type of notes that you’re accustomed to taking – your goal is to make a bare-bones outline that sums up each paragraph in two phrases or fewer.
Here’s a sample passage, one paragraph at a time, and our map of it:
After you read the first sentence, make a quick note about the broad subject matter of the passage:
Topic: Egalia’s Daughters
And once you get to the last sentence or two of the first paragraph, make a note about the passage’s scope –this is just a narrower version of the topic, that tells you what about it specifically interests the author:
Scope: Book’s ending not supported by research
And to sum up the key points from paragraph 1:
¶1 – Book reverses gender roles; ending not based upon research
Now, as you read paragraph two, stop after just the first sentence and predict what the overall paragraph is going to be about:
¶2 – SJT: Even people who are oppressed by a society generally support it
As you scan the rest of the paragraph, did any keywords jump out at you to tell you that the author was doing anything other than explaining this theory? Nope – our note is sufficient, and we can move on to the final paragraph.
Apply the same exercise to the third paragraph: Make a note about what the paragraph’s overall topic seems to be after you’ve read only the first sentence:
¶3 – What if normally-advantaged group made disadvantaged? Impossible to know.
Does the rest of the paragraph serve any function other than to prove its leading sentence? You only need to do a quick scan for any new keywords to realize that no, it does not.
Once you’ve read the entire passage, make a note of the author’s primary objective in writing the passage – chances are that you’ll get a question about it. In this case, if we look at our three paragraphs in order, we can see that the author was trying to prove the point that he made about Egalia’s Daughters in the first paragraph:
Purpose: To explain why book’s ending not supported by research.
Now (and not any earlier than now!) we’re ready to go the questions - having read strategically, we’ve noted information that will allow us to answer virtually every question efficiently. Happy “mapping”, and stay tuned for more reading comp best practices in next week’s entry!
Not too long ago, I used something called the “balance approach” to show you how to solve a mixtures problem. But the balance technique isn’t exclusive to mixtures. In fact, the most likely time for it to come up is when a problem deals with plain ol’ averages.
Here’s an example of the kind of GRE problem I’m talking about:
At a bowling tournament in which males and females competed, the average score of the participants was 154 points. If the average score of the 8 males was 148 points, how many females were in the tournament if the average female score was 158 points?
Most of your competition is going to try to use the average formula: average equals sum divided by number, or as I prefer to write it,
Average × Number = Sum
Using the above formula gives you this:
154(8 + x) = 8(148) + x(158)
There are a couple of problems here. One, you have to do some nasty arithmetic, such as 154×8 and 8×148. And perhaps more importantly, it takes a rather impressive feat of translation to set that baby up.
Try this instead.
The overall average is 154. Each man got 148 points, which is 6 points short of the average. There were 8 men, so altogether, they dragged down the average by 8×6 = 48 points.
This means the women need to make up a 48 point deficit. Each woman scores a 158, which is 4 points above the average. If each woman contributes 4 points to overcoming the 48 point shortfall, then there need to be 48/4 = 12 of them.
That sure was a lot easier than solving the equation. And if you’re a real critical thinking wizard, you might notice that even this was too much work. The ratio of the men’s deficit (-6) to the women’s surplus (+4) is 6 to 4, or 1.5. Thus, the ratio of women to men also needs to be 1.5, and that it is: 12÷8 = 1.5.
Subscribe to our mailing list
TagsAbout the Test critical thinking GRE Math GRE math prep GRE practice gre prep GRE quantitative gre quantitative content gre quantitative reasoning GRE quantitative section GRE Reading Comprehension GRE score GRE strategy GRE study gre studying gre test gre test prep GRE Test Prep gre verbal gre verbal reasoning gre verbal section GRE vocab GRE vocabulary Quantitative Reasoning verbal reasoning
Tweets from @KaplanGradPrep