In the old days, when there were no sectional cut-offs in many exams, some people would choose to be “specialists”. In other words, they would strive to be really really good at one section and devote most of the time in the paper to that section, thus clearing the overall cut-offs despite a negligible score in one section.

However, colleges quickly realised that by such a criterion they ran the risk of getting people who spoke impeccable English but could not do a back-of-the-envelope calculation to save their lives (or their jobs), or others who could be human computers yet could not string together two consecutive grammatical sentences. Either type would go on to be less-than-ideal manager material. So nearly all the top colleges have moved to a scenario where there are sectional cut-offs; thus ensuring that one needs to spend a significant amount of time on each section.

Having said that, one can still choose to be flexible about time allotment. Very few people are equally proficient in both sections; and it is an established fact that the overall cut-off exceeds the total of the individual or sectional cut-offs (the whole is greater than the sum of the parts, after all!). So it is generally necessary not only to clear the cut-offs in each section but also to totally ace one section. You need to create a strategy which plays to your strengths; one of the most important things benefits of the SimCATs is that they allow you to experiment with different strategies and work out what suit your style.

For example, let us assume that practice tells you that your stamina is average, but your preparation is solid enough that you are tolerably confident of clearing both sectional cut-offs. You could start with your weaker section, planning on giving it a little less than half the time (say 70 minutes) and then taking stock after that time. If you are confident that any reasonable cut-off would be crossed, then you could shift to the other section and give it your best for the remaining time, thus ensuring that your overall score will be maximised. If you are not confident, give the first section a little more time to be safe!

Another strategy which a lot of people found handy in the old paper-based days could also be adapted to suit here. Initially, give maybe 70 minutes to each section. If at the end of that you feel sure that you have done well in both sections (and confident of clearing realistic cut-offs), then devote the remaining 30 minutes to your strongest section and aim to maximise your total score. If, on the other hand, you feel that you haven’t done justice to either one of the sections, then go to that section and ensure that you clear its cut-off. An advantage of this strategy is that it doesn’t require you to modify your existing strategy much, as you are already used to giving 70 minutes per section initially.

Note: all the above assumes that the test-taker has adequate ability and preparation in each of the sections! Without that, all the strategy in the world will avail nothing.

In the next couple of posts, my friend T will delve deeper into time-allocation at a micro level, rather than the broad generalisations I have made here.

regards

J

An important question to ponder is “should I attempt one section completely and then move to the other? Or should I switch between sections?” To decide this, once again, let’s do an experiment: first take 2 section tests each in QA and VA. Do two QA first and then 2 VA. Then take another set of 2 section tests each and do 1 QA, 1VA, 1QA, 1VA.

 If the score in the latter experiment is significantly lower than in the former, then you probably have a “switching problem” as in your mind takes time to get into top gear when you switch from QA to VA and vice versa. If the two performances are comparable, then your mind is probably adept at shifting from one section to another without requiring a warm-up time.

Another way to recognise this is if you find you do better within a section when you do all question of a given type one after the other; say all RCs or all VA or all LR – your analysis when writing Sim tests should help you to recognise this kind of pattern if it exists.

 If you do have a switching problem, do ensure that you do not make frequent shifts just because the option is provided. Decide on which section to do first (as discussed above) and allot a certain minimum amount of time to be given to that section; once that time is done, move to the other section and stick with it. Towards the end, perhaps, you can return to the earlier section if you have budgeted some time for it, or if you feel absolutely confident that you would have cleared any reasonable cut-off in the second section.

 If, however, you find that switching is not a problem per se, then you can be fairly flexible in how you attack the paper. You might choose to, for example, do all the quick-shot singleton questions first, then do all the sets (DI, LR, RC) then if time permits attack the rest of the questions. Or you might choose to first attack certain pre-decided question types (say “vocabulary, parajumbles, arithmetic, logs, LR”) and leave the rest for later.

 Either way, another question which should arise is, how do I divide the time across sections? My next post will address that.

regards

J

Concentrating for 3 hours at a stretch can seem quite a daunting task, given that 2 hours 20 minutes seemed like forever in the previous format. But to be brutally honest, it is far less than what our minds are capable of (even in these days of T-20 and twitter and ten second attention spans). After all, tests like the GMAT last for over three hours and people manage perfectly fine.

If we are honest with ourselves, we will realise that our brains are basically extremely lazy chaps – so when we sit for a “140 minute test”, knowing that we have to concentrate for 140 minutes, by the time about 100 minutes are up, our brain is already thinking longingly about what to do when it gets over. And when we try to get our brains back on track, they tells us “look dude, I can’t concentrate for so long at a stretch. Give me a break already!” Effectively, we rationalise the laziness as incapability.

Another acquaintance of mine, who faced this issue, took a rather extreme approach to solve this issue. He sat down one day with a whole bunch of mock tests (2 hour full length tests of those days), with the stated intention of writing 3 in a row (i.e., he planned to sit for 6 hours at a stretch!). He lasted for over 5 hours before he had to give up. But his result was rather interesting. Normally, he used to see that his concentration (and scores!) would drop drastically towards the last 45 minutes of a test. But when he had committed himself to sitting for that long, he stayed fully focussed for more than 4 hours because his brain no longer was in anticipation of release. He scored excellently in the first two hour test – and remarkably, he exceeded that score in the second test! And of course, he never again faced a problem of stamina again – when one has once concentrated for 4+ hours running, one cannot very well perceive 2 hours as a significant strain!

While this was probably a rather extreme solution, it is certainly a good idea to at least get used to concentrating hard for three hours at a stretch. Next time you sit for a test at home, firstly eliminate all distractions (keep your phone, gmail, twitter, facebook etc off!). Secondly, make sure that you have no commitments for at least the next 5 hours. Thirdly, plan that immediately after finishing the test, you will take a section test. Give your mind as little opportunity for distraction as you possibly can. Just maybe, you will find that you can concentrate for 3 hours at a stretch after all.

In my next post, I’ll address a related question – should one do the sections in series or in parallel?

regards

J