Let’s face it: most folks either love or hate standardized tests. If you perform well on them, you tend to love them; if you perform less well on them, you tend to hate them. Those who are fond of the GMAT are prone to accept score results as prima facie evidence of their ability to perform well in an MBA program, either reinforcing a track record of strong performance or making up for a not-so-illustrious academic record. (It is these kinds of applicants you sometimes see on the Business Week’s b-school forums, where they use their laser-like focus to compare and fret over 10 point differences in GMAT scores.
Individuals who dislike the GMAT test often view it as an arbitrary and inaccurate measure of their ability to perform in grad school. A common refrain is: ‘I just don’t test well on standardized tests – my brain does not function that way;” or “Performance on standardized tests measures one’s ability to perform well on tests and not much more.”
As with many things in life, reality lies somewhere in between the two extremes of love and hate. The GMAT test, when considered along with one’s prior academic experience at the baccalaureate level and beyond, is an accurate predictor (at UCLA Anderson, at least) of how one performs in his or her first year in the MBA program. Fortunately for most applicants, there is no exact cutoff or minimum at UCLA Anderson of either of these measures. The distribution of GMATs and GPAs that reflect an ability to perform well, as reflected in each year’s incoming class, is fairly broad.
Beyond these numeric measures of preparedness for an MBA lie such qualitative measures as leadership and teamwork skills, managerial experience, initiative, ability to learn and growth from mistakes, introspection, ability to articulate clear reasons for an MBA and career goals going forward, contributions (to school, work, and/or community), etc. It is here that the bulk of time of applicant evaluation is spent. Although less quantifiable dimensions, they are equally important.
So whether or not you love or hate the GMAT, you may want to temper your view. At the same time that the GMAT is not the quintessential measure of an applicant’s merits, it is a useful evaluative tool in the admissions process. A healthy dose of ambivalence just might be in order…..
Indeed, I believe a GMAT test is there to seperate the ones that are willing to do what it takes from the ones who think they have talent...In many cases talent is nothing without the willingness to work for it. And of course this willingness reflects in the way you are prepared for the gmat. I found a good site giving a few reviews, this might help: http://gmat-preperation.blogspot.com/
Posted by: Guido Pelsmans | October 25, 2009 at 03:09 AM