Tutoring for someone scoring in the 170s? Forum

[wishyfishy]

I scored pretty well on my diagnostics with a 167. I've been half-heartedly studying for the past month and can now score 171 pretty consistently. There's no real trend in the sections I do badly on—it tends to vary a lot (granted I haven't taken a lot of PTs, about 7). I decided to look into a private tutor to get more motivated and also have a fresh pair of eyes look at my progress, but I'm at a total loss on where to go. I've researched the big companies somewhat, but honestly can not tell the difference. Also, the ones I've called keep insisting I need to buy one of their "packages" with 10+ hours but I really don't think I need any more than 5. Money is not an issue as long as I get results. Does anyone know any Steve Schwartz-type characters in and around the Chicago area? Or does anyone have any advice on what kind of tutoring will be best for me, currently scoring at 171 and only looking to improve 4 or 5 points? Thanks in advance.

[Sloth Hero]

Probably do like 20 more Ptests yourself. If your score isn't increasing and you can't isolate your weaknesses from that, then get a tutor. This way your tutor will at least have some material to go on.

I don't think a tutor is worthwhile until you have exhausted almost every resource available to you.

You are doing very well for the amount of work you have put in so far -- that alone should be motivation to fight for a 180.

[incompetentia]

As somebody who had sort of the same problem, I would attribute it primarily to focus if you really have no pattern in terms of which you miss (although there erally should be 1 or 2 that you're missing around 50%). In what types of environments have you been taking PTs? Have you made an effort to simulate test conditions?

How many are you missing per section normally?

[citykitty]

I'm going with inc on this.

No real pattern to what i was missing.

Just bust your ass and review and you should be fine.

[wishyfishy]

Well, to clarify, it's usually either logic games or reading comprehension. I do consistently well on the LR with only 1 or 2 wrong now almost every test. With LG and RC, it's usually that I get a hard game or hard passage and I run out of time. I have no trouble getting a perfect score on LG and only 2 or 3 wrong on RC if I do it untimed. I'm reading the LR bible now (although I think it might not be worth it) and I've ordered the Manhattan RC. I am also thinking of ordering the Manhattan LG repetition. Does that seem like a good idea?\

And I've been using Steve's proctor clip with the distractions for the test, usually with an experimental section as well. I think I will probably go to the library to take the test starting this weekend.

[incompetentia]

If it's a time issue, that changes everything. All you really need to do is examine your approach to LG/RC and how much time you spend on reading the passage/setting up the game.

Considering that this is probably your only obstacle to what would likely be a high-170s score, I wouldn't even bother with a tutor if you can diagnose what the time problems are.

[094320]

..