Alright. Um, hi Aparmeyo. Welcome to the success story. Interview six 80 to seven 13 lake one
and a half, two months. Um, if I remember correctly an improvement
from . Yes. Okay. How do you feel that? Yeah, I feel really great. I mean, it
was a tough journey, especially since I'm watching and, uh, very less self-motivation.
Yeah, it was a tough journey, but at the end of the day, I think I'm really satisfied.
Okay. So coming from the first attempt versus the second attempt, if you told me that sentence
correction is, and we figured out that sentence, correction was one of your bigger problems,
right? The, one of the biggest problems that you
had, how did you use the geomatic goals to tackle that problem and get better at it?
I think that, um, the scholar Rainium interface was itself very lucrative. I mean, you should,
you could always go on it and see lots of stacks, which otherwise if you're just solving
from a textbook or, and you wouldn't be able to know, timing was one of the factors.
I was thinking a lot of time and still making mistakes. And secondly, the content itself,
like a sentence correction is divided into so many segments, which needs to be date separately,
modifiers. Otherwise we are looking at sentence collections,
one big hole, but it's not. So you have to be able to differentiate between what, all
the things that was. I mean, the content in EGMR was flawless.
So I could spend a lot of time in each of those aspects.
And then, uh, automatically I saw my scores improve actually, when I was doing the practice
tests and out and slowly, slowly as I gained confidence, uh, I, I think, uh, it actually
showed in my mocks as well. So that was the, that was the sequence in
which it went. Okay. And then, um, I don't know if you notice, uh, but you had 98 percentage,
uh, as your, as your accuracy in the practice quizzes, sentence, correction, being a sentence,
correction, being your weakest subsection. So that was the perfect utilization of the
courses, what I, I feel, but, so that's, uh, that was a very good job.
Uh, what about the other two subsections critical reasoning and reading comprehension? Yeah.
So when I was preparing for the first time, first, my six 80 score, I think at that point
of time, I was pretty much confident in CR, although there were some blind spots, uh,
such as the boldface questions, which I utilize hugely in the second attempt when I did my
MIGI Mac board face question was something which I was always worried about.
Um, but it, it was so systematically broken down into parts, like CR also consists of
a lot of parts that have inferences and conclusions in order to be able to identify that particularly,
and then go through systematically step by step.
Uh, I think, uh, gave me a lot of confidence now, every time I used to read one passage,
I mean, critical reasoning question. I couldn't understand the full integrity of
it and probably that's how even helped me, uh, scored more than what I would have in
the previous time. And RC. Yeah, please go Ahead. Yeah. And for
the, uh, for the RC part, I feel that, uh, I was fairly good at RC because I could comprehend
a little bit longer passages, uh, uh, in one stretch.
So I didn't focus too much on learning, learning, uh, from the math course, but I focused a
lot on doing the questions. So which again, boosted my confidence and
which is integrated to keep going and, uh, solving on the testing. You talked about how
the approach now that you looked at a critical reasoning passage, you could, you know, go
closer to the answer versus the first attempt that you were preparing for.
So that essentially tells me that you imbibe the pre thinking approach properly, um, on
the same lines that since you are weak in sentence correction, did the meaning based
approach also help you a lot for solving se questions versus the first time you, you,
where you were tackling the example? Yeah, definitely. I think the meaning based
approach is the best approach possible to do se questions. I mean, first of all, if,
uh, if you just get the meaning, right. Uh, most of the times all the incorrect answers
can be there without even going through the grammar and the syntax part of the sentences.
So that is the best approach. And, uh, there is no doubt about it. That is what helped
me, I think, at the end of the, Okay. Okay. So, um, coming back to Sierra Narcy,
since you told that you were fairly familiar with the topics, how did you use Coleraine
because you were solving a lot of questions, as you mentioned, uh, solving those questions
then going to Scala rhenium, uh, what data points were you looking at and then why did
you come back to the course to, to, to, you know, tackle those, um, you know, possible
gaps that, that were there? Yeah. So one of the key points which I was
looking at was time, uh, so the average time taken or the median time taken by me versus
the people who have gotten it. Correct. Uh, so I was lagging a bit in the
time aspect in all of the verbal part. Uh, so there were some particular places, uh,
if I saw that I'm lagging, I would go and, uh, do the, uh, theory part of it from the
each course once again, just to be sure that, uh, okay.
I have the fundamentals, right. And again, I'll go back to the Scalia, man, just doing
the questions until I get, uh, get to, uh, 80% or 85% accuracy.
So once I get to that point, I feel looking at this part is, uh, I think we can. Okay.
So, so what we call that as precision targeting is all, some questions.
If you are a fairly strong at the topic, you solve a few passions, look at this called
stats. You know, maybe for, as you mentioned for CR you had full face as an issue, then
you go back to the course and figure it out and then do the entire course, um, often boldface
to become better. That's that's the best use of Scala. Rhenium
is. Yeah, I was feeling an urge from inside. If it was under 80%, like I have to go and
be on it 2% only, then I'll be, I can, I have, I can do and go ahead with my life after.
Perfect. Yeah. Okay. So this was about your vote. What went on on the Kwan part because
you come from an engineering background, Quantaverse failure at a very good state.
How did you use the course and then the corn scholar radium to, to prepare for this attempt?
Right. So what I was, since I, uh, I got a V 33 last time, I knew that we was verbal
was what I needed to focus on most, uh, since I'm fairly good at quant, I didn't pay too
much attention to point. Initially, of course, when the exam dates
were arriving, suddenly it hits you that you need to do point as well.
So I quickly glanced through what, all the topics, uh, how it has been broken down in
the post. So I, I was a little bit, uh, afraid of the competent or examine the probability
and combination permutation part. Like historically I have not been good at
it. That's why even through that, those particular topics specifically, and I saw some questions
and I thought if I do the mocks and just analyze my mock, I think the, uh, preparation for
quant will be enough there, even though I messed up on the test day a little bit.
Uh, but it didn't finally, I managed to get a 40 minutes, barely fine, Messed up on the
test if what happened. So I, uh, I took the Q V uh, order. So first
was Quan. So I started with the con question, first question, and, uh, I'm not able to solve
it. Six minutes are gone six minutes into the
question. I was still not able to mark the correct answer. And now it's going into a
bag cycle. Like, why am I not able to solve it? And I
know that first 10 questions at least need to be correct.
So I don't know what happened. I just somehow Malbec and went on with it. And, um, at the
end of the, uh, you know, section, uh, when 10 minutes remaining, I had 10 questions left,
so this was, I had to go through it. Uh, then I, I think my brain started working
faster at that time. So, uh, I was able to finish, I think, eight questions out of those
10, within 10 minutes and two question, I just marked just randomly the timing and that
was fine. Okay. Okay. Okay. Um, now after the point
is done fairly fine, because you're all fairly, fairly good with cones throughout, um, then
started the vocal subsection. You knew that mobile was a problem last time,
but now we were prepared how confident very we not doing the entire course solving questions,
taking the marks, and I'd come to Moses in a little bit, but, but how confident were
you when you started solving the vocal paper in the actual Right?
So, uh, I was fairly confident going into the test in the first place, but after the,
uh, uh, you know, fiasco, I, my confidence level went a little bit down, but turns out
when I started the verbal section after doing two, three questions, I was back on track
because I had practiced verbal so many times. And like, it now felt like a very natural
for me to see a CR question or an essay question. And certainly then it became like, I didn't
even think about the time. And I just, just kept on doing the questions.
And I think I was more confident in what will then point at the end of the test.
So I thought if somebody is pulling me down part, not the verbal part, because I was,
uh, I think I was pretty much happy with my point.
I mean, Pobal performance. Okay. Okay. Now, coming back to your marks, I was actually
looking at your account before we had this before we were having this, you know, uh,
I saw that you took a diagnostic test, which was a very good activity because you need
to understand what score are you starting off with?
What are your strengths? What are weaknesses? Do you have ability gaps, you are finding
gaps, all of that. And then once you went along the preparation, once you've completed
stages 1, 2, 3, you then started taking the other part or other marks before your exam,
how close were the sick Mike's marks, uh, or to, to, to the actual Jima?
I would say, uh, very close. In fact, the Sigma smokes were definitely a bit tougher,
tougher in the sense, the, uh, things which it tests are much more subtle than what the
GMR would actually test. So in a way that if you're able to get a four
in Sigma X marks consistently, there's no doubt that you will be able to be able to
do the same in the actual job. So, and the stacks also, which it was giving
was, uh, very, uh, fundamental in, uh, getting our strategy, right, as if, how much time
you should be able to question and move on and all those things were there.
Uh, so yeah, I think it's a very close and in fact, a little bit on the higher side than
the, I was actually going to add the last month that you're taken, it's only 10 points
versus the difference was only 10 points. That's something that we propose as well,
that if you score X, uh, in, in your Sigma X chances of getting that X plus 10 and X
minus 10 or X score in actual demand is very high.
So, so that's, that's also there. So you had a very fair idea that, all right, I am going
to get this for, Yeah. I think I was expecting definitely a 700 plus,
uh, until my first question in mathematics. I mean, but yeah, I'd be before going to the
test, I was fairly sure I'd get about 700. Okay. Okay. But seven 30 was a very pleasant
surprise. I didn't, I didn't expect that. Okay. Um, let's not talk about the LMP program.
So we worked for almost around one and a half months, if I'm not wrong. Right. How did the
program help you and what were your learnings? What, what, what, how did it help? Yeah, I
think that was a key key in getting me the seven 30, because it's a, some kind of, uh,
uh, push, which is there from the mentor side, which is for you.
And, uh, I was able to, you know, should you will time properly and in, in exactly the
places where I needed to focus on, not just randomly going through, uh, questions, solving
problems and not getting any insight on it, you had specifically given me tasks to do,
do the analysis, cement, my, whatever, the learnings I had, and then go ahead to the
next, uh, next a week area. So that was very systematically done. And
I think that's what is needed. If you're targeting for a, uh, a test date within a short span
of time, if you're not able to do it in a systematic way, you will get lost somewhere
in between. And the optimal result won't come. So specifically
after doing the entire, uh, you know, going through the course, once you had, uh, you
had told me how to focus, focus on my weak points, and you had given me a one week or
two week plan on how to tackle each of them. And I did exactly that. And, uh, that was,
uh, yeah, it was a confidence booster as well. And, uh, inherently also I felt that, uh,
yeah, this this way, uh, I'll be able to perform, uh, act Regina, Very honestly, you know, it's
all those UMAT calls and the data that even we get from scholars, what we are looking
at is, is how you did the course and what are the outcomes based on which we create
those plans for you. But the major point over there is yes, you
did the course properly. The course told you a lot of data, which the data, which we leveraged
to create all those plans, and then you were very diligent to execute those plans and then
take the tests. And very importantly, you know, it's very
important for a student to be diligent if you're taking the test in a very short amount
of time and you need good improvements specifically when you know that you are not that strong
at certain, not maybe two topics. So, so that's, that's very important on the
same lines. If someone is, let's say targeting a good score improvement in a very short amount
of time, what would your tips be to that candidate? I would say that, uh, uh, you need to focus
on not solving problems, but to understand what, uh, exactly that problem is.
For example, in sentence correction, you need to be able to differentiate between, uh, the
types of problems, uh, passed by the, by G mat.
I mean, uh, modify as well as you need to be able to separate out what kind of errors
are there in any particular sentence. So that is particularly for sentence correction
and similarly for CR also, and RC. Also, you need to be understand what you need to understand
what the, uh, G Matt is trying to get from you.
They want you to comprehend the problem rather than just find out the mistakes and, uh, try
to solve it, uh, and try to, you know, patch it up.
So until you get to the core of the problem, you won't be able to increase your not significantly
in a short period of time. So that requires little bit How to reach that
goal. My next question. Yeah, I think you should . So by that you essentially
mean that you need to do the course properly. If you need to do the cost, whatever resource
you have, you have utilize the resource properly, otherwise not improving Rethinking three thinking
and meaning analysis are, I think the greatest tools for someone who is we can, the global
section, they need to master that. Okay. Very interesting. So, so now admissions
for, so what are your plans? Where are you applying and how is that process coming along?
Yeah, so as streamlined five universities, uh, I'll be applying mostly, I am targeting
Europe, Europe, heavy, uh, so ATC, uh, lbs, um, and ISE, Spain are the three Europe European
universities. And, uh, you know, any states I'll be applying
to talk. And as a, uh, you know, uh, this first time attempt, since I've got seven 30,
you have a lot of enthusiasm I'll apply to Stanford.
So let's see what I wish you all the best job from hell. Uh, it was, it was very interesting,
you know, right from day one, you were very diligent student, which we always envisage
that if you are a diligent student, scoring wealth would not be a problem when you were
one of those, you did it at the end of the day, school scored at seven 30.
So thank you for being with us and sharing all these insights really helpful and all
the best for your admissions and applications. Thank you so much. And it was a pleasure working
with you and thank you for pushing me to get the seven 30, Always a pleasure.