Whenever anyone mentions they're currently or thinking about studying for the GMAT, I always tell them to check out the Economist GMAT Tutor and at least do the free week trial.

Why I recommend GMAT Tutor to everyone:

1. The adaptive learning component.
This is the main reason I would highly recommend it. When working full time, you?re just so busy you barely have time to study, and don't have time to ?manage? the process of studying. I felt like the GMAT Tutor took the load of managing the process of studying off me and enables me to just focus on understanding the content and practicing.

How it does this: GMAT Tutor feeds you learning and practice materials at a pace that is custom to what you do well at. If you rock the geometry stuff, it'll fly you through that section. If you struggle, it'll give you more practice problems there and keep coming back to it over time until you've mastered it. The GMAT itself is an adaptive test, and I really appreciated this component of the GMAT Tutor program. It takes the stress and burden of coming up with your own study plan. All you have to do is log in and press start, and it feeds you what you need.

2. The flexibility of the online sessions.
I could study whenever and wherever I wanted, and select how many minutes I wanted to study. I found a lot of value in doing quant drills without pen/paper on the mobile app when I was in a taxi or wanted a 5 minute break from work. Also, the progress and score projection tracking made it feel like a game--I enjoyed watching my progress % and score projection range go up after every session and it made me excited to study.

3. The Skype tutoring sessions and in-app question feature.
If I came across a piece of content or a practice problem that I struggled with, I could click a button on that box and jot down an email to a real person, who would respond via email within a day or two. The tutors I met with over Skype were also very helpful--having someone explain difficult concepts and work on tough problems with me was valuable. I also appreciated the opportunity to have a handful of practice essays graded and returned with comments.


Compared to other options: While I didn't take an in-person class, I know the cost of a class is typically higher, it's definitely less convenient, and you go at the class pace instead of your own.

I did buy the Manhattan textbooks and did a focused 3-months of GMAT prep with them before switching to GMAT Tutor. I found it very difficult to know what topics on which to focus my study with the books, and felt I wasted a lot of time going through content I didn't need to spend so much time on. Additionally, I felt like my motivation to study had to come from sheer discipline, while it was so much easier to just jump on and press Go on a GMAT Tutor session.

I have been using the Economist GMAT Tutor course for the last 3 months and it was remarkably helpful for helping me achieve my goal of scoring 710. This program came highly recommended from a friend of mine who described it as "one of the top 3 purchases of his life".

With a full time job and long workday hours, doing a series of weekend prep courses was not a good option for me. I was looking for a program that I could use in my free time and would let me study for 15 minutes or 4 hours depending on my schedule. I used the 7 day trial (which I recommend anyone should do before considering the purchase) and was hooked.

I was especially impressed with the full explanations provided for every answer in the Verbal section. Those were extremely helpful for understanding the structure of arguments and subtle grammar and style issues in sentence correction questions.

I studied engineering in university, so the majority of the math concepts were familiar to me. However, on some of the GMAT questions, I had trouble solving the questions in the recommended 2 minute window. The big advantage of the Economist program is that it teaches you shortcuts and quick ways to solve tricky problems, and gives you multiple tools to solve the problems. Further, after every question, the program asks you "How long do you think you took to answer the question?" This is especially helpful to get a feel for timing and pacing. You are taught not only how to answer questions correctly, but also to be aware of the big picture and how far off pace you might be.

Some other great features of the program are that you can have multiple one on one skype tutoring sessions with tutors from around the world (I highly recommend Jake Wengroff), you can submit written essays for the AWA portion and get them graded by real people, and you can submit any kind of question through their "Ask a Tutor" feature. The responses you get back are often very detailed and helpful.

Finally, studying with this program is addictive. Just like the real GMAT exam, the program features adaptive algorithms that target your weakest areas and force you to practice those. Once you have completed a certain set of questions, a % complete graph will project a possible range of scores for you. This is addictive because the projected score tends to increase the more you study, so I found that I was always looking forward to the next study session so I could move the projected score up higher and higher. I wrote 6 practice exams with the program, all of which were in the project range; therefore, I believe it was a fair estimate of my abilities.

In total, I spent 75 hours going through about 85% of the course content and practice questions. I wrote 6 sim tests and scored the following:

Format: Score (IR, Quant, Verbal)

630 (3, 42, 36)
660 (6, 48, 34)
660 (3, 51, 31)
710 (5, 46, 43)
710 (6, 50, 38)
730 (6, 50, 41)

I submitted 3 essays for AWA and was graded 5.5, 5.5-6.0, and 5.5-6.0.

On my real GMAT I scored:

710 (8, 49, 37) with a 6.0 on AWA. 91% percentile.

I hope to apply to an MBA program in 2018 and am confident that this score will get me into my first choice school, hopefully with a big scholarship.

Knowing how helpful (good) reviews are for choosing the ?right? GMAT prep tool, I would like to share my recent experience using the Economist GMAT Tutor.

Since I regularly work long hours, the only real option for me was to take a self-paced course. Thus, with three months to go before the test date, I signed up for free trials for both the MGMAT and the Economist GMAT Tutor program. And after only one day, I was 100% sure that the Economist tool was going be ?my? tool in getting ready to finally beat the GMAT. Here is why:

As opposed to the MGMAT tool, the Economist tool does not use videos, meaning that you have to read all the content and answer explanations. Moreover, you constantly have to answer both short review questions and actual test questions as you work through the material. If you ? like me ? are the kind of person who studies late and easily loses focus when watching videos, the Economist tool will certainly work much better for you.

The Economist tool also makes it really easy for you to track your progress as it gives you a lot of detail on the time spent studying, the percentage of completed content and an approximate score estimate. The last two features in particular were a game changer for me because practicing thereby became kind of a computer game.

The algorithm running the Economist prep tool really hones in on your weaknesses and spends much less time on your strengths. For example, I completed 90% of the verbal content in a quarter of the time that it took me to complete 90% of the quant material (note that quant has been my weakness all along). Moreover, you do not need to use material, which makes studying all the more efficient (although I do recommend using the OG for the last two weeks of your prep).

As far as the Economist GMAT tutor?s CATs go, I feel that they are pretty accurate in measuring how you will do on the actual test. My scores after finishing all the content were 720, 670, 700 and 710 and I ended up scoring a 700 on the actual test.
Additionally, the Economist GMAT Tutor offers a score guarantee, meaning that you are guaranteed a 70 point improvement from your base score (which I set at 610 points during my free one-week trial) if you sign up for the 3-month trial. Since my target score was a 680 this was all the more incentive to sign up. After all, if hadn?t reached my target score, I would at least have gotten my money back.

AWA: The AWA templates are really helpful. If you are really weak in writing though, I can see how the templates alone will not do much for you. Definitely use the essay grading feature ? the personalized feedback you get on your essays is pretty good.

IR: To me, this is definitely the ?weak spot? of the Economist GMAT tutor. For my taste, there are far too little questions in the question bank to allow for a thorough preparation. Moreover, the CATs do not have an on-screen calculator like on the real test.

Quant: The quant sections is amazing! The Economist tool has it all: simple explanations, a huge question bank, and good tutors (you get up to six one-on-one tutoring sessions via Skype) about any topic you choose. Moreover, the algorithm really hammers test taking strategies (e.g. POE, approximations, etc.) into your brain and literally forces you to approach quant problems the way you should.

Verbal: I cannot seriously say much about the helpfulness of the verbal sections as I scored above the 90th percentile from the beginning.

Last but not least, I want to mention how helpful Isaac was as a tutor for my ?strategy sessions?. Although my first session with him was a rough awakening (he pretty much told me that much of what I had been doing was ineffective), he completely changed my approach to the test itself. If it wasn?t for him (and his super helpful timing charts) I would have never been able to exceed my target score and get a 700 on the actual test! Thanks!

I first took the GMAT after some studying on on my own at the end of last summer. I thought I was adequately prepared to hit my target score, but walked out of the testing center disappointed. I realized that I needed to attack the exam with a thorough study plan so that I could reach my target.

I first signed up for the 7 day trial of the Economist GMAT tutor and felt that it would be the complete review I needed. I knew that I would have to space my studying out over multiple months, so I had to rework my first study approach. The course is great in that it allows you to work at your own pace and if you can make time to do an hour or two a day over a couple months, you will have worked your way through the majority of the material. I found that the course helped me identify some of the nuances seen in the harder level questions that can be difficult to understand. Also, the way that the course is designed allows you to stay engaged with the material as long as you are going through it consistently. As you make your way through the course, you will notice that the lessons and questions you are seeing are tailored to the areas that you tend to struggle with more. The tutors and support team are also extremely helpful and respond to questions promptly, they definitely want to see you do well and they strive to make themselves as available as possible.

I found that some of the verbal material was substantially harder than what I consider more common in the official GMAT Prep questions, especially the reading comprehension. But you can feel confident that if you are able to get through the Economist material in this section, you will probably do very well on the actual exam. Also, it is difficult to look back at all the material that you have already covered, although you can find brief summaries of each lesson on the home page.

All in all, I highly recommend the course to people who are disciplined with their study time and are able to devote a sufficient time to get through the majority of the course.

I initially sat the GMAT exam with minimal study and scored 640. I quickly realised that I needed to boost my mark in the verbal section of the GMAT which was the weakest component of my score at 33 (69th percentile). Over the following two and a half months I focused on the dreaded sentence correction component of the verbal exam. The Economist GMAT course helped me understand the nuances specific to the GMAT exam, such as the fact that the word 'as' should be followed by a conjugated verb whilst the word 'like' should not.

In addition I also had two 1 hour sessions with the Economist verbal tutor Kasia. Initially I was skeptical of how large a difference a simple 1 hour session could make to my overall score, however my Skype session with Kasia quickly changed my views. During the session she identified several areas I was weak at such as 'Bold' questions in critical reasoning and the conditional rules in sentence correction. She sent me nearly 100 questions with simple explanations specific to my weaknesses to guide my self-study and two highly relevant grammar textbooks along with guidance on which chapters to read. I did all of the questions, reviewed my answers and read the textbooks in detail.

In the exam I scored 44 in the verbal section, which put me in the 98th percentile and lead to an overall score of 740 (97th percentile). I also scored 6/6 in the Analytic Writing Assessment (AWA) and 8/8 in the Integrated Reasoning (IR) section. Consequently I received multiple offers for schools of my choice including one from a business school ranked in the top 5 in the world by the Financial Times and another that offered me a merit scholarship, that discounted my course fees by 50%, saving me thousands of dollars. I highly recommend the Economist's GMAT Course!

I used the GMAT tutor for about 2 months leading up to my test date. Initially, I had picked up a few review books and tried other computerized programs that aimed to simulate the test's feel and layout. They were not helping as much as I wanted. The Economist product held several differentiating features that helped me learn not only the 'tricks' to specific question types, but review some math and verbal concepts that I was rusty on. Specifically, the GMAT Tutor's ability to dynamically walk through various points of explanation, depending on what I was getting wrong most helped to streamline my study. Material that I demonstrated mastery of immediately wasn't shown to me many times - I was able to concentrate on improving more than just going through the motions. The other feature that stood out was the ability to ask specific questions to the Economist staff about material that I wasn't understanding. Focused, personal responses got me father, faster in my my study.

I didn't take advantage of the essay samples, but I can imagine that they would be useful for others. The only improvement that I could possibly suggest is a more modular approach to the content. I had to study math concepts more than verbal, and it would have been nice to jump around between modules at my discretion, especially close to my test date.

The Economist GMAT Tutor provided me with an extremely thorough preparation for the GMAT. The course helped me to improve my score by 90 points.

Things I liked:
- you can work at your own pace
- featured a graphical indication of your progress through the course
- uses an enjoyable, interactive and adaptive curriculum
- the online tutors always respond to your question within two days
- very much practice based...practice practice practice
- the answer to each practice question is explained thoroughly
- the simulation tests are very comparable to the real GMAT
- I found the explanation of mathematical and verbal concepts very easy to follow
- the estimated score prediction is accurate
- the mobile app is great for studying when you are away from your computer

Things I disliked
- the course is very expensive, but you get what you pay for
- I could not finish 100% of the course in time. If you are working full time you will need 3 full months, putting in about 2- 3 hours each evening and at least 8 hours during each weekend. I had a few weeks where I wasn't able to work. Overall I completed about 67% of the course in 3.5 months (86% of the quant (62 hours of work) and around 51% verbal (14 hours), plus 6 simulation exams). I also did some practice exams with the official software.

Overall the prep was very thorough and I fully recommend spending the money.

Let me describe my experience with this GMAT study program. After unsuccessfully trying to break the 700 level on my first exam in June 2016, I went on a studying hiatus. Two months later in August 2016, I signed up for this GMAT course due to its score guarantee.

The advantages of this course are:

1) The verbal, quant, AWA course materials resemble those on the actual exam.
2) In my case, the simulation test scores closely reflected the scores that I was getting on the official GMAC software (I purchased an exam pack).
3) There are more than enough practice questions for the student to work on.
4) Most of all, it walks you through the studying process so you know which skills to target. This was a real advantage for me because I was able to focus on the essentials and avoided taking in extra information.

In my opinion, this course can improve in several areas:
1) The practice questions are great, but sometimes the same types of questions show up more often than optimal, even if I was able to answer them with high accuracy.
2) It seems that the the system recommends practice questions based at least partly on the results of the simulation tests that the user took. On one of the practice exams my internet disconnected, leaving me with a significantly lower score than what I normally received. This then impacted the types of questions I got.

Overall, I made the right decision choosing this GMAT course. I had tried both the Kaplan and Manhattan materials before stumbling across the GMAT tutor and can say that this course put me into the 700's. However, do expect to put in over 100 hours overall because there is a lot of material.

I decided to go with the Economist after reviewing several courses. Their quant section is good - lots of practice questions, good coverage of content and solid strategies around problem solving. However, I was very disappointed with their verbal section. The sentence correction content and practice questions are not even close to what is tested in the GMAT. The Economist ignores general readability errors and logical errors which are extensively tested in the exam, dangling and missing modifier type questions are not given as much importance and are introduced much later in the course, again concepts that are extensively tested in the exam. Moreover, lot of attention is placed on concepts that aren't really tested in the exam. The verbal comprehension practice questions are vague and don't make sense a lot of times. The critical reasoning practice questions aren't nearly as challenging as the ones you get on the exam, especially once you are past the 80th percentile. My baseline score for verbal was 70th percentile, however after 3 months of intense study and finishing about 90% of the course, my verbal score only went upto 76th percentile in the actual exam. Since I was stronger in verbal, my plan was to get a really high verbal score to balance my overall score. I ended up with a 650 in the exam which is a lot lower than I wanted. I highly recommend that regardless of which company you decide to go with, practice the questions in the official GMAT guide to get a real flavor for types of questions tested in the exam.

Some other cons - you are unable to pick topics that you might want to practice - the software decides what kind of problems and the topics you get. I also personally found it impossible to finish the course in 3 months as once you complete 80% of the course, the program goes into maintenance mode where a high a number of problems are repeated and the progress is slow. They charge you 200$ to extend the program for a month.

Overall I don't recommend going with the Economist as although their quant section is pretty good, you can't buy quant and verbal separately (which some companies offer) and the whole package just isn't worth it.

The Economist's GMAT prep is a fantastic course. I took the 7 day trial and I was hooked. The interactive platform is actually pretty fun to work with, and my favorite part was it moves at your own pace. The system gauges where you need extra work, and gives it to you. I also have had an exceptional experience with their customer service team. I had a medical situation in my family that required my full attention for several weeks. The Economist team was very responsive in helping me out. I would highly recommend this course to anyone looking to do a self paced study.

I loved the Economist GMAT course. I had taken the GMAT Nov of last year, but didn't get into the school I wanted so I decided to take it again.

This time around I wanted to have a tutor/program to work through. I chose the Economist because it had a money back guarantee if I didn't hit above a certain amount of improvement if I did the full course. I spent over 130 hours studying between this course, tutoring sessions, practice tests, videos, and my own study material (official GMAT review book and some math books). The course took me through everything and kept me from solely focusing on quant where I struggled last time. I was able to improve both my quant and verbal sub-sections. I also improved my IR score (not as important to me since my school doesn't look at it). However, I didn't find the AWA portion helpful. It was very structured in how to build your essay, but I thought it was very one dimensional.

My main tutor was Jake Wengroff. He was an excellent tutor. He knew how to walk through practice problems at my speed and how to explain concepts. He also did a great review of the problems from my practice test when I asked for assistance reviewing it.

So while the course was very helpful, I do want to warn: do not buy it for the guarantee!!! Getting the guarantee is next to impossible. You have to complete 90% of the course and doing so would take 100 hours after finishing the first 75-80% of the course (this is based on what I was told by a tutor other than Jake). Basically it is a huge undertaking and will most likely lead to getting burnt out on studying which means it isn't worth it. With that being said, I got 50 points of improvement and moved 10 percentile up. Not quite the guaranteed 70 points for the course I bought, but in my opinion it was worth the money!

Over my lifetime of purchases the Economist GMAT Tutor ranks in my highest bracket for product satisfaction.

Initially I was a bit discouraged about the high cost, but I gave the free week trial a test run and loved the software from minute one. I found the program forced you to sit down and study at an intensity level that was equivalent to that of test day. Personally this would not have been possible for me if I was studying independently. With the program I studied about 85 hours total, but they were hardcore focused hours.

I only completed one live tutoring session which was very professional and easily accessible. I did not feel I needed further one on one sessions because the program explained everything very logically.

I did use three of the essay reviews and it was evident that the marker put some thought into the essay and provided insightful comments.

Lastly the program gives you an "estimated score" as you progress through the course. This was very rewarding to see your estimated score rise at the end of a long study session - further motivation.

I initially wrote a 540 without studying. At test day about two months later I wrote a 710! If I had put in the same amount of time without the Economist prep tool I would estimate my score would have been around a 670.

These extra points landed me a huge scholarship at my first choice school - easily paying off my initial sticker shock.
Give the free trial a run, you have nothing to lose.

I have a long history with the GMAT. During senior year of my college year I took a self-study Manhattan GMAT course and was only able to score a 650. This was disappointing as anyone whose looking at an top program knows they need a 700+.

I decided to give it another go a couple years later. I had heard good things about the Economist so I went with them. I found their adaptive learning program to be much more effective than watching a lecture and then doing problems. In the end I obtained a 730 score thanks to the excellent structure of the program and the helpful tutors. Thanks, Economist!

The Economist GMAT Tutor was exactly what I needed. It starts with the basics, which is exactly what I needed because when I stated, I didn't know what I was in for. But it starts you out with small steps and works with you at the pace you can go. And if you are struggling with a concept, it goes back and keeps hammering at those subjects until you get it down. The tutors you get paired with are very helpful. I ended up working with two different tutors over Skype, but I had one tutor who took a real interest in my studies and help me with some strategies where I was weak. I don't know where I was at the beginning of the program (I think it put me around a 450 score as I started) but by the end I was scoring in the high 600. I took two practice tests through the Economist and another one through the GMAC. The Economist scores were really accurate. I got a 670 then a 680. On my real test I got a 690. It got me into my number one choice school with a great scholarship.

I decided to apply to business school mid-September, so my timing was less than ideal. I had always assumed that a little practice would help me shape up and I would obtain a good GMAT score easily. Economist?s free mock exam (which you get on your weekly trial) proved to be a defining moment in my journey. I scored 630 and I did very poorly in quant. It was a rude awakening, but a necessary one. I can confidently say the money I invested in the Economist GMAT course yielded excellent value and was the best decision I made in the process of applying to business school. These are the features I liked the most about the course:

1) Interactive, engaging platform improved my discipline and my enjoyment of the process. The same wit you find in the magazine is present in the course material.
2) You can let the adaptive engine take you through the course working more intensely on your weakest areas or you can chart your own course by selecting which topics you want to cover as you go. This was very important to me given my time constraints.
3) No need to take notes, you can always revisit key highlights of a lesson in your control panel.
4) The ask a tutor feature is responsive and useful. You?ll get a response within 6-12 hours.
5) The live one-on-one sessions with tutors were great to build my confidence tackling data sufficiency questions. The tutors will pull up questions on topics you select in advance and work on the questions with you.
6) AWA grading. My first essay sucked. The person who graded it basically dissected the thing with five or six comments and completely changed my approach. Went from a 3 to a 6 in three attempts.
7) Had a head start comparing with other internationals when it came to Verbal due to my English skills. But the sentence correction material? it was brilliant. After a month with the Economist prep I just could not get a sentence correction question wrong. Very simple rules make you improve dramatically.
8) I found the mock exam to be a lot more realistic compared to what I tried on other companies, particularly MPrep. Still, the best mocks are those you get from GMAT prep.

Things not so great about it:
1) The score predictor does not work very well, I wouldn?t pay attention to it.
2) Pretty weak on IR preparation. Seems to me that the Economist subscribes to the ?IR doesn?t matter? view. I had to complement my preparation with GMAT prep.
3) I found the Reading Comp. questions a little more ambiguous than the actual GMAT
4) While the engine works well, it does repeat a few questions you?ve answered before every once in a while.

Trust me, you will not be disappointed. Went from a 630 to 730 in the last Economist mock and scored a 760 in the real thing.

I purchased the ultimate prep by the Economist upon recommendation from a colleague. My opinion is that the overall course (algorithm based software + simulation tests + tutoring sessions) is great for anyone looking for an overall improvement, and who learns best from a mix of self-studying and tutoring sessions. It helped me go from 540 to 730 over a period of 6 months. The strength of the course is the quantitative part of the algorithm based software and the live tutoring sessions. However, the course has two major drawbacks that are worth considering. Firstly it is too expensive for what it is. Sure, the tutoring sessions are extremely helpful and the tutors are competent, but the algorithm based course itself does not cover anything that e.g. Magoosh does not cover. Secondly, the Sentence Correction section of the algorithm based software is not as strong as the other parts (RC, CR, PS & DS), and it is definitely not sufficient if you are aiming for a high verbal s core. I had to purchase the MGMAT SC book to cover the advanced Sentence Correction questions - which is not optimal taking the price of the course into consideration.

I was very satisfied with the GMAT prep course from the Economist. It was a very efficient way to get up to speed, as the software clearly noticed what I am good at and in which areas I still need more preparation for. Also, whenever I had a question, the team behind this app got back to me quickly and always with relevant information. Overall, I am very happy with this tool and would definitely recommend it to anybody who would like to get ready for the GMAT.

I had a chance to work from home for 4 months and knew I wouldn't have another chance the grind out the hours necessary to do as well as I wanted to. I picked The Economist GMAT prep based on its content delivery style. The conversational tone and adaptive software keep the information fresh and flowing throughout the months of studying. It does a great job of dropping you back into timed questions to help with patience and information retrieval. Really helped me reach my goals.

Even though this course is a bit expensive compared to other ones out there, if you have trouble finding time or tend to get distracted once you start studying, this is a good course. You can do timed sessions. I did most of my studying on 30 minutes sessions. It helped me keep track of my study hours and was able to study during lunch hours or whenever I could spare a few focused minutes.

When I started studying for the GMAT, I felt like I was moving through lead to get it done. I was reading through Manhattan GMAT books and not really making any progress in my practice tests (I went from a 550 to a 580 on practice tests after poring through the Manhattan books for a couple weeks).

A friend who graduated from Harvard Business School strongly recommended I try the Economist GMAT Tutor, and I started the 7 day free trial. I LOVED it?I honestly enjoyed studying! Not only did studying become much easier, I scored a 740 on the real GMAT after a little less than 4 months of studying with the Economist.

Here?s why I highly recommend the Economist to anyone and everyone thinking about taking the GMAT:
(1) I can't tell you how fun studying for the GMAT became! It's like a gamified study tool that's customized to you. There are graphs that show your progress in the course, time spent by Quant/Verbal, and a score forecast graph that is so fun to watch go up and up as you progress through the course.

(2) Speaking of customized: the Economist is a smart, adaptive tutor that adjusts to what you need to spend more or less time on. The GMAT itself is adaptive, and I love that the Economist is, too. The Economist either quickly moves through the content if you keep answering things right or slows you down and gives you more practice if you're struggling. Rather than having to skim through stuff in a book that you think you Might have mastered, or waste time and sit through stuff in a class that you don't need to spend time on?or worse, have to rush through harder concepts for you because you have to follow the class' pace?the Economist helps you focus on what you need to focus on.

(3) You can study on your own time, whenever and wherever. It isn't a scheduled class you have to attend always at a certain time, or take time to travel to. You also don?t need to lug a heavy book around with you. I downloaded the mobile app and studied for 5-minute increments on my phone when I needed a break at work, and for 25-minute increments on my lunch break. You can also use the app offline (on an airplane, for example).

(4) The ?Ask-a-Tutor? feature was seriously awesome. Any time I had a question on a specific practice problem or concept in the course, I would just hit a button and submit my question, and within a day or so a tutor would reply via email with a detailed explanation to answer my question. It was fantastic. Also, the Tutoring Sessions were very helpful and I really enjoyed getting customized help and walk throughs with the Tutors over Skype! (P.S. Jake Wengroff is the bomb.com).

(5) This is maybe a small point, but the AWA Essay tutoring in the Economist is the best. They give you a very easy format to follow/memorize, and allow you to submit practice essays that they return, graded and with comments. I followed their format exactly and got a 6.0 on the AWA portion.

For the cost (around $650), I think the Economist is a great value. Way better than either books or a class. Even if you don?t end up going with the Economist, I highly recommend taking advantage of the 7-day trial!