1) Your individual scores and composite score
XX PS / XX VR / XX BS --
XX overall [REDACTED FOR APP CYCLE]
My thoughts immediately post-test can be found here:
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=14365139&postcount=997
2) The study method used for each section
Overall: I followed the
SN2ed schedule, modified by adding 1/3 of the corresponding problems from the TPRH Science Workbook to each assigned 1/3 of TBR problems. This made the workload significantly higher, and it was easy to fall behind. In the end, I actually only completed the final 1/3 for about half of the TBR chapters, and in some of the latter chapters, only completed the first 1/3.
I used
Anki, a free flashcard program, to make virtual flashcards. I ended prep with over 1300 cards. I made a card for every equation or group of related equations, and for each concept or group of details. In this regard you have to gauge how it will be most effective for you to construct your cards. I even
coded my own equation images in LaTeX because it allowed me to look at and review equations in the exact format I wanted, and during the process of creating the images, reinforced the equations themselves in my mind.
I have never been one to use flashcards, physical or virtual, but the amount of detail I aimed to retain at the ready for the MCAT greatly outweighed that for any other test I had every prepared for. Recognizing that, I dove in with Anki from the beginning, and don't regret it in the least.
PS: I used TBR for content review, completing passages and problems from TBR and the TPRH Science Workbook. It can be ascertained, however, by referencing the AAMC Content Outlines, that TBR's content is not complete, so I supplemented by using various online resources (listed under part 3, materials).
VR: I actually started out alternating days' passages between EK 101 and the TPRH Verbal Workbook, while doing a passage or two from TBR Verbal every day. The inevitable creep of the immense workload of the SN2ed schedule came upon me, and I dropped TBR Verbal pretty quick. I ended up giving up on EK 101 Verbal as well, due to dissatisfaction and frustration with that book in particular. Once I began doing the AAMC FL's, it wasn't long before I gave up on verbal practice altogether. I no longer felt I had anything to gain from practicing verbal passages. On AAMC passages, when I missed problems due to oversight of details or question stem nuances, there was no clear way I could see to work to prevent this. It just felt like unavoidable margin of error in my performance. Often, when I missed questions on AAMC verbal material, I disagreed with the question answers. Don't get me wrong here, I missed a good number of VR question on the AAMC FL's that I downright deserved to miss, but at the same time there are a number I would still challenge today. I didn't see how practicing more non-AAMC verbal passages could help me improve, so I stopped.
BS: I began using EK Bio for content review, and TBR Bio and the TPRH Science Workbook for passages. I even did some passages from EK 1001 Bio in the beginning, but gave up quick as I didn't feel it was useful (and I found an error pretty early on, so my confidence in the quality started out low). About halfway through content review, after finding numerous errors in EK Bio (unlisted in EK's online errata), I gave up on the book entirely. I didn't like TBR Bio's presentation of content (it's unbearable), so since I was already into organ systems material at this point in prep, I switched over to a trusted anatomy and physiology textbook. That's right, I did content review out of a 1000+ page text. I didn't find any difficulty in reading appropriate material with the trusty AAMC BS Content Outline beside me. Really glad I made that decision. Around that time I stopped doing the EK Bio 30-minute Exams as well.
3) What materials you used for each section (Kaplan, TPR, Examkrackers, AAMC, etc.)
Here's is my full materials review:
AAMC
Overall: It may seem a bit strange for me to review materials released from the publisher of the exam itself, but there are some comments I would like to make. I went into test prep without any expectation of perfection from prep companies. I did not make that concession for the AAMC, a massive organization of sufficient means to produce near-perfect quality materials. I was subsequently extremely disappointed to find numerous errors (in question stems, answer choices, and answer key explanations) and shortcomings (unnecessary and unacceptable ambiguities, for example) in the AAMC materials, both in the Practice Tests (FL's) and Self-Assessments. My apologies in advance to future test takers who expect reliable materials as I did; you will surely be disappointed. For those curious, yes, this experience did reduce my confidence in the reliability of the actual exam.
THE BERKELEY REVIEW
Overall: TBR sweeps the floor with their competition for a number of reasons. The sheer volume of extremely high-quality practice passages included in TBR's books would take the cake itself, but with a presentation of material that, depending on the chapter, ranges from adequate to superb, on top of Test Tips provided throughout the material that are virtually invaluable for problem-solving in an MCAT-style setting, I have to give a strong vote for TBR.
Physics (2013): There are several errors in the content text itself, but these are few and far between. More common are errors in the answer keys for the passages. I found the Fluids and Solids chapter in particular to be an inadequate presentation of the material for my own mastery, but as a major caveat to that judgment I had never been exposed to the material in a course. As a review of material one has previously learned, I cannot judge the chapter, but if you are in the position I was, I would be prepared to supplement with something else (I used HyperPhysics). The passages in TBR Physics are the really big draw here, in my opinion.
- Bottom line: Would highly recommend.
General Chemistry (2010): TBR's finest, in my opinion. TBR Gen Chem will force you to really learn this stuff, and as someone who had TA'd general chemistry for two years prior to studying for the MCAT I still found these books to be excellent and enlightening. The Equilibrium chapter, as many know, can be an absolute killer, but like all of these chapters, it's the exact way you want to prepare: for the worst. There is at least one (presumed) error in the in-text example problems, and several errors in content text, and I'm sure there exist some throughout the passage answer keys as in the Physics books. Bear in mind these errors may be fixed in more recent editions.
- Bottom line: Would highly recommend.
Organic Chemistry (2010): Though the latest Organic books have been updated and removed a good deal of material, I cannot speak to them. I know common sentiment is that these editions of TBR's Organic are overkill, and though a great deal of information is presented that probably isn't required, I found familiarity with everything presented in these books to be excellent prep for the test. Once again, excellent passages, some errors in the passage answer keys (though remember this is an outdated edition)
- Bottom line: Would highly recommend.
Biology (2013): The infamous TBR Bio books deserve their reputation. Passages are a mixed bag; some are really good, and excellent practice, while some are utterly ridiculous and there seems to be little reason to believe the MCAT has ever or would ever resemble such. Overall, you're probably better off using the TPRH Science Workbook for bio practice passages. The content is often equally poor; The chapters on Metabolic Components and Metabolic Pathways are near useless and incomprehensible. Whoever wrote these books needs a lesson in formatting, because
speckling every other word in a
sentence with
different formatting doesn't help any reader gain a sense of what's important. All it does is make reading a paragraph a visual and comprehensive nightmare. Overall I don't find the presentation of material in these books to be superior to other sources, and the practice passages are beat out by TPRH SW. That said, if you want to be prepared with lots of bio practice passages, the number of passages in the TBR Bio books is significant and not a bad value for the price, especially if you can get them used.
- Bottom line: Optional.
EXAMKRACKERS
Biology (2007): Though often hailed as the perfect, concise presentation of MCAT biology material, I'm going to go against the grain here on EK Bio. I found at least a dozen errors in EK Bio not listed on the laughably-sparse errata forums on EK's website. The book makes some arrogant judgments on what is and isn't going to appear on the test, and I disagree with that attitude. The 30-minute exams provided for each chapter aren't special enough compared to TPRH SW passages to merit purchase for them alone, and I don't think the content in this book is up to par for the test taker who wants the best possible prep, for the best possible mastery, for the best possible score. It's just not there, sorry Orsay.
- Bottom line: Would not recommend.
101 Verbal Passages (2008): Jon Orsay may have gotten a 15 on VR, and his brother (the author) may be the genius Jon makes him out to be in the book's preface, but this book is not reflective of either. 101 passages is certainly a sturdy chunk of practice material, but the passages' texts themselves are not where the books falls short; it's the questions. The book has the same problem TBR Bio does, but to a lesser degree; some of the passages and their associated questions are really good practice, but some are just horrid. A number of passage questions and their associated answer key explanations absolutely exemplify the inherent weakness of the MCAT VR section, which is that when you base the evaluation of answers for a reasoning examination on something other than rigorous logical proof, you get valid disagreement between perspectives on the same passage-question pair. A number of answer key explanations are just jokes. The TPRH Verbal Workbook is better overall, and I would only go for EK 101 if you really expect to need maximal practice on verbal. In that case I would try to ignore the really crappy passages/questions.
- Bottom line: Would not recommend.
1001 Physics (2003): A good set of problems. These are almost all calculation-style discretes, and many of them are quite challenging and/or present otherwise simple computational instances in interesting or unusual ways.
- Bottom line: Optional.
1001 Chemistry (2003): Also good. Similar in format to the 1001 Physics problems. I recall in particular a problem in the early chapters regarding a seemingly-simple concept that I was not familiar with from either my chemistry courses or TBR. Just an example of how these are useful practice.
- Bottom line: Optional.
1001 Organic (200?): Questions are often simpler than the 1001 Physics/Chemistry problems, but some are good practice. Many errors throughout, so that's frustrating, but not useless. Not up to par with the two previously listed books.
- Bottom line: Would not recommend.
THE PRINCETON REVIEW
Hyperlearning Science Workbook (2009): An incredible source of practice material. Nearly a thousand pages, containing hundreds of passages and discretes, with adequate explanation in answer keys. Though this book is only available secondhand, and as such price can drive up quite high, I would say it's "worth it" as a source of practice material. It's the best source of biology passages I've seen, beating out both TBR and EK. Physics and chemistry problems can be challenging as well. There are enough discretes (hundreds) in the book that I would consider this a sufficient replacement for the EK 1001 series. A final interesting note, there is a particular passage that appeared in both my TPRH SW and my TBR Bio books,
nearly identical in both passage and questions. I wonder how that happened?
- Bottom line: Would highly recommend.
Hyperlearning Verbal Workbook (2008): The best source of verbal practice outside of AAMC material. Question and answer explanation quality trumps EK.
- Bottom line: Would highly recommend.
TPR Biology Review (latest edition): I had a chance to look through a copy of this for about a half hour recently. I would confidently recommend this as a the best all-around bio content review I've seen. Some notes I made in my examination of the book:
Pros - Covers the following notably well: Bacterial Life Cycle (not covered in TBR or EK), Sensory Perception (some topics outright absent in TBR), Embryogenesis (beats TBR and beats EK/Kaplan by far), Muscular System (beats everything else), Connective Tissue, Genetics, Vertebrate Classes, Fungi, Oxygen Utilization and Tolerance.
The book contains a Glossary!
Cons - Molecular Biology is very (possibly overly) detailed, like TBR, but better presented. Their info on the use of flashcards is well-meaning but extreme; read with skepticism. Ignore their information on passage mapping and question types. Page 2 describes the MCAT as "the most confidence-shattering, most demoralizing, longest, most brutal entrance exam for any graduate program." Ignore this crap, all it does is make for a defeatist attitude.
I did not work through any of the included practice passages, but in my opinion the book is work $35 new just for the content review. You'd pay $30 for EK Bio, and $70 for TBR Bio. Combining TPR Bio and the TPRH SW gets you bio content review and practice passages, plus passages and discretes for all other science topics. Best route in my opinion.
- Bottom line: Would recommend.
KAPLAN
Biology Review Notes (2010): This book definitely contains some useful nuggets that you won't find in EK or in other materials I've come by, but is far from perfect. Errors abound, both in the text itself and various figures, despite how pretty they may look (as a result of the handiwork of the Scientific American staff employed in collaboration to make the book). No passages, just discrete-style problems at the end of each chapter and a "high-yield problem-solving guide" at the end of the book with short sample passages and commentary but no actual passages w/problems to practice.
- Bottom line: Would not recommend.
PS / BS Section Tests (2004): I only used one of the seven (each for BS and PS) section tests I had available, but for both instances I found the tests pleasantly challenging and of sufficient quality. I recall finding one error, but proportionally this would not stand out to me in comparison to other prep companies' materials.
- Bottom line: Would recommend.
WIKIPREMED
Website: Many of the websites Wetzel has linked in the pages of Wikipremed (all free to access!) are hidden gems of the internet. Beyond the understanding and clarity I gained from sources found through Wikipremed, however, I think one of the most underrated parts of Wetzel's brainchild is his commentary on the content pages. Wetzel considers himself one of the few true experts on the MCAT, and I have to say I'd give him that. His insight can be extremely helpful in preparing an MCAT mindset, and I would not pass up the chance to read what he has to say. Though I can agree with some who find the video lectures too slow of pace, I think much can be gained from their selective utilization and the magic of the video time slider.
- Bottom line: Would highly recommend.
Physics Flashcards: These are
incredible. John Wetzel will lead you through a spiral of physics topics and, through creative problems and clear explanations and commentary, show you how to view physics from every angle. Easily the most revolutionary material I used throughout my prep. I have very few issues with these cards (I don't much like Wetzel's treatment of entropy, but that's both advanced and complicated, and should not present an issue for anyone at the level of the MCAT), and though they aren't perfect, there are fewer errors given the amount of material in these cards than in any other prep material I've used from other companies. As a bonus, when you order the physical card set, you get equation master cards dividing each section of material which condense relevant equations for you. Of course, the entire flashcard set is also available free online. Personally, I really enjoyed having physical cards to go through, and found nothing lacking in the physical quality of the materials.
- Bottom line: Would highly recommend.
OTHER SUPPLEMENTAL
HyperPhysics: Excellent quality material. I used this site heavily for content review (or in some cases, first time learning) of various physics topics, such as diffraction and thermodynamics.
Khan Academy: Also excellent quality material. Enable HTML 5 on YouTube and watch videos at 1.5X or 2X speed for greater efficiency. I used Khan Academy for clarity in learning thermodynamics.
CrashCourse: High production value from the Brothers Green (Hank will be the one presenting MCAT-relevant material), and for the most part high quality material. Helpful for deepening conceptual understanding of some topics. Keep YouTube's Annotations feature enabled while watching, as some errors are corrected in pop-up annotations. Material is unfortunately imperfect, however, a good example being the massive glaring (uncorrected) error in the Endocrine System video (if you can't spot it, you're not done with biology content review!).
MCAT-Review.org: A nice annotated run through the AAMC topics outlines. Useful for starting points in researching specific (often obscure) testable topics.
TL;DR - No prep material is perfect, not even from the test makers. Make it work.
WHAT TO USE:
TBR Physics, Gen Chem, Organic
TPR Biology
TPRH Verbal Workbook and Science Workbook
Wikipremed Physics Flashcards
OPTIONAL:
TBR Bio (for passages only)
EK 1001 Physics / Gen Chem
WHAT TO AVOID:
EK / Kaplan Bio
TBR Bio (for content)
EK 101 Verbal
SPECIAL NOTES
Embryogenesis: I was not particularly satisfied with the treatment of this material in any of the listed prep books. EK Bio provides no visual illustration of the lowly half page treatment of the topic, Kaplan Bio contains errors and/or misleading illustration of the topic, and TBR Bio is excessively verbose and less-than-ideally accessible in the presentation. *Edit*: I approve of TPR Bio for embryogenesis.*
Biology Content: I began reading from a trusted anatomy and physiology textbook about halfway through content review (I used Saladin, which I would highly recommend if asked), basically giving up on prep books. I did not find it difficult to determine what information was relevant and worth reading by simply consulting the BS Topics Outline.
TPR Bio:
On the above note, I will attempt to review a copy of TPR Bio when I can. It is my hope that it will exceed the others in quality. I have added my review of TPR bio into this post, copying from my post further down the thread.
4) Which practice tests did you use?
I purchased all available AAMC full-length (FL) practice exams, as well as the AAMC Self-Assessment Package (includes Physics, Gen Chem, Biology, Organic, and Verbal Self-Assessments).
AAMC 3: 15 PS / 13 VR / 14 BS -- 42
AAMC 4: 14 PS / 13 VR / 15 BS -- 42
AAMC 5: 13 PS / 12 VR / 15 BS -- 40
AAMC 7: 14 PS / 13 VR / 14 BS -- 41
AAMC 8: 14 PS / 10 VR / 15 BS -- 39
AAMC 9: 14 PS / 13 VR / 14 BS -- 41
AAMC 10: 14 PS / 12 VR / 15 BS -- 41
AAMC 11: 14 PS / 11 VR / 15 BS -- 40
Range: 39 - 42
Median: 14 PS / 12-13 VR / 15 BS
Mean: 14 PS / 12.1 VR / 14.6 BS
As you can see, my actual MCAT score...[REDACTED FOR APP CYCLE].
5) What was your undergraduate major?
[REDACTED FOR APP CYCLE].
Upon beginning my studying, I had just...[REDACTED FOR APP CYCLE].
If anything, what I would have others take away from this is that any advisor that gives you an ultimatum a la "you must major in _____ to excel on the ____ section of the MCAT" is wrong.
6) Any other tips you may have for those of us who still have this test lurking over us?
The MCAT is hard. It is a difficult exam in that it requires quick thinking, performance under stress, and readily-accessible knowledge of a great number of topics. That said
...
I see a lot of people building this test up in their heads, personifying it as a scary monster. Before I ever took an AAMC FL I knew this was a bad perspective. It's just a test. Before I ever had a reliable prediction of how I could score, I recognized that it's not some "beast" you're being thrown into the ring with. It's not an enemy, it's not out to get you, it's a bunch of questions on a screen, and you are in control. Every move you make is your own, and if you go into prep recognizing that, it might help prevent the feelings of helplessness that many of us encounter at some point while we attempt to master testable material, excel on practice tests, or achieve whatever other MCAT-related goal.
Regarding practice tests, I strongly endorse maximal simulation of test-day conditions during all practice exams. I ate the exact same breakfast, around the same time on every FL day. I was fortunate enough to have access to a corporate computer lab for taking my practice tests. The day I went in to take AAMC 3, I had never seen the format of the CBT, never seen the computer lab, never used the computers there, etc. I went in with a pair of the earplugs I would be bringing to the exam and a pair of headphones (which I wore unplugged to simulate the ear covers I knew Prometric would provide). I walked into the computer lab with the same experiential naiveté that I would end up having at Prometric (having never been there before). I felt the same nervousness. My score ended up being...[REDACTED FOR APP CYCLE]. Every time I took an FL there, I used a different computer in a different part of the room. Simulate it as much as possible; no phone use during the breaks, no food you wouldn't bring with you, no talking to anyone (I actually got interrupted once by an unknowing employee telling me she was leaving, whoops), you get the deal. In fact, I simulated distractors without meaning to, because more than once while I was taking an FL some workmen were drilling into the door frames; earplugs are a godsend.
On that note, I used Howard Leight Max earplugs (individually wrapped pairs, since you need them as such to take them into the testing room), found cheap here:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0033YLEGO/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
I am not kindly disposed toward the verbal section. I think the premise behind it (testing critical thinking skills, integration of new information and making predictions, etc.) is valid, but the execution is unacceptably poor. The frequency of flawed questions is such that I do not believe there to be a single person on the planet that can consistently score 15 on real MCAT verbal. What I mean by flawed can be understood by the thoughts found in the following links (currently in my signature, but posted here for posterity):
Thoughts --
More Thoughts
Overall, I think enough VR questions are valid that one should be able to score double digits by sufficient critical thinking and dexterity with language alone, but beyond that, I think scores become somewhat unreliable measures.
7) How long did you study for the MCAT?
~100 days, so a little over three months, from May to mid-August. Study times ranged roughly from 5-12 hours per day, with most standard days at about 6 hours of studying.
