TBR or EK for content review.

SDN Members don't see this ad. (About Ads)

Guys I have both the TBR and EK and EK seems so much more straight forward and concise and TBR seems so complicated.

I was wondering instead of using TBR as content review should I just switch over to Exam crackers.

MY exam is on May 27 and I am really at a slow pace with the BR books.

I dont want to switch over to Exam crackers though and end up scoring lower because the content review was not as thorough. Whats the consensus?

Also should I use the TBR passages if I am using EK for Content review

To be on the safe side, I'd go with BR for the sections where they're #1. EK's not bad, but it's more for people with a strong grasp on the material that need minimal content review. However, even for those people, BR would probably be beneficial.


Biology: 1. EK Bio (for content) + BR Bio (for passages and further topic depth if needed) 2. TPR Hyperlearning, detail oriented 3. Kaplan

Physics: 1. BR 2. Nova 3. TPR Hyperlearning 4. Kaplan

Verbal: 1. EK Verbal + EK 101 Verbal 2. TPR Hyperlearning 3. BR 4. Kaplan (Avoid if possible)

Organic Chemistry: 1. BR, by far 2. TPR Hyperlearning 3. EK/Kaplan

General Chemistry: 1. BR, by far 2. TPR Hyperlearning 3. EK/Kaplan

Extra Practice Material: 1. TPR Hyperlearning Verbal Workbook + TPR Hyperlearing Science Workbook, good source of practice passages 1. AAMC Official Guide to the MCAT Exam (most representative material available) 2. EK 1001 series, helps nail down basics

Yes I do see that BR is better for content review, but I dont have the time between now and May 27 to study so much.

I am taking physics 2 as well.

I was thinking of using EK for content review and TBR for passages.

Good idea?

Use EK if you already have a good grasp on the material and simply need to remember everything. I've been using EK exclusively and haven't had a problem with it; however, if you struggled with the material initially, you'll probably want to go with something else.

Originally Posted by harkkam

Guys I have both the TBR and EK and EK seems so much more straight forward and concise and TBR seems so complicated.

I was wondering instead of using TBR as content review should I just switch over to Exam crackers.

MY exam is on May 27 and I am really at a slow pace with the BR books.

I dont want to switch over to Exam crackers though and end up scoring lower because the content review was not as thorough. Whats the consensus?

Also should I use the TBR passages if I am using EK for Content review

There are several multiple choice questions incorporated in the BR text sections. I'd strongly suggest you do those and read only what you need based on how well you do on those questions. If you are acing the questions from a given section, then blow off the reading.

I'd also second SN2ed's advice, as I think it's spot on.

Originally Posted by BerkReviewTeach

There are several multiple choice questions incorporated in the BR text sections. I'd strongly suggest you do those and read only what you need based on how well you do on those questions. If you are acing the questions from a given section, then blow off the reading.

I'd also second SN2ed's advice, as I think it's spot on.

so you are saying to the questions at the end of a section first, and decide based upon that whether or not to read the section??

Originally Posted by luckyt66

so you are saying to the questions at the end of a section first, and decide based upon that whether or not to read the section??

Not the questions at the end (the set of 100 or so that come with passages), but the ones that appear throughout the chapter reading. If there's a section you know well, you should skip to the questions and if you get them right, then it's okay to skip that reading. It's about being time efficient.

And to the OP who was comparing the different books, it really comes down to how well you know the material as to how you should work through the books. For the physics and general chemistry, hundreds of opinions from people who have used both have been shared at this site and they pretty much all of them (those who have used both) suggest BR. For biology and verbal, most of those same people suggest EK. For organic chemistry, it comes down to how well you know it as to which is best.

true... but I find the BR books very dense and difficult to read, while the examkrakers makes the material more digestible. I find myself having to read the same passage over and over in the BR to grasp the main concept and the examkrackers makes it very obvious in colorful format.

Im sure the BR books prepare you better content wise however I think for me I have trouble using it because it really just feels like a txt book.

My test is in July but I am taking three classes now. I really cant spend as much time as needed for the TBR content, it seems very dense thats all. I was wondering if ExamKrackers would help me get a good understanding of the material and help me get to my 30 goal.

Use whichever you feel comfortable with. I've never seen the BR books so I can't say anything about that but I only used EK and it covered everything I needed to know. Based on what you're saying, I'd say use the EK books and then switch to BR for any sections you want supplemental reading. Either way, both books have everything you need to know so don't be afraid that EK is leaving content out. They state things a lot quicker though, hence the possible need for a supplement.

I am experiencing the same thing. The BR books have about 12 different equations in the 70 pages of reading for each section of the books. Whereas, the ExamKracker books specifically spell out the equations you need out of those 12 equations and give tricks for solving them quickly. For example, I read through the BR Chapter 1 in general chemistry, took 1/3 of the questions from the review section test and averaged a 60% on them. A week later I read the same chapter from Examkrackers "as opposed to rereading the BR chapter as suggested by SN2". I took the second 1/3 of the BR books chapter 1 review section and got 90% of the questions right.... I am almost tempted to continue that trend. Examkracker books are not so much passage based. However, the BR books are heavily passage based, MCAT like? The BR books seem like a condensed lecture book and the EK books are more like the study guide. I only want to take this turd once "a doctor I shadow said it was like paying someone $200 to hit me in the stomach" I hope this is effective.

Originally Posted by Melton098

I am experiencing the same thing. The BR books have about 12 different equations in the 70 pages of reading for each section of the books. Whereas, the ExamKracker books specifically spell out the equations you need out of those 12 equations and give tricks for solving them quickly. For example, I read through the BR Chapter 1 in general chemistry, took 1/3 of the questions from the review section test and averaged a 60% on them. A week later I read the same chapter from Examkrackers "as opposed to rereading the BR chapter as suggested by SN2". I took the second 1/3 of the BR books chapter 1 review section and got 90% of the questions right.... I am almost tempted to continue that trend. Examkracker books are not so much passage based. However, the BR books are heavily passage based, MCAT like? The BR books seem like a condensed lecture book and the EK books are more like the study guide. I only want to take this turd once "a doctor I shadow said it was like paying someone $200 to hit me in the stomach" I hope this is effective.

Success on the test often starts with attitude. "Take it once; do it right!" What that means to one person is not exactly the same thing as another. There are some people who have a really strong background, so they can skim material and jump right into questions. For others, they need to reabsorb (an in many instances relearn) material. They may have had a bad physics professor or taken an abbreviated summer course for organic chemistry or whatever. So before you decide what book you need, you should figure out what you need and what works for you. Did you do well on midterms by (a) reading the book or (b) going over the previous year's exams? From there it's a matter of matching your philosophy with the materials.

Berkeley materials are designed to help people get faster at multiple choice test taking. They are not sexy and colorful. They are systematic and thorough, with highly detailed answer explanations. Answer explanations is where they put their energy and efforts. It takes a few weeks of dedicated studying before most people realize that review is not all that important, and it really comes down to going over your questions after you take a passage. That is why you'll see test strategies repeated in several different explanations. You have to like and believe in this style of approaching the material to get the most out of the books.

There is also how you view the books themselves. Some people need a little pizzazz while others view them as workbooks and want them in the color scheme and style of the MCAT. Just as a point of accuracy, the first chapter in general chemistry for BR is 28 pages (not 70) and there are two equations (not 12). Eq 1.1 is for mass percent and Eq 1.2 is the highly useful M1V1 = M2V2. Both of those are essential and should be memorized. There are 34 sample questions in 26 pages and the last two pages are dedicated to math tricks to help overcome calculator-envy. Because that first chapter is so math oriented, it's going to require several examples (that's how math is). If you opt to stay with BR, then you'd do yourself a big favor by noticing that if you removed the examples in the text and all of the passages and questions at the end of each section, leaving you with just text, then the book is essentially the same size as EK's book.

Which book ultimately works best for you should be decided by the end of chapter 3. You mentioned different scores on the verious sections. Try reading one text and then doing the questions from the other materials next time. My guess is that by reviewing the 40% you missed on the Stoichiometry section, you grew more than reading either BR or EK text, especially on a chapter like that one. I wish you the absolute best with your preparation. And as a wise poster name Bleargh posted recently, it all comes down to how hard you are willing to work more than what you actually work on.

Originally Posted by BerkReviewTeach

So before you decide what book you need, you should figure out what you need and what works for you. Did you do well on midterms by (a) reading the book or (b) going over the previous year's exams? From there it's a matter of matching your philosophy with the materials.

Sorry to bring back a thread from the dead, but I'm experiencing a similar situation to the OP. I've done a couple of TBR chapters, but am finding that they take me really long to get through (sometimes more than a day) and I'm losing motivation.
I want to get through them, because I know that in the end they will be most beneficial, but I do not want my content review to go too long and interfere with having a month before my MCAT for FLs.

If I learn better by option b (going over previous exam-see above- and practice), what does this amount to in regard to studying?
The problem is that I'm a perfectionist, so it's hard for me to skim, and to read through things really quickly to get the gist of it. But doing practice is typically what benefits me most.

I'm a bio undergrad. I've always scored best on physics exams (in school), but do forget most concepts, equations, etc; but when I relearn physics material, it is always where I am most successful. General and organic chemistry have always been my worse subjects.

Any suggestions would be highly appreciated. I do want to get through TBR (+ EK for bio), but am losing motivation.

I'm currently following the SN2ed schedule and have the MCAT scheduled for August as well. When I first started the program, I was a bit overwhelmed at first as I am a non-trad with a research job and kids. Two things have changed that have made it quite a bit faster for me (so far). First, after the first couple of monster chapters (atomic theory for instance), the chapters do get shorter and that helps quite a bit. Second, after about two weeks I improved my efficiency and have been reading the chapters a lot faster while retaining more information. I think I just got more familiar with the format and the schedule in general and I have been focusing more on the questions within each chapter, the major subjects and formulas, and especially the passages at the end. This really seems to have made things a bit faster and more effective than just slogging through the text and trying to remember every last detail.

At first, I felt like I was desperately trying to stay ahead of an oncoming tidal wave and now, I feel like I maybe need to put a couple of more hours in at the end of the day. So the gist of my lengthy reply is to maybe try sticking with it for another week or two and see if you can find your groove with this historically proven schedule.

As an aside, I have had to cut out the EK1001 questions portion of the schedule. I could fit it in time-wise, but at the end of that lengthy day of extensive reading and reviewing I find that I just rush through those questions without much thought. I think they can be very useful and I try to fit in some of the subjects I have trouble with on the next day, but doing every third question of all those subjects can quickly add up to 2 or 3 extra hours. At least for me, anyways.

Originally Posted by Spindrift11B4

I'm currently following the SN2ed schedule and have the MCAT scheduled for August as well. When I first started the program, I was a bit overwhelmed at first as I am a non-trad with a research job and kids. Two things have changed that have made it quite a bit faster for me (so far). First, after the first couple of monster chapters (atomic theory for instance), the chapters do get shorter and that helps quite a bit. Second, after about two weeks I improved my efficiency and have been reading the chapters a lot faster while retaining more information. I think I just got more familiar with the format and the schedule in general and I have been focusing more on the questions within each chapter, the major subjects and formulas, and especially the passages at the end. This really seems to have made things a bit faster and more effective than just slogging through the text and trying to remember every last detail.

At first, I felt like I was desperately trying to stay ahead of an oncoming tidal wave and now, I feel like I maybe need to put a couple of more hours in at the end of the day. So the gist of my lengthy reply is to maybe try sticking with it for another week or two and see if you can find your groove with this historically proven schedule.

As an aside, I have had to cut out the EK1001 questions portion of the schedule. I could fit it in time-wise, but at the end of that lengthy day of extensive reading and reviewing I find that I just rush through those questions without much thought. I think they can be very useful and I try to fit in some of the subjects I have trouble with on the next day, but doing every third question of all those subjects can quickly add up to 2 or 3 extra hours. At least for me, anyways.

Wow, thanks a ton for the encouragement and the time you took to reply. I will continue trying to get through TBR and will hopefully adjust. The advice on focusing on the in-chapter examples, formulas, and end of chapter passages may actually work really well for me.

I have a lot of respect for you- going through this lengthy process as a non-trad with a job and kids must be tough. So best of luck, thanks again, and with your determination, I'm sure you'll get through great!


By the way: are you taking notes while/after you read or sticking to reviewing the material on the scheduled chapter review days?

Originally Posted by SN2ed

To be on the safe side, I'd go with BR for the sections where they're #1. EK's not bad, but it's more for people with a strong grasp on the material that need minimal content review. However, even for those people, BR would probably be beneficial.


Biology: 1. EK Bio (for content) + BR Bio (for passages and further topic depth if needed) 2. TPR Hyperlearning, detail oriented 3. Kaplan

Physics: 1. BR 2. Nova 3. TPR Hyperlearning 4. Kaplan

Verbal: 1. EK Verbal + EK 101 Verbal 2. TPR Hyperlearning 3. BR 4. Kaplan (Avoid if possible)

Organic Chemistry: 1. BR, by far 2. TPR Hyperlearning 3. EK/Kaplan

General Chemistry: 1. BR, by far 2. TPR Hyperlearning 3. EK/Kaplan

Extra Practice Material: 1. TPR Hyperlearning Verbal Workbook + TPR Hyperlearing Science Workbook, good source of practice passages 1. AAMC Official Guide to the MCAT Exam (most representative material available) 2. EK 1001 series, helps nail down basics

hey Sn2,

I have all the EK stuff and the TPRH VW and SW. I even have all the Kpalan stuff. I was looking to possibly invest in Chad's videos for chem and organic chem to supplement my EK material for both chems. I am pretty strong in physics but wanted to save some money and go with what I have. DO you reallly think the BR books are THAT good. Should I not invest in the videos and use those 60 bucks to get the BR bio and possibly BR for others...?

I have taken the test before and got a 24P. 9BS,8PS,7VR. I was thinking about going through all the EK for content review and do the 1001 EK for practice followed by TPRH SW practice passages.
What do you think of this idea? What would you recommend I change up if anything? Thakns

Originally Posted by Mash43

hey Sn2,

I have all the EK stuff and the TPRH VW and SW. I even have all the Kpalan stuff. I was looking to possibly invest in Chad's videos for chem and organic chem to supplement my EK material for both chems. I am pretty strong in physics but wanted to save some money and go with what I have. DO you reallly think the BR books are THAT good. Should I not invest in the videos and use those 60 bucks to get the BR bio and possibly BR for others...?

I have taken the test before and got a 24P. 9BS,8PS,7VR. I was thinking about going through all the EK for content review and do the 1001 EK for practice followed by TPRH SW practice passages.
What do you think of this idea? What would you recommend I change up if anything? Thakns

I'm not SN2ed, whose opinion may be more valuable than mine, but from all the reading that I've done through threads and SN2ed's schedule, I think that the point to emphasize is that timed practice passages are way more important than any content review.

So, although the TBR books are great for review of the actual content, the main reason (I think) that they're recommended and so highly praised is because of the practice passages at the end of each chapter.

So if you have the money and/or time, investing in the TBR books even just to do their practice passages is a worthwhile investment in itself.

If you have a solid background in all the subjects, EK may be okay for you for your content review- but they are not enough for your timed practice. If you don't have time/money to get the TBR books, TPRH Science Workbook is supposedly a good replacement as it has solid passages to work on. If your background isn't strong on some of the MCAT topics, you should supplement EK with TPRH, TBR, Chad's videos, etc. for your weaker (or all) subjects.

Edit: Upon looking at your post more closely, and seeing your score from your 1st MCAT, I would probably go with TBR if you could afford it. I don't think EK alone would be nearly enough to improve your scores to 30+. To me, it seems that you either didn't do sufficient content review the first time or did not do sufficient timed practice. Both are necessary to raise your scores (especially timed practice with either TPRH SW or TBR passages). I'm assuming you already know this, but, just in case, I should point out that doing the AAMC FLs are a must.

Originally Posted by altitude

I'm not SN2ed, whose opinion may be more valuable than mine, but from all the reading that I've done through threads and SN2ed's schedule, I think that the point to emphasize is that timed practice passages are way more important than any content review.

So, although the TBR books are great for review of the actual content, the main reason (I think) that they're recommended and so highly praised is because of the practice passages at the end of each chapter.

So if you have the money and/or time, investing in the TBR books even just to do their practice passages is a worthwhile investment in itself.

If you have a solid background in all the subjects, EK may be okay for you for your content review- but they are not enough for your timed practice. If you don't have time/money to get the TBR books, TPRH Science Workbook is supposedly a good replacement as it has solid passages to work on. If your background isn't strong on some of the MCAT topics, you should supplement EK with TPRH, TBR, Chad's videos, etc. for your weaker (or all) subjects.

Edit: Upon looking at your post more closely, and seeing your score from your 1st MCAT, I would probably go with TBR if you could afford it. I don't think EK alone would be nearly enough to improve your scores to 30+. To me, it seems that you either didn't do sufficient content review the first time or did not do sufficient timed practice. Both are necessary to raise your scores (especially timed practice with either TPRH SW or TBR passages). I'm assuming you already know this, but, just in case, I should point out that doing the AAMC FLs are a must.

thank you. this is very helpful

I haven't taken the MCAT yet, but I've been using both TBR and EK (got it free from a friend so may as well use it) and I'd have to say using both that TBR is definitely the way to go. EK just doesn't cover things in nearly enough detail and it has practically no practice passages compared to TBR which has more passages than most people will probably ever use. I suppose EK's detail is enough if you're fresh out of your pre-reqs and did very strongly in all of them, but even then the issue of practice passages remains (although you can get around that by buying the TPRH workbooks off of ebay). However, if you're like me and went into this being years out of your pre-reqs then TBR is definitely the way to go since its more like an abbreviated textbook whereas EK is more like Cliff Notes.

When I started out I probably would have scored in the low 20s. I can't say for sure since I didn't bother taking a practice test until I finished all my content review, but when I started out I remembered practically nothing from gen chem and orgo. When I took my first practice test though I got a 12 on the PS. My BS score though was a 9, due entirely to bio (did absolutely great on orgo). I had been using EK bio for content review for bio but after that I decided I needed more detail so over the next week I read through all of TBR bio and got a 13 on my next practice test's bio section (along with another 12 on PS).

I think content review is really underrated for MCAT prep. Practice is really important, but you can only ever do as well as your knowledge foundation will allow. If you're deficient in a content area then no amount of practice is going to save you.

So yeah, I'd recommend the TBR science books (including bio for obvious reasons). EK, imo, is best used as a quick way to brush up on what you've already reviewed. That said, if you feel really strong in your pre-reqs and/or don't have at least three months before your test date then go with EK.

to SN2ed: Why do you recommend TBR so highly over TPRH or kaplan for Gen chem and Organic?

Originally Posted by altitude

Wow, thanks a ton for the encouragement and the time you took to reply. I will continue trying to get through TBR and will hopefully adjust. The advice on focusing on the in-chapter examples, formulas, and end of chapter passages may actually work really well for me.

I have a lot of respect for you- going through this lengthy process as a non-trad with a job and kids must be tough. So best of luck, thanks again, and with your determination, I'm sure you'll get through great!


By the way: are you taking notes while/after you read or sticking to reviewing the material on the scheduled chapter review days?

Thanks for the respect! I'm lucky in that I have a flexible job and a very understanding and supportive wife. I hope that TBR is working out better for you by now. That abnormally large Bio book1 is definitely a bit dense but thus far, it seems well worth it to me. I think OCDOCDOCD summed it up pretty well.

As for the notes, yes I have been taking notes as I read through them the first time. Sometimes I think it is taking too much time, but in the same respect, it helps me to stay engaged with the material and also serves as a concise review and draws my attention to the more important items. I have also messed around with note cards a bit and I kind of wish I had just skipped the notes and started with those from day one. That said, IMHO if one just puts in the work, you find the methods that work well for you.

This thread is boss. I just started using TBR and I can't say how great it is. Wish I actually used it during my semester coursework to supplement my studying.

Originally Posted by Swhann

to SN2ed: Why do you recommend TBR so highly over TPRH or kaplan for Gen chem and Organic?

Mainly because of their abundance of practice passages. Kaplan, as many have said, just straight up sucks, whereas TPRH is pretty good on content review. But yeah, TBR reigns supreme a big deal due to its available practice passages.

Originally Posted by jHustle

Mainly because of their abundance of practice passages. Kaplan, as many have said, just straight up sucks, whereas TPRH is pretty good on content review. But yeah, TBR reigns supreme a big deal due to its available practice passages.

I think Kaplan's fine for content review, you just need their extra test material to get the practice. The benefit of TBR is that the practice materials come at the end of each chapter, unlike Kaplan which ask only discrete questions.

Originally Posted by Swhann

to SN2ed: Why do you recommend TBR so highly over TPRH or kaplan for Gen chem and Organic?

It's not just SN2ed that makes that recommendation. Pretty much anyone who's worked with both will say the same thing.

Originally Posted by OCDOCDOCD

I think content review is really underrated for MCAT prep. Practice is really important, but you can only ever do as well as your knowledge foundation will allow. If you're deficient in a content area then no amount of practice is going to save you.

A thorough review of questions after you've taken an exam is the best of both worlds. Reviewing the content you need and understanding how to use it in context is critical. I've seen many students do well using reverse order learning, where they do passages first, grade/evaluate second, and then content review of their weak areas last.