(Just to make sure) Better FL's other than AAMC's

[Futbol99]

I've literally spent hours looking for the best FL's other than AAMC's to get me practicing and prepping for my MCAT May 31, but I haven't found concrete answers, especially later in time. I want to start incorporating many exams in for getting used to critical thinking, timing, application and active studying. I don't care so much about how much the score resembles the real thing more than just about how much the way the passages are presented how relevant it is to the real mcat beneficial to my time in my preparation. I need to increase my ability to apply my knowledge quickly, and wouldn't be a better way to spend it by as much practice as possible.

From my research on threads, I see that TBR are the best out there in people's opinion.
I have access to all TPR exams from the course (including cracking)- are they not a good source for practice? Im willing to spend money on TBR if they can easily beat TPR. Would I have enough time for them to be available for me?

Share your opinion please, thank you all <3

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[mrh125]

They're all variable. Gold-standard is good, tbr is decent, kaplan is okay practice, and tpr hyperlearning is amazing. the problem is that none of the verbal reasoning sections in any of those are very similar to official aamcs ones. aamc practice tests are the best resource you can get. as for the other ones, try them all for practice. definitely get tbr and tpr hyperlearning. gold standard is good too because they do ask some good phys sci and bio sci questions. also examcrackers 1001 passages because they ask nit-picky bio stuff you may be asked on the real deal (with the bio my rule is the more detailed info you know the better).

 

[Futbol99]

They're all variable. Gold-standard is good, tbr is decent, kaplan is okay practice, and tpr hyperlearning is amazing. the problem is that none of the verbal reasoning sections in any of those are very similar to official aamcs ones. aamc practice tests are the best resource you can get. as for the other ones, try them all for practice. definitely get tbr and tpr hyperlearning. gold standard is good too because they do ask some good phys sci and bio sci questions. also examcrackers 1001 passages because they ask nit-picky bio stuff you may be asked on the real deal (with the bio my rule is the more detailed info you know the better).

What do you mean by TPR hyperlearning? Did you mean the Science Workbook? I have that but I meant like FL's as in like TPR Tests 1-5 and MCAT Cracking 1-3. Is that what you meant? :S

 

[brood910]

TBR FLs are not really good imo.
They have so many errors in their answer explanations.
PS is a good practice I guess, but BS is pretty bad.

 

[mrh125]

What do you mean by TPR hyperlearning? Did you mean the Science Workbook? I have that but I meant like FL's as in like TPR Tests 1-5 and MCAT Cracking 1-3. Is that what you meant? :S

http://www.amazon.com/Princeton-Review-Hyperlearning-Science-Workbook/dp/B001T62V2Y

this book. TPR tests are good, they reuse a lot of questions though, so it gets skwed. I've done cracking 1-3 and tpr 1. science work book is okay too. nothing directly compares to official AAMCs all the other sources will give you practice tho.

 

[mrh125]

TBR FLs are not really good imo.
They have so many errors in their answer explanations.
PS is a good practice I guess, but BS is pretty bad.

i agree about the BS, some of it is decent practice though (they cover a lot of diff topics that other FLs dont really do), but there is a sizable amount of garbage in it. Better to have more resources that at least make you think about the material than very few tho. every source has its drawbacks.

 

[Futbol99]

http://www.amazon.com/Princeton-Review-Hyperlearning-Science-Workbook/dp/B001T62V2Y

this book. TPR tests are good, they reuse a lot of questions though, so it gets skwed. I've done cracking 1-3 and tpr 1. science work book is okay too. nothing directly compares to official AAMCs all the other sources will give you practice tho.

OK cool, yeah I have that book, been using it for awhile!
And that's good that you used those tests, I was planning to incorporate them, they just never received good feedback on this forum. If like @brood910 said that TBR is not that special, I may consider saving money and do my TPR tests for extra practice. I think you both wrote the MCAT same time if my memory recalls...Did any particular sources (tests and practice) make you feel ready for that beast, especially with the crazy BS like everyone is saying? @mrh125 - did u find any of the TPR tests particularly helpful in anyway?
- In terms of practice which is all I need to do now very strictly, I have TBR (done through a lot of the qs already), TPRH SWB, and EK1001 for Bio, and many Kaplan topical/practice tests, SA AAMC's (although Ive done them already but back in December) and the AAMC's. I probably wont get to use all that, but is that enough to gauge around my thinking and application skills for better prep?
Thanks guys.

 

[mrh125]

OK cool, yeah I have that book, been using it for awhile!
And that's good that you used those tests, I was planning to incorporate them, they just never received good feedback on this forum. If like @brood910 said that TBR is not that special, I may consider saving money and do my TPR tests for extra practice. I think you both wrote the MCAT same time if my memory recalls...Did any particular sources (tests and practice) make you feel ready for that beast, especially with the crazy BS like everyone is saying? @mrh125 - did u find any of the TPR tests particularly helpful in anyway?
- In terms of practice which is all I need to do now very strictly, I have TBR (done through a lot of the qs already), TPRH SWB, and EK1001 for Bio, and many Kaplan topical/practice tests, SA AAMC's (although Ive done them already but back in December) and the AAMC's. I probably wont get to use all that, but is that enough to gauge around my thinking and application skills for better prep?
Thanks guys.

I found TBR questions useful just because they ask some really good stuff in physical sciences and as I mentioned before about bio sci they do ask about topics the aamcs covers that aren't really emphasized all that well in other sources. I used all of the sources (kaplan, gold standard, tbr, tpr etc) and examcrackers 1001 both times I took the mcat and they all came in handy because they mcat is all about being able to quickly think about different topics and applying info you know in ways you might not expect. Examcrackers 1001 was a godsend for bio, but kaplan is the most iffy source imo. they test a bunch of stuff that isn't even on the mcat anymore such as benzene reactions and their physical sciences is a mixed bag. I would consider swapping out kaplan for gold standard because their phys sci and bio are really helpful and they provide you 10 diff tests (you dont have to go through all 10 though because they get repetitive. they also emphasize a lot of calculations in phys sci which is really good because you need to have quick calculations, estimations and sci notion down to the point where you barely have to think about it on the mcat and one of the most common complaints people have about the mcat is all the calculations.) . Hit everything before the official aamcs sources.

Also, consider going through the self-assessments again because you there's a lot of good material on them and I'd definitely recommend ordering the official aamcs guide because it provides you more official mcat questions in each section.

 

[mrh125]

oh and depending on how much time you have i'd consider jus powering through a lot of the secondary sources. if you can pace yourself really well you can cover a lot of ground each day. for stuff like kaplan i'd recommend viewing them just as exercise and practice problems. the curves for kaplans are very flawed and so are a lot of the questions. the subject tests especially bio discretes do have some good stuff on it such as embryo anatomy and mesoderm, endoderm, and ectoderm questions.

 

[Futbol99]

I found TBR questions useful just because they ask some really good stuff in physical sciences and as I mentioned before about bio sci they do ask about topics the aamcs covers that aren't really emphasized all that well in other sources. I used all of the sources (kaplan, gold standard, tbr, tpr etc) and examcrackers 1001 both times I took the mcat and they all came in handy because they mcat is all about being able to quickly think about different topics and applying info you know in ways you might not expect. Examcrackers 1001 was a godsend for bio, but kaplan is the most iffy source imo. they test a bunch of stuff that isn't even on the mcat anymore such as benzene reactions and their physical sciences is a mixed bag. I would consider swapping out kaplan for gold standard because their phys sci and bio are really helpful and they provide you 10 diff tests (you dont have to go through all 10 though because they get repetitive. they also emphasize a lot of calculations in phys sci which is really good because you need to have quick calculations, estimations and sci notion down to the point where you barely have to think about it on the mcat and one of the most common complaints people have about the mcat is all the calculations.) . Hit everything before the official aamcs sources.

Also, consider going through the self-assessments again because you there's a lot of good material on them and I'd definitely recommend ordering the official aamcs guide because it provides you more official mcat questions in each section.

My man!!! Thank you for your advice and insight It means a lot! So you wouldn't recommend any of the Kaplan stuff or just not specifics? I read somewhere that Kaplan BS was good? Lol not sure. If I have time I will try to incorporate as much. I'll get the GS, i read a few threads on those. Is VR not that great on there or you found it good?

 

[mrh125]

My man!!! Thank you for your advice and insight It means a lot! So you wouldn't recommend any of the Kaplan stuff or just not specifics? I read somewhere that Kaplan BS was good? Lol not sure. If I have time I will try to incorporate as much. I'll get the GS, i read a few threads on those. Is VR not that great on there or you found it good?

Honestly, most of the VRs except for the AAMCs suck and dont prepare you well at all and the same goes for gold standard (I personally found gold-standard verbal to be a bit of a joke and I think some of the passages they use in earlier FLs are from wikipedia rticles). If you do the VRs for secondary materials mostly use them to test your reading comprehension, do not follow or memorize their logic that they use in their answers because official aamcs logic is different. I can see you getting some benefit out of just doing the questions and reading passages because it trains you to become a more active reader though. It probably did for me and you'll also want to do that VR under timed conditions because in the real MCAT VR you will be under a lot of pressure to finish in time (on my mcat I had to go through two passages/15 questions in the last 15 minutes).

Do some of the kaplan subject tests like bio discretes and consider using the main kaplan tests as material to just drill you and reinforce you on what you know. The main reason why people like kaplan bio is because some of the passages can be long, convoluted, and detail-oriented like official aamcs ones, but it's really hit or miss and I don't think it helped me all that much. a lot of their o-chem is garbage like i said before because they include stuff that isn't on the mcat anymore, though you could skip almost all of the aromatic stuff.

 

[brood910]

TBH, you just have to know basic stuff for orgo. I didnt even do any practice questions for orgo and I still got 100% on orgo on all AAMC FLs.

 

[Futbol99]

TBH, you just have to know basic stuff for orgo. I didnt even do any practice questions for orgo and I still got 100% on orgo on all AAMC FLs.

Judging from my AAMC 3 and 4 scores as well as my Self Assessment back in January, my orgo was on the higher end, I got around 80%+ But I rarely put in time. I did basic content review, and depended on my knowledge from Orgo I/II class. I thought that I was wrong as Orgo got the shorter end of the stick every time, so I wanted to give it more focus...do you recommend doing the regular - or devote time into it? I hear mixed things - a couple friends who wrote in August 2013 said they had half their BS orgo. Sometimes I see on this forum people are saying Orgo is getting phased out and replaced by more genetics/biochem. I know there isnt a concrete answer, but I guess I was just wondering how long should I be focusing my attention on orgo for the remaining time.

 

[brood910]

Judging from my AAMC 3 and 4 scores as well as my Self Assessment back in January, my orgo was on the higher end, I got around 80%+ But I rarely put in time. I did basic content review, and depended on my knowledge from Orgo I/II class. I thought that I was wrong as Orgo got the shorter end of the stick every time, so I wanted to give it more focus...do you recommend doing the regular - or devote time into it? I hear mixed things - a couple friends who wrote in August 2013 said they had half their BS orgo. Sometimes I see on this forum people are saying Orgo is getting phased out and replaced by more genetics/biochem. I know there isnt a concrete answer, but I guess I was just wondering how long should I be focusing my attention on orgo for the remaining time.

DONT IGNORE IT. I still recommend doing AAMC materials for orgo.

You just have to know basic stuff. Make sure you understand why things happen in reactions. Ex: roles of nucleophiles, electrophiles, etc..

Also, spend most of your time on understanding different experiments when you are studying for orgo. Ex: distillation, gas chromatography, etc..