Yes, I agree with NextStep. I took the May 8th test, was doing very well on aamc fl bio sections and felt really good about my real bio section, no doubt due in part to my fairly strong undergrad bio class history (everything from genetics to anatomy/physiology to medical biochem to a research-paper-based neurobio class... though I def didn't get A's in all). We'll see how legit my advice is come June 10th (when scores are posted), but here it is:
1) You've got the right focus already. I consider experimental passages to be the most important factor for the BS section. It's like a reading-comprehension test, although you're reading experimental summaries and data (that are simplified and roughly presented compared to, say, a summary in
The New England Journal of Medicine,
Nature, or
Cell). That being said, the most important source to look to, as always, is the AAMC's material. Look to the fl's bio experiment passages for ultimate guidance. I didn't purchase the official AAMC self-assessment package, but if it has experiment passages, it's probably worth it.
Whatever other sources you use - and you should definitely use other sources - view them through the paradigm of the AAMC's examples. Specifically, the AAMC's often crappy graphs. Lahwdhavemercy their graphs can be crappy: low resolution, ambiguous symbols, just poor. Expect that.
2) Here's a great pointer from US News' website, an article from November 2013 by Anubodh Varshney:
"Consider periodically reading current biomedical literature, such as The New England Journal of Medicine or JAMA, in order to get additional practice and exposure to these concepts. You don't need to spend significant amounts of time trying to comprehend all of the nuances of studies during your preparation. Instead, try to take away big picture points and focus on fully understanding how conclusions are drawn from data."
- http://www.usnews.com/education/blo...r-the-biological-sciences-section-of-the-mcat
The key point here: don't get bogged down in the details. I have had a subscription to NEJM since 2012 (how nerdy is that, my girlfriend got it for me as a birthday present... vomit I know), and I can't comprehend 90% of the stuff in there. But if you can grasp that important 10%, the big-picture conclusions and
why they were made from the data presented, you're waaaay ahead of the game.
I think you can sign up for "journal alerts" emails or a certain number of free articles per something (month maybe) from the likes of NEJM, JAMA, or journal aggregating sources. Think about getting your hands on stuff like that.
3) If you can't get your hands on medical journals, and I wouldn't blame you if you couldn't, even sources like good college textbooks have experiment summaries and descriptions. Sometime's they're in special sections within - or after - chapters. These are awesome too. Read them and try to understand, again, the big picture without getting bogged down in too many details.
4) As stated above, become intimately familiar and comfortable with the types of graphs and tables that often pop up in bio research articles. Know how to identify and read log graphs quickly.
5) Realize you often don't have to know a single iota about the material presented in these passages in order to answer them reading-comprehension style. If in a passage I was asked, "based on the data in figure 1, what is the effect of Wnt signaling on neural tube cells in the 8th week of gastrulation?" I don't have to know a damn thing about neural tube cells and Wnt signalling content-wise. I have to read a figure. There may be one or two content-review questions per experimental passage, but they are usually easier and straight off of the AAMC's mcat content outlines, and you sound like you're ok there.
6) I wish I could provide a go-to source for specifically experimental-based mcat bio passage practice, but I can't. However, I haven't really looked... it may be worth a quick search. I can say I'm super glad I took the developmental neurobiology class I did, solely because it was structured like this: we simply read noteworthy articles (dating back to the 80's) from places like
Nature and
Cell, then tried to grasp the big picture, reasons why the researches did what they did how they did it, and critiqued the experimental designs / results.
Do some or all of these things, which is more than I did, and you will rock that sumbitch.
