TPR 2014 vs TPR 2015

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

remedy23

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2014
Messages
146
Reaction score
22
Has anyone noticed any differences between the two books? One of the things I liked about TPR was how thorough it was.

Why does 2015 TPR get so much hate? Is the 2015 version a condensed version of 2014, or is it because they didn't update anything from the 2014 books?

Members don't see this ad.
 
I think it's because TPR's rush to be out on the market first resulted in the books having so many errors that they had to release a pdf erratum. They also only have one chapter of biochem, which might be fine for some. But I think overall they'd be fine for content review.
 
I think it's because TPR's rush to be out on the market first resulted in the books having so many errors that they had to release a pdf erratum. They also only have one chapter of biochem, which might be fine for some. But I think overall they'd be fine for content review.
yeah that's why i hear Kaplan's better... they have one whole book on biochem.
 
Yeah. I'm using them and like them a lot for content review, but their practice questions are sub-par. Definitely have to supplement with other resources.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Haha exactly what I'm using, actually. :) TBR claims to have anticipated the addition of biochemistry to the MCAT, so their books actually cover most of the biochem content. They're a tad lacking on metabolic pathways content review but have plenty of practice passages on that topic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
yeah that's why i hear Kaplan's better... they have one whole book on biochem.
TPR actually does cover pretty much all of the biochem content. They only have one chapter called "biochemistry" in the biology/biochem book, which covers enzymes/kinetics and metabolism, but they have all the other biochem content spread out through out other books/chapters. For example, the very next chapter is titled "molecular biology" and thoroughly covers the central dogma. Things like amino acids, fatty acids and sugars (biomolcules) are actually in the last chapter of organic chemistry. In general it just seems like they lumped pieces of biochem into the other domains of chemistry, which I feel is acceptable for someone who has actually taken the biochemistry class. I have the big TPR complete MCAT and I feel it does a great job of covering all the bases. I'm using the kaplan book for the behavioral sciences just for coverage since it is a new section.

I will say that they probably have parts of physics that are not appropriate according to the new outline. But for people to be upset that that they didn't change their books enough I think is unfair to say because I feel that they do cover everything, and at the end of the day, the new mcat isn't changing much content wise, aside from the addition of the new sections.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
TPR actually does cover pretty much all of the biochem content. They only have one chapter called "biochemistry" in the biology/biochem book, which covers enzymes/kinetics and metabolism, but they have all the other biochem content spread out through out other books/chapters. For example, the very next chapter is titled "molecular biology" and thoroughly covers the central dogma. Things like amino acids, fatty acids and sugars (biomolcules) are actually in the last chapter of organic chemistry. In general it just seems like they lumped pieces of biochem into the other domains of chemistry, which I feel is acceptable for someone who has actually taken the biochemistry class. I have the big TPR complete MCAT and I feel it does a great job of covering all the bases. I'm using the kaplan book for the behavioral sciences just for coverage since it is a new section.

I will say that they probably have parts of physics that are not appropriate according to the new outline. But for people to be upset that that they didn't change their books enough I think is unfair to say because I feel that they do cover everything, and at the end of the day, the new mcat isn't changing much content wise, aside from the addition of the new sections.
so they changed their chemistry to incorporate more biochem? I had thought that their books changed very little from previous years? if they did in fact incorporate biochem into gen chem/physics that would be better imo..
 
I have the TPR whole review set and I love it. Sometimes I feel as though it may be a little too in depth (I'm a Junior Biochem major so I'm pretty fresh on everything). There's free standing questions throughout the chapters, as well as practice questions and passages at the end of each. The book also comes with 4 full lengths as well, which is awesome. I've downloaded Kaplan's pdfs also, but I haven't had the need to dive into them. If TPR doesn't explain something well enough, a quick google search makes it much better.
 
Apparently the wrong version of the new text was submitted to print, and all the printed copies were an older version with errors, thus the errata pdf.
 
Top