Content barely helps you with the real MCAT

[Ahmed786]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I used to believe that you needed to have a firm firm grasp of all of the content for the real MCAT but after taking yesterdays (1/30) monster, I've realized this is not at all the case. Sure you need to know your basic ideas (DNA is replicated in the Nucleus, transcription in nucleus, translation on rough ER, ETC in mitochondria) but thats really about it. And suprsingly, even for PS this seemed to be the case (you needed to have the formulas memorized but only very very minor understanding of the content)

To everyone who took it yesterday didn't it feel like that you could have had all of your prep books open in front of you and you still would not have scored any better?

It seems that in order to do well you need to take more practice tests (around 15-20) and understand the logic processes instead of just memorizing more and more useless facts in content. (It is almost seems like it tests in the same fashion to the LSAT)

Just my 2 cents from yesterday.

 

[Spank]

I used to believe that you needed to have a firm firm grasp of all of the content for the real MCAT but after taking yesterdays (1/30) monster, I've realized this is not at all the case. Sure you need to know your basic ideas (DNA is replicated in the Nucleus, transcription in nucleus, translation on rough ER, ETC in mitochondria) but thats really about it. And suprsingly, even for PS this seemed to be the case (you needed to have the formulas memorized but only very very minor understanding of the content)

To everyone who took it yesterday didn't it feel like that you could have had all of your prep books open in front of you and you still would not have scored any better?

It seems that in order to do well you need to take more practice tests (around 15-20) and understand the logic processes instead of just memorizing more and more useless facts in content. (It is almost seems like it tests in the same fashion to the LSAT)

Just my 2 cents from yesterday.

Yup. I don't understand why it this MCAT was made like this. Seriously, what's the point of bogging people down with ridiculous PhD level art history passages? If med schools really want to test our logic abilities why not just make the LSAT required? I felt like I wasted inordinate amounts of time studying science that was not needed. I had all the concepts in chem, physics, and bio down cold. 98% of it was worthless for the exam.

For Christ's sake, if you want to test logic, give us a logic based exam like the LSAT. Don't make all the passages extremely convoluted to test and see if we are using proper logic to solve the problems

 

[Beren]

Yup. I don't understand why it this MCAT was made like this. Seriously, what's the point of bogging people down with ridiculous PhD level art history passages? If med schools really want to test our logic abilities why not just make the LSAT required? I felt like I wasted inordinate amounts of time studying science that was not needed. I had all the concepts in chem, physics, and bio down cold. 98% of it was worthless for the exam.

For Christ's sake, if you want to test logic, give us a logic based exam like the LSAT. Don't make all the passages extremely convoluted to test and see if we are using proper logic to solve the problems

Heaven forbid physicians needing logic and good reading comprehension. 😛Considering your perspective, I'm surprised you aren't wondering why most physicians need to know about aldol condensations or harmonic motion. The MCAT is simply an aptitude test, just like the SAT.

 

[Marjan Islam]

the MCAT really is a "how well can you think in the hot seat" kind of test. When I took it the first time, I did Kaplan online and live course, EK set and Bio 1000 q's, TPR Hyper Learning, Berkley Review with all passages through content, ...yeah, that was a TOOOON of work, but I still didn't do great my first time.

It's a test that's 70% critical thinking (which you can't obviously memorize the answers to, just get familiar with the type of situation this type of thinking requires), and 30% content.

I DO however, feel that doing tons and tons and tons of content CAN help because every so often, by just reading the first 5 words of a question, you know exactly what they're asking, and where the trick to it is. There just isn't THAT many ways to ask these same questions, and occasionally you will get lucky.

 

[JmanDO]

Wow, Spank, talk about faulty logic. You are pissed that they tested logic and complain that they should just be honest about testing logic and give you another full length professional exam? Not only that but you feel most of the detail you learned was not put to good use and you wish that it had been-meaning you would have preferred a brutally long exam over a brief skim of what you've learned over the past 3 years, that apparently didn't need much more than a few memorized eqns to complete?

Do you also complain about having food to eat and a home to sleep in?

 

[FuSoYa]

I used to believe that you needed to have a firm firm grasp of all of the content for the real MCAT but after taking yesterdays (1/30) monster, I've realized this is not at all the case. Sure you need to know your basic ideas (DNA is replicated in the Nucleus, transcription in nucleus, translation on rough ER, ETC in mitochondria) but thats really about it. And suprsingly, even for PS this seemed to be the case (you needed to have the formulas memorized but only very very minor understanding of the content)

To everyone who took it yesterday didn't it feel like that you could have had all of your prep books open in front of you and you still would not have scored any better?

It seems that in order to do well you need to take more practice tests (around 15-20) and understand the logic processes instead of just memorizing more and more useless facts in content. (It is almost seems like it tests in the same fashion to the LSAT)

Just my 2 cents from yesterday.

Amen. Pretty much every thread that asks, "How did you study for the MCAT?" has answers like this. Everyone that has taken the real deal will tell you the same, memorizing content isn't enough. Too bad so many college courses are exactly that, cram and regurgitate.

Hopefully people studying for the MCAT will take this advice to heart

 

[karayraisu]

A wise person once said that the MCAT is a critical reading test. This and nothing more. I finally understand why.

And yes, I think this is the trend that recent MCATs are becoming. Therefore, I think after you have a basic grasp of the content, then it's all about PRACTICE! PRACTICE PRACTICE PRACTICE until you fine-tune how to attack passages. Get the BR review books and practice with their passages while quit memorizing facts.

After seeing yesterday's test, I feel like now the MCAT is very heavy on how well you can react under timed pressure with new material, rather than fact regurgitation. I don't know if this is a move for the better, but I think this may just be more fair (rewards thinkers, rather than crammers) in the long run.

 

[fenguin]

I know what you're saying. I sometimes do get the feeling that the MCAT is trying to be like the LSAT in some aspects (reading comprehension, sufficient/necessary conditions, etc.) but the questions aren't as written as robustly, which can result in multiple correct answer choices. IMO the MCAT VR is still harder than the LSAT RC because the MCAT question writers aren't as careful about making their arguments/solutions airtight.

(I've taken both official tests)

 

[NYR56]

Although I wouldn't go so far as to say that content review is useless, isn't it better that the MCAT test how well you think? A monkey can memorize the basic bio/chem/physics/orgo needed for the MCAT - but that isn't what they ever tested. The test may be changing but the hardest part of any of the AAMC tests wasn't that you had to recall facts but rather see the tricks in the questions. I imagine most people get the "easy" rated questions right, which are just straight forward factual review. The harder questions require thought and analyzing the information presented to you, which, IMO, is much more important for future doctors.

I think the biggest issue is that the AAMCs led people to lean towards pure content review and the actual MCAT leaned away from that. Thing is, I bet people did much better than they think and the stress of taking the exam made it seem much more intense.

I'm very curious to see how we all did though. If most of our scores match what we were getting on the AAMC exams, I'll say the test was a good test.

 

[jhamaican]

I have no problem with the MCAT being more of a critical thinking test than content based. But individuals in this thread a missing the point. People are angry because the AAMC passes the test off as largely content based with large lists of here is what you need to know for bio, physics, orgo etc... they need to just tell it like it is.

and having taken the 1/29 test and having taken all tpr and aamc practice test, it was not representative in the least. Why post practice tests that are outdated and more content based when you are going to hit us with more a critical thinking style test?

Once again, i am OK that if the test is more critical thinking based rather than content mastery, but the way the practice tests and the aamc manual make the test appear to be very content based is very deceiving. It was like a bait and switch.

I believe that the 2010 tests may represent a change to a more critical thinking emphasis that was not present in the previous years and those of us who took the test on the 1/29 and 30 may have unfortunately been the guinea pigs to take the first shot. Hopefully the curves are fair.

 

[cliffhuxtableDO]

So when taking the MCAT it's more beneficial to read critically in ALL sections and try to apply the information in the passage more than anything else?

 

[TheBoondocks]

I used to believe that you needed to have a firm firm grasp of all of the content for the real MCAT but after taking yesterdays (1/30) monster, I've realized this is not at all the case. Sure you need to know your basic ideas (DNA is replicated in the Nucleus, transcription in nucleus, translation on rough ER, ETC in mitochondria) but thats really about it. And suprsingly, even for PS this seemed to be the case (you needed to have the formulas memorized but only very very minor understanding of the content)

To everyone who took it yesterday didn't it feel like that you could have had all of your prep books open in front of you and you still would not have scored any better?

It seems that in order to do well you need to take more practice tests (around 15-20) and understand the logic processes instead of just memorizing more and more useless facts in content. (It is almost seems like it tests in the same fashion to the LSAT)

Just my 2 cents from yesterday.

I couldn't disagree more. The reality is that most people don't understand the basics well enough. Believe it or not, it's possible to score well on the AAMCS with what I like to call a "fake good" understanding. The difference between the AAMCs and the actual thing is "indirect" language.

On an AAMC, you know you need to use V=IR. On the real MCAT, they'll hint at it. Very few people truly understand the basics. They just memorize. I took the MCAT in September and barely studied. I bought everything but only ended up hastily reading TPR and taking 2 AAMCs. I got a 14 PS 7 Vr and 13 BS. That test was easy. I had to retake for verbal.

In the last couple months, I went through all of TBR passages and EK 1001 chemistry and physics. I gut stumped on numerous questions that tested the nuances of concepts. It is these nuances that the MCAT tests and the AAMCS rarely test them.

I took the Friday test and while it was weird, If you were prepared you knew what they were getting at.

 

[TheBoondocks]

I have no problem with the MCAT being more of a critical thinking test than content based. But individuals in this thread a missing the point. People are angry because the AAMC passes the test off as largely content based with large lists of here is what you need to know for bio, physics, orgo etc... they need to just tell it like it is.

and having taken the 1/29 test and having taken all tpr and aamc practice test, it was not representative in the least. Why post practice tests that are outdated and more content based when you are going to hit us with more a critical thinking style test?

Once again, i am OK that if the test is more critical thinking based rather than content mastery, but the way the practice tests and the aamc manual make the test appear to be very content based is very deceiving. It was like a bait and switch.

I believe that the 2010 tests may represent a change to a more critical thinking emphasis that was not present in the previous years and those of us who took the test on the 1/29 and 30 may have unfortunately been the guinea pigs to take the first shot. Hopefully the curves are fair.

Ok, this post is annoying. The MCAT of 2010 is not more difficult than in the past. A few retakers posted that the PS of 01/30/10 was EASIER than the May 2nd of 2009. They said Saturday's test was HARD but not HORRENDOUS like the other one.

The AAMC tests AREN'T CONTENT BASED. I thought this too. The problem is that they test you on familiar stuff. So, if you're aware of the info, you skip the passage and use your outside knowledge. Whereas, if you're weak like I was in September, you will realize the passage has tons of info.

To illustrate, The BS passages in AAMC 3 has a hormone passage on parathyroid hormone and calmodulin controlling osteoclast and osteoblast activity. I got them all right before having studied the hormones because all of the info was there. I retook AAMC 3 after thorough content review and I skimmed the passage and answered it from knowledge.

What does this say? The passage presents you with all of the info you need, you just need to calm down and look for the clues.

 

[TheBoondocks]

I used to believe that you needed to have a firm firm grasp of all of the content for the real MCAT but after taking yesterdays (1/30) monster, I've realized this is not at all the case. Sure you need to know your basic ideas (DNA is replicated in the Nucleus, transcription in nucleus, translation on rough ER, ETC in mitochondria) but thats really about it. And suprsingly, even for PS this seemed to be the case (you needed to have the formulas memorized but only very very minor understanding of the content)

To everyone who took it yesterday didn't it feel like that you could have had all of your prep books open in front of you and you still would not have scored any better?

It seems that in order to do well you need to take more practice tests (around 15-20) and understand the logic processes instead of just memorizing more and more useless facts in content. (It is almost seems like it tests in the same fashion to the LSAT)

Just my 2 cents from yesterday.

Do you know whom I predicted to get the highest score on the 01/30/10 test? Surftheiop. Why? The dude only wanted a 33 but struggled on the AAMCS while still pulling a 37 or 38 average. There were other kids who "dominated" the AAMCS but I'd knew they'd get hit in the mouth. Why? Knowledge, they studied so much that it was mostly knowledge getting them through and not analyzing the passage.

The AAMC passages 7-10 are representative. Is the actual test more difficult? The answer is yes in general, but the curve adjusts. Also, be forewarned, the CBTs like to emphasize one topic in 2 or 3 passages so be ready.

Man up. Go back and read threads in 2007, Aug 20, July 24 and July 13 were brutal. Almost every single club cries bloody murder. A couple sane posters said it wasn't too bad if you kept your head on a swivel which although hard to do, is absolutely necessary.

While studying, ponder concepts. Ask yourself when or not this may or may not be true. If I halve this what happens. A very easy mistake is on flow rate. Q=Av What happens if I halve the area, well you'll say easy the velocity doubles. What happens if reduced the radius by 2. Well duh It doubles. No, the velocity quadruples. I missed this a couple times. While studying think of how they will trick you. Good luck all.

 

[TheBoondocks]

I have no problem with the MCAT being more of a critical thinking test than content based. But individuals in this thread a missing the point. People are angry because the AAMC passes the test off as largely content based with large lists of here is what you need to know for bio, physics, orgo etc... they need to just tell it like it is.

and having taken the 1/29 test and having taken all tpr and aamc practice test, it was not representative in the least. Why post practice tests that are outdated and more content based when you are going to hit us with more a critical thinking style test?

Once again, i am OK that if the test is more critical thinking based rather than content mastery, but the way the practice tests and the aamc manual make the test appear to be very content based is very deceiving. It was like a bait and switch.

I believe that the 2010 tests may represent a change to a more critical thinking emphasis that was not present in the previous years and those of us who took the test on the 1/29 and 30 may have unfortunately been the guinea pigs to take the first shot. Hopefully the curves are fair.

The passages forced you to read and understand. However, if you were prepared and knew your stuff then it wasn't too bad. I took it on this date as well. I retook to improve my pathetic verbal. I took some TPR tests and felt that the concepts learned from there were applicable. I'm sure you did better than you think.

 

[LostInStudy]

Yea, there was a survey once that lasted a few years on SDN that recorded all the practice averages and actual scores of test takers. The general trend was that 70% of the time the person scored -1 to +2 of their practice average. And from reading all the threads, this seems to be true in general. The MCAT wouldn't be doing it's job if you went in and took it and it felt easy, that's part of the experience.

Hope this helps,

-LIS