BR vs EK for General Chem

[ACal]

---

Members do not see this ad.

So I've seen that a lot of people recommend EK for biology content and BR for General and Orgo Chem content AND practice. I've been reading BR General Chem so far and I feel like it's a lot of repetitive review and its just taking a lot of time. I have the EK chem content book and it's like 20% as long as BR and still covers the topics.

I read the EK bio and I feel like even though its concise it definitely covers all the topics. Is EK chem not sufficient?

 

[mzblue]

EK is great if you KNOW and understand the topics and need a quick refresher. If you've been away from the material for long, BR is the way to go. EK made a whole lot of sense to me and in fact i loved it once i'd gone through BR. Truth is, EK does hit the concepts BR hits. it's just that if you're shaky on the material, it might be hard to get it when it's presented in a succinct way. if EK works for you, then by all means go for it.

 

[PingPongPro]

BR chem is good. It might be long, but I found most of the information to be important. There are a few sections such as indicators, certain experiments, etc. that I think can be skimmed.

There have been people who used EK and got good scores, as well as BR people who got good scores. It really depends on the individual.

If you are trying to take a shortcut because you are lazy/low on time, than changing to EK might not be the best decision.

 

[paul411]

I used only EK and made a 12 on PS, so it's not bad.

I hadn't taken gen chem since AP chem in high school and used EK to re-learn and review.

 

[ACal]

Hmm maybe I'll do what I'm doing with Bio, EK for General Chem content review and BR for General Chem passages...

Any thoughts about EK orgo and physics? I took ochem a year ago in college and am taking physics right now.

 

[MShopes]

Hmm maybe I'll do what I'm doing with Bio, EK for General Chem content review and BR for General Chem passages...

Any thoughts about EK orgo and physics? I took ochem a year ago in college and am taking physics right now.

EK is great for physics as well as orgo...I just finished physics review with EK and I can say it is excellent but as Mzblue said, you need to have a good grasp of the material to be able to handle EK. In other words, you should only use EK if you need a quick refresher on your review because you recently took these courses and remember some of the material. If you haven't taken these courses for years or feel that you don't remember anything or will not remember it when you see it, then BR is the way to go. I took all my sciences within 1.5 years ago so whenever I look at EK topics of physics or any other subject, I quickly remember everything again and it works great for me.

Since you mentioned you took these classes recently and you are taking physics right now, don't bother with TBR. It is painfully long. While I found their teaching to be excellent, it would waste my time to do their review instead of EK. But to each his own opinion so see what works better for you if you have both EK and TBR.
On a side note, I suggest that if you are planning to use EK, still use BR for passages. They have a ton of passages for each section of each subject which will be great for practice and I heard it is close to the real thing but more difficult. Don't spend too much time with content review, you will do content review any ways by practicing passages and reviewing the wrong and right answers. Good luck!

 

[salim271]

Gen chem is terrible for EK imo... if nothing else, you need another book for gen chem. I believe the conceptual information is just too basic, and there is not enough emphasis on the math behind gen chem.

 

[Swagster]

Gen chem is terrible for EK imo... if nothing else, you need another book for gen chem. I believe the conceptual information is just too basic, and there is not enough emphasis on the math behind gen chem.

Most of what I learn is from going over the answers afterwards and I had to abandon everything but BR. Nothing compares to BR when it comes to answer explanations. It so blows everything else away in physics and gen chem with their examples and questions.

 

[salim271]

Most of what I learn is from going over the answers afterwards and I had to abandon everything but BR. Nothing compares to BR when it comes to answer explanations. It so blows everything else away in physics and gen chem with their examples and questions.

Agreed, when BR reviews an answer, especially for the more complicated questions, you get a VERY thorough review of why one answer is right and the others are wrong. BR passages are great.

 

[whiteshadodw]

Agreed, when BR reviews an answer, especially for the more complicated questions, you get a VERY thorough review of why one answer is right and the others are wrong. BR passages are great.

the only downside to BR is that some of the stuff is wayyyyy too detailed. the bio review isn't great, but the passages are pretty nice. for chemistry, ochem, and physics it is a little too long, and too harsh in the sense that they will own you with questions that haven't been taught.

while this is disheartening, the sad fact is that if you want the highest score possible (which no one should be aiming for anything less than a 45) then TBR is great for ochem, chem, and physics.

 

[salim271]

the only downside to BR is that some of the stuff is wayyyyy too detailed. the bio review isn't great, but the passages are pretty nice. for chemistry, ochem, and physics it is a little too long, and too harsh in the sense that they will own you with questions that haven't been taught.

while this is disheartening, the sad fact is that if you want the highest score possible (which no one should be aiming for anything less than a 45) then TBR is great for ochem, chem, and physics.

Yupppp long as hell. I did my review with EK, mostly because i didnt get the BR books until a few weeks ago from a friend. My review with them has basically been spamming passages and going over them, about 12-15 passages a day. BR bio has a whole chapter dedicated to sexual reproduction and the life of the ovum, sperm, and zygote, i remember EK had like 3 paragraphs on it in total, lmao.

 

[ak21]

Yupppp long as hell. I did my review with EK, mostly because i didnt get the BR books until a few weeks ago from a friend. My review with them has basically been spamming passages and going over them, about 12-15 passages a day. BR bio has a whole chapter dedicated to sexual reproduction and the life of the ovum, sperm, and zygote, i remember EK had like 3 paragraphs on it in total, lmao.

LOL. This is like the perfect example to describe how some of their stuff is

 

[ACal]

I'm still planning to use BR for gen. chem, just for the passages though....I feel like their gen. chem content is too detailed just like their bio content. I mean 2 books of over 300 pages each...might as well be rereading my gen. chem textbook

 

[BerkReviewTeach]

I'm still planning to use BR for gen. chem, just for the passages though....I feel like their gen. chem content is too detailed just like their bio content. I mean 2 books of over 300 pages each...might as well be rereading my gen. chem textbook

I want to apologize if this comes across the wrong way, but I kind of chuckle when I read statements like this. Not at the author but at the impact of marketing on perception. BR looks longer than the other books at face value, but if you actually broke down the page count and compared it to other books you'd see it's not that much longer. It's about 10% to 20% longer than the average book and that's mostly due to the fact that just like in every BR book, there are some examples from other subjects. If someone just were to use the general chemistry book, they'd get a little o chem, bio, and physics.

Here is the page count for just the review section for both gen chem books:

• Stoichiometry 28 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 13 pages)
  Atomic Theory 56 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 40 pages)
  Equilibrium 34 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 18 pages)
  Acids-Bases 28 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 16 pages)
  Titrations 22 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 15 pages)

Book I has 168 pages of review that if you removed the sample questions would be 102 pages.

• Gases 26 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 16 pages)
  Phases 30 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 19 pages)
  Thermodynamics 32 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 20 pages)
  Kinetics 24 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 14 pages)
  Electrochemistry 26 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 17 pages)

Book II has 138 pages of review that if you removed the sample questions would be 86 pages.

In total, the general chemsitry books have 306 pages of text review (covering 80% general chemistry and 20% other sciences) that would drop to 188 pages if you took out the sample questions.

It's just not as long as people think when they first look at the books. I'll be the first to admit that students don't need to read every page, because they have a good knowledge base already and reading certain sections is a waste (in any book). But at least glossing through the example questions will expose you to some of the great shortcuts and mnemonics.

 

[whiteshadodw]

I want to apologize if this comes across the wrong way, but I kind of chuckle when I read statements like this. Not at the author but at the impact of marketing on perception. BR looks longer than the other books at face value, but if you actually broke down the page count and compared it to other books you'd see it's not that much longer. It's about 10% to 20% longer than the average book and that's mostly due to the fact that just like in every BR book, there are some examples from other subjects. If someone just were to use the general chemistry book, they'd get a little o chem, bio, and physics.

Here is the page count for just the review section for both gen chem books:

• Stoichiometry 28 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 13 pages)
  Atomic Theory 56 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 40 pages)
  Equilibrium 34 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 18 pages)
  Acids-Bases 28 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 16 pages)
  Titrations 22 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 15 pages)

Book I has 168 pages of review that if you removed the sample questions would be 102 pages.

• Gases 26 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 16 pages)
  Phases 30 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 19 pages)
  Thermodynamics 32 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 20 pages)
  Kinetics 24 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 14 pages)
  Electrochemistry 26 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 17 pages)

Book II has 138 pages of review that if you removed the sample questions would be 86 pages.

In total, the general chemsitry books have 306 pages of text review (covering 80% general chemistry and 20% other sciences) that would drop to 188 pages if you took out the sample questions.

It's just not as long as people think when they first look at the books. I'll be the first to admit that students don't need to read every page, because they have a good knowledge base already and reading certain sections is a waste (in any book). But at least glossing through the example questions will expose you to some of the great shortcuts and mnemonics.

I like the sample questions. if i get them right, i move on, if i get them wrong i rework the problem or try to fix my conceptual thinking. i don't read those explanations 90% of the time.

 

[BerkReviewTeach]

I like the sample questions. if i get them right, i move on, if i get them wrong i rework the problem or try to fix my conceptual thinking. i don't read those explanations 90% of the time.

That is the PERFECT way to use them. It's trial by fire and reviewing only what you truly need.

 

[BurghStudent]

I'm using TBR for all the subjects. Really, it just boils down to what your preference is. Do you like everything explained? Or are comfortable extrapolating the rest of the information given about 50-80% of the info?

Different people do well with either method.

 

[Silverfalcon]

Different people do well with either method.

I cannot agree this more. I have a really mixed feeling about BR. As much as I felt like I was very well prepared with BR when I was studying for the exam, I cannot say whether it really paid off. Honestly.

 

[BurghStudent]

I cannot say whether it really paid off. Honestly.

What do you mean? Do you have advice for others using TBR? Thanks.

 

[Silverfalcon]

What do you mean? Do you have advice for others using TBR? Thanks.

Meaning that I did not score 12+ on the real MCAT as other test-takers did. TBR is good, and the passages are decent, but I rather felt that TBR (the new books) focused too much on tricks rather than the comprehensive understanding of the materials. I'll give you an example: TBR's section on thermochemistry and thermodynamics had several pages of heat pumps and refrigerators. And after struggling to read through all that, the authors then said something in the line of, "You probably don't need to know all these details, but just know that..." In other words, the emphasis here was off. If it's something that you don't need to know, why add that many pages of dense readings? It really doesn't add anything to it (and I note: this wasn't a part of their "tricks" either.. just additional info that was unimportant).

That's why I think EK is better in that it leaves you with things to search for. One of the BR's fundamental problem is that it makes the readers to think that they grasped the materials, and some passage questions reflect the information in the reading (so you get a high score on passages). But the thing is, the real exam isn't like that. The real exam has both tricky and straightforward questions, so if you were under the impression that you knew everything, that just meant that you knew everything that BR told you. EK on the other hand leaves you somewhat empty-handed. It's obviously a pain in the butt if you dislike looking stuffs up, but that gets you ready for the real ones where most information are something you haven't seen before.

Oh and in case someone disagrees (which is fine), I'll say this: I went through all the passages, read every single page in all four books (Chem I/II, Physics I/II), and even made a study guide by writing down the tricks and facts that I didn't know. Perhaps, if I didn't do that and looked stuffs up more on things that I felt uncomfortable, I may have done better. Who knows.

 

[whiteshadodw]

Meaning that I did not score 12+ on the real MCAT as other test-takers did. TBR is good, and the passages are decent, but I rather felt that TBR (the new books) focused too much on tricks rather than the comprehensive understanding of the materials. I'll give you an example: TBR's section on thermochemistry and thermodynamics had several pages of heat pumps and refrigerators. And after struggling to read through all that, the authors then said something in the line of, "You probably don't need to know all these details, but just know that..." In other words, the emphasis here was off. If it's something that you don't need to know, why add that many pages of dense readings? It really doesn't add anything to it (and I note: this wasn't a part of their "tricks" either.. just additional info that was unimportant).

That's why I think EK is better in that it leaves you with things to search for. One of the BR's fundamental problem is that it makes the readers to think that they grasped the materials, and some passage questions reflect the information in the reading (so you get a high score on passages). But the thing is, the real exam isn't like that. The real exam has both tricky and straightforward questions, so if you were under the impression that you knew everything, that just meant that you knew everything that BR told you. EK on the other hand leaves you somewhat empty-handed. It's obviously a pain in the butt if you dislike looking stuffs up, but that gets you ready for the real ones where most information are something you haven't seen before.

Oh and in case someone disagrees (which is fine), I'll say this: I went through all the passages, read every single page in all four books (Chem I/II, Physics I/II), and even made a study guide by writing down the tricks and facts that I didn't know. Perhaps, if I didn't do that and looked stuffs up more on things that I felt uncomfortable, I may have done better. Who knows.

the thing is TBR makes you feel like you've covered EVERYTHING front and back. this isn't the case, but no prep company can cover every topic. people should seriously do the SN2 hat trick. i don't even think many people know that an official AAMC topics list (outline exists). people should seriously go through this outline religiously. if there is a formula associated to a concept, write it down, because chances are it will help you remember the concept and you can use it on the test. there are only like maybe 20 formulas on the whole AAMC topics list. i think 15 of them are literally from physics, and the other 5 chemistry, but if you go over the topics in that religiously then you'll do fine. TBR passages are good, and they are just practice, but if you're focusing too much on TBR you might miss the big picture. the problem is that a majority of TBR passages are so focused on the details that you miss the big picture. the phase 3 passages are seriously the best because they make you tie in everything else.

i think TBR is really good, but some questions are too tricky for your own good. yes you want to develop tricks for the MCAT but 95% of the stuff is conceptual, and the other 5% is easy calculations like what's the concentration of hydronium ions if the pH = 6. you don't need log 2=0.301 and log 3 = .481 tricks to find the answer. as you've already alluded, most people need to spend more time with concepts you struggle with rather than focus on tricks. people get so hell bent on getting a 12+ on TBR that they lose sight of the big picture. don't.

 

[BurghStudent]

Thanks for the input.

I noticed while going through the AAMC topic list that some things were never covered. For example, it lists for you to know about skin really well. Skin is only mentioned twice in the TBR book as part of other topics. I will definitely stick to that list. I agree, no company can cover everything.

I am also going to do TPRH's Science Workbook which has like 900 pages of passages and questions, so hopefully another company's perspective will act as a safety net.

 

[ACal]

I want to apologize if this comes across the wrong way, but I kind of chuckle when I read statements like this. Not at the author but at the impact of marketing on perception. BR looks longer than the other books at face value, but if you actually broke down the page count and compared it to other books you'd see it's not that much longer. It's about 10% to 20% longer than the average book and that's mostly due to the fact that just like in every BR book, there are some examples from other subjects. If someone just were to use the general chemistry book, they'd get a little o chem, bio, and physics.

Here is the page count for just the review section for both gen chem books:

• Stoichiometry 28 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 13 pages)
  Atomic Theory 56 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 40 pages)
  Equilibrium 34 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 18 pages)
  Acids-Bases 28 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 16 pages)
  Titrations 22 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 15 pages)

Book I has 168 pages of review that if you removed the sample questions would be 102 pages.

• Gases 26 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 16 pages)
  Phases 30 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 19 pages)
  Thermodynamics 32 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 20 pages)
  Kinetics 24 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 14 pages)
  Electrochemistry 26 pages (remove the sample questions and it'd be 17 pages)

Book II has 138 pages of review that if you removed the sample questions would be 86 pages.

In total, the general chemsitry books have 306 pages of text review (covering 80% general chemistry and 20% other sciences) that would drop to 188 pages if you took out the sample questions.

It's just not as long as people think when they first look at the books. I'll be the first to admit that students don't need to read every page, because they have a good knowledge base already and reading certain sections is a waste (in any book). But at least glossing through the example questions will expose you to some of the great shortcuts and mnemonics.

When you say BR is only 10% to 20% longer than the "average" book? Are you talking about average textbooks or average MCAT review books? Because EK General Chemistry has about 120 pages of content including example questions...

 

[Silverfalcon]

you don't need log 2=0.301 and log 3 = .481 tricks to find the answer

This has to be one of the BEST things I've read in this site. Hands down.

 

[BerkReviewTeach]

When you say BR is only 10% to 20% longer than the "average" book? Are you talking about average textbooks or average MCAT review books? Because EK General Chemistry has about 120 pages of content including example questions...

Given the context of this thread, it would be in reference to the average review book. Assuming EK Gen Chem is in fact 120 pages as you state, then it would be below average. If average is about 160 pages of review, then 188 pages of actual review in the Berkeley Review book would make it about 17% above average. If you want to look at Nova, Kaplan, and TPR to get an actual average page count, then we could get a more precise answer. But I feel pretty confident that most books would be closer to BR in page count than EK.

I'll give you an example: TBR's section on thermochemistry and thermodynamics had several pages of heat pumps and refrigerators. And after struggling to read through all that, the authors then said something in the line of, "You probably don't need to know all these details, but just know that..." In other words, the emphasis here was off. If it's something that you don't need to know, why add that many pages of dense readings? It really doesn't add anything to it (and I note: this wasn't a part of their "tricks" either.. just additional info that was unimportant).

It's funny you mention thermo as the example, because that happens to be one of the things I loved when I was studying. Here is the last paragraph of that chapter verbatim.

• "This is one of the most difficult topics tested on the physical sciences section of the MCAT. As such, their questions must be modified to a level that will generate a bell curve. Although the passages may seem overwhelming, if you have a very fundamental perspective that a refrigerator takes in work (applied to a piston) and releases heat while an engine takes in heat (to expand a gas a piston) and releases work, you should do fine on their questions. Do not over-study this topic, even if you feel like you only partially comprehend it."

I think that paragraph is gold, and it made me feel much better. After reading their four and a half pages on refrigerators, heat pumps, heat engines, and steam engines, I had an okay grasp of the fundamentals. I know we can't mention specific topics at this site, but let's just say I was REALLY glad I knew this topic as they explained it. It's a really great explanation of how a Carnot engine works, and given that the MCAT lists that as a topic, I'd much rather have a good explanation than a gloss-over. It's fine to gloss over PV=nRT and F=ma, but certain subjects like Carnot machines and electrochemical cells need detail, at least for me they did.

 

[BerkReviewTeach]

the thing is TBR makes you feel like you've covered EVERYTHING front and back. this isn't the case, but no prep company can cover every topic. people should seriously do the SN2 hat trick. i don't even think many people know that an official AAMC topics list (outline exists). people should seriously go through this outline religiously. if there is a formula associated to a concept, write it down, because chances are it will help you remember the concept and you can use it on the test. there are only like maybe 20 formulas on the whole AAMC topics list. i think 15 of them are literally from physics, and the other 5 chemistry, but if you go over the topics in that religiously then you'll do fine. TBR passages are good, and they are just practice, but if you're focusing too much on TBR you might miss the big picture. the problem is that a majority of TBR passages are so focused on the details that you miss the big picture. the phase 3 passages are seriously the best because they make you tie in everything else.

i think TBR is really good, but some questions are too tricky for your own good. yes you want to develop tricks for the MCAT but 95% of the stuff is conceptual, and the other 5% is easy calculations like what's the concentration of hydronium ions if the pH = 6. you don't need log 2=0.301 and log 3 = .481 tricks to find the answer. as you've already alluded, most people need to spend more time with concepts you struggle with rather than focus on tricks. people get so hell bent on getting a 12+ on TBR that they lose sight of the big picture. don't.

This is such an brilliant post!!! As much of a homer for BR as I can be at times, I am a firm believer that a student should try passages and questions from at least three different sources. I was actually told this by a teacher when I was studying. The idea is that the MCAT is written by several different people, so your practice should be from materials written by several different people. I agree 100% that Phase III mixes topics and emphasizes concepts better than the first two phases, which is what it's supposed to do.

While I agree that most math will be simplistic, there are times that you have to come up with a good guess at something like a pKa given the Ka. It's not hard to do, but BR tricks save you ten to twenty seconds which can add up over the exam. I love their approach for lenses and mirrors and can do those calculations in my head in ten seconds now. I used maybe 10% of the tricks when I took the real MCAT, but I'm really glad I learned them all. You don't know which tricks will help, but on a timed exam you're guaranteed at least some will help. Like you say, nothing will cover everything and fit everyone. But some materials will come closer than others.