- Joined
- Jun 26, 2006
- Messages
- 3
- Reaction score
- 0
I just got back from taking the test, and have mixed feelings about the whole thing. I have been a lurker on here and want to thank all the regular posters who posted up study tips and advice. My scores pale in comparison but I'm just glad its over for now. Might have to re-take but who knows.
PAT: 18
QR: 17
RC: 17
Bio: 22
GC: 17
OC: 17
Total Science: 19
AA: 18
My GC, and OC scores obviously hold me back from a great a total science score but I just want to state those scores are not a true reflection of my knowledge on either subject. Honestly the test I took was such a mess. Bio was insanely easy. Questions were direct and to the point. I was feeling great after that section...and then GC and OC came. 👎
Let's start with GC, right off the bat, it started with a Kp problem. Not a big deal, make a table of what you start off with, the change, and then eq. But all this requires time....so I finish and move on to the next problem. A simple problem about periodic trends? Maybe a easy problem about molarity? No, matter of fact my ENTIRE test had no periodic trend or molarity questions. I get a henderson-hasselbalch question. Again, easy but seriously where are the filler questions so I can get moving? They never came. It was like that for the whole freaking test.
Then came OC, same deal, at this point i was rattled and I'm sure it didnt help my score. So my advice would be to not panic in a situation like this. Learn from me. I got myself under control and did the best I could. No easy R,S config problems, no simple rxns mechs, no questions about SN1/SN2 properties (lots of rxns thoughs). I had questions with multiple rxn steps. One question had you going from step A to step E, I kid you not. Even the creator of Achiever didnt pull crap like that. The sad part is that I knew how to do 95% of the stuff but it took time and the questions along with the answer choices were extremely tricky. When you take the test be sure to watch out for trap questions, because there are many.
Those sections just ruined the rest of the test for me. I was doing PAT and thinking about what my science score was gonna be. PAT for those of you who are wondering, its not that hard, really. Achiever is over kill and Top Score is about right, maybe a tad too easy than the actual thing. I always start with angles first because I feel my eyes are the freshest, if that makes sense. Again nothing crazy, just me being shook.
RC: wasnt too bad, until I got to the last passage, seemed like a trend for my test.
QR: same thing, ALL word problems (95%). I almost have a mind to write the ADA and ask them what they are doing. If you are going to ask that many word problems, each of which requires a good 30 seconds to setup, then you should give more time. Honestly getting a 17 was a miracle in itself, I'm surprised it wasn't a 10. Its quite unfair how other test versions have less word problems. I get the feeling that there are significant differences between test versions all together. Can you tell, I'm really bitter.
If I had to study for it again, I would practice doing problems that might be in the ACS study guide, ones that require a good grasp of the material and practice doing those under a time constraint. You can also pray that you don't get my version of the test, which had no easy filler questions. If you are struggling with how many neutrons, protons exist after a 8 beta decays and 12 alpha decays, this version of the test is gonna hurt. That was the type of filler questions I got, easy but required time. I also want to add that I hate the pop up periodic table. Anyways done venting, thanks for reading. Good luck to others out there.
PAT: 18
QR: 17
RC: 17
Bio: 22
GC: 17
OC: 17
Total Science: 19
AA: 18
My GC, and OC scores obviously hold me back from a great a total science score but I just want to state those scores are not a true reflection of my knowledge on either subject. Honestly the test I took was such a mess. Bio was insanely easy. Questions were direct and to the point. I was feeling great after that section...and then GC and OC came. 👎
Let's start with GC, right off the bat, it started with a Kp problem. Not a big deal, make a table of what you start off with, the change, and then eq. But all this requires time....so I finish and move on to the next problem. A simple problem about periodic trends? Maybe a easy problem about molarity? No, matter of fact my ENTIRE test had no periodic trend or molarity questions. I get a henderson-hasselbalch question. Again, easy but seriously where are the filler questions so I can get moving? They never came. It was like that for the whole freaking test.
Then came OC, same deal, at this point i was rattled and I'm sure it didnt help my score. So my advice would be to not panic in a situation like this. Learn from me. I got myself under control and did the best I could. No easy R,S config problems, no simple rxns mechs, no questions about SN1/SN2 properties (lots of rxns thoughs). I had questions with multiple rxn steps. One question had you going from step A to step E, I kid you not. Even the creator of Achiever didnt pull crap like that. The sad part is that I knew how to do 95% of the stuff but it took time and the questions along with the answer choices were extremely tricky. When you take the test be sure to watch out for trap questions, because there are many.
Those sections just ruined the rest of the test for me. I was doing PAT and thinking about what my science score was gonna be. PAT for those of you who are wondering, its not that hard, really. Achiever is over kill and Top Score is about right, maybe a tad too easy than the actual thing. I always start with angles first because I feel my eyes are the freshest, if that makes sense. Again nothing crazy, just me being shook.
RC: wasnt too bad, until I got to the last passage, seemed like a trend for my test.
QR: same thing, ALL word problems (95%). I almost have a mind to write the ADA and ask them what they are doing. If you are going to ask that many word problems, each of which requires a good 30 seconds to setup, then you should give more time. Honestly getting a 17 was a miracle in itself, I'm surprised it wasn't a 10. Its quite unfair how other test versions have less word problems. I get the feeling that there are significant differences between test versions all together. Can you tell, I'm really bitter.
If I had to study for it again, I would practice doing problems that might be in the ACS study guide, ones that require a good grasp of the material and practice doing those under a time constraint. You can also pray that you don't get my version of the test, which had no easy filler questions. If you are struggling with how many neutrons, protons exist after a 8 beta decays and 12 alpha decays, this version of the test is gonna hurt. That was the type of filler questions I got, easy but required time. I also want to add that I hate the pop up periodic table. Anyways done venting, thanks for reading. Good luck to others out there.
