examkrackers chemistry

[masterMood]

hey all,
As I'm finishing up the the examkrackers chemistry book (just that), I'm realizing that there's a lot of things in it that I've never covered in my chemistry lectures/classes before, and that the examkrackers goes into a lot of detail about various htings.


When I took general chemistry in college, I learned the essential equations and how to manipulate them and I understood the concepts pretty well. But examkrackers seems to be going into a lot more detail than I've ever seen before.

I'm scoring 10-11s on the "30 minute exams" that they give at the end of the book.

How would that translate for the actual thing?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[requeim]

yeah i agree with you...going through the EK chem book makes me feel like i didnt pay attention in gen chem.

 

[masterMood]

see i'm understanding what i'm reading (but i'm taking a lot of time mulling over the concepts and visualizing everything, so there are times where i'm just staring at a page trying to decipher what's really being said). WheN i get to the questions, i feel like they're all muuch simpler than the lectures.

 

[engineeredout]

If you don't have it already, consider getting the 1001 question book for chem. Its not passage based format but it definitely drills those concepts in (similar to the 1001 physics book).

For me, as a chem eng major, I took a class just on kinetics, two on thermodynamics, fluid mechanics etc so all this is really basic compared to the classes I've had. The problem is that I tend to overcomplicate matters when its not needed for the mcat.

 

[engineeredout]

Oh and I can't seem to get higher than a 10 on the 30 min exams for any section, so yeah to bring up the original question, is that an accurate predictor?