Freaking Out over Exam Krackers

[Dbate]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I have been using Exam Krackers to prep for the MCAT almost exclusively (i decided to use Berkeley Review for Physics because I needed greater depth and more background).

So far on their 30 min exams I have been getting OWNED

My averages are: Bio 8, Chemistry 9, Verbal 10, and Orgo 8. I am taking the MCAT on September 7th, so I am really worried.

At the beginning of the book, they say that the 30 min exams are hard, but when I looked through past threads, many people did not have a significant difference between their Exam Krackers scores and the actual MCAT.

Has anyone had an experience with low EK 30 min exam scores, but still did well (35+) on the MCAT?

 

[Irish Football]

Take a practice AAMC test, that should give you a better indication of what to expect on the real thing.

I studied nothing but EK (except for some verbal reasoning studying with TBR), and I never looked at the tests in the back. I ended up getting a 29 my first test and 35 on my retake, so the content in the EK books is really good, it's just that I never found the tests that helpful.

(To answer your question, I have heard that the EK tests are more difficult than the real MCAT)

 

[Dbate]

The only AAMC test I took was Practice Test 3, but that was last December before I started any prep and before I took biochem and Physics 2.

I scored a 26 on that one and I was aiming to get at least a 37 or higher on the real MCAT. So my scores are fairly disheartening :/

 

[MedPR]

I have been using Exam Krackers to prep for the MCAT almost exclusively (i decided to use Berkeley Review for Physics because I needed greater depth and more background).

So far on their 30 min exams I have been getting OWNED

My averages are: Bio 8, Chemistry 9, Verbal 10, and Orgo 8. I am taking the MCAT on September 7th, so I am really worried.

At the beginning of the book, they say that the 30 min exams are hard, but when I looked through past threads, many people did not have a significant difference between their Exam Krackers scores and the actual MCAT.

Has anyone had an experience with low EK 30 min exam scores, but still did well (35+) on the MCAT?

I hate to sound like a dick, but the EK 30 minute exams are easy. I averaged 12-13 on them, and 11-12 on the AAMCS. 33Q on the real thing.

 

[darkjedi]

I would not trust any of the prep review practice tests for your real score. The only thing I found that was correlated to my real MCAT test were the official practice MCATs that are released by the AAMC. I believe there is a free diagnostic one you can take to get a gauge of how you might do.

Aiming for a 37 is rather lofty as it's something like 98% percentile. Honestly I feel like anything past 33 is mostly luck. In any case, I highly recommend taking the other real practice AAMC tests as they can identify your weak points that you need to address. Additionally since they are all real questions, you get a fairly good gauge of how questions are worded and worked through.

 

[Dbate]

Take a practice AAMC test, that should give you a better indication of what to expect on the real thing.

I studied nothing but EK (except for some verbal reasoning studying with TBR), and I never looked at the tests in the back. I ended up getting a 29 my first test and 35 on my retake, so the content in the EK books is really good, it's just that I never found the tests that helpful.

Did you do the questions throughout the chapter? Or did you mostly focus on reading the chapters.

And did you get the 29 after EK or before?

And thanks for the replies! It's really helpful.

 

[Dbate]

I hate to sound like a dick, but the EK 30 minute exams are easy. I averaged 12-13 on them, and 11-12 on the AAMCS. 33Q on the real thing.

Ummmmm....Congratulations?

 

[tn4596]

You probably should delay your test for another month or two for science content review. The examkracker review book an 1001 questions serie is what I used. Do them all and then find more questions/problem to do until your brain is fried. That'll do it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[angemon89]

You really should take some more FL's.

 

[sector9]

Thread moved to "MCAT Discussions"

 

[Irish Football]

Did you do the questions throughout the chapter? Or did you mostly focus on reading the chapters.

And did you get the 29 after EK or before?

And thanks for the replies! It's really helpful.

I did random questions throughout the chapters, but definitely not all of them. I pretty much reviewed the content in the reading and relied on my science background from classes as well. My 29 was after EK but it was mainly due to a low verbal score, which I improved by studying more verbal specifically (TBR and EK101). I think EK is really fine for the science content though.

PS listen to all the posters here and take some AAMCs!

 

[sliceofbread136]

I got a 37r on my mcat.

 

[Dbate]

I am going to take an AAMC tomorrow. Hopefully, my score will be better than on Exam Krackers.

 

[MedPR]

Ummmmm....Congratulations?

If you're getting <10 on the EK 30 minutes, you're not getting >10 on the real test. Sorry bro.

 

[PanRoasted]

The 30 minute exams are meant to test your content knowledge more than your critical thinking skills. People who do exceptionally well on the 30 minute exams but not as well on AAMC probably have strong content mastery but poorer logical reasoning abilities. Gauge yourself using AAMC FLs only. I probably got 70 or 80% on the EK bio exams after finishing the EK book, and I have done much better on the AAMC FLs.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-T989 using SDN Mobile

 

[Dbate]

If you're getting <10 on the EK 30 minutes, you're not getting >10 on the real test. Sorry bro.

Says the guy who graduated from college with a 3.0.

Oh, I'm sorry. You did get a 4.0 at Community College. You must be a "genius".

 

[ComfortCreature]

Dbate - I recommend re-taking that free AAMC practice you took before. If you get a low score on a test you're somewhat familiar with, you'll have a little better indication of your current standing.

 

[Dbate]

I just finished AAMC 9 and I scored a 30 (9 PS, 10 VR, 11BS). So right now I am debating whether I should take the test or postpone it.

The latest date this year is September 11, which is only four days after my currently scheduled date so that seems like a waste.

I realistically understand that it is not possible to improve very much in two weeks. So I may decide to wait until 2013 to take the MCAT. What do you all think?

 

[tn4596]

Yea, delay it. You will have a lot of free time to study in winter break. It is very ideal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MedPR]

Says the guy who graduated from college with a 3.0.

Oh, I'm sorry. You did get a 4.0 at Community College. You must be a "genius".

Actually I graduated from college with a 2.65. I don't see what my GPA has to do with the fact that you (self admittedly) aren't doing well on EK. You're averaging 27 on EK (8+9+10). 35+ is significantly better than 27. EK is easier than the AAMCs and easier than the real MCAT. If you aren't getting >10 on EK, you won't get >10 consistantly on AAMCs and you certainly won't get 30+ on the real MCAT unless you do more content review.

 

[MedPR]

I just finished AAMC 9 and I scored a 30 (9 PS, 10 VR, 11BS). So right now I am debating whether I should take the test or postpone it.

The latest date this year is September 11, which is only four days after my currently scheduled date so that seems like a waste.

I realistically understand that it is not possible to improve very much in two weeks. So I may decide to wait until 2013 to take the MCAT. What do you all think?

Look at how well you're doing on all topics, not just one test. My personal experience was consistent 33-35 with 10+ on every section of AAMC3-11 so I went into test day knowing I'd end up with a score of 30+. If your scores aren't consistent, your content knowledge is lacking and you should postpone. If you are always right around 30, and will be happy with a score of 27-29, then you should take it as scheduled. Sure you might get a 31-33, but you might also get a 26.

 

[osprey099]

Says the guy who graduated from college with a 3.0.

Oh, I'm sorry. You did get a 4.0 at Community College. You must be a "genius".

You don't need to take things so personally. MedPR was just answering your question. If you can't take any criticism, how do you expect to be a doctor?

 

[glassdoll]

If you're happy with 30-32 on the real thing, that's likely doable if you put in a good effort these next couple weeks. 35+ is a stretch though, because that's >95th percentile.

 

[Suluki]

I don't have much to contribute except that I feel your pain Dbate! I always did pretty poorly on the EK 30 min exams. I think part of the problem is that I didn't take them seriously. I would even often look at the answers while doing it which can through you off. I do think the questions are harder than the AAMC exams (from what I've taken) except for the questions that are not from a passage which are always fairly easy. I wouldn't base any decisions about retaking on the EK exams but do at least 3 of the AAMC and then look at your average. That's my thoughts with my mcat scheduled in 10 days!

 

[Dbate]

If you're happy with 30-32 on the real thing, that's likely doable if you put in a good effort these next couple weeks. 35+ is a stretch though, because that's >95th percentile.

I'm shooting for a 32.

This is really my fault for going to Europe the summer before the MCAT. I pretty learned everything these last 2 weeks pulling 12 hour days.

Now I have two more weeks of 12 hour days, and then I take the real deal!

 

[Dieumerci]

My MCAT exam is scheduled for the 6th. I barely feel prepared 🙁. I just had a 22 on AAMC 11. I dont know what to do to boost that score in such a short time. The real cause of my problem is the fact that I had limited time to study due to terrible personal reasons. Because I know I can do better with more time. But I cant postpone my test date to next year because I got pre-admission into a med school and they need a score of 24<. by November. 🙁🙁

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

My MCAT exam is scheduled for the 6th. I barely feel prepared 🙁. I just had a 22 on AAMC 11. I dont know what to do to boost that score in such a short time. The real cause of my problem is the fact that I had limited time to study due to terrible personal reasons. Because I know I can do better with more time. But I cant postpone my test date to next year because I got pre-admission into a med school and they need a score of 24<. by November. 🙁🙁

For the next 2 weeks you don't want to sleep. Figure out what you're bad at. Do as many EK101's and chad video's for PS and BS. Getting a 24 shouldn't be difficult at all.

 

[Dbate]

I wanted to bump this thread to offer my opinion on the exam krackers material. I used EK almost extensively for my first MCAT and I used the Berkeley Review for Physics (because EK physics was terrible).

I ended up with a 30 (11 PS, 11 VR, 8 BS).

I decided to retake and the second time I used only Berkeley Review for everything. That was the BEST decision of my life.

On my second MCAT, I got a 35 (12 PS, 12 VR, 11 BS).

So my advice would be to avoid Exam Krackers. I feel they do not cover the material in depth and their orgo review is TERRIBLE. My first MCAT was about 50-60% orgo and it was definitely reflected in my score.

 

[StudyShy]

I wanted to bump this thread to offer my opinion on the exam krackers material. I used EK almost extensively for my first MCAT and I used the Berkeley Review for Physics (because EK physics was terrible).

I ended up with a 30 (11 PS, 11 VR, 8 BS).

I decided to retake and the second time I used only Berkeley Review for everything. That was the BEST decision of my life.

On my second MCAT, I got a 35 (12 PS, 12 VR, 11 BS).

So my advice would be to avoid Exam Krackers. I feel they do not cover the material in depth and their orgo review is TERRIBLE. My first MCAT was about 50-60% orgo and it was definitely reflected in my score.

👍

 

[marcdagr8]

I used only EK and got a 37. I also took my MCAT pre-req courses (physics, chem, bio, and o-chm) about 10 years ago. I also used a 10 year old set of EK books that I got cheap off of ebay.

I must respectfully disagree with any assessment that calls EK crap.

 

[brood910]

I think it is different for individuals.
I found EK 30 mins exams to be harder than TBR passages while others think the opposite.
Maybe it is because EK requires you to recall things more than to refer back to the passages.

Avged 7-9 on EK passages.

Avging 11-13 on TBR passages atm.

 

[Mehd School]

I wanted to bump this thread to offer my opinion on the exam krackers material. I used EK almost extensively for my first MCAT and I used the Berkeley Review for Physics (because EK physics was terrible).

I ended up with a 30 (11 PS, 11 VR, 8 BS).

I decided to retake and the second time I used only Berkeley Review for everything. That was the BEST decision of my life.

On my second MCAT, I got a 35 (12 PS, 12 VR, 11 BS).

So my advice would be to avoid Exam Krackers. I feel they do not cover the material in depth and their orgo review is TERRIBLE. My first MCAT was about 50-60% orgo and it was definitely reflected in my score.

First of all, congrats on the score.

Second of all, your first mcat most certainly was not 50-60% organic. Get real.

 

[Temperature101]

First of all, congrats on the score.

Second of all, your first mcat most certainly was not 50-60% organic. Get real.

According to test takers on SDN last year, there was an mcat test that had 3 organic passages plus a couple of discretes. That is about 40% of the test. OP probably had major weaknesses in organic; that might be why OP felt like his/her test had more organic questions than bio.


Edit... OP is notorious on SDN for his hyperbole. He started a thread in the pre-allo forum insinuating that people with low stats should not become doctors. And his definition of low stats is 3.5 gpa and 30 mcat.

 

[Mehd School]

According to test takers on SDN last year, there was an mcat test that had 3 organic passages plus a couple of discretes. That is about 40% of the test. OP probably had major weaknesses in organic; that might be why OP felt like his/her test had more organic questions than bio.


Edit... OP is notorious on SDN for his hyperbole. He started a thread in the pre-allo forum insinuating that people with low stats should not become doctors. And his definition of low stats is 3.5 gpa and 30 mcat.

My significant other sat for an MCAT administration last year where there were 3 Organic passages + discretes. That test was still significantly below 50% organic.

 

[NickNaylor]

I used EK only for my studying and scored a 41. EK is sufficient but is not for everyone. In fact, I believe in their products so much that I now teach in their classes.

Again, it all depends on what you need. EK is not designed for people that need to be taught the material again. It is designed for people that have a relatively intact, basic understanding of the material but need to be reminded of the details. EK intentionally leaves a lot of material out that other companies leave in because EK covers only what is actually tested on the exam based on the published AAMC content outlines for each section. This is a strength if you're looking for concise review but a weakness if you need everything explained as if it's the first time seeing the material.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717

 

[Lys Ile Glu Leu]

I used EK only for my studying and scored a 41. EK is sufficient but is not for everyone. In fact, I believe in their products so much that I now teach in their classes.

Again, it all depends on what you need. EK is not designed for people that need to be taught the material again. It is designed for people that have a relatively intact, basic understanding of the material but need to be reminded of the details. EK intentionally leaves a lot of material out that other companies leave in because EK covers only what is actually tested on the exam based on the published AAMC content outlines for each section. This is a strength if you're looking for concise review but a weakness if you need everything explained as if it's the first time seeing the material.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717

👍

I wish I had thought of it that way. I went with Kaplan over EK based on reviews that highlighted the lighter content coverage. I probably could've had a better review with EK now that I think of it as you've described it. 41 though? OmFnG. 29 personally. :/

 

[Dbate]

I used EK only for my studying and scored a 41. EK is sufficient but is not for everyone. In fact, I believe in their products so much that I now teach in their classes.

Again, it all depends on what you need. EK is not designed for people that need to be taught the material again. It is designed for people that have a relatively intact, basic understanding of the material but need to be reminded of the details. EK intentionally leaves a lot of material out that other companies leave in because EK covers only what is actually tested on the exam based on the published AAMC content outlines for each section. This is a strength if you're looking for concise review but a weakness if you need everything explained as if it's the first time seeing the material.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717

It obviously varies from person to person, but I would err on the side of caution. It would be better to cover the material in depth and be fully prepared for the test.

You don't want to be the person who comes across things that were never covered in the prep books. That was me and it felt terrible.

TBR covers everything and I some of the passages they had in their prep books were the same as those I saw on the actual test.

So for me (and many others), TBR is alot better than EK. I wouldn't want to use test materials that purposefully leave out some material.

 

[Mehd School]

It obviously varies from person to person, but I would err on the side of caution. It would be better to cover the material in depth and be fully prepared for the test.

Just to be clear, you're saying that Nick, who scored a 41, was not fully prepared for the test.

I think a better approach would be to just digest what he said and essentially what I preach on here that is some materials work better than others for certain people. Just because EK didn't prepare you doesn't mean it didn't prepare Nick. (it did.)

 

[passionformed]

Thanks guys! Now I know TBR and EK are two best resources. Hopefully the 3 month s2ned schedule + ek and tbr (much overlap) will allow me to break 30.

EDIT: What books are best for learning the material? I plan this summer on relearning the material (my undergrad courses did not teach me enough, imo), then the summer afters sophomore year to review it for MCAT.

 

[Dbate]

Just to be clear, you're saying that Nick, who scored a 41, was not fully prepared for the test.

I think a better approach would be to just digest what he said and essentially what I preach on here that is some materials work better than others for certain people. Just because EK didn't prepare you doesn't mean it didn't prepare Nick. (it did.)

I don't know who you are or why you feel the need to argue with me. And I don't really care. I am clearly offering an opinion on EK. Learn to read with comprehension.

He clearly said EK wasn't for people who need some more background for the test. I said it would not fully prepare some people, so obviously not him.

 

[Dbate]

Thanks guys! Now I know TBR and EK are two best resources. Hopefully the 3 month s2ned schedule + ek and tbr (much overlap) will allow me to break 30.

EDIT: What books are best for learning the material? I plan this summer on relearning the material (my undergrad courses did not teach me enough, imo), then the summer afters sophomore year to review it for MCAT.

For me, TBR was great for learning because it is really comprehensive. Their Biology book is probably WAY too much detail, so I think EK would be more than sufficient.

 

[marcdagr8]

I don't know who you are or why you feel the need to argue with me. And I don't really care. I am clearly offering an opinion on EK. Learn to read with comprehension.

He clearly said EK wasn't for people who need some more background for the test. I said it would not fully prepare some people, so obviously not him.

Chilax bro. I read your statement the same way as senior Mehd School did, implying that an EK prep is not "fully prepared." If you are gonna take things so personally, make sure that you are more specific.

 

[Mehd School]

I don't know who you are or why you feel the need to argue with me. And I don't really care. I am clearly offering an opinion on EK. Learn to read with comprehension.

He clearly said EK wasn't for people who need some more background for the test. I said it would not fully prepare some people, so obviously not him.

Ha, ok. I'm sorry you were offended for whatever reason. I wasn't arguing, simply offering a suggestion. Relax.

 

[passionformed]

I don't know who you are or why you feel the need to argue with me. And I don't really care. I am clearly offering an opinion on EK. Learn to read with comprehension.

He clearly said EK wasn't for people who need some more background for the test. I said it would not fully prepare some people, so obviously not him.

If I think I need to relearn the material, would you still suggest EK? Or is TBR better? I ask because some classes (gen bio, gen chem 1) I feel like I barely know anything in them. Also, congrats on the 35.

 

[Dbate]

If I think I need to relearn the material, would you still suggest EK? Or is TBR better? I ask because some classes (gen bio, gen chem 1) I feel like I barely know anything in them. Also, congrats on the 35.

I think TBR is good because it literally covers everything. Their bio, however, is WAY too in depth. So I would definitely recommend TBR for everything but bio (i literally had never learned the physics for the MCAT and TBR taught me everything), so I think TBR is really good.

 

[NickNaylor]

It obviously varies from person to person, but I would err on the side of caution. It would be better to cover the material in depth and be fully prepared for the test.

You don't want to be the person who comes across things that were never covered in the prep books. That was me and it felt terrible.

TBR covers everything and I some of the passages they had in their prep books were the same as those I saw on the actual test.

So for me (and many others), TBR is alot better than EK. I wouldn't want to use test materials that purposefully leave out some material.

They only leave out material that is not directly tested on the exam. Because of this approach, there is significantly less material to cover and your studying is significantly more focused.

You are certainly welcome to your opinion, and I definitely agree that EK isn't for everyone. However, material is not "being left out" and EK is a high quality resource when it comes to review.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717