Getting 2s on VR :(

[darkguy2k]

I've been studying for verbal using Kaplan and the 101 EK. I've been averaging 6 to 7. Since my test is coming up so close, I began using my aamc tests. I've been doing so poorly on the aamc VR section. I've been getting 2s. I don't know why, I'm doing a lot terrible than when I practiced for the last 2 months. I've timed myself whenever I practiced too. Are the aamc VR a lot more difficult?

I'm really getting nervous about this section now. My test is coming up in less than a week. I feel so depressed

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[apumic]

I've been studying for verbal using Kaplan and the 101 EK. I've been averaging 6 to 7. Since my test is coming up so close, I began using my aamc tests. I've been doing so poorly on the aamc VR section. I've been getting 2s. I don't know why, I'm doing a lot terrible than when I practiced for the last 2 months. I've timed myself whenever I practiced too. Are the aamc VR a lot more difficult?

I'm really getting nervous about this section now. My test is coming up in less than a week. I feel so depressed

If you were averaging 6-7 on EK materials, you were never doing well in the first place. The drop to a 2 isn't a good sign. Honestly, you probably need to push your test back if you're consistently getting such low scores. For VR practice, AAMC>EK≥TPR>>Kaplan>random Joe-schmo test prep. The unfortunate thing, though, is that VR skills are highly resistant to test prep, which is why they are so valuable to test-makers. VR skills correlate very closely to other measures of intelligence (something the BS & PS sections do not do a good job of), which means those skills are developed over a lifetime and cannot be easily improved over short period of time. As a result, once you have gotten accustomed to such things as the most commonly-asked types of questions, common patterns in the passages used, and general format of the test, you are likely to reach a plateau. That plateau will, of course, vary from person to person, but it tends to be reliable on test-retest measures.

 

[zachjm2]

If you were averaging 6-7 on EK materials, you were never doing well in the first place. The drop to a 2 isn't a good sign. Honestly, you probably need to push your test back if you're consistently getting such low scores. For VR practice, AAMC>EK≥TPR>>Kaplan>random Joe-schmo test prep. The unfortunate thing, though, is that VR skills are highly resistant to test prep, which is why they are so valuable to test-makers. VR skills correlate very closely to other measures of intelligence (something the BS & PS sections do not do a good job of), which means those skills are developed over a lifetime and cannot be easily improved over short period of time. As a result, once you have gotten accustomed to such things as the most commonly-asked types of questions, common patterns in the passages used, and general format of the test, you are likely to reach a plateau. That plateau will, of course, vary from person to person, but it tends to be reliable on test-retest measures.

Ok, first of all, this is completely wrong. I scored a 4 on my first verbal diagnostic and by the end I was consistently scoring 11's and 12's. Don't ever let someone tell you that you can't do something. Sure, we all have our strengths and weaknesses, but there are a large number of things that you can learn to do with enough hard work. There is a specific set of skills that the verbal section tests and you can learn how to master them. It's true that less than a week is not a long time to make any guarantees (the same could be said for PS or BS), but it is possible to improve from where you are now. If you can afford to push your test back, that would be ideal. But if not, then I would say crack down on verbal until test day.

First, I say you should read this

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/archive/index.php/t-39366.html

Do you have the EK Verbal and Math book? If you can read through that, EK does a great job of explaining what you need to know for the verbal section. The key to doing well on the verbal section is learning to view each passage for what they are - arguments. All of the VR passages take the form of written argument, meaning that the author has gotten on a soapbox and is trying to convince you of their opinion. Learning to pick up on their opinion (main idea) will help you get about half of the questions right. The other half of the questions are going to require that you go back to the passage. After all, you don't have time to memorize a passage. A good example of this is a question that asks something like: what is the purpose of paragraph 3 in the passage? Or another example: which of the following assertions in the passage does the author back up with evidence? You have to go back to the passage and look for the answer.

 

[USCTrojan11]

Ok, first of all, this is completely wrong. I scored a 4 on my first verbal diagnostic and by the end I was consistently scoring 11's and 12's. Don't ever let someone tell you that you can't do something. Sure, we all have our strengths and weaknesses, but there are a large number of things that you can learn to do with enough hard work. There is a specific set of skills that the verbal section tests and you can learn how to master them. It's true that less than a week is not a long time to make any guarantees (the same could be said for PS or BS), but it is possible to improve from where you are now. If you can afford to push your test back, that would be ideal. But if not, then I would say crack down on verbal until test day.

First, I say you should read this

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/archive/index.php/t-39366.html

Do you have the EK Verbal and Math book? If you can read through that, EK does a great job of explaining what you need to know for the verbal section. The key to doing well on the verbal section is learning to view each passage for what they are - arguments. All of the VR passages take the form of written argument, meaning that the author has gotten on a soapbox and is trying to convince you of their opinion. Learning to pick up on their opinion (main idea) will help you get about half of the questions right. The other half of the questions are going to require that you go back to the passage. After all, you don't have time to memorize a passage. A good example of this is a question that asks something like: what is the purpose of paragraph 3 in the passage? Or another example: which of the following assertions in the passage does the author back up with evidence? You have to go back to the passage and look for the answer.

Definitely agree with the last passage. Also, sometimes I tend to think verbal is just how rested and mentally ready you are on THAT day. I've gotten high scores on some days and low scores on some days with EK. It varied between 8-12. With that said, I was in the zone on my MCAT and did well on verbal cause I was ready THAT day and had just previously been raped by PS.

Please push your test back, even with 6-7 in verbal, which may be your best case scenario, you will be screened out. Furthermore, a 6 in verbal with excellent scores in other sections may draw red flags showing you have the ethic to work hard but lack the "skills" to be successful. Aim for an 8 or higher. Remember this is just an opinion but Ive seen this sentiment echoed in a few places.

 

[apumic]

Ok, first of all, this is completely wrong. I scored a 4 on my first verbal diagnostic and by the end I was consistently scoring 11's and 12's. Don't ever let someone tell you that you can't do something. Sure, we all have our strengths and weaknesses, but there are a large number of things that you can learn to do with enough hard work. There is a specific set of skills that the verbal section tests and you can learn how to master them. It's true that less than a week is not a long time to make any guarantees (the same could be said for PS or BS), but it is possible to improve from where you are now. If you can afford to push your test back, that would be ideal. But if not, then I would say crack down on verbal until test day.

First, I say you should read this

Sorry, friend, anecdotal evidence means nothing. What I stated is what is supported by psychometric research. The MCAT VR has a test-retest reliability coefficient of 0.80. If one is consistently scoring <<7 on practice exams a week before the exam date, I do not believe it is wise nor prudent to suggest the person is likely to be able to improve over that period. In reality, such an increase, if even possible in a given person's case, is likely to take much longer than just a few weeks (or even months) if the person has already been practicing and is already accustomed to the tests (i.e., if the person has already maximized his/her personal ability and present skill-base).

 

[Tin Man]

Yeah, what worries me is that the OP was AVERAGING 6-7, implying 3+ practices. A drop to a 2 on the "real" practice MCAT's doesn't exactly give me confidence that any "luck" factor is going to work in the OP's favor when the test date comes up.

I'm not saying that you can't push that score up. You can. But even if you managed to score within the 6-7 range, it's unlikely the rest of your test would be good enough to prevent you from being flushed out during the application process. The overall score isn't really that important if one of your sections was too low, and the generally accepted cut-off is around 8-9 for any one section.

And, unfortunately, to raise your VR score from below par to average, it's probably going to take more than some kind words from the forums. I can give plenty of advice on how to get a higher VR score from a lower one, but (with no offense intended), it sounds like you're lacking some of the foundational skills you need to take the test, and most of the advice you'll find here assumes you have these basic skills.

Just for curiosity's sake, what are the rest of your scores like on the other sections? If they're low as well, then your problem may not be so much a problem with verbal skills as a reading comprehension problem.

 

[zachjm2]

Sorry, friend, anecdotal evidence means nothing. What I stated is what is supported by psychometric research. The MCAT VR has a test-retest reliability coefficient of 0.80. If one is consistently scoring <<7 on practice exams a week before the exam date, I do not believe it is wise nor prudent to suggest the person is likely to be able to improve over that period. In reality, such an increase, if even possible in a given person's case, is likely to take much longer than just a few weeks (or even months) if the person has already been practicing and is already accustomed to the tests (i.e., if the person has already maximized his/her personal ability and present skill-base).

I understand that the MCAT claims to have both reliability and validity and if it didn't, the AAMC would have a hard time presenting their test as a way for admissions committees to differentiate between test takers. I've wondered about both reliability and validity of the MCAT since I've seen poor relationships between say, GPA or IQ tests and MCAT scores with many too many people. If the MCAT tests basic science knowledge, then (science) GPA should correlate well with MCAT scores. If the MCAT tests critical thinking and logical ability, then IQ test scores should correlate well with MCAT scores. And I've seen basically everyone make incredible jumps across their test prep. After all, whose diagnostic is very similar to their final score? The reliability would probably not hold up until you were at the end of your preparation. We're referring to the same plateau at the end of test preparation, but the OP probably isn't there yet.

My point is that if someone really figures out the verbal section, they can do well. I don't think it's fair to make a judgment like that about someone's level of ability, especially if they haven't gotten a chance to fully prepare. I hope the OP can delay his test date to give time to prepare. But if he's going to take it, he could still study for verbal and possibly see some improvement.

 

[zachjm2]

Sorry, friend, anecdotal evidence means nothing. What I stated is what is supported by psychometric research. The MCAT VR has a test-retest reliability coefficient of 0.80. If one is consistently scoring <<7 on practice exams a week before the exam date, I do not believe it is wise nor prudent to suggest the person is likely to be able to improve over that period. In reality, such an increase, if even possible in a given person's case, is likely to take much longer than just a few weeks (or even months) if the person has already been practicing and is already accustomed to the tests (i.e., if the person has already maximized his/her personal ability and present skill-base).

I understand that the MCAT claims to have both reliability and validity and if it didn't, the AAMC would have a hard time presenting their test as a way for admissions committees to differentiate between test takers. I've wondered about both reliability and validity of the MCAT since I've seen poor relationships between say, GPA or IQ tests and MCAT scores with many too many people. And I've seen basically everyone make incredible jumps across their test prep. After all, whose diagnostic is very similar to their final score? The reliability would probably not hold up until you were at the end of your preparation. We're referring to the same plateau at the end of test preparation, but the OP probably isn't there yet.

My point is that if someone really figures out the verbal section, they can do well. I don't think it's fair to make a judgment like that about someone's level of ability, especially if they haven't gotten a chance to fully prepare. I hope the OP can delay his test date to give time to prepare. But if he's going to take it, he could still study for verbal and possibly see some improvement.

 

[Tin Man]

My point is that if someone really figures out the verbal section, they can do well. I don't think it's fair to make a judgment like that about someone's level of ability, especially if they haven't gotten a chance to fully prepare. I hope the OP can delay his test date to give time to prepare. But if he's going to take it, he could still study for verbal and possibly see some improvement.

There isn't really a way to "figure out" the verbal section. Even people who are really, really good at English-based stuff (like me) don't do perfectly on it. It's one of the harder sections to improve. If you do poorly on a science passage, that's an indication that you need to study more about what that specific passage was covering.

But the VR passages aren't so easily divided up, since they're all testing the same skills, so generally, if you're doing poorly on one passage, you're going to do poorly on all of the passages. There isn't a way to cram for VR, nor is there a way to effectively "study" for it.

It just takes practice, and establishing your baseline generally means take a couple of tests and get familiar with the format and question types. After that, however well you do is pretty much going to tell you the level of skill you have at VR, as the MCAT defines it. Looking up a word you didn't know isn't going to help you, nor is gaining knowledge on the author who wrote the passage.

Like I said, it CAN go up. It takes a lot of practice, and with that practice, the score can be raised. But my point is that it isn't particularly easy to raise the score. People who do well on VR have a strong foundation in reading comprehension, a decent vocabulary, a strong focus on what they're reading, and the ability to think critically about the work. These skills are generally developed throughout schooling, not in the 1-3 months most pre-meds use to study for the MCAT. It's just too much.

I could expect someone to raise 1-2 points just through practice and familiarity alone. But if the 2 was indicative of how the OP will do on the real test, then the chance he's going to raise it 7 points he needs just to be average before the test is almost nil. If the skills aren't there now, he doesn't have much of a chance of getting them in less than a month...

I'm not going to give advice in terms of pushing the exam back, voiding it, whatever. I'm firmly committed to not receiving angry emails from pre-meds later blaming me for their decision to void. But I will say that, should the OP choose to take the MCAT again next year, that he work to identify the basic skills he's missing. Is it reading comprehension? Focus? Lack of vocabulary? Running out of time? Whatever it is, work non-stop to develop those skills, whether it means reading a lot, writing a lot, taking more English classes, whatever. Without a constant attempt to build that foundation, chances of doing well on VR are going to remain low.

 

[NickNaylor]

I don't mean to be rude, but how do you manage to get 2s? I feel like that's almost as hard as getting a 13. It's almost as if you would have to intentionally try and get answers wrong.

That suggests to me that you might have a fundamental issue with either understanding the passages or understanding the questions. Work some passages under no time conditions just to see if you're capable of getting the questions right given a large amount of time. If you're able to do better, then you simply need to work on your speed. If you're not, I'm not really sure what to do...

VR really is one of those things that you have to do a bunch to start to notice the little subtleties in the passage, questions, and answers. Either that or be lucky.

 

[sphun65]

I've been studying for verbal using Kaplan and the 101 EK. I've been averaging 6 to 7. Since my test is coming up so close, I began using my aamc tests. I've been doing so poorly on the aamc VR section. I've been getting 2s. I don't know why, I'm doing a lot terrible than when I practiced for the last 2 months. I've timed myself whenever I practiced too. Are the aamc VR a lot more difficult?

I'm really getting nervous about this section now. My test is coming up in less than a week. I feel so depressed

Take your test and void it. There is no advice in the world that can save a 2 in less than a week. If you get a 2, or anything less than a 5 for that matter, you will really be hurting yourself.

Your biggest mistake was studying for the verbal with Kaplan. When you retake next year, follow the EK strategy exactly. Your work is certainly cut out for you now, so good luck.

 

[Pons Asinorum]

My point is that if someone really figures out the verbal section, they can do well.

Whole lotta anecdotal in that. Also, about the above comment: the OP made a 2 on a VR section after averaging 6-7's. There is no "figuring it out" that is going to flip a switch and turn that into consistent 9-10's. If there was a way to figure it out, there would be a test prep company printing out pallets of money with it. The verbal section, as discussed prior, is the section that most strongly correlates to innate ability, fairly or no. Also, from an advice standpoint, if you got that 2 on a Kaplan practice exam, you need to stop using Kaplan VR materials. Their PS and BS, sure, but their VR passages and question stubs bear no resemblance to the AAMC verbal passages. Stick with AAMC passages for diagnosing your level of VR performance.

 

[zachjm2]

Whole lotta anecdotal in that. Also, about the above comment: the OP made a 2 on a VR section after averaging 6-7's. There is no "figuring it out" that is going to flip a switch and turn that into consistent 9-10's. If there was a way to figure it out, there would be a test prep company printing out pallets of money with it. The verbal section, as discussed prior, is the section that most strongly correlates to innate ability, fairly or no. Also, from an advice standpoint, if you got that 2 on a Kaplan practice exam, you need to stop using Kaplan VR materials. Their PS and BS, sure, but their VR passages and question stubs bear no resemblance to the AAMC verbal passages. Stick with AAMC passages for diagnosing your level of VR performance.

If verbal only tested innate ability, then everyone's verbal diagnostic would be basically the same as the rest of their scores. It wasn't the case for me or any of my friends. Was this the case for you? How about other people you know?

When you decide that a test only measures your innate abilities, you have screwed yourself out of improving. After all, how can you improve on something that's already set and out of your control? I can only imagine what it would be like to think that way. I'm guessing if you fail a test then you assume it's because you're stupid.

If you google the MCAT interpretive manual, it lists all of the skills the verbal reasoning section tests. You can learn how to do those things. It's about learning how to understand arguments and apply information from the passages to other situations.

And by the way...this has to be anecdotal because no one does experimental studies on student preparation for the MCAT.

 

[TriagePreMed]

I didn't think getting a 2 was even possible, since random chance alone dictates a better score. Is English not your first language?

 

[apumic]

If verbal only tested innate ability, then everyone's verbal diagnostic would be basically the same as the rest of their scores. It wasn't the case for me or any of my friends. Was this the case for you? How about other people you know?

You SHOULD improve to a point with exposure to test materials (i.e., preparation); however, VR has few skills you can quickly improve (unlike the sciences).

When you decide that a test only measures your innate abilities, you have screwed yourself out of improving. After all, how can you improve on something that's already set and out of your control? I can only imagine what it would be like to think that way. I'm guessing if you fail a test then you assume it's because you're stupid.

If you google the MCAT interpretive manual, it lists all of the skills the verbal reasoning section tests. You can learn how to do those things. It's about learning how to understand arguments and apply information from the passages to other situations.

And by the way...this has to be anecdotal because no one does experimental studies on student preparation for the MCAT.

That last statement simply shows your ignorance of the scientific community (esp. the bx science community, the science education community, and the quantitative methods researchers -- i.e., the people who study research methods). People HAVE and DO study student performance and preparation on a variety of standardized tests to include the MCAT. (The MCAT is actually one of the more studied ones.)

 

[ModernAlchemist]

Why does no one realize that the OP is a troll? I thought at least Cole would be able to spot one of his own.

 

[Pons Asinorum]

You SHOULD improve to a point with exposure to test materials (i.e., preparation); however, VR has few skills you can quickly improve (unlike the sciences).

Exactly. Once familiarity with test and stress are teased out, there is a ceiling on VR that one will not crack. Period. No amount of reading the NYT, as some on here try to throw out as VR prep, or doing crosswords or whatever else will fix that.

 

[GRod18]

thread feels like trolling, I don't think anyone with some what of a command in English can get 2s on AAMC diags. That being said, OP why haven't you responded to all these wonderful advices that SDNers have posted?

 

[zachjm2]

That last statement simply shows your ignorance of the scientific community (esp. the bx science community, the science education community, and the quantitative methods researchers -- i.e., the people who study research methods). People HAVE and DO study student performance and preparation on a variety of standardized tests to include the MCAT. (The MCAT is actually one of the more studied ones.)

First of all, if you get into medical school, I really hope you don't plan on having an attitude like this when you're dealing with patients.

Let me clarify so you understand what I meant. Of course, the AAMC studies performance on the MCAT and they have their statistics that they claim show validity and reliability. I said that earlier if you had read what I said. As for preparation, test prep companies claim that their prep courses increase your scores. The AAMC claims that there is no significant difference in performance between those who take prep courses and those who don't. Test companies and the AAMC have opposing motives and it shows in their "results". Test companies want to show they can improve your score and the AAMC wants to show that their test is resistant to test prep courses. So what do these "studies" tell you?

Most of us, I'm assuming, find advice from different sources and combine it, so our preparation is not just from one test prep company. People who don't take prep courses still use prep books and other ways to study. If you showed me a "study" that took this into account and tracked students' progress as they used certain advice or strategies, then you could say something about the results. It would have to follow progress from a diagnostic to the end of studying and it would have to have advice similar to mine earlier. I don't see how a study like that would exist because it takes a combined understanding of different prep strategies and is more specific than say Kaplan or EK. Something like that would be almost too complex and hard to design and besides, who would have the time, money, or motivation to do a study like that?

 

[darkguy2k]

I didnt expect to get all these replies. I agree with a lot of you guys on what you're saying. This is an ability which I should have picked up throughout grade school and college. But I also agree that this is something you can improve on with practice.

I feel like this maybe a psychological problem that I'm having. When I began studying 2 months ago, I was doing as bad, however, I did start to see improvement. I did a lot of practice. I went up from a 2 to 7s (I know it isn't enough, but I was starting to get the VR section a bit more than I did before). I just recently began to do worse though. This last few weeks before my test, nerves started to him me. I haven't been able to sleep well and have been very anxious and nervous about this test. I've been thinking way too much about the outcome and what will happen to me if I don't do well. This has been going on for the last few weeks. Since then, my scores has went down, even for my BS and PS (but not as much). I was averaging about an 8 on both sections (I know its not much, but have been trying my best). I seriously have low self esteem at this point and feel extremely depressed. I feel like I should quit my road to med school. I've put so much work and effort with my apps. Everything is great, except for this test. It really all comes down to this score, so I feel a lot of pressure. I'm terrible at test taking. The slightest thing can take away my concentration. To tell you guys the truth, I haven't been able to concentrate too well lately when taking practice tests either. Verbal section alone need tremendous amount of concentration, which I'm lacking off as of now. I seriously cannot think. I feel so down. This isn't like me, it all just happened this last few days

 

[apumic]

First of all, if you get into medical school, I really hope you don't plan on having an attitude like this when you're dealing with patients.

I currently work in healthcare with a variety of pts in a clinical setting, most of whom are quite upset, agitated, and in medical and/or psychological crisis. 99+% of my pts are at one of the most vulnerable points in their lives, so thank you for the tip, but honestly, I've got several yrs' experience working in a hospital environment full-time. I am still learning, for sure, but if anything, I am one of the better deescalators on staff and someone who has been called in more than a few times to put out a fire when a pt was about to blow.

On a message board like this, people tend to state things as fact. That was exactly what you did. It showed heavy ignorance of an area of research. I simply pointed that out because you made statements as though no such research exists. This is like saying "the earth is flat because I have never noticed the ground curve under my feet and this is valid proof because no one has ever studied this." Obviously, if someone said this, you would call them a *****. The fact that the person had not seen any such research to refute his point made no difference to your perception of his ignorance. Likewise, your ignorance of an area of literature related to your planned area of study is a bit baffling.

Let me clarify so you understand what I meant. Of course, the AAMC studies performance on the MCAT and they have their statistics that they claim show validity and reliability. I said that earlier if you had read what I said. As for preparation, test prep companies claim that their prep courses increase your scores. The AAMC claims that there is no significant difference in performance between those who take prep courses and those who don't. Test companies and the AAMC have opposing motives and it shows in their "results". Test companies want to show they can improve your score and the AAMC wants to show that their test is resistant to test prep courses. So what do these "studies" tell you?

The AAMC and test prep companies' research is not the best source when it comes to this. There are many other researchers that have researched the MCAT (as well as similar exams) extensively without such a bias toward "proving" something for their respective organization.

Most of us, I'm assuming, find advice from different sources and combine it, so our preparation is not just from one test prep company. People who don't take prep courses still use prep books and other ways to study. If you showed me a "study" that took this into account and tracked students' progress as they used certain advice or strategies, then you could say something about the results. It would have to follow progress from a diagnostic to the end of studying and it would have to have advice similar to mine earlier. I don't see how a study like that would exist because it takes a combined understanding of different prep strategies and is more specific than say Kaplan or EK. Something like that would be almost too complex and hard to design and besides, who would have the time, money, or motivation to do a study like that?

A school's premedical program? (And several have done such things, although typically involving courses within the school and correlating them with outcomes.)

I didnt expect to get all these replies. I agree with a lot of you guys on what you're saying. This is an ability which I should have picked up throughout grade school and college. But I also agree that this is something you can improve on with practice.

I feel like this maybe a psychological problem that I'm having. When I began studying 2 months ago, I was doing as bad, however, I did start to see improvement. I did a lot of practice. I went up from a 2 to 7s (I know it isn't enough, but I was starting to get the VR section a bit more than I did before). I just recently began to do worse though. This last few weeks before my test, nerves started to him me. I haven't been able to sleep well and have been very anxious and nervous about this test. I've been thinking way too much about the outcome and what will happen to me if I don't do well. This has been going on for the last few weeks. Since then, my scores has went down, even for my BS and PS (but not as much). I was averaging about an 8 on both sections (I know its not much, but have been trying my best). I seriously have low self esteem at this point and feel extremely depressed. I feel like I should quit my road to med school. I've put so much work and effort with my apps. Everything is great, except for this test. It really all comes down to this score, so I feel a lot of pressure. I'm terrible at test taking. The slightest thing can take away my concentration. To tell you guys the truth, I haven't been able to concentrate too well lately when taking practice tests either. Verbal section alone need tremendous amount of concentration, which I'm lacking off as of now. I seriously cannot think. I feel so down. This isn't like me, it all just happened this last few days

You sound pretty heavily burned out and like your level of stress has become quite counterproductive. Maybe you should contact your school's counseling center and see if they have free or low-cost services that could be of assistance in helping to teach you some good relaxation techniques and/or skills for coping better with your stress/anxiety if that is an issue.

 

[zachjm2]

On a message board like this, people tend to state things as fact. That was exactly what you did. It showed heavy ignorance of an area of research. I simply pointed that out because you made statements as though no such research exists. This is like saying "the earth is flat because I have never noticed the ground curve under my feet and this is valid proof because no one has ever studied this." Obviously, if someone said this, you would call them a *****. The fact that the person had not seen any such research to refute his point made no difference to your perception of his ignorance. Likewise, your ignorance of an area of literature related to your planned area of study is a bit baffling.

Ok, how about this - if there is so much research out there on this topic and you are so familiar with it... show me a study that shows that verbal strategies do nothing and that performance is all about innate ability. It would have to follow from the first test (diagnostic) before any studying to the end of studying, not just give a reliability coefficient across tests at the end of preparation. Obviously, everyone has a range that they finish around by the end. I'm talking about initial jumps after the diagnostic from preparation and learning about verbal. Show me that all scores start to finish are extremely close together regardless of what you know about the verbal section.

 

[Tin Man]

Grr. This is getting out of control. Let's try to simplify the issue.

IF there is a way to raise the VR score outside of the basic familiarization with the formatting and other basic test-taking strategies (which should theoretically be set once you've taken 2+ VR tests), then what skills are we looking to improve?

1) Vocabulary. Not much of a way to study for this. Either you have a large enough vocabulary to carry you through the VR section, or you don't, and if not, you're going to have a tough time.

2) Very basic knowledge of the topic being discussed. The MCAT never requires much knowledge over the many topics discussed, but if you don't know that Islam is a religion while Arab is a nationality, or who Gandhi was, then you're probably going to have some difficulty should either of those topics come up. Again, not something you can study for. It's just something you have to know, and something you will know if your middle school years were worth anything.

3) Reading comprehension. Can you figure out the main point of an article you don't agree with? If I gave you an article written in a foreign language, could you still give me a decent idea of where a thesis statement might be located? Can you understand when sarcasm is being used? These skills are hard to develop later if they have not been honed by the high school years.

4) Argument. People good at VR read every article as if they are going to argue against it. Do you know some of the basic logical fallacies (ie, straw man)? Can you identify each assertion? Are you able to quickly think of reasons (or facts) that dispute what the author is saying? These are common MCAT questions, and again, are hard to develop if not done so during regular schooling.

5) Speed. Can you pick up the general point and some important details without rereading? If you have to reread, can you remember with high precision where you should look in the article for any given question? Are you successful at pulling information from the question itself? Time seems to be a major killer of many people's VR scores. Luckily, it's one that can definitely be improved with practice, but it highly dependent upon the above four points. You're only going to be as fast as you can think, and if your VR skills are poor, then your speed is only going to get so high.

These are the skills that are needed to do well on the VR section. The vast majority of VR strategies out there are designed to give you the maximum efficiency in using these skills, NOT TO IMPROVE THESE SKILLS.

I've seen the word "innate" being thrown around a bit in terms of VR skills, which I disagree with. I don't think that the ability to do well on VR is necessarily "innate." I do think, though, that the skills are developed in middle-high school, and your ability in grade school English is going to roughly equal your ability for the rest of your life unless you make an active, long-term attempt to improve these skills.

I personally always had a strong interest in reading and writing. I was reading at an advanced level at every age since childhood, and I won my first writing contest in second grade (obviously a school one, but the interest was there). I have never in my life scored below an A in any English class, and have always found reading and writing in difficult settings a very natural skill for me. By the time I came up for a test (AP, whatever), I didn't need to study, because the skills I needed to do well had already been ingrained after all the reading and writing I had been doing since I was a kid.

Is it possible to improve these skills? Sure. But drastic change is not going to happen in less than a month. It may not even happen in a year or more. It takes constant practice, constant exposure, and a constant increase in the difficulty of the material. It's going to take a TON of reading and writing before you see any noticeable difference. This differs from the sciences, where simply doing flash cards or working problems for a month should should a significant increase in the score.

I, at least, am not saying that I don't believe in the OP's ability to improve. But I don't believe that it will be possible to raise from a 2-5 to a 9+ even by January. It's going to take either a lot of work, or a lot of luck, and one should never go into the MCAT banking on luck.

 

[apumic]

Tin Man, I totally agree. VR scores are useful because of this fact that they are developed relatively early in one's development. They correlate closely with other measures of intelligence because they are difficult/impossible to "cram" for.

Ok, how about this - if there is so much research out there on this topic and you are so familiar with it... show me a study that shows that verbal strategies do nothing and that performance is all about innate ability. It would have to follow from the first test (diagnostic) before any studying to the end of studying, not just give a reliability coefficient across tests at the end of preparation. Obviously, everyone has a range that they finish around by the end. I'm talking about initial jumps after the diagnostic from preparation and learning about verbal. Show me that all scores start to finish are extremely close together regardless of what you know about the verbal section.

You keep missing the point here. VR will improve during prep. The thing is that while you can expect a fairly linear SCORE(StudyTime) graph for the sciences (as well as quant sections on the GRE, SAT/ACT, etc.), VR (and other verbal sections) would show a graph that is much more logarithmic. (Of course, one would expect the science sections to plateau eventually as well but not nearly as quickly as the VR section. This is largely due to the factors outlined by Tin Man.)

 

[Pons Asinorum]

First of all, if you get into medical school, I really hope you don't plan on having an attitude like this when you're dealing with patients.

And I really hope your skin grows a little thicker before your first attending on the wards starts licking it with flame.

 

[CMAA]

I think you can buy a monkey online and train it to hit around 5-6.

 

[Tin Man]

I think you can buy a monkey online and train it to hit around 5-6.

Dude, you have three posts so far, and you wasted one of them to say this? Seriously?

Lame.

 

[deleted74029]

Weird, there's a guy in my graduate program who said he got a 2 on verbal. Like someone said earlier I didn't even think this was possible.

I'd put off the MCAT for at least a year, with hard work I think anyone can score an 8 at the least. That may be ok if your science scores are high.

 

[Gara]

OP I know it's a different situation and anecdotal but I scored 4 points higher on the exam than I did on all 10 of my AAMC full length practice tests. I think practice can help but it has to be A LOT of practice. I mean daily practices along with extensive reading. I've also dealt with serious anxiety my entire life and I know once you master that you'll improve significantly.

That being said I also have to agree that the VR section is one of the hardest to improve. I only did well on it because I've spent my entire life reading and debating with others.

I agree with the poster above. Put the test off a year until you are better prepared (Kaplan will let you retake the course for free if you don't feel prepared). If you still don't make it next year you can try again or go into some other field. Medicine is a lofty goal and it requires us to put so much of our heart into it that it feels like our life will come to nothing if we fail but that's not the case. There are a million and one other ways to be a successful and happy individual who makes a difference in the lives of others. Whatever happens keep your chin up!