How to get a 35+

[625233]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I need as many tips as possible please. I opted out of taking bio 1/2 in college because of IB credits. When should I take the Princeton review? Before self study or after?


WeRunThis

 

[texan2414]

1. Be a Genius.
2. Be a Genius.
3. BE A GENIUS!!!!

 

[ProudMD]

I only got a 33 (12 PS, 10 VR, 11 BS), but I under-performed on VR and neglected organic chemistry during my preparation (missed around 5 super easy organic chemistry questions on the real thing).

I don't think you need to be a genius (or even be very smart) to score a 35+. For the sciences, you can realistically aim for a 12 if you thoroughly grasp the content and do an extensive number of practice passages. Taking all the AAMC exams under realistic conditions is also a must. As long as you are not terrible in the sciences, a 12+ in PS and BS is very doable. The PS section is the easiest section in the whole exam, and I would go further to say that most people can realistically aim for a 13 on PS.

Verbal is somewhat trickier. You can't really prepare for this section in the traditional sense, but you can, again, do an overwhelming number of practice passages. Reading rigorous material on the side can also help. Unless you struggle significantly with reading/analyzing English, a 10 in VR is absolutely doable.

So if you add up everything together, you'll see that with thorough preparation, substantial practice (passages and all AAMC full lengths), and maybe a little bit of luck, a 35 is a realistic score. I wasn't that far off, and I definitely slacked off/cut some corners during my preparation. I definitely prepared pretty adequately, but I didn't work nearly as hard as I could have.

Best of luck!

EDIT: Now, if you want to score in the upper 30s/lower 40s, then I do believe that you'll need a certain degree of innate intelligence and a fair dosage of lady's luck! But a 35 is well within the achievable range of the average premed student.

 

[ProudMD]

And if you are looking for a preparation plan/outline, feel free to browse around the MCAT sub-forum. The famous SN2ed plan covers three months of rigorous preparation using TBR materials. Even though I never used TBR, most people on here strongly recommends the material.

I mostly used the Princeton Review. I took their course, did most of their practice passages, and completed some extra practice problems/passages from other sources. I didn't do any of the TPR full-length exams and only focused on all the AAMC exams for my full-length practice. I can confidently recommend TPR's course and materials.

Just remember to give yourself ample time to prepare, and do not take the exam until you are scoring at or slightly above your target score on your practice AAMC exams. But you'll most likely be taking the new MCAT, so you should prepare accordingly for that one.

 

[dkr34]

Take the course during your self-study. Opting out of Bio 1/2 because of IB credits is a bit of a tricky situation. You want to be sure you give yourself ample time to study for this exam, especially if you hadn't taken Bio in years.

 

[ProudMD]

Take the course during your self-study. Opting out of Bio 1/2 because of IB credits is a bit of a tricky situation. You want to be sure you give yourself ample time to study for this exam, especially if you hadn't taken Bio in years.

Agreed, and we are not just talking about the MCAT. Medical schools require 2 semesters of general/intro biology (Bio 1/2), and if you use IB credits, you'll probably have to take additional upper-division biology courses in order to meet the biology prerequisites. This won't be a problem if you are a bio major or something closely related.

But when it comes to the MCAT, just develop a comprehensive plan, give yourself ample time to prepare, and do as many full-length exams under testing conditions as you possibly can. If you do all of the above and you have a solid science foundation, a 35 is absolutely a realistic goal. Good luck!

 

[Mad Jack]

1. Be a Genius.
2. Be a Genius.
3. BE A GENIUS!!!!

I'm no genius and I scored a 35. It's more about a lot of hard work, thinking logically, and test-taking ability than it is about innate intelligence.

 

[efle]

You people are all crazy if you don't think substantial intelligence is required for scoring 95th+ percentile among the demographic that takes the MCAT. It's cool that you guys are so humble and all, but its dishonest to tell someone all that's needed is a good work ethic and lots of practice to make a 35.

 

[NextStepTutor_1]

I agree with those who say that being a genius is not a requirement for scoring at +35 on the real deal. It is really all about how you practice (i.e. taking the time to find the strategy that works for you, practicing under real conditions), how well you are able to think critically (always easier said then done, but that's why studying takes months), and application (practice, practice, practice, my friend). Review every single question with the ultimate goal of making your mentality when approaching questions the same as the AAMC's.

Good luck!!

 

[benjaminl1nus]

How to score a 35 - be able to learn from mistakes as efficiently as possible. also, know everything, including yourself. A considerable amount of intelligence is required for that, for sure. The ability to learn from mistakes and adapt to future circumstances.

 

[Sartorius111]

You people are all crazy if you don't think substantial intelligence is required for scoring 95th+ percentile among the demographic that takes the MCAT. It's cool that you guys are so humble and all, but its dishonest to tell someone all that's needed is a good work ethic and lots of practice to make a 35.

I would imagine that nearly every person applying to medical school has taken multiple rigorous college courses and done at least decently well in them in order to even be considering medical school. Most of us have at least decent science GPAs (3.3+) and that means we've mastered a lot of this material in undergrad courses. The material on the MCAT is nothing new and nearly everyone taking it has already learned it at least once. I think anyone who wants to (barring legitimate mental disability) can get a 35+.

Sorry to be so blunt... but I believe if you didn't get the score you wanted, you either didn't work hard enough or you didn't work efficiently enough.

 

[ProudMD]

I would imagine that nearly every person applying to medical school has taken multiple rigorous college courses and done at least decently well in them in order to even be considering medical school. Most of us have at least decent science GPAs (3.3+) and that means we've mastered a lot of this material in undergrad courses. The material on the MCAT is nothing new and nearly everyone taking it has already learned it at least once. I think anyone who wants to (barring legitimate mental disability) can get a 35+.

Sorry to be so blunt... but I believe if you didn't get the score you wanted, you either didn't work hard enough or you didn't work efficiently enough.

Agreed. Of course we need reasonable intelligence and maybe a bit of luck. But given the following: adequate science background, thorough preparation, ample time, and plenty of practice full-lengths (all the AAMCs at a minimum), a 35 is a very realistic goal for just about everyone. It doesn't mean that many people will achieve this goal because most people can't prepare for the exam under the most ideal circumstances.

 

[efle]

I would imagine that nearly every person applying to medical school has taken multiple rigorous college courses and done at least decently well in them in order to even be considering medical school. Most of us have at least decent science GPAs (3.3+) and that means we've mastered a lot of this material in undergrad courses. The material on the MCAT is nothing new and nearly everyone taking it has already learned it at least once. I think anyone who wants to (barring legitimate mental disability) can get a 35+.

Sorry to be so blunt... but I believe if you didn't get the score you wanted, you either didn't work hard enough or you didn't work efficiently enough.

Your argument actually runs contrary to your conclusion I think. The majority of test takers scoring 80th percentile and up are very experienced with the material, hardworking, and most of them spent months preparing. What separates a 39 from a 33 isn't more time studying or study effeciency, it's ability to nail the curveball passages/questions which test your ability to understand and manipulate new information at high speeds, the very definition of fluid intelligence (especially in verbal).

 

[Sartorius111]

Your argument actually runs contrary to your conclusion I think. The majority of test takers scoring 80th percentile and up are very experienced with the material, hardworking, and most of them spent months preparing. What separates a 39 from a 33 isn't more time studying or study effeciency, it's ability to nail the curveball passages/questions which test your ability to understand and manipulate new information at high speeds, the very definition of fluid intelligence (especially in verbal).

There's a huge difference between a 35 and a 39. I do NOT think that hard work, and the like, can get anyone a 39. I DO think that it can get pretty much anyone a 35 though. So, in response to your point, you're right. What separates a 39 from a 33 isn't more time, etc. However, what separates a 35 from a 33 is time, hard work and efficiency.

 

[ProudMD]

There's a huge difference between a 35 and a 39. I do NOT think that hard work, and the like, can get anyone a 39. I DO think that it can get pretty much anyone a 35 though. So, in response to your point, you're right. What separates a 39 from a 33 isn't more time, etc. However, what separates a 35 from a 33 is time, hard work and efficiency.

Also not blowing off orgo and missing 4+ easy orgo questions on the real deal...

 

[efle]

The percentile gap between a 35 and 39 is only 4%, so not sure I agree. I think intelligence starts to matter a lot by the 80th percentile/30 mark. Think about who is taking the MCAT, do you really think scoring top 5% only takes a good study method and ethic? A hell of a lot more than 5% of takers study very intensely for a very long time and go in quite well-equipped; it is mostly reasoning ability that spreads out the top fifth or so of the curve.

 

[texan2414]

2015 score reports will attempt to solve a lot of these problems by providing confidence bands.

 

[efle]

The current test also has confidence bands, just not reported. the 70% interval is +/- 2 points

 

[justadream]

You people are all crazy if you don't think substantial intelligence is required for scoring 95th+ percentile among the demographic that takes the MCAT. It's cool that you guys are so humble and all, but its dishonest to tell someone all that's needed is a good work ethic and lots of practice to make a 35.

I agree with the premise but I disagree with the cutoff point.

I think if you really study hard, a person of average intelligence can get a 35+. I believe verbal is basically like a limiting factor in your performance that cannot really be improved. But getting a 13/10/12 breakdown is possible for most people. The MCAT science sections do not test intense critical thinking. If you know the concepts well (AAMC tests the concepts in unfamiliar settings but the principles are relatively basic), you can score 12/13 or better.

I think at upper 30s and 40 is where innate intelligence starts to become limiting - mostly because you basically need a good verbal score at this point.

 

[efle]

The demographic taking the MCAT has already been hugely selective for for intelligent people, and getting in the top 5% of that group requires you to be well above average intelligence. A 13/10/12 is 97th/85th/95th percentiles, you do not get there just by practicing and memorizing a lot. The MCAT sciences absolutely test critical thinking, very few of the questions are purely knowledge based and they are answered correctly by most test takers. You people spend too much time on SDN if you think anybody with a good work ethic can get above 30, let alone a 35+.

Average intelligence is all you need for a 97/95th percentile science performance against all people who survived weed out...what even is this thread...

 

[ProudMD]

The demographic taking the MCAT has already been hugely selective for for intelligent people, and getting in the top 5% of that group requires you to be well above average intelligence. A 13/10/12 is 97th/85th/95th percentiles, you do not get there just by practicing and memorizing a lot. The MCAT sciences absolutely test critical thinking, very few of the questions are purely knowledge based and they are answered correctly by most test takers. You people spend too much time on SDN if you think anybody with a good work ethic can get above 30, let alone a 35+.

Average intelligence is all you need for a 97/95th percentile science performance against all people who survived weed out...what even is this thread...

I think we disagree on our definition of "intelligent". Many/most people who take the MCAT are horribly unprepared (hence the average score of 25), and anyone with a solid background in the basic sciences (which does not really require intelligence) and thorough preparation (both quality and quantity) can realistically aim for a 35.

However, given a variety of factors such as lack of preparation being the most notable, few people actually score around a 35.

But I absolutely think that average intelligence is all that's needed for a mid-30 score.

 

[musicalfeet]

I agree with the premise but I disagree with the cutoff point.

I think if you really study hard, a person of average intelligence can get a 35+. I believe verbal is basically like a limiting factor in your performance that cannot really be improved. But getting a 13/10/12 breakdown is possible for most people. The MCAT science sections do not test intense critical thinking. If you know the concepts well (AAMC tests the concepts in unfamiliar settings but the principles are relatively basic), you can score 12/13 or better.

I think at upper 30s and 40 is where innate intelligence starts to become limiting - mostly because you basically need a good verbal score at this point.

Haha 13/10/12 was the exact breakdown I was aiming for in my first take! I was...pretty far off on the BS section 🙁. Of course, I think 13/10/12 is definitely possible if said test-taker had a strong background in the sciences. For example, now that I'm taking physiology AFTER I'd taken the MCAT for the first time, I kind of kick myself for not taking it earlier because one passage that destroyed a lot of people on my date was ON ONE OF MY LECTURES! I was like " OMG at least I wouldn't have been so shocked and freaked out by it if I was somewhat familiar with it".

[Edit: to further proudMD's point, I am definitely not that intelligent nor do I have a SUPER SCIENCE background, but managed to scrape a score in the low 30's. Even though theoretically you only need the intro classes to do well on the MCAT, I really think the extra Bio upperdivs I'm taking this semester is going to help on my BS section. Plus we're required to read scientific journals in class, so at least I'll be familiar with that, whereas the intro classes don't really require journal reading.]

 

[Gauss44]

There are many recipes for getting a 35+. Some work better for some people than others. Check the sticky for people who got a 30+ and then focus on the replies from people who say they got 35+. This way you can find a method that works for you.

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/30-mcat-study-habits-the-cbt-version.503250/

 

[ProudMD]

There are many recipes for getting a 35+. Some work better for some people than others. Check the sticky for people who got a 30+ and then focus on the replies from people who say they got 35+. This way you can find a method that works for you.

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/30-mcat-study-habits-the-cbt-version.503250/

I see what you did there