- Joined
- May 24, 2013
- Messages
- 11
- Reaction score
- 3
4/27/2013 MCAT. Scored a 40.
SCIENCE TAKEAWAYS
VERBAL TAKEAWAYS
SCIENCE TAKEAWAYS
- "Rather than reading the graph, first anticipate by thinking \"What is the relationship?\" Then find the graph that depicts that relationship."
- work backward from ACs
- "To assess if linear, rearrange equation in the form y= mx + b with y-axis as y, x-axis as x."
- Make sure you select the AC that says what you mean it to say.
- really dissect the Q. what is it asking for? what is it telling you? mind the little words.
- use units to guide math
- do not lose track of the big picture
- understand the main point of any experiment
- understand the general experimental procedure
- understand what the graph is saying. read the fine print. interpret the data carefully. (the test makers will try to trick you on this!)
- "rather than + or - differences, consider ranges and averages when analyzing table data"
- support often comes in the form of a missing link (rather than alternative explanation)
- correct AC must be responsive to the Q
- look to tables and other resources before number crunching
- "to snapshot graph, consider fixed vertical or horizontal line (i.e. hold one axis value constant while tracing through values on the other axis)"
- "do not simply snapshot graphs, trace effects moving along both axes"
- sketch out the math
- translate the question into your own words. what is the question asking you to do with the information in the passage? don't be afraid to retranslated until you find the most intuitive iteration.
- answer the question in your own words. articulate what the correct answer will need to do based on the question.
- read each question as if you have never seen it before. focus on each word rather than taking it in as a chunk.
- consider the initial and final states of the rxn (the pathway itself is often less clear).
- read and evaluate each answer choice fully. word for word.
- keep it simple. don't overlook the obvious.
- be able to step back from the math and consider conceptually
- "don't automatically settle for your hunch. do the work to verify it, especially when you have reason to doubt."
- "remember to consider stoichiometry. always ask \"how many?\""
- consider: how are the ACs different? how are they the same?
- "use your own analysis. don't lean on the passage for unnecessary support. However, use all available information (per passage)."
- use all available information
- intuition is often aided by drawing a diagram
- basic thoughtful deliberate algebra is your friend
- "ask \"how?/why?\" until you get to the bottom of it"
- helpful to map out simplified pathways and diagrams to get at the crux of the question
- get at the crux of the question
- SIMPLIFY SIMPLIFY SIMPLIFY
- "use common sense to eliminate ACs, then move on to mathematics"
- thinking > memory
- "solve using inequalities, ranges, and landmarks"
- ½a = b is the same as a = 2b. the latter version is often easier to evaluate.
- keep your head on a swivel
- start by establishing desired units
- assume a 100g sample for easy math
- use simple fractions ½ or ⅓ etc. as landmarks
- "check your answers, but do not change them without a compelling reason"
- "if you're unhappy with an AC, think harder and think differently, consider an alternative approach"
- simplify by considering initial and final states
- simplify by separating into vector components
- scan ACs first for formatting
- "note the units or scale of graphs. when comparing graphs, these may not be equivalent."
- "for physics all units must be SI (m, kg, s)"
- "On each question, ask yourself if it is based on Experiment 1 or on Experiment 2. This will help greatly on passages with multiple experiments."
- "delineate criteria for correct AC, particularly if convoluted, complex, or unclear"
really read the question - "changing your angle of attack can clarify the problem. ex. \"what happens if the reverse path is considered?\""
- don't get suckered into thinking the eqn. given is the only eqn. to consider
- do the easy math! (not all math is a time suck!)
- "do not need to avoid extreme sounding ACs in science passages (that's a verbal strategy.) Hwvr, one exception disproves an extreme statement. "
- "if none of the ACs are attractive, revisit the Q: what exactly is it saying?"
- sometimes it helps to spell out your train of thought
- always use your physical intuition first
- understand the passage
- "for physics especially, really try to visualize what's going on"
- you don't always need to know the background information to get the correct AC. it's a reasoning test.
- trending: look at three table values
- "That a passage does not mention something is not sufficient grounds for its elimination (i.e. lack of evidence is not evidence of lack.) Hwvr, the best AC will be correct BASED ON THE PASSAGE"
- the best AC will be correct BASED ON THE PASSAGE
- "use ratio method to compare. all other variables and constants fall out of the eqn. Can set \"proportional to\" (⍺
\"equal to\" (=)." - "be mindful of x \"times\" and % \"percent increase\""
- "write out the cardinal rules and relationships for a passage up front (ex. kinematics or enthalpy equations, moles, etc.)"
- use the tables and charts given to answer questions. do the work to establish trends using inequality signs. this is particularly important if the AC is not apparent from prior knowledge.
- use table values for similar species to approximate
- be methodical
- "for stoichiometry, lay it all out. look for errors and math shortcuts "
- be mindfully conservative in your inference
- "keep it simple. if there's an easier route to the correct AC (more direct, closer to the question asked, fewer hoops, or given plainly in a table or graph), use that way."
- don't create work for yourself.
- "often best to look at the ACs for formatting, do the math setup independently, and then return to the ACs"
- "beware verbatim, seek context"
- visualization is key
- read word for word like you know they're trying to trick you
- understand what's happening
- ensure that multi-clause ACs make sense together
- "don't lose track of your train of thought, always return to the Q to be sure your answer is responsive"
- common slippage invites trickery
- make sure units are correct
- "for graph, where plot intersects x and y axes may be most telling"
- sometimes a tricky Q just needs fresh eyes
- the littlest words make the biggest difference
- get at the crux of the question. what's it really asking?
- don't lose lazy points. do the work.
- you have time to do the smart math. sketch out the relationships.
- interrogate passage if Q unyielding
- control your confidence. thinking > knowing.
- passage mapping. know what is given where.
- what can you do with what you've got?
- adduce eqn. to guide thinking
- "be careful on every Q, no matter how easy it seems. think about your thinking."
- one misfit component is enough to eliminate an AC
- what are the necessary assumptions of the experiment? what are its variables? what are its controls?
- don't read so quickly through the experiments passages that you don't retain anything.
- search for breakthrough understanding
- clean up your scratch work (Q# and clear math or diagramming)
- have a good answer for every Q in the passage before continuing on. minimize toggling.
- mind the littlest words
- be methodical. lay it all out.
- consider units carefully.
- control the white flash. breathe. relax. be methodical. move.
- anticipate the relationship
- focus on key words to establish meaning
- "for unit conversions, lay it all out. exponent units affect conversion!"
- "identify exceptions (ask, \"why might this not necessarily be the case.\")"
- trust yourself
VERBAL TAKEAWAYS
- Goldilocks specificity. more specific is better than less specific as long as it remains within the scope of the passage.
- Scope
- Reference frame
- Order of causality
- AC must be responsive to Q
- Simplify the Q and ACs in light of the MP
- Do not read more into the Q than is actually there
- Imagine author's POV/MP on all Qs
- Embrace softeners. Avoid extremes.
- Read flanking clauses when referring back (for context)
- "For analogies, clearly spell out the relationship."
- Use the main point to set your scope. What does the test maker think is the right answer in light of the main point?
- meaning = definition + connotation
- "\"comparison\" = \"alike\""
- Be wary of vagueness.
- Think about why someone says something. What is the motivation behind the utterance?
- Breakdown criteria for correct AC.
- Do not equate.
- alternative explanation > head-to-head
- Time frame
- No outside information.
- Consider the implications (not just the meaning) of each AC prior to eliminating. Read and EVALUATE all ACs.
- "Role (ex. \"supporting an idea\" ≠ \"elaborating upon it.\" serve different roles.)"
- "If you are unhappy about choosing a certain AC, there's probably a reason."
- parse to simplify
- "you are looking for the \"best\" answer"
- read in caricature
- do not over infer. do not supply your own meaning. stick to a close reading of the passage. no logical leaps.
- translate the question into your own words. what is the question asking you to do with the information in the passage?
- answer the question in your own words. articulate what the correct answer will need to do based on the question.
- read each question as if you have never seen it before. focus on each word rather than taking it in as a chunk.
- "even when Q refers you to a paragraph, you're better off answering based on your understanding rather than referring back. referring back skews context and weight."
- read and evaluate each answer choice fully. word for word.
- keep it simple. don't overlook the obvious.
- "a la LSAT, pay close attention to the strength of statements (ex. \"would\" vs. \"might\")."
- "don't get suckered into thinking a passage is easy, the difficulties may be subtle. (booby traps!)"
- "organize, but don't compartmentalize"
- "don't read through names. typical trickery is to give foreign sounding names and expect you won't differentiate. be clear on the \"who\" of any passage as you're reading."
- "correct AC in the setting of the MP (of the passage, of the paragraph)"
- keep track of where things are in the passage
- keep to a close reading of the passage. be conservative in your inference.
- evaluate as premises and conclusion (strengthen/weaken premises to strengthen/weaken conclusion) as well as incidental clauses (which do not directly affect strength of argument)
- "note the source of support for a statement (authority, example, accepted theory, etc.)"
- "keep track of the \"when\" of things"
- invoke the author's reasoning
- order of precedence
- gestalt > verbatim
- sometimes a tricky Q just needs fresh eyes
- "conservative (specific, well supported) inference"
- get at the crux of the question. what's it really asking?
- "when referring back, be sure to evaluate in terms of gestalt"
- what are the author's priorities?
- "when you refer back, read closely"
- correct AC must fit Q flawlessly. one wrong word is grounds for dismissal. (and one right word is not enough for a correct AC.)
- "identify exceptions (ask, \"why might this not necessarily be the case.\")"
- climb into the passage. (you have to read it differently than science passages.)
Last edited:
