Is AAMC III a poor indicator?

[ancientmd]

I just took this and thought the verbal was different and the sciences were easier.... Anyone else think the verbal was somewhat hard/ambigous?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[misscalipig]

i found aamc 3 verbal is be easier than aamc 5 and 6, and the science to be a bit harder.

anyone else have any opinions?

 

[rCubed]

i thought as a whole, number III was harder, i went down six points total from AAMC V to AAMC III. the verbal wasn't that bad, but i think the science was a little nit-picky

 

[limit]

Subtract 6 points from your AAMC III score and that should give you a rough gauge as to how well you should perform on test day, assuming luck goes your way.

 

[limit]

Kidding

Relax folks, think of it this way. If you go over the solution to every problem, you have the same starting knowledge base with regards to the aamc problems as anyone else (assuming you score isn't outrageously low). It's all about learning... Athletes don't set world records during training, they save that for test (ie, race) day.

 

[rCubed]

Originally posted by limit
Subtract 6 points from your AAMC III score and that should give you a rough gauge as to how well you should perform on test day, assuming luck goes your way.

lol, i read that and i was like

 

[misscalipig]

heehee =D that was funny...

seriously though, verbal was easier, i think verbal is the one that fluctuates the most, at least for me, because if i get interesting passages, i do well, if not, i can barely finish...

 

[Jamier2]

My real score was one point higher than my AAMC III test.

 

[limit]

Originally posted by Jamier2
My real score was one point higher than my AAMC III test.

Thems fightin' words.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

Originally posted by Jamier2
My real score was one point higher than my AAMC III test.

Mine was one point lower.