Is it just me or does EK Bio seem too vague?

[FollowTheMoney]

---

Members do not see this ad.

It seems like they do cover all the topics. However, i don't know if you would constitute "quality content review" by mentioning 1 sentence about a major topic and then talking about something else. I swear this book seems to be a "summary" or something and not a true bio content review. Anyone else agree?

 

[ElliottB]

I've found it to be fairly comprehensive. You don't have to be a master of all things bio, just know how and why certain things work. If you need to know anything in super detail, they'll probably give it to you in a passage.

 

[mynamehere]

maybe it's just you 🙂 they do a good job explaining the concepts to help you understand all the bio

 

[Cumberland_Doc]

The thing I hate the most about EK is their Phys/GChem/Ochem questions. While I also have the TBR series to study these subjects, I also read the EK chapters and do the questions as an added practice. However, there are many times that the EK lecture test will ask questions about concepts that weren't even covered in the actual content review. For example, today I took EK Ochem Lecture1 test and there was a question regarding optical isomers. There were a couple I missed due to the Hydrogen being located in a "high priority" location, which causes the absolute configuration to flip. When I read over this, I remembered this little detail from undergraduate Ochem class, but I found it problematic that the content review did not find it important enough to even mention it.

As far as biology is concerned, I find that it is extremely straightforward and comprehensive. Many times, I have used it as a supplement to college courses such as Physiology and Genetics. It's a great little book!

 

[IndianVercetti]

Legitboss, you and I might be the only ones who agree on this lol

I also felt examkraker bio was kind of brief in coverage of certain topics, so im using berkeley bio this time around.

 

[B lanco]

EK is a review book.

Review books were never meant to be primary sources.

 

[Pisiform]

TPRH - Biological Sciences (Biology) is the WAY to go.

I LOVE it 😍

EK is good if you are not aiming for a HIGH score

 

[Maneuver]

EK is good if you are not aiming for a HIGH score

[YOUTUBE]Z4IqMcbJS78[/YOUTUBE]

If you're too lazy to watch the video she got a 40 using EK

 

[Pisiform]

[YOUTUBE]Z4IqMcbJS78[/YOUTUBE]

If you're too lazy to watch the video she got a 40 using EK

I don't trust Asians --- she is probably misleading --- OR --- troll ---- OR ----- have a strong science background (mean did really well in undergrad sciences), just needed a review 😎

 

[FollowTheMoney]

[YOUTUBE]Z4IqMcbJS78[/YOUTUBE]

If you're too lazy to watch the video she got a 40 using EK

Everyone needs a different study regiment in order to do well on the MCAT. This girl gives off the vibe that she was definitely the type of person that read her textbooks front to back, sat in the front, and learned everything like she was planning to teach the class. Not to mention, she bought the books 2 years in advance. Granted, I should've learned the material correctly the first time, but EK is for people that don't really need to study and just need more of a summary. I know plenty of smart people that only used EK and did not do well. Don't mislead people...if you want to do well on the MCAT and you are not a supernerd/inhuman genius I would say BR is the way to go honestly. I also have been supplementing EK Bio with TPRH Bio and it has worked well.

 

[LetsGo352]

Isn't BR Bio too dense though?

 

[FollowTheMoney]

Isn't BR Bio too dense though?

Yes, BR Bio is too dense but for some people it works. I personally found TPRH Bio to be a much better detail oriented approach to Biology. They explain concepts really well and I would recommend it to anyone who wants "more" than EK Bio. EK Bio is perfect for a biology major who has taken many upper division biology classes and "knows" the material already. It is not for someone trying to "learn" the material again. Honestly, I feel I am a smart human being, but EK Bio just didn't leave me satisfied.

 

[Rayhaan]

I disagree with people that say BR bio is too detailed. Maybe its just me but it isn't like I am memorizing anything at all. Almost all of the stuff has been covered by in my first and second year classes. So I don't really see the difference in reading 25 pages per chapter vs reading 45 pages per chapter. For me that wasn't a big deal.

 

[LetsGo352]

Yes, BR Bio is too dense but for some people it works. I personally found TPRH Bio to be a much better detail oriented approach to Biology. They explain concepts really well and I would recommend it to anyone who wants "more" than EK Bio. EK Bio is perfect for a biology major who has taken many upper division biology classes and "knows" the material already. It is not for someone trying to "learn" the material again. Honestly, I feel I am a smart human being, but EK Bio just didn't leave me satisfied.

Yeah, it seems like TPR is a good balance for Bio, but it's just impossible to find that book unless your in the class or know somebody with it. Has anyone had experience with their "Cracking the MCAT" book that has the content from all 3 sections? Anybody think the Bio in Hyperlearning would be similar to the Bio in that book?

 

[LetsGo352]

Is the TPRH Bio in between EK and BR in terms of detail? And who else found this book to be helpful?

 

[Silverfalcon]

I'm close to finishing Lesson 1 of EK Bio book. It's comprehensive for sure, but I agree with others that there are times that EK book isn't very clear. Maybe it's because I didn't learn some of the things that they talked about (saturation kinetics for enzymes for example), but also, this book seems to expect the students to have mastered and understood biology pretty well.

I'm planning to go through this book pretty fast and use other prep books for more thorough review and preparations. I view EK as either 1) quick review books for people who do not have time to do thorough reviews on essentially everything and more and 2) condensed review for people who remember the materials relatively freshly or are just very strong at those topics.

That's just how I view EK in general.

 

[TriagePreMed]

I'm close to finishing Lesson 1 of EK Bio book. It's comprehensive for sure, but I agree with others that there are times that EK book isn't very clear. Maybe it's because I didn't learn some of the things that they talked about (saturation kinetics for enzymes for example), but also, this book seems to expect the students to have mastered and understood biology pretty well.

I'm planning to go through this book pretty fast and use other prep books for more thorough review and preparations. I view EK as either 1) quick review books for people who do not have time to do thorough reviews on essentially everything and more and 2) condensed review for people who remember the materials relatively freshly or are just very strong at those topics.

That's just how I view EK in general.

The first lecture of EK bio is bull****. When I read it, I was thinking "holy ****, what is this?" but every lecture after is very reasonable. I'm still having problem with lecture 1 and is the only one where I scored an 8 from the practice tests. The others are 10-12 first time around.

 

[LostInStudy]

Yes, it's about time TPRH gets recognized. For me, content wise, TPRH + EK is the way to go.

-LIS

 

[UMICHPremed]

Everyone who has taken the Mcat says the bio portion of the exam is becoming more and more passage based. Thus, memorizing details from BR or TPRH may not be the most efficient way to prep for the bio section.

I am solely using EK for content, and I am scoring 14-12 on AAMC bio sections. You will be fine if learn the content in whatever book. As long as you understand why things work and not just knowing the fact that it works.

 

[FollowTheMoney]

Everyone who has taken the Mcat says the bio portion of the exam is becoming more and more passage based. Thus, memorizing details from BR or TPRH may not be the most efficient way to prep for the bio section.

I am solely using EK for content, and I am scoring 14-12 on AAMC bio sections. You will be fine if learn the content in whatever book. As long as you understand why things work and not just knowing the fact that it works.

Although you indicated that you are only using EK Bio, I'm sure you would agree with me in saying that you probably have a solid foundation in biology in regard to the details, concepts, etc. from your biology classes, right? If so, then your situation would make perfect sense because EK Bio highlights what you need to know and the rest of the missing details that connect everything together are all in your brain. However, in order for most of us who either crammed, slacked off, etc. to know why things work we are going to need another source. EK Bio does not tell you why things work, it tells you blatantly what you need to know without much depth. It's like when your professor posts a study guide of all the vocabulary terms to be covered on the next test and you go home and look each one up in the dictionary and it gives you one sentence about it. For many who probably read their textbook chapter, that may be sufficient. For everyone who didn't, it is not.

 

[UMICHPremed]

Based on your response, its safe to say I got by the same way in college. I never attended lecture, but instead crammed from the book intensely a few days before the exam.

I actually have the BR Bio book. I tried to study from that but realized that I really don't have enough time to go through that book. I took an AAMC FL and found out that it really is a reasoning test. It requires fundamental understanding, but doesn't really test depth of knowledge so I decided to borrow the EK book from a friend.

 

[aidama]

Everyone who has taken the Mcat says the bio portion of the exam is becoming more and more passage based. Thus, memorizing details from BR or TPRH may not be the most efficient way to prep for the bio section.

I am solely using EK for content, and I am scoring 14-12 on AAMC bio sections. You will be fine if learn the content in whatever book. As long as you understand why things work and not just knowing the fact that it works.

I got an 11 BS using Exam Krackers. It provides significantly less details than does TPR. IMO, EK organizes Biology in a fashion that helps you understand the topics in ways that are more applicable to reading and critically analyzing a passage.

There ends my EK plug. I think it's useless for Physics/Chemistry, but the OP didn't ask about that

 

[UMICHPremed]

I got an 11 BS using Exam Krackers. It provides significantly less details than does TPR. IMO, EK organizes Biology in a fashion that helps you understand the topics in ways that are more applicable to reading and critically analyzing a passage.

There ends my EK plug. I think it's useless for Physics/Chemistry, but the OP didn't ask about that

Do you think that you would have done better on the bio had you used TPR and known more details?

 

[Silverfalcon]

I cannot say whether I agree everything that the person in the video said... I feel like a luck was a huge factor for her (I mean, it is for anyone who score that high but especially in this case). Just the way I see it..

 

[TriagePreMed]

I cannot say whether I agree everything that the person in the video said... I feel like a luck was a huge factor for her (I mean, it is for anyone who score that high but especially in this case). Just the way I see it..

You can't get yourself "lucky" to a 40. Even if you want to knock down 10 full points from her "luck" you still get a good MCAT score. Aren't you the same guy who said the guy with a 41 was a fluke? Sounds like you're setting yourself up for failure because you will say "it was bad luck" when you don't get a 40.

 

[Silverfalcon]

You can't get yourself "lucky" to a 40. Even if you want to knock down 10 full points from her "luck" you still get a good MCAT score. Aren't you the same guy who said the guy with a 41 was a fluke? Sounds like you're setting yourself up for failure because you will say "it was bad luck" when you don't get a 40.

First of all, I never commented such comment before. You can go through my posts - there was no such thing and I have no idea what you are talking about.

Secondly, before you go onto absurd generalization, let me clarify what I said because this was something I read from SDN by multiple posters. The term "luck" I used for 40 was not to go from 30 to 40. Instead, it referred to going from say, 36-37 as practices in MCAT averages to scoring 40 on the actual test. Scoring higher than practices does not happen regularly - not just for MCAT but for many other standardized tests as well - but luck does play an important factor for students if such event happens. I'm not just coming up with this assertion - it's something shared by many other members of SDN, so go search for them if you don't believe myself.

 

[saveourpens]

No doubt about it in my mind, I use the EK bio basically as a guide for my bio textbook.

 

[NickNaylor]

OP, EK books are designed with that purpose in mind. They aren't meant to explain every little detail. To effectively use EK books, you're expected to have at least a basic level of knowledge of the material (and more realistically, a fairly strong grasp of the material). If you don't know anything, I imagine the EK books would be difficult to use. They are meant to remind you of concepts and details, not teach you everything.

 

[UMICHPremed]

I think in terms of content, the EK book has all the information necessary for scoring a 15. Whether you score a 15 or not depends on your reasoning abilities.

From taking AAMC exams, I miss questions on the bio section mostly because of mental lapse and incorrect reasoning. I have not run into anything that is not covered in the EK book.

 

[NickNaylor]

I think in terms of content, the EK book has all the information necessary for scoring a 15. Whether you score a 15 or not depends on your reasoning abilities.

From taking AAMC exams, I miss questions on the bio section mostly because of mental lapse and incorrect reasoning. I have not run into anything that is not covered in the EK book.

Agree with this completely. I used the EK books exclusively and thought they did a great job with preparation.

 

[Maneuver]

I think in terms of content, the EK book has all the information necessary for scoring a 15. Whether you score a 15 or not depends on your reasoning abilities.

Couldn't agree more. This is true of the exam itself.

 

[MLT2MT2DO]

People that were not that strong in Bio have reported back with 13+ scores in bio using ONLY the EK bio book as their review book.

Myself, I seem to be floating around the ~10ish range only using this book but questions I'm missing on practice tests have always been in the Lecture book when I've went back to it to review my missed questions. I just happened to gloss over it.

For EK bio I think everything is there it just doesn't hammer the concept into your brain until your ears start bleeding like TBR PS books do (I find what TBR does is actually a good thing, despite my metaphor).