It seems like doing lots of practice passages and reviewing them is more important than just studying content. Is this true?
Is the key to doing well on the MCAT doing lots of practice passages?
- Thread starter leagall
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2008
- Messages
- 1,659
- Reaction score
- 170
I think it is extremely beneficial to do a lot of practice passages. If you take AAMC practice tests 3-10, you will have completed 56 passages (416 questions in PS/BS, 320 in VR) in each section. If you go over all of the answer explanations, that is a lot of content review. It is important to have a basic understanding of all of the concepts as well.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2010
- Messages
- 231
- Reaction score
- 0
Its my opinion that if you have taken the basic science courses recently, you probaby don't need spend 75% of your time doing content review. I would recommend reviewing your weak areas first (for example, if you didn't do well in gen chem) and then get started on practice tests. Then go back and review what you got wrong on the tests. Make sure to really study topics that you consistently get wrong.
All of what I've said is for somebody who has taken the courses recently and probably doesn't get a 15 (total) on their first practice test. If you feel like you don't know anything after taking your first "diagnostic" exam, then maybe a full content review is in order.
I spent the first several weeks of studying doing content review, and it did not increase my practice scores. Only doing the exams (and reviewing them) has helped to increase my score. If you can get your hands on 15-20 practice tests, then "wasting" one or two in the beginning to see where you stand isn't a big deal. And after taking all of them, you will be much more confident when you sit for the actual exam. Confidence, completely independent of knowledge, has a significant impact on your score. In the end, do whatever you need to do to feel confident on test day.
All of what I've said is for somebody who has taken the courses recently and probably doesn't get a 15 (total) on their first practice test. If you feel like you don't know anything after taking your first "diagnostic" exam, then maybe a full content review is in order.
I spent the first several weeks of studying doing content review, and it did not increase my practice scores. Only doing the exams (and reviewing them) has helped to increase my score. If you can get your hands on 15-20 practice tests, then "wasting" one or two in the beginning to see where you stand isn't a big deal. And after taking all of them, you will be much more confident when you sit for the actual exam. Confidence, completely independent of knowledge, has a significant impact on your score. In the end, do whatever you need to do to feel confident on test day.
Kehlsh is correct with a caveat. Be careful to go over IN DEPTH content review like Berkeley Review would have you do. I read all 8 chapters of their ochem, what a waste. Thinking back, reading all the chemistry was productive and counter productive. Some (maybe most) prep companies put way too much emphasis on what you need to know,in the end you need to use basic science concepts and not super complicated stuff.
For example, BR had a whole section on equilibrium having me do I.C.E. problems (initial / change / equilibrium), with calculations that almost required the quadratic formula, complex math, etc. I basically lost this skill because after doing all 7 BR FLs and the AAMC ones, there was not a single equilibrium question. That's 15 PS sections with not one question that started off with "You have ____ moles of X and ___ moles of Y, what will be the equilibrium concentrations if K = __." To spend hours on those problem with no pay off is frustrating.
In the end I would tell people this.
#1 Do a simple content review: Go buy a big kaplan book or princeton review single book at the store, this is plenty for content
#2 Either get EK1001 passages or BR passages (again BR goes overboard on being hard) or even TPR hyperlearning passages
#3 Move to lots of FL's... you may even want to do a smaller amount on #2 (like EK1001's and not BR), followed by taking as many FL's as possible.
Why I think this is better strategy that what you see advised on SDN so often?
For example, BR had a whole section on equilibrium having me do I.C.E. problems (initial / change / equilibrium), with calculations that almost required the quadratic formula, complex math, etc. I basically lost this skill because after doing all 7 BR FLs and the AAMC ones, there was not a single equilibrium question. That's 15 PS sections with not one question that started off with "You have ____ moles of X and ___ moles of Y, what will be the equilibrium concentrations if K = __." To spend hours on those problem with no pay off is frustrating.
In the end I would tell people this.
#1 Do a simple content review: Go buy a big kaplan book or princeton review single book at the store, this is plenty for content
#2 Either get EK1001 passages or BR passages (again BR goes overboard on being hard) or even TPR hyperlearning passages
#3 Move to lots of FL's... you may even want to do a smaller amount on #2 (like EK1001's and not BR), followed by taking as many FL's as possible.
Why I think this is better strategy that what you see advised on SDN so often?
- you don't over emphasize content, you just do enough
- you can correct content weaknesses online now (feel like you don't understand a section very well and are performing poorly consistenly on FL's? Go to www.khanacademy.org or course saver dot com or wikimcat.org?? or something and learn that specific topic in more depth). This is huge because it saves you time, and by doing mostly FL's you will be working on the right difficulty and the more frequently tested topics...
- Good example - Carbon 13 NMR was tested over and over again in Berkeley review ochem, and as a prep student you try to learn this stuff. ABSOLUTE WASTE OF TIME. The depth of NMR on the MCAT is, "how many signals show up?" Not shifts, not anything but simple questions. Why learn all this unnecessary mumbo jumbo?
👍
exactly. SN2's plan is good but I think someone needs to tip people off to stop reading all this unnecessary junk. Also, anyone can get 20 practice tests.
Gold Standard: 10
Kaplan book: gives 4?
TPR book: gives 4?
AAMC: 8
BR: 7
That's 30+ tests right there.
D
deleted202457
Thanks a lot for your advice everyone---especially MCATGuy. I took a diagnostic and was fine with Bio and Verbal but I am very weak in Physical Sciences. Can anyone recommend me additional books/practice material?
I just used AAMC and BR FLs. Which is 15 total. But I did a lot of passage by BR, some very good, some way too hard.
This is why I would rather people just buy EK1001 and the big kaplan or TPR book.
Then do 20 FL's without even looking at your scores, just take excellent notes. Got a 15 on one? who cares. Got a 35 on one? who cares. Just take those 10-20 FLs to get you up to speed while using EK1001. Then move onto the final stage of AAMC FLs.
This will take you less time than going through all those BR books and the material will be focused on what you are actually tested on (as opposed to stuff much harder and much more random, which is prep companies trying to cover EVERYTHING)
EXTRA PS Practice: Physics, Nova, BR or EK1001. Gen Chem EK1001 or BR.
BR will go pretty heavy. I would rather do EK1001 and then tons of FLs and then if there were weaknesses, correct them on the internet.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2007
- Messages
- 7,545
- Reaction score
- 196
About BR, it does go into some unnecessary depth, however, it's great for people that need a little bit more to get the rust off their pre-req gears. If someone is still strong in their pre-reqs, then BR can be seen as a waste of time. In these cases, EK is the better choice because it provides you with only what you need to know. Unfortunately, too many people think they are strong in their pre-reqs when they are not.
That's why the safer bet is to stick with BR (or TPRH if you have it). Even if you're strong in your pre-reqs, it doesn't hurt to go above and beyond what you might need for the test. True, BR chapters are longer, but if you plan accordingly, you should be able to easily do one chapter a day. If you can't, then you're most likely weak in that area and you need something like BR to help you.
Now about why my schedule doesn't include tons of FLs, one of the primary reasons is cost. Adding FLs would significantly raise the cost of my schedule. I could add GS FLs which are around $100 for 10, unfortunately, that's still quite a bit of money and recent test takers have said they aren't that helpful. Plus, they aren't good in verbal which kind of negates the FL feel.
One could argue that if I took out BR and replaced it with EK, that would bring down the cost. However, as I mentioned above, BR is the safer bet AND it includes tons of practice passages. When compared to the AAMC FLs, BR offers more practice passages per dollar.
8 AAMC 168 Passages for $280 = 0.6 Passages per $
4 BR books ~472 Passages for $240 = 1.97 Passages per $
10 GS FLs 210 Passages (this includes verbal which is pretty bad in GS FLs) for ~$100 = 2.1 Passages per $
10 GS FLs if you exclude their verbal 140 Passages for $100 = 1.4 Passages per $
Another benefit of taking practice passages is that you'll get the full range of possible topics. With FLs, you will inevitably miss certain topics and/or go over some topics more than others. Now that sounds pretty good at first glance. It seems like you'll get used to topics tested more often. Unfortunately, you can't predict what you'll see on test day. You may get those topics you saw in the FLs, you may not. It's better to take practice passages from all topics, identify any weaknesses, even if they don't show up often on FLs, and eliminate those weaknesses.
Well I hope that long winded explanation explained why I chose BR over other books and including more FLs.
That's why the safer bet is to stick with BR (or TPRH if you have it). Even if you're strong in your pre-reqs, it doesn't hurt to go above and beyond what you might need for the test. True, BR chapters are longer, but if you plan accordingly, you should be able to easily do one chapter a day. If you can't, then you're most likely weak in that area and you need something like BR to help you.
Now about why my schedule doesn't include tons of FLs, one of the primary reasons is cost. Adding FLs would significantly raise the cost of my schedule. I could add GS FLs which are around $100 for 10, unfortunately, that's still quite a bit of money and recent test takers have said they aren't that helpful. Plus, they aren't good in verbal which kind of negates the FL feel.
One could argue that if I took out BR and replaced it with EK, that would bring down the cost. However, as I mentioned above, BR is the safer bet AND it includes tons of practice passages. When compared to the AAMC FLs, BR offers more practice passages per dollar.
8 AAMC 168 Passages for $280 = 0.6 Passages per $
4 BR books ~472 Passages for $240 = 1.97 Passages per $
10 GS FLs 210 Passages (this includes verbal which is pretty bad in GS FLs) for ~$100 = 2.1 Passages per $
10 GS FLs if you exclude their verbal 140 Passages for $100 = 1.4 Passages per $
Another benefit of taking practice passages is that you'll get the full range of possible topics. With FLs, you will inevitably miss certain topics and/or go over some topics more than others. Now that sounds pretty good at first glance. It seems like you'll get used to topics tested more often. Unfortunately, you can't predict what you'll see on test day. You may get those topics you saw in the FLs, you may not. It's better to take practice passages from all topics, identify any weaknesses, even if they don't show up often on FLs, and eliminate those weaknesses.
Well I hope that long winded explanation explained why I chose BR over other books and including more FLs.
You are obviously the pro, not me. But I think I have a different philosophy here on the prep.
The 472 passages of BR are IMO, too hard sometimes and go into too much depth. I could give numerous examples.
The thing you say about FL's not being able to cover everything is very possilbe but I think this disadvantage would be easily mitigated by the # of FL's. Having taken 30 FL's, it is unlikely you will run into something you haven't seen on test day (I just don't think you will miss any pertinent content if you do EK1001 + 30-35 FL's, the MCAT isn't about stumping you on recollection of random content facts).
Ask anyone who has taken the MCAT recently, RARELY do you miss questions because of content (<20% of total errors) IF you have done decent content review, and those are easily repaired after 10-15 FLs.
10 FL contain ~ 140 BS and PS passages but they are more focused on MCAT level stuff. I ended up doing so many BR Ochem passages and I feel like that's time wasted. Reading a chapter is 2-4 hrs and then ~100 passages at 20 min a passage (review and taking) is 30 hrs, that is ~50 hours on something that got 1 passage worth of play on test day.
The ochem on the test isn't even very hard. I feel like I should have just taken 5-10 more FLs instead of working that Ochem book, then I would have got all around practice better.
I just feel like BR is overrated. 30-40% of the stuff they cover goes into too much depth for the MCAT. The type of pH and pKa math they have was flipping ridiculous, maybe that helped me save time on PS because the MCAT math seems so simple in comparison but the factor were missing is all this takes time. If I had a full 3 months I think BR would be fine, but I would still rather do 30-35 FL's with a mini content review, than 10 FL's with all the BR passages. It's the same amount of time. You can always correct content weaknesses as you go through the first 20 FL's, then you should have definitely touched everything, and EK1001 can also help to cover all the necessary skills.
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2010
- Messages
- 118
- Reaction score
- 1
When you find an area of weakness, BR is great because you have >10 practice passages on a given subject and a good description of how to solve each problem. Full-lengths may have one passage every ten tests on a topic in which you are weak, and EK does not give you the ability to practice a passage based approach to these subjects. You may not have time to do all the BR passages, but you're still better off to have them.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2007
- Messages
- 7,545
- Reaction score
- 196
Yeah, we have different viewpoints here and I can see your side very well. When I was coming up with my guide, one of the plans I was thinking about was similar to what you suggest: very light on the content review, heavy on the FLs. I ended up not choosing that one because I think the majority would benefit from more depth for their content review while doing tons of practice passages (should be ~ 30 content review : 70 practice passages). Also, most FLs are weak in verbal.
I also think you bring up something important about taking practice passages/FLs which I bolded. One of the most important parts of taking practice passages is the post-practice review. It's a common misconception that taking tons of practice passages won't include any content review. That's quite the opposite, if you're weak in a particular area. Should that be the case, then in your post-practice review, you should be reviewing the relevant content.
As I wrote in my reviewing guidelines:
9. What content areas are you weak in?
10. How can you improve so you don't make the same mistake again?
So if you need to brush up on your content to avoid making the same mistake, then do it. Taking practice passages doesn't stop after you check your answers. You're done with those passages AFTER you have thoroughly reviewed them.
General Guidelines for Reviewing:
- Go over EVERY question. Both the ones you got right and the ones you got wrong.
- Reviewing should take 2-3 times longer than taking the timed practice problems.
- If your tests are fluctuating, it is due to the different topics on the various tests. In other words, you have some glaring weaknesses that when targeted, nail you, badly. You have to find out what those weaknesses are because they are evident by your scores. Do NOT dismiss any wrong answer as a "stupid mistake." You made that error for a reason. Go over your tests again.
- You might want to consider making a log for all of your post test results where you work through the questions below. Doing so, you'll be able to easily notice trends.
Some things to go over when reviewing:
1. Why did you get the question wrong? Why did you get the question right?
2. What question and passage types get you?
3. How is your mindset when facing a particular passage?
4. Are you stressed for time?
5. Where are your mistakes happening the most? Are they front loaded? Are they at the end? All over?
6. What was your thought process for both the questions you got right and the ones you got wrong?
7. For verbal, what was the author's mindset and main idea?
8. Did you eliminate all of the answer choices you could from first glance?
ex. You know an answer should be a positive number so you cross out all of the negative number answer choices.
9. What content areas are you weak in?
10. How can you improve so you don't make the same mistake again?
I think you obviously have the best thought out plan, and BR has the best passages, my only criticism is mostly on BR for sometimes going off the deep end when unnecessary. But like I said they have the best passages when they go over the pertinent stuff.
EK's strength is probably saying, "ok, here is what you need to know." Which makes them efficient. BR's strength is explaining things really well and having the best passages, but it also becomes their fault when they want to explain things not as important very well and in depth. This is best exemplified in the organic chemistry. I learned that Ochem better than I had in my class, and I was top 1% in ~500 students BUT it was too much.
In the end though, my prep couldn't have been better (Not saying I aced the exam). My prep did all it could because on test day, the things that hurt were getting time busted in Biology because of a wickedly hard passage in genetics (a passage that was harder than any BR/TPR/AAMC genetic passage I've ever seen, there is no prep for that. It's speed, logic, and pulling out pertinent info in a super dense/jargon filled passage). I try to tell myself that spending extra time on Ochem hurt me, but in reality, taking 10 more FL's likely would have changed the passage SHOCK of running into that beast. I've taken 300 level genetics and 400 level cell biology, so I have no idea how 1 year of general bio could have done well on that passage under time pressure.
- Joined
- May 22, 2008
- Messages
- 17,394
- Reaction score
- 9,144
Once you get the content down, the most important thing IMO is getting used to the test and taking a lot of FLs.
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2009
- Messages
- 1,644
- Reaction score
- 675
I can concur with this message, right now I am doing practice tests and so far I am not happy with my score, so I review my practice test and look at the common topics I am getting wrong since there is a trend in what can of question type that is on my MCAT and approx how much percentage of that topic is on my MCAT. These are the question types I have to master and do good on and if I don't understand them then I need to reread those chapters and focus on practice base and free base questions (gimme points). For example, Stoichiometry is mostly three to five questions on your exam. For Orgo there are Oxygen-containing questions on your exam and for Biology a common topic that dominates is Circulatory, Lymphatic system. So let's say I am getting 20% correct in Stoichiometry out of five questions correct then I need to do some passages and learn some quick math problems, lol since this is a bulk of questions I am getting wrong. I need to view the thread for math tips and tricks because I am a person that will literally solve every detail in a problem to get the answer and really think about it unfortunately 🙁 >.< YIKES!!
