Quantcast

jan 19 test anyone????

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

bigbonustoday

Full Member
2+ Year Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2016
Messages
47
Reaction score
16

Members don't see this ad.
Did anyone take the test on jan 19? any experience you'd like to share?

More specifically,
1) level of difficulty, by section, compared with AAMC official FL/section bank/kaplan/NS?
2) question style, more like section banks or old mcat or in the middle?

I'm taking the jan 28. Any feedbacks would be appreciated!!!!
 

5words

Full Member
2+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2016
Messages
352
Reaction score
76
I'd be interested in knowing two since they said, the Jan 19 had lots of calculations.
 

Orthopedics101

Full Member
5+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
441
Reaction score
793
Tbh I took the test on Jan 19th as well and I agree mostly with what reddit is saying. C/P which is usually my best section (AAMC 1 - 130, AAMC 2 - 131) was extremely harder. I would say comparable to the section banks. While there were easy straightforward passages, there was like a point in the test where 3-4 passages and a couple discrete questions had heavy calculations on relatively obscure topics. For CARS. The first passage was 8 paragraphs long with 7 questions. I think that's what threw off everyone else's timing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

5words

Full Member
2+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2016
Messages
352
Reaction score
76
Tbh I took the test on Jan 19th as well and I agree mostly with what reddit is saying. C/P which is usually my best section (AAMC 1 - 130, AAMC 2 - 131) was extremely harder. I would say comparable to the section banks. While there were easy straightforward passages, there was like a point in the test where 3-4 passages and a couple discrete questions had heavy calculations on relatively obscure topics. For CARS. The first passage was 8 paragraphs long with 7 questions. I think that's what threw off everyone else's timing.
So would you say the format (C/P) was somehwere between the old mact and the new one? or that just a more advanced version of the new one?
 

Ad2b

Full Member
5+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Messages
2,869
Reaction score
2,766
So would you say the format (C/P) was somehwere between the old mact and the new one? or that just a more advanced version of the new one?
On mine, 8/5/16, it was very similar to the SB and a few questions like the q-packs. For mine, key review/studying was AAMC materials. ALL of it. I mean ALLLLLLLLLLLLLL and the SBs. Yeah, ALL and SBs. See how that is? SBs and ALL AAMC materials :D

For CARS, I found it exactly like the old tests and the CARS q-packs (largely old test questions). Thing that confuses people is that the passages are not so much longer as the font is larger making it seem longer (they're not - I checked on my test to see if that was true).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Orthopedics101

Full Member
5+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
441
Reaction score
793
So would you say the format (C/P) was somehwere between the old mact and the new one? or that just a more advanced version of the new one?

The format wasn't the problem. I'd say 75 - 80% of it was just like the AAMC practice tests, the problem was the remaining 20% was so much harder and tested relatively obscure physics topics which required a level of thinking that is extremely hard under the timed conditions. And as you know that 20% can be the difference between a 127 and a 132.
 

Groggs

Full Member
2+ Year Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2016
Messages
172
Reaction score
96
Got a 132 on AAMC FL2 in C/P and scored around an 81% on C/P section bank. In my opinion the C/P on 1/19 was as difficult, if not more so, than the section bank and certainly more difficult than any AAMC practice test.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

bigbonustoday

Full Member
2+ Year Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2016
Messages
47
Reaction score
16
I think you all are just being very big babies about the 1/19.

Everyone took it.

You're judged against the others who took it with you.

What is the huge deal?

I didn't take the 01/19 but I 100pct agree with above. It's all relative and you should prefer a harder test if you studied hard for it since it'd differentiate you better from the rest of the crowd. The 8 hours during the exam would be like hell but you don't care about that.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
 

Orthopedics101

Full Member
5+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
441
Reaction score
793
I think you all are just being very big babies about the 1/19.

Everyone took it.

You're judged against the others who took it with you.

What is the huge deal?

I simply said the test was harder than what AAMC put out as practice materials attempting to give OP some idea about the difficulty. I did not whine nor did I cry. The problem is you automatically discrediting what everyone who did take the test has to say (in your post above). Why you are even commenting about a test you did not take is beyond me. If there are 400-500 posts about the difficulty of the test on reddit (and there are even some on here as well) than you should probably take their word for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

lebronisking23

Full Member
Joined
May 10, 2016
Messages
74
Reaction score
91
Just to confirm about the test. Bio and psych was normal. You'll get the stupid questions from left field that will not be any mcat book in this world. Especially psych. CARS was front loaded like crazy with seven questions each for The first three passages. They were definitely a bit longer as well and I think that's why everyone said it was more difficult. They kind of just threw you off at the start with timing, but then the last three were short and only five questions each. Physics was tough, but it just came down to knowing your equations in my opinion. I was lucky and memorized all of them and was able to apply them. All in all, definitely harder than the practice aamc stuff, more on par with nextstep tests.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top