junkct

10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Mar 12, 2008
444
1
LA
Status
Hey, so I feel like kaplan's bio covers most of the test material but misses a few topics here and there. I don't notice it so much on the kaplan FLs as I do on the AAMC tests, and the last thing I want to happen is get faced with 3 or 4 questions on test day that I have no clue how to even approach. I've heard EK is pretty good on bio.. I have their 1001 questions for bio, but I was just wondering if it's worth it to pick up the actual bio book from them. Or do you all think kaplan is sufficient for the BS section? and also, how about PS?
 

FutureCaringMD

10+ Year Member
Dec 19, 2008
5
0
Status
Pre-Medical
I'm new to this forum and just started studying, so I don't know how helpfull my advice is.

With that said, yesterday I picked up examkrackers bio review. It is easy to follow, nice colorfull diagrams. I haven't noticed any major errors yet. Content seems well so far, however I paid a lot of attention in my bio classes and everything here is review for me. Examkrackers may not be detailed enough for you if you didn't pay attention in class, it seems to be a very fast quick review.---Then again i've never seen kaplan's books to compare and contrast.

Hope I was helpfull
 
About the Ads

engineeredout

10+ Year Member
May 11, 2008
3,446
609
Pennsylvania
Status
Fellow [Any Field]
I used EK to study for bio, kaplan seemed far too detailed. Ended up getting a 10 on BS without taking bio prior to the mcat. I'm pretty sure that anything I got wrong on the mcat was a result of difficult questions themselves and not an actual lack of knowledge, so take that as you will.
 

futuredoctor10

10+ Year Member
Jan 25, 2007
1,625
19
Status
Resident [Any Field]
I used Kaplan for the BS when I took my MCAT this summer and am using other sources for my retake (primarily EK Bio).

Since I have used/am using both, here's my take on them. EK Bio is much easier to read and really well-written (additionally color diagrams help break up the monotony of text). It is also more concise than Kaplan.

As far as your feeling that Kaplan Bio covers most test material but misses a few topics here and there, you are right. There were some questions on AAMCs in BS and the content/background I did not really find in the Kaplan book. However, this is true for EK as well - that not all topics are covered.

I think using EK and Kaplan is a good combo - I would read EK primarily and use Kaplan as a filler for concepts EK does not discuss in depth (fetal circulation, Glomerular filtration & GFR, osmotic/hydrostatic pressure, etc)
 

Simran1031

Princess of 2014=)
10+ Year Member
Jul 6, 2007
462
0
www.globalworldhealth.blogspot.com
Status
Pre-Medical
i am planning to use them together. I like how kaplan has connections to the other subjects on the sides like to physics or chem in the bio part of the book. i like the way ek lays out stuff better and audio osmosis goes very closely with the ek book. i am hoping to use kaplan only when i need further clarification since it is much more detailed and too much so..but i think their notes, and panel stuff is at times helpful like clinical correlates or pavlov's dogs..im planning to use kaplan mosntly for practice and ek for content..
 

SN2ed

Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Jun 27, 2007
7,545
195
Status
Resident [Any Field]
I think using EK and Kaplan is a good combo - I would read EK primarily and use Kaplan as a filler for concepts EK does not discuss in depth (fetal circulation, Glomerular filtration & GFR, osmotic/hydrostatic pressure, etc)
This is what I did when I used both Kaplan and EK. I found EK Bio to be more helpful than Kaplan. I also used EK Bio 1001.
 

junkct

10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Mar 12, 2008
444
1
LA
Status
this is interesting... I actually really like the amount of depth that kaplan goes into their content. I never took a bio class before I started studying, so I think that a cursory review probably wouldn't be good for me. I am able to get good scores on the BS sections of the aamcs (usually 12-14), but the questions I'm missing seem to be on topics that I've never come across in the kaplan books at all.

ek1001, for me, seems to be A LOT more in-depth than kaplan though. good practice, but will it really be that detailed on the real deal?
 

DamienWhite

10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Aug 5, 2008
14
0
Status
Pre-Health (Field Undecided)
this is interesting... I actually really like the amount of depth that kaplan goes into their content. I never took a bio class before I started studying, so I think that a cursory review probably wouldn't be good for me. I am able to get good scores on the BS sections of the aamcs (usually 12-14), but the questions I'm missing seem to be on topics that I've never come across in the kaplan books at all.

ek1001, for me, seems to be A LOT more in-depth than kaplan though. good practice, but will it really be that detailed on the real deal?
hey. im new to the site as well. i was trying to order some of these books online but i cant seem to find the most recent editions on amazon or overstock. im looking specifically for Berkeley review. Also, is 2004 the latest edition for the bio 1001 questions for examkrackers?
 

dr zaius

10+ Year Member
Oct 27, 2008
1,368
408
Status
Resident [Any Field]
I used the Kaplan Premier series book. I liked the color diagrams, and as someone else said, the way the book connects topics across subjects. I supplemented the Kaplan biology with EK 1001 questions. I ended up with an 11 in BS on the actual MCAT, and I had a limited biology background.

I used the same approach-Kaplan+EK 1001 questions-on all the sections and ended up with a well rounded 35. The strategy worked for me, but but everyone is different.
 
About the Ads