Why do you think you got a 32 on the first MCAT?
bad luck? I don't know; I didn't feel any different walking out of that test than I did after a practice test. When I checked SDN later, it seemed like everyone thought the test was a bit easier than they were expecting, so maybe the curve hit me.
I was always hoping for a tough test because (and I mean this in the least arrogant way possible) I'm really good at sciences...engineering major who loves biology = good combo for MCAT... I feel like easier tests fail to separate those who know their stuff back and front and have such a good understanding of the material that they can truly reason out everything, from those who simply memorized the material and are smart people, but do not necessarily understand the intricacies behind the material on the MCAT.
There will always be those random bio questions that you just don't know, and those random PS questions that you miss due to one careless error or another, and it's best to keep those down to a minimum (<2-3 per section). But on easier tests, missing these questions hurt you a lot more than on harder tests. I'd rather have a kaplan test where each scaled score incorporates 2-4 raw points, rather than an AAMC test where the difference between a 12 and a 15 is 3 questions. I think most would agree with this.
As for VR, it beats the heck out of my how I got an 8. I never scored lower than a 9 on my practices, and most of them were in the 10-11 range. I felt that the VR was too easy on the real thing, so I probably got screwed by the curve again. And being that I'm not particularly great at VR, I prob got screwed even worse than I did on the sciences.
Overall, I felt that the 32 was SORELY unrepresentative of my abilities. I don't necessarily believe a 39 IS (I'd probably go with a 37 if I had to guess), but I believe it is a better indicator than a 32.
