- Joined
- Jun 2, 2006
- Messages
- 141
- Reaction score
- 3
How thorough do you all review previous exams? I've read some of the 30+ (actually, all of them) posts, and they all seem to advocate an in depth look at each question (both correct and incorrect).
While I can't argue against such meticulousness, can there be a concern that one is spending too much time reviewing?
For instance, when reviewing incorrect answers, it's one thing to read through the relevant chapters in prep books to become familiar with the material, but should the same process be followed when reviewing correct answers? Is it okay to to simply read over the answer discussion and, if it makes sense, proceed to the next one?
This question is actually sounding more trivial by the letter; I'm only asking, because, over the course of the past 9 practice exams (no AAMC), I've been stuck at the same score range (low 30s), despite thorough review.
While I can't argue against such meticulousness, can there be a concern that one is spending too much time reviewing?
For instance, when reviewing incorrect answers, it's one thing to read through the relevant chapters in prep books to become familiar with the material, but should the same process be followed when reviewing correct answers? Is it okay to to simply read over the answer discussion and, if it makes sense, proceed to the next one?
This question is actually sounding more trivial by the letter; I'm only asking, because, over the course of the past 9 practice exams (no AAMC), I've been stuck at the same score range (low 30s), despite thorough review.