Hey Guest! Check out the 3 MCAT Study Plan Options listed in the 'stickies' area at the top of the forums (BoomBoom, SN2ed, and MCATJelly). Let us know which you like best.

Also, we now offer a MCAT Test-Prep Exhibitions Forum where you can ask questions directly from the test-prep services.
SDN members see fewer ads and full resolution images. Join our non-profit community!

Princeton VR vs. EK VR

Discussion in 'MCAT Discussions' started by joshto, May 28, 2008.

  1. joshto

    joshto Nervous&Neurotic 10+ Year Member

    Jan 30, 2006
    I want to get other people's opinion on how they think the AAMC VR compares to Princeton and to EK verbal. I have both EK passages and Princeton passages that I am studying from.

    The EK 101 Passages seem to be less abstract and more opinion and fact-based whereas the Princeton VR seems to have questions which are more focused on details rather than the main idea. Does anyone agree/disagree with me?

    It doesn't surprise me that each prep company has passages that suit the strategy they preach, but I want to know which passages are more like the real thing?
  2. SDN Members don't see this ad. About the ads.
  3. WarriorsFan

    WarriorsFan 7+ Year Member

    May 28, 2008
    Agreed, I found PR and Kaplan both likes to focus on detail. EK is better because more reasoning is involved. Having said that, nothing beats AAMC material, because that is the real thing.
  4. trojanMD

    trojanMD 2+ Year Member

    Feb 9, 2007
    I think the EK verbal is more representative of the AAMC verbal than the TPR. EK is more reasoning based, author's main point, etc. while TPR has more hunt and peck type questions. I find the AAMC to be a hybrid of the two with a little more resemblance to EK verbal. EK verbal and AAMC verbal passages are of the same difficulty in terms of readability but EK verbal questions are slightly more challenging to answer than AAMC verbal questions mainly b/c sometimes it seems that EK verbal answers are justified in a loopy kind of way. Nonetheless, I have found myself benefitting more from studying EK verbal rather than the TPR verbal. My AAMC practice scores and EK 101 also correlate pretty well too. If you want to use TPR, use their verbal workbook (which isnt half bad) but stay away from their diagnostic verbals. They are crazy hard and do not resemble AAMC verbal at all.
  5. supafield

    supafield Dream Big 7+ Year Member

    May 18, 2006
    Couldn't agree more....
    The workbook is reasonable and fairly helpful...
    The diagnostics are nuts and merely a way to convince their students that identify the killer passage and ignoring it is the way to go.... The AAMC rarely makes a passage soooooo difficult... tough yes, impossible no.

    I consistently score 10-12 in verbal on aamcs... 11 on august 06 actual mcat and I read the first sentence of TPR diagnostic # 1 and have no idea what they're talking about... the rhetorical thing about rhetoric is that rhetoricists rhetoric the most rhetoricing rhetichors there are to rhetoric... (a dramatization of the insanity of a few of their passages enhanced by the use on fake words and sentence structure lol)
  6. tncekm

    tncekm MS-1 2+ Year Member

    Jul 18, 2006
    LOOOOOOOOL! So freaking true! :thumbup:
  7. lastcall

    lastcall 7+ Year Member

    Nov 5, 2007
    EK verbal 101 workbook is easier than the TPR verbal workbook, imo. I couldn't even understand the first passage in the TPR workbook and I thought "okay, maybe this *** passage is an exception" but no, they were all horrible...not merely boring but literally incomprehensible, like WTF incomprehensible. I did not like TPR verbal. Just my .02 of course.

    So, I switched to EK verbal. But like everyone says, aamc is still best.

Share This Page