Relative difficulty of ExamKrackers lecture exams?

[solitude]

I'm curious how everybody has felt about the relative difficulty of both the in-text questions and the 30min lecture exams in ExamKrackers? I've yet to take a full-length AAMC (saving for the few weeks before the exam), so I ask, are scores on these ExamKrackers questions representative of scores we can expect for the actual exam? It would be especially helpful if those who have already taken the actual MCAT could comment on their %'s on the ExamKrackers question and their authentic scores.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[jamilla_w]

Not representative. (Though the Q's are about as difficult as on the MCAT)

Probably because you are doing the questions right after reviewing the material.

 

[solitude]

Not representative. (Though the Q's are about as difficult as on the MCAT)

Probably because you are doing the questions right after reviewing the material.

Well actually i did the lecture exams a while after reviewing the material, like a few weeks. But overall do you think that scores are a bit inflated?

 

[HunterGatherer]

lecture exams are a good indicator if you went over the material a few times and have a solid handle on it. My average scores on the 30min science exams were similar to my actual scores on the real deal. I did not do the 30min exams until I reviewed that particular chapter at least 3 times though. I did the chapter questions each time I reviewed.

 

[vargant]

bump

 

[ChubbyChaser]

Ive heard they were usually harder than the real deal, but I did about equal, with the exception of the first two verbal lectures.

 

[SN2ed]

I did much better on the real MCAT than on their lecture exams. 12 on the real thing, but only 7-9s on the EK lecture exams.

 

[unsung]

Yes, I'm finding the 30 min exams to be relatively difficult as well, although it does seem to vary by subject. My fav subj- o-chem, which I'm scoring >90% correct in the 1001Qs book , I'm doing the worst in, in terms of the 30 min exams. I seem to be doing the best in the exams in physics, although I feel like I have a much better grasp on o-chem. Not sure why.

Maybe the o-chem one is just harder than the others? I'm finding that the exams often exceed the material gone over by the lecture.

 

[unsung]

I did much better on the real MCAT than on their lecture exams. 12 on the real thing, but only 7-9s on the EK lecture exams.

That makes me feel much better. The other thread from a while back with people posting their scores on all the EK exams scared me half to death.

 

[SN2ed]

I felt the same way when I saw those scores.

 

[tdjn]

Hey SN2, what about the Bio EK lecture quizzes (Did you get the 12 in Bio on the real MCAT?)? I got like a 8, 7, 7, 11, 4 (gasp) on five of them so far... I didn't really "review" the chapters before I took those tests... I mean I had read them 2 weeks before and let the material sink in my mind before taking those tests.

But after getting that 4, needless to say, it was pretty discouraging (It was on oogenesis, reproduction organs, etc.. is that stuff even really on the MCATs?). Anyway, if you scored fairly on the Bio, hearing your input/advice would be awesome.

 

[SN2ed]

Honestly, I didn't think any of the EK lectures were even close to the MCAT. I just treated them as topical practice, not MCAT practice. I wouldn't get worked up about them at all. I'm pretty sure they even talk about not taking their lecture exams to heart.

 

[tdjn]

Thanks a lot man. That definitely helps. Good luck with the application process