I apologize for my previous post. I should have thought twice about it. I was just kidding around
Yes, I can not wait to get those books. I know that my test date is 1-2 years away but I want to start studying now.
Have you taken the MCAT?
I have also heard that these books are good for people who only need a review of the material. Do you think it is also possible let say for someone who did not learn anything during their undergrad(I am not saying that I did not) to review this book and do well on the MCAT?
thank you
Yeah, I apologize for being a little thin-skinned. The truth is that it frustrates me to no end that these guys (they're my bosses and friends) don't care to improve their website. I get that teaching is their favorite thing, but for the love of God hire the people who did their CBT site to do their business website. The reality is that one of the owners did the site years ago and doesn't want to change it.
As for the books filling in the gap for someone who learned nothing, that's hard. If they are good at learning from the reading and practice, then definitely. But if they are an audio learner, then books (no matter how good) won't be enough. If you have two years with them, which I personally think might be too much (it will be hard to retain material you study in 2011 on a 2013 exam), you'll be able to extract the important points. I would do only the text part this early, doing the multiple choice questions in the reading section. Save the passages for the last six months before your exam.
Would you suggest working on any particular book over the other by topic? I personally found the Bio to be very challenging and not something similar to what I saw on my MCAT.
I've also started the dreaded quarter system and have my exam on 01/29 so I'm kinda stressed on time as well. Would it be any benefit to focus on one book over the other?
Thanks in advance!
The truth of the matter, and having taken the MCAT after a summer of absorbing information, I pretty much fall in step with the consensus SDN opinions on materials. I think the general chemistry book for BR is the best of all the books, because it has so many examples and teaches how to integrate physics, organic, and biology into gen chem. If you have limited time, that's the book to put your efforts into, because it will cover the widest range of MCAT material. It's also really good with concepts.
I think the new physics is next best. I love that they have taken the tircks they used to only discuss in classes and added them to the books. Both the physics book and g chem book are considered to be the best for a reason.
The organic book is good, but in all honesty could use an overhaul to get rid of some excess baggage. About 10% of the material hasn't been discussed in MCAT threads here at SDN since I've been posting. Things like the sugar tests for instance. I think that's a problem with the entire industry, given that posters often comment about materials in their books that isn't tested. As far as cramming with it in the last three weeks, I'd say focus strictly on the lab techniques section (it's excellent) and skim the carbonyls.
My personal opinion of BR biology is that the details overwhelm me. I know there are people who learn well this way, but I'm not one of them. I liked a couple of the physio chapters (heart and lung was good and kidneys was great) and I think about two thirds of the passages are really good. But overall, if I had to study again, I would use the BR books for reference and their passages. I'd probably just do their cell, neuro, heart/lung, and kidney chapters.
As for verbal reasoning, I think their class is really good and their book would really benefit by an overhaul by the people who designed the class notes (politest way I can put it without pissing my bosses off). Some of the answer explanations in the book are longer than the passages, and I'm not one who does well with verbose explanations. I like verbal to be to the point (which is what makes the class notes good in my eyes). What I
did recommend is doing only the passages with answer explanations that max out at two paragraphs. Those are the best ones. The really verbose explanations imply that something must be weird in the passage or question to need that much of an explanation.
I hope this helps.