Should I feel comfortable with using EK bio for review?

[WhiteCoatSyndrome]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I'm following the SN2ed schedule and have been using EK for bio and TBR for passages. I feel really strong in bio, as I am a bio major and have just finished biochem and genetics this past semester, however TBR bio passages have been giving me trouble. I feel that I understand the material well after reading the EK chapters and do well on the EK 30 minute exams, but am scoring an average of about 65% on TBR bio, with some chapters being much higher and some lower, in the 50% range. It seems that the questions I miss are either due to details only learned in the TBR chapter or because I misunderstand/misinterpret the question being asked. I rarely miss questions due to lack of understanding, which is frustrating. Having said all this, I'm beginning to wonder what I should base my progress on. Should I just focus on trying to improve and get better at "working" the passages? What should I make of my score? I'm shooting for a 10+ bio on the sep. 1 exam.

 

[nabilesmail]

I read EK bio twice and TPRH Bio twice. I'd recommend an alternative source for reproduction/ebryology. Ek sucks for that. Also, metabolism sucks with respect to Km and Vmax stuff, use Ek but get another source too!

 

[deleted127837]

.

 

[WhiteCoatSyndrome]

That's what I'm saying though. It's hard to tell what needs supplementing and what doesn't. I feel that I am pretty familiar with all of the concepts introduced in EK, but I feel like there might be a passage based on something not covered in EK. A lot of people just use EK and are fine. I think it's mostly using passage info to help out

 

[Cinclus]

I found that EK Bio contained everything I needed to know. This cannot be said for some of the other EK books, but Bio is awesome.

 

[nabilesmail]

I found that EK Bio contained everything I needed to know. This cannot be said for some of the other EK books, but Bio is awesome.

i think ek is very weak on reproductive/embryology

 

[V5RED]

i think ek is very weak on reproductive/embryology

Which specific items that are on the list of MCAT topics are not covered in the EK biology book?

Relative to my textbooks, all prep materials are very weak on everything, so I am wondering which specific aspects of reproduction and embryology are absent.

 

[nabilesmail]

I hadn't taken physio before studying and after reading ek bio for reproduction/embryology i almost knew nothing. I didn't know whata tropoblast was, i had trouble understanding many things for that section. I read TPR Bio and that helped out there. I think EK is fine for everything but reproduction/embryology =]

 

[09ine]

I think using EK Bio WITH 1001 is the best course, because there's alot of tiny details that get missed until you do practice questions.

The 1001 for bio is great for practicing discretes and fine tuning subjects that you're not 100% on.

 

[ebasappa]

I'm following the SN2ed schedule and have been using EK for bio and TBR for passages. I feel really strong in bio, as I am a bio major and have just finished biochem and genetics this past semester, however TBR bio passages have been giving me trouble. I feel that I understand the material well after reading the EK chapters and do well on the EK 30 minute exams, but am scoring an average of about 65% on TBR bio, with some chapters being much higher and some lower, in the 50% range. It seems that the questions I miss are either due to details only learned in the TBR chapter or because I misunderstand/misinterpret the question being asked. I rarely miss questions due to lack of understanding, which is frustrating. Having said all this, I'm beginning to wonder what I should base my progress on. Should I just focus on trying to improve and get better at "working" the passages? What should I make of my score? I'm shooting for a 10+ bio on the sep. 1 exam.

I'm in the EXACT same position as you, even that percents and everything😱 I've searched around and some people have been saying that TBR is a bit too hard. I think we just need to pay more attention to detail because alot of it just detail oriented... It seems to me that TBR makes these questions hard on purpose because part of their learning process is you encountering questions you don't know, and then reviewing.

 

[WhiteCoatSyndrome]

I found that EK Bio contained everything I needed to know. This cannot be said for some of the other EK books, but Bio is awesome.

Did you use tbr passages? Any comment on my progress with that?

 

[PanRoasted]

I'm following the SN2ed schedule and have been using EK for bio and TBR for passages. I feel really strong in bio, as I am a bio major and have just finished biochem and genetics this past semester, however TBR bio passages have been giving me trouble. I feel that I understand the material well after reading the EK chapters and do well on the EK 30 minute exams, but am scoring an average of about 65% on TBR bio, with some chapters being much higher and some lower, in the 50% range. It seems that the questions I miss are either due to details only learned in the TBR chapter or because I misunderstand/misinterpret the question being asked. I rarely miss questions due to lack of understanding, which is frustrating. Having said all this, I'm beginning to wonder what I should base my progress on. Should I just focus on trying to improve and get better at "working" the passages? What should I make of my score? I'm shooting for a 10+ bio on the sep. 1 exam.

Like many have said on this forum before, BR bio is just not fair. You will never have to know all the information that BR assumes you will know for their passages, and should not waste time trying. The passages themselves are very good for PRACTICE, but I don't think you should ever gauge your actual performance on the MCAT based on your BR bio scores unless you make up a different scoring curve. This is because BR bio is intended to be much more difficult than the actual MCAT as far as the content goes, but mimics the actual passage styles with a fair amount of accuracy. The best way to approach BR passages is answer them normally, and if you come across a question where you are expected to know obscure, random information, try to make your best guess based on passage clues, question clues, basic logic; etc. Don't sweat a 65% on BR, in my experience that equates to about an 11 in real AAMC terms.

 

[MedPR]

TBR is doable with a half-ass background in anatomy and physiology. The concepts and information given are not more difficult than the AAMCs or the real MCAT. TBR just expects that you know more random facts (not given in the passages) than EK/AAMC do.

 

[ridethecliche]

You can go around in circles with this stuff forever.

At the end of the day, you study this stuff and go forward.

I used EK and got an 11. I was scoring mostly 12's and 13's in practice. I messed up when taking the test and would use a new strategy to attack certain passages if I had to do it again.

Basically, for enzyme reactions or other a to b to c kinda stuff, write down your own notes. Shorthand for what activates/inhibits etc.

It saves tons of time.
​