SN2'd first day

[TexasSurgeon]

EDIT: This was supposed to be a thread about the first day of SN2. However as with all intelligent life, things evolve. This thread has now become a support page for people following the SN2 plan. You can think of it as Alcoholics Anonymous for people studying to take the MCAT using the SN2 plan.

EDIT July 1, 2014:
If you are interested in @mehc012's Anki Deck, DO NOT SEND A PM. Here is the link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7if6wgaif98rkoa/mehc012 SN2edCh4s.apkg
**A NOTE: @mehc012 and several others (myself included) want to tell you guys that studying from another person's deck will probably not be as beneficial to you as creating your own cards. Yes you can take advantage of @mehc012's generosity, but you won't get the same advantage. Study the material. Create cards as you go along. You will find it more helpful to your studying. **

EDIT July 22, 2014:
The following is @TBRBiosadist's official MCAT Verbal Reasoning Strategy:
@TBRBiosadist's strategy that got [him] from a 7 average to scoring 13-15 average..

Spend the bulk of your time reading. Up to 3 minutes per passage.

• Read the first and last paragraph thoroughly to begin with. Understand what the authors main point will be because 90% of questions require nothing more than a general idea.
• After this, read the entire passage slowly enough where you dont feel like you need to reread sentences for understanding.

Next is just answer questions, there is a few tricks here that work about 90% of the time

• Unless the passage is asking you about a specific detail, dont look back. READ EVERY ANSWER THOROUGLY AND THEN Answer what makes sense from the general point of the passage. Its very easy to prove a wrong answer to be somewhat correct if you dig hard enough, dont. Answer what your gut says and move onto the next question, dont contemplate to much. With that being said...
• Answer like you were dropped on the head as a child. Alot of times if Im arguing between two answers, there is the answer that is 100% correct, and one that is 90% correct. Be an idoit and choose the one that seems like it is correct. However.....
• "Always" is a word to avoid. If an answer uses this word, or definites like it, it is something to avoid. I would say 80% of the time the wishy washy answer is more correct then the highly affirmative one. This leads to my final point....
• 100% of the time you are not actually looking for the "right" answer in verbal, this isnt PS or BS where 1+1 almost always equals 2 (unless we are talking about the different sedimentation values for Ribosomes). In verbal you are looking for the answer that isnt wrong. Often times an answer will seem very "right" but one aspect of it is clearly wrong, as compared to an answer that isnt wrong, but doesnt seem as right as that answer, these are meant to fool you. Choose the answer that isnt wrong.

I understand that I few of these tips may be at odds with each other. Ultimately you must adjust slightly for each passage, but it comes down to one thing. Read thoroughly. Read every sentence in the passage. Read every question. Read every answer. Then the correct answer will be fairly obvious. This may seem like it takes longer, but it takes much less time than skimming, and then trying to find the correct information later.

Or to summarize in one sentence

Understand what the hell the author is arguing

EDIT July 26, 2014:
@DoctorInASaree uploaded a guide to Verbal Reasoning. If you're interested, it's worth a look. Here is the link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/2byivymmqwlvjms/MCAT VR Primer DRSAREE.pdf

EDIT 2, July 26, 2014: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/sn2d-first-day.1074344/page-52#post-15510851
________________________________________________
Just finished the first day of SN2...man is it long and exhausting.

The first day is BR physics chapter (translational motion) + 1/3 of the passages. I felt like I wasn't able to apply the stuff I read into the stuff I was tested on.

Has anyone felt this way when following the schedule? It just seems like the contents of the chapter didn't really stick in my head when I took the practice passages. Will this improve over time?

EDIT 3, March 4, 2015:

For verbal, if you are feeling lost and confused, I highly highly recommend you to look into the MCAT Strategy Course by @Jack Westin. I've been working with him, and nothing comes close to his course and teaching. It's a strategy course, so it will cover everything, not just the VR/CARS section.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[texan2414]

The Light and Optics chapter in TBR Physics is just a beat down!!!!!!!!

 

[TBRBiosadist]

My biochem professor made a student cry today. I love her.

 

[DoctorInASaree]

Scientific reasoning gem: Mr Feynman explains the scientific method

Given the amount of experimental passages that I have encountered; this video has proved to be invaluable in understanding the basic scientific processes underpinning all scientific experiments.

 

[poop420]

Scientific reasoning gem: Mr Feynman explains the scientific method

Given the amount of experimental passages that I have encountered; this video has proved to be invaluable in understanding the basic scientific processes underpinning all scientific experiments.

Can my teacher be like this!

 

[poop420]

do you guys know if you can share AAMC exams and the self assessment between two people or its a one time use thing ?? **** happened and I dont even know if I can afford to pay for the exam much less all these practice exams.. Why I hate being dirt poor!

f*ck !!! this normally would be a confidence killer but nah, no way !! I spend too much of my time studying to derail now..

 

[Lokkja]

Ah. In that case, I'd argue that "ability to answer basic questions on psych and sociology" is pretty much zero percent relevant to actually interacting with other humans in a meaningful fashion. Instead, it just adds in a bunch of subjective crap to what is supposed to be an objective measure of ability. The more objective they make it, the less relevant it is (cuz the more dissimilar to actual social interaction it is), yet the more subjective it is, the more it muddies the waters and makes the MCAT less study-able.

Test subjective skills through subjective measures, and objective ones objectively. Let's not pretend that the robots can do the work of interviews.

Except that the MCAT has zero predictive capabilities of residency success or anything beyond it. If we're going to use a standardized exam as a means for evaluating students then we should include those who may perform well in multiple subjects. It's also very clear you aren't educated in the subjects of psychology or sociology if you think it's "subjective". Do you think all psych students just take multiple choice exams that are entirely based around opinion? The material involved is different but testing it is absolutely no different - it's still entirely objective.

I mean what are you actually objecting to here? You think that by broadening the information that's tested, medical schools run the risk of evaluating students who are well rounded? God forbid...

The exact reason why the new MCAT has become a passage based exam is formed entirely around an ideal test of reasoning skills and ability to apply information in multiple forms. Physics is no more closely related to medical school than psychology is - the point of testing these subjects isn't for regurgitation. The medical field is increasingly broadening and as such the task of asking medical students to be completely well rounded with the human body is a difficult task. These tests are set out to demonstrate which individuals can use their fundamental understandings of multiple subject areas to base their analysis of new information upon for its application. So people can look at the fact that the MCAT has a **** ton of more material to cover and fret... but what they aren't realizing is that it would be impossible for us to cover all the subjects in great detail and perform well on a standardized test in three months. The fact that more information is being added to the laundry list is evidence that what's important is the approach to the test, not the knowledge itself - which is EXACTLY what Berkeley Review teaches in its books, and it's why their books have becoming increasingly better at preparing students than any others.

 

[mehc012]

Except that the MCAT has zero predictive capabilities of residency success or anything beyond it. If we're going to use a standardized exam as a means for evaluating students then we should include those who may perform well in multiple subjects. It's also very clear you aren't educated in the subjects of psychology or sociology if you think it's "subjective". Do you think all psych students just take multiple choice exams that are entirely based around opinion? The material involved is different but testing it is absolutely no different - it's still entirely objective.

1) I actually was only 1 or 2 classes short of a psych major and have a pretty good sense of psych. I am admittedly less familiar with sociology only because I attempted it and it was the most mind-numbingly boring, awful class I ever sat through.
2) I said nothing about predicting success in residency or beyond. The MCAT is the standarized portion of the med school application process.
3) The whole point was, theoretically, to focus on more than just sciences in order to get students who are better at social interactions instead of gpa robots. My point was that learning social science does not make you a god of social interactions. Assessing social skills is a subjective process, which can only be poorly assessed via objective questions on an MC exam. If they start asking more subjective questions, in order to address the theoretical point of the new MCAT, they compromise the objectivity of the exam...and as the sole aspect of the app process which is purely objective, that would be a shame. If they do not make the questions subjective, then really they will accomplish the opposite of their goal, as they will put up an additional knowledge hurdle for people to pass, requiring further robot-ism. If they're just going to make us memorize a bunch of basic psych experiments, terms, and concepts, they've changed nothing except the length of the test.
4) FYI, upper level psych courses DO have a lot of subjective stuff in them. Sure, you can try to get around it by throwing in a bunch of statistics, but many of the experiments you would really need to gain fine resolution are either unethical or impossible to perform. At some point, you get to the fun classes where you listen to a bunch of different viewpoints, throw your hands in the air, and go "well, we think it's probably this or this, but these guys vehemently believe in this theory" and here are some first-hand accounts from patients". Your tests become long essays contrasting various viewpoints on a subject. Now, many science topics end up similarly, but in my experience the psych ones devolve into "and this version resonates better with me" far more quickly than similar discussions in science, making it more subjective. So it's either really basic memorization+objective answers or complicated, 'no real right answer' stuff...there is nothing conceptually challenging in there.

 

[DoctorInASaree]

Except that the MCAT has zero predictive capabilities of residency success or anything beyond it. If we're going to use a standardized exam as a means for evaluating students then we should include those who may perform well in multiple subjects. It's also very clear you aren't educated in the subjects of psychology or sociology if you think it's "subjective". Do you think all psych students just take multiple choice exams that are entirely based around opinion? The material involved is different but testing it is absolutely no different - it's still entirely objective.

I mean what are you actually objecting to here? You think that by broadening the information that's tested, medical schools run the risk of evaluating students who are well rounded? God forbid...

The exact reason why the new MCAT has become a passage based exam is formed entirely around an ideal test of reasoning skills and ability to apply information in multiple forms. Physics is no more closely related to medical school than psychology is - the point of testing these subjects isn't for regurgitation. The medical field is increasingly broadening and as such the task of asking medical students to be completely well rounded with the human body is a difficult task. These tests are set out to demonstrate which individuals can use their fundamental understandings of multiple subject areas to base their analysis of new information upon for its application. So people can look at the fact that the MCAT has a **** ton of more material to cover and fret... but what they aren't realizing is that it would be impossible for us to cover all the subjects in great detail and perform well on a standardized test in three months. The fact that more information is being added to the laundry list is evidence that what's important is the approach to the test, not the knowledge itself - which is EXACTLY what Berkeley Review teaches in its books, and it's why their books have becoming increasingly better at preparing students than any others.

Zero predictive capability? Why do you think they ask us to write such a useless test? The MCAT is closely correlated with Step scores.

Solid assumption on mehc012's familiarity with Psychology by the way! Do you actually believe that studying Psychology 101 material will make future medical students more "well-rounded" ?

The new MCAT has become a passage based exam? Is the current MCAT that I'm slated to write in less than two months not a passage based exam? Am I missing something?

 

[aspiringMD/DO]

Hi guys, did we establish the most strategic/useful order to taking the AAMC exams? ie. beginning at 11 and working your way down, etc?

 

[Lokkja]

Zero predictive capability? Why do you think they ask us to write such a useless test? The MCAT is closely correlated with Step scores.

Solid assumption on mehc012's familiarity with Psychology by the way! Do you actually believe that studying Psychology 101 material will make future medical students more "well-rounded" ?

The new MCAT has become a passage based exam? Is the current MCAT that I'm slated to write in less than two months not a passage based exam? Am I missing something?

The MCAT is not closely correlated with STEP scores. When you take into account a multitude of factors it's correlated by about .19 with STEP 1 and not correlated at all with NBME Subject exams or Preclinical performance. I know this because I had to do a gigantic presentation on predictors of medical school success. (Here's the source; http://www.researchgate.net/publica...ical_school_performance_across_the_curriculum)

As for why they have us write it? The MCAT is a hurdle and as such probably weeds out massive amounts of people who would apply without a standardized test in their way. It's also a good way of demonstrating people who would be hopeless in the fast pace information environment of medical school (people who score sub-25ish lets say). You're lying to yourself if you think medical schools genuinely believe that a standardized exam tells them how good of a doctor someone will be. The standardized exam exists because no better alternative exists, and there are plenty of schools who have moved away from this exam. The very university that created the MMI's (McMaster) only assesses your verbal portion of the MCAT. That doesn't meant the MCAT isn't a useful tool, it just means it can also end up cutting down people who would have made good doctors.

Mehc012 stated that testing psychology was subjective - which means she made massive assumptions about the ways in which they will test (subjective? When has it ever been stated psychology/sociology portions of the new MCAT will be subjective) I made an assumption based on her statements - which in themselves were assumptions. Studying psychology 101 won't MAKE a person more well rounded, it's about finding a student who IS well rounded. Nobody addressed the point I made that psychology/sociology are no more or less affiliated with medical science than physics - and as such if you're going to test students in fields that are at the peripheral of medicine then why draw the line at physics? The current format of the MCAT places a high emphasis on mathematical abilities when you consider physics and G chem make such a large portion of it. There are people who are not mathematically inclined, but perform exceedingly well in areas of psychology and sociology - why should we devalue their abilities in those fields while valuing the ability of people in the fields of physics and G chem?

What I meant by that last statement was that when you compare say AAMC 3 to AAMC 11 you see a massive difference. My point was the 2015 MCAT is just a further step in this direction, and in my opinion a good one.

 

[ayocaptain628]

Hi guys, did we establish the most strategic/useful order to taking the AAMC exams? ie. beginning at 11 and working your way down, etc?

the one with the white tiger avatar said after his exam, he wished he had taken 11 ASAP and then 9 and 10

 

[Lokkja]

1) I actually was only 1 or 2 classes short of a psych major and have a pretty good sense of psych. I am admittedly less familiar with sociology only because I attempted it and it was the most mind-numbingly boring, awful class I ever sat through.
2) I said nothing about predicting success in residency or beyond. The MCAT is the standarized portion of the med school application process.
3) The whole point was, theoretically, to focus on more than just sciences in order to get students who are better at social interactions instead of gpa robots. My point was that learning social science does not make you a god of social interactions. Assessing social skills is a subjective process, which can only be poorly assessed via objective questions on an MC exam. If they start asking more subjective questions, in order to address the theoretical point of the new MCAT, they compromise the objectivity of the exam...and as the sole aspect of the app process which is purely objective, that would be a shame. If they do not make the questions subjective, then really they will accomplish the opposite of their goal, as they will put up an additional knowledge hurdle for people to pass, requiring further robot-ism. If they're just going to make us memorize a bunch of basic psych experiments, terms, and concepts, they've changed nothing except the length of the test.
4) FYI, upper level psych courses DO have a lot of subjective stuff in them. Sure, you can try to get around it by throwing in a bunch of statistics, but many of the experiments you would really need to gain fine resolution are either unethical or impossible to perform. At some point, you get to the fun classes where you listen to a bunch of different viewpoints, throw your hands in the air, and go "well, we think it's probably this or this, but these guys vehemently believe in this theory" and here are some first-hand accounts from patients". Your tests become long essays contrasting various viewpoints on a subject. Now, many science topics end up similarly, but in my experience the psych ones devolve into "and this version resonates better with me" far more quickly than similar discussions in science, making it more subjective. So it's either really basic memorization+objective answers or complicated, 'no real right answer' stuff...there is nothing conceptually challenging in there.

2) Right, and I agreed with that sentiment - my point was that the MCAT is a tool of evaluating students, and as such why alienate groups of them because they aren't good at the very specific peripheral subjects added? By adding more subjects you allow more opportunities for an individual to demonstrate their abilities.
3) But that would be missing the point entirely. By only creating a premise in which the new MCAT is focused on "social interactions" you're missing the bigger picture that I'm trying to paint above. You're making massive assumptions about the means in which they will test these subjects. From my understanding of talking with other psych majors who wrote the trial sections they did exceedingly well in those areas. How similar will it be? Not sure - but assuming it will be subjective makes no sense - they aren't *****s and you cannot test subjectively on a standardized multiple-choice format either, and I wouldn't be surprised if the WS got the boot partially because of that.
4) The means in which the subject field acquires its information may be subjective (although the vast majority of medicine is done in petri dishes and mice for the same ethical issues you're talking about) but that doesn't have anything to do with the means in which its tested. If it's not challenging the 2015 MCAT won't be any different for you or people like you, but personally I've seen MANY science majors who take social science courses and even on multiple choice exams can't perform nearly as well. The material is different, the way they test it isn't. You can say it's just "more memorization", but there ARE individuals who will do better on psych/social when they would do poorly on the PS, and individuals that would do well on PS but poor on this section. In my opinion the entering of these sections decreases the importance of any one single section.

They're also scoring it entirely differently. So now the scaling will be much better and representative of your abilities. Whereas for some schools a 30 compared to a 31 could mean an operating score difference of .3 (which is actually large), the new MCAT will have such high scores (100+) that a deviance of one point won't make or break you.

 

[mehc012]

2) Right, and I agreed with that sentiment - my point was that the MCAT is a tool of evaluating students, and as such why alienate groups of them because they aren't good at the very specific peripheral subjects added? By adding more subjects you allow more opportunities for an individual to demonstrate their abilities.
3) But that would be missing the point entirely. By only creating a premise in which the new MCAT is focused on "social interactions" you're missing the bigger picture that I'm trying to paint above. You're making massive assumptions about the means in which they will test these subjects. From my understanding of talking with other psych majors who wrote the trial sections they did exceedingly well in those areas. How similar will it be? Not sure - but assuming it will be subjective makes no sense - they aren't *****s and you cannot test subjectively on a standardized multiple-choice format either, that's why they took out the WS!
4) Then if it's not challenging the 2015 MCAT won't be any different from you, but personally I've seen MANY science majors who take social science courses and even on multiple choice exams can't perform nearly as well. The material is different, the way they test it isn't. You can say it's just "more memorization", but there ARE individuals who will do better on psych/social when they would do poorly on the PS, and individuals that would do well on PS but poor on this section. In my opinion the entering of these sections decreases the importance of any one single section.

They're also scoring it entirely differently. So now the scaling will be much better and representative of your abilities. Whereas for some schools a 30 compared to a 31 could mean an operating score difference of .3 (which is actually large), the new MCAT will have such high scores (100+) that a deviance of one point won't make or break you.

2) That's bull. Unless premeds suddenly become content with doing "OK", you're not setting up a system where some people do well on the science bits and some on the socio bits...it's the same old system where everyone studies their asses off for all of them, and people will either do generally well or generally not. You're just making the process longer. There's a reason that scores tend not to be completely polarized (6 BS, 15 PS). Furthermore, even if the theoretical people who 'shine' at memorizing a few extra facts on Psychology but can't manage to learn Bio (which is more realistic than someone who can rock PS and BS but magically can't memorize a few Psych definitions) do score well there and not well elsewhere, that is not a good score. Unbalanced is bad. So you're not really rewarding those who are good at Psych but can't swing PS and BS, even if such a person were common, which seems unlikely.
3) I'm assuming they will be giving multiple choice exam questions. The only information you can definitively learn in Psych is a bunch of definitions and a few experiments. So there will be some discrete knowledge (straightforward) and perhaps some experimental setups. Exactly the same as what we have now. If you can't do PS or BS, you're not magically going to become good at Psych, it's all the same damn thing. The only thing the MCAT really tests is test taking ability and a basic level of content knowledge. They're not adding anything radically different, so nothing will change. I mean, PS and BS are really the same damn thing, despite ostensibly covering widely varied subjects. Psych will be no different. In order for it to be any different, to test anything new beyond what's already tested, they'd have to drastically change the exam and make it not multiple choice. At the end of the day, an MC exam is an MC exam is an MC exam. They're all the same.
4) No given section will be harder, but it will be longer, more tiring, and require more prep. For zero gain.
I'm sorry, but I flat out do not believe you on the "MANY science majors who take social science courses and even on multiple choice exams can't perform nearly as well". Great anecdote, I have one too: people who do well in courses, (science or otherwise) do well when taking other courses. People who do well on MC exams, do well on MC exams. Subject matter is largely irrelevant unless that person just doesn't bother to study when not interested in the topic.

Adding more sections just means that the scores will spread out more as the point scale expands. If you would have done well on the old test, you'll do well on the new one. If you would have sucked at the old test, you'll suck at this one. If anything, the Psych sections will be an equalizer, as they require far less background info as the baseline. It's not changing ANYthing except making the whole process longer and more arduous, and rescuing the dying department of Socio. What a waste of everyone's time.

 

[Lokkja]

2) That's bull. Unless premeds suddenly become content with doing "OK", you're not setting up a system where some people do well on the science bits and some on the socio bits...it's the same old system where everyone studies their asses off for all of them, and people will either do generally well or generally not. You're just making the process longer. There's a reason that scores tend not to be completely polarized (6 BS, 15 PS). Furthermore, even if the theoretical people who 'shine' at memorizing a few extra facts on Psychology but can't manage to learn Bio (which is more realistic than someone who can rock PS and BS but magically can't memorize a few Psych definitions) do score well there and not well elsewhere, that is not a good score. Unbalanced is bad. So you're not really rewarding those who are good at Psych but can't swing PS and BS, even if such a person were common, which seems unlikely.
3) I'm assuming they will be giving multiple choice exam questions. The only information you can definitively learn in Psych is a bunch of definitions and a few experiments. So there will be some discrete knowledge (straightforward) and perhaps some experimental setups. Exactly the same as what we have now. If you can't do PS or BS, you're not magically going to become good at Psych, it's all the same damn thing. The only thing the MCAT really tests is test taking ability and a basic level of content knowledge. They're not adding anything radically different, so nothing will change. I mean, PS and BS are really the same damn thing, despite ostensibly covering widely varied subjects. Psych will be no different. In order for it to be any different, to test anything new beyond what's already tested, they'd have to drastically change the exam and make it not multiple choice. At the end of the day, an MC exam is an MC exam is an MC exam. They're all the same.
4) No given section will be harder, but it will be longer, more tiring, and require more prep. For zero gain.
I'm sorry, but I flat out do not believe you on the "MANY science majors who take social science courses and even on multiple choice exams can't perform nearly as well". Great anecdote, I have one too: people who do well in courses, (science or otherwise) do well when taking other courses. People who do well on MC exams, do well on MC exams. Subject matter is largely irrelevant unless that person just doesn't bother to study when not interested in the topic.

Adding more sections just means that the scores will spread out more as the point scale expands. If you would have done well on the old test, you'll do well on the new one. If you would have sucked at the old test, you'll suck at this one. If anything, the Psych sections will be an equalizer, as they require far less background info as the baseline. It's not changing ANYthing except making the whole process longer and more arduous, and rescuing the dying department of Socio. What a waste of everyone's time.

2) Score's aren't polarized? Wut? There are plenty of people who score 8-10's in PS and 13-15's in BS or vice versa. And you say unbalanced is bad yet two of the medical schools I'm applying to weight PS lower than the other two sections and one doesn't even take PS. Universities clearly already are weighing students for unbalanced.
3) Yes, you're assuming, that pretty much sums up the problem.
4) I think once again you're showing your own personal bias. It's pretty clear from your MCAT scores that you're a bright person in all the current areas covered, but most people simply aren't. I'm graduating with an honours psych degree, one of the courses we have to take for the degree is an honours research stats class - and it's known by most psych students because it's often a defining reason for why students do or don't get an honours degree. I know a girl who got A+'s in every psych class she took but couldn't pass statistics. There are a large amount of people who are better at different areas. It just seems ignorant for you to deny that not all people are brilliant in all areas.

And you STILL haven't addressed why physics deserves to be on the exam anymore than psych.

 

[mehc012]

2) Score's aren't polarized? Wut? There are plenty of people who score 8-10's in PS and 13-15's in BS or vice versa. And you say unbalanced is bad yet two of the medical schools I'm applying to weight PS lower than the other two sections and one doesn't even take PS. Universities clearly already are weighing students for unbalanced.
3) Yes, you're assuming, that pretty much sums up the problem.
4) I think once again you're showing your own personal bias. It's pretty clear from your MCAT scores that you're a bright person in all the current areas covered, but most people simply aren't. I'm graduating with an honours psych degree, one of the courses we have to take for the degree is an honours research stats class - and it's known by most psych students because it's often a defining reason for why students do or don't get an honours degree. I know a girl who got A+'s in every psych class she took but couldn't pass statistics. There are a large amount of people who are better at different areas. It just seems ignorant for you to deny that not all people are brilliant in all areas.

And you STILL haven't addressed why physics deserves to be on the exam anymore than psych.

3) So are you...I'm just not acting like that's a huge surprise or an inappropriate thing to do in a debate when neither of us has access to the AAMC's knowledge/reasoning, nor their data. We are uninformed people debating on this topic, let's not pretend that either of our positions is based on anything more than assumption and bias. I'm arguing that MY assumption is more valid than yours, and you are doing likewise.

4) Fine, allow me to rephrase.

Most science majors I know who take Psych do so because it is the CLOSEST thing to a science course they can take, without it being counted as a science or having a lab (mostly). To me, the skills required for doing well at either are pretty analogous, though I have never, ever, seen Psych course cover half the volume of material as a science course, and as I said Psych was the only place at my school where you would find any multiple choice. I also tend to find the subject material far less conceptually difficult, but sure, maybe that's my bias, so ignore that. Even assuming that the two were equivalent in difficulty (maybe I had crappy Psych department, despite it being very highly rated), the basic skills are similar...learn some topics, learn some prototype experiments, answer questions about said topics and the methods demonstrated in those experiments.

This differs greatly from, say, the skills required in an English course, or a history course. Psych and Socio may be social sciences, but they are the two which most strive to emulate the hard or natural sciences, and they require similar skills when tested.

Likewise, math, though usually lumped with the sciences, requires a different skill set in order to succeed. And for this, I'm talking Calc 3, proofs, abstract, etc. The exams are wholly different.

So no, it doesn't surprise me that someone who is good at the skills required for passing science/psych courses did not do well at Stats. It also wouldn't surprise me if she wrote poor literary analysis. It would surprise me if she weren't more comfortable answering, say, an intro bio question than either of the above (though again, I personally consider Psych easier, so the reverse, bio→psych I would expect to be more consistent).


5)
...I didn't realize that I was supposed to defend physics?
A lot of medicine requires at least a basic understanding of concepts such as fluid pressures/movements, conductivity, etc. The diagnostic instruments use EM radiation, lasers, etc. You don't need to know the nitty gritty of how these things work, but having a basic understanding about why arteriole smooth muscle is the primary regulator of blood pressure, what substances Xrays are absorbed by, etc, IS useful. Understanding vaguely how and why your machines work is useful.

Psych can also be useful...but you will learn psych related things in med school.

That's what I'd come up with if asked to defend it. I don't care enough about it to do so spontaneously, though, and I wouldn't be upset if they yanked physics from the test. I don't think that doing so would improve the exam, but it probably wouldn't hurt it either. I'm not sure why you decided I should be the physics defender? It's the only prereq which I took solely because it was a prereq, it's not my fav by any stretch.


6) I still maintain that test-taking is a skill of its own, separate from any course, and that the BIGGEST skill covered by the MCAT is the ability to do well on exams. If you are reasonable at test-taking, you should be able to get a high C, low B on a multiple choice exam even without knowledge of the material tested. There's just only so much you can do with 4-5 answer choices.

 

[aspiringMD/DO]

@Lokkja @mehc012

 

[DoctorInASaree]

The MCAT is not closely correlated with STEP scores. When you take into account a multitude of factors it's correlated by about .19 with STEP 1 and not correlated at all with NBME Subject exams or Preclinical performance. I know this because I had to do a gigantic presentation on predictors of medical school success. (Here's the source; http://www.researchgate.net/publica...ical_school_performance_across_the_curriculum)

As for why they have us write it? The MCAT is a hurdle and as such probably weeds out massive amounts of people who would apply without a standardized test in their way. It's also a good way of demonstrating people who would be hopeless in the fast pace information environment of medical school (people who score sub-25ish lets say). You're lying to yourself if you think medical schools genuinely believe that a standardized exam tells them how good of a doctor someone will be. The standardized exam exists because no better alternative exists, and there are plenty of schools who have moved away from this exam. The very university that created the MMI's (McMaster) only assesses your verbal portion of the MCAT. That doesn't meant the MCAT isn't a useful tool, it just means it can also end up cutting down people who would have made good doctors.

Mehc012 stated that testing psychology was subjective - which means she made massive assumptions about the ways in which they will test (subjective? When has it ever been stated psychology/sociology portions of the new MCAT will be subjective) I made an assumption based on her statements - which in themselves were assumptions. Studying psychology 101 won't MAKE a person more well rounded, it's about finding a student who IS well rounded. Nobody addressed the point I made that psychology/sociology are no more or less affiliated with medical science than physics - and as such if you're going to test students in fields that are at the peripheral of medicine then why draw the line at physics? The current format of the MCAT places a high emphasis on mathematical abilities when you consider physics and G chem make such a large portion of it. There are people who are not mathematically inclined, but perform exceedingly well in areas of psychology and sociology - why should we devalue their abilities in those fields while valuing the ability of people in the fields of physics and G chem?

What I meant by that last statement was that when you compare say AAMC 3 to AAMC 11 you see a massive difference. My point was the 2015 MCAT is just a further step in this direction, and in my opinion a good one.

You seem like you have an axe to grind with the MCAT. You're experiencing difficulties scoring well on MCAT practice passages and FLs. Stop being angry at the test and people in this thread (@mehc012 specifically), get off SDN and go do something about it.

Have a nice day.

 

[TexasSurgeon]

You seem like you have an axe to grind with the MCAT. You're experiencing difficulties scoring well on MCAT practice passages and FLs. Stop being angry at the test and people in this thread (@mehc012 specifically), get off SDN and go do something about it.

Have a nice day.

So you do get angry

I haven't really been following the thread closely, but there's nothing in the recent posts to really suggest that @Lokkja's is "experiencing difficulties scoring well". Even if he/she is, I don't really see how you need to point that out. It's a debate between the two of them. @aspiringMD/DO put it best lol

There's also a difference between being angry at a person and being angry at the arguments. It's natural to be angry/upset at a person's arguments because people have very passionate views, but I don't think that would stop @Lokkja and @mehc012 from being friends. To be honest, what you posted was really the only thing that came off as rude/angry.

 

[ayocaptain628]

You seem like you have an axe to grind with the MCAT. You're experiencing difficulties scoring well on MCAT practice passages and FLs. Stop being angry at the test and people in this thread (@mehc012 specifically), get off SDN and go do something about it.

Have a nice day.

um

 

[JMMTB]

If you could do medical school in 3 years instead of 4 (faster pace) would yall be interested?

 

[mehc012]

If you could do medical school in 3 years instead of 4 (faster pace) would yall be interested?

Nope. Gotta enjoy the journey, man...I didn't want college to end as quickly as it did, and I feel no rush for med school. Maybe I'll change my mind when I hit it.

 

[poop420]

If you could do medical school in 3 years instead of 4 (faster pace) would yall be interested?

I want to stay and enjoy the full experience but if its significantly cheaper i might confider it

 

[TBRBiosadist]

#thisthread #chillyo

 

[poop420]

#thisthread #chillyo

See what happens when the craziest person in the group leaves lol

 

[TBRBiosadist]

real tho, yall need to hop on the love train, pop some valerian, ganja, molly, or buddhism, and stop being angry at each other.\


**** everyone already hates premeds for being pretentious, narcissitic, neurotic pricks, last thing we need to do is hate each other.

oh wait, **** im going to be competing against you guys for positions.


TEAR EACH OTHER'S THROATS OUT. DRINK THEIR BLOOD. FORGET YOUR SECONDARIES. ATTACK YOUR INTERVIEWER.

 

[TBRBiosadist]

relevant

 

[poop420]

what about being humane and let the best man/woman win ...?? *sits in corner with ganja* We all brothers and sisters

 

[TBRBiosadist]

what about being humane and let the best man/woman win ...?? *sits in corner with ganja* We all brothers and sisters

For funsies our psych class tested each other for clinical signs of psycopathy. Needless to say I aced it. Got the highest score in the class actually.

 

[poop420]

For funsies our psych class tested each other for clinical signs of psycopathy. Needless to say I aced it. Got the highest score in the class actually.

lol

................ Dont see myself as really competitive .. I mostly will try my best to push myself but never been the one to compete with another person .. Hope I can get by on my charm lol or they might just chew me up

 

[TBRBiosadist]

 

[JMMTB]

Ya the journey is important. Just rumors for an upcoming cycle.

 

[ayocaptain628]

If you could do medical school in 3 years instead of 4 (faster pace) would yall be interested?

Yes. For me, the biggest reason I keep vacillating between going now and gap year is time. Opportunity cost. I fear that all my time will be allocated to medical school and i won't be able to properly provide for my parents and grandparents until after they're really old

 

[ayocaptain628]

In other news
It's almost September 6!!!
Gl to @orangetea and other sept6ers!!

 

[DoctorInASaree]

Me? Angry?

To anyone who is interested in why I answered in the way that I did; feel free to send me a private message in my Inbox.

I have noticed many people asking the following question: Should I use TBR Bio to review Biology content?

It is quite a fascinating question, because EK and Kaplan's content review leave much to be desired. The middle ground or balanced approach that many people recommend is TPR and subsequently the TPRH Science Workbook for passages. Where does this leave TBR? Would it be circumspect, for those who want to leave no detail unturned, to study from TBR? Or is that too much of an arduous task? Ought they, then, to skim through chapters taking notes here and there? Or is that indicative of an apathetic effort, and therefore not a prudent use of one's resources?

Discuss!

 

[orangetea]

It was all fun and games until I realized my test is on 9/6/14... #awkward.

 

[ayocaptain628]

It was all fun and games until I realized my test is on 9/6/14... #awkward.

sry, did i remind u

 

[ayocaptain628]

Me? Angry?

To anyone who is interested in why I answered in the way that I did; feel free to send me a private message in my Inbox.

I have noticed many people asking the following question: Should I use TBR Bio to review Biology content?

It is quite a fascinating question, because EK and Kaplan's content review leave much to be desired. The middle ground or balanced approach that many people recommend is TPR and subsequently the TPRH Science Workbook for passages. Where does this leave TBR? Would it be circumspect, for those who want to leave no detail unturned, to study from TBR? Or is that too much of an arduous task? Ought they, then, to skim through chapters taking notes here and there? Or is that indicative of an apathetic effort, and therefore not a prudent use of one's resources?

Discuss!

i personally supplanted TBR w/ EK b/c i have always been the type to get a holistic view beforehand before getting into the nitty gritty
once i have a baseline, it's a lot easier for me to assimilate the minutiae in TBR to what i already know and triage what i think will be important to know for the exam
i also think tprh science workbook is better for passages
between the three sources for me, tpr is excellent for content explanation and breadth of detail

 

[orangetea]

sry, did i remind u

ahahaha nooo!!! it's been on my mind since I signed up for it.

I am not really that superstitious actually. So dis is for those of you going through it.. it works out at the end.. I went from a 7/7/8 (my first test ever) to a 12/11/12. I also have to say that ESPECIALLY the last month of studying things started to click... I realized how to approach verbal.. the PS/BS tricks were all written down in a note book... ALSO.. I highly advise people to do more than just the AAMC tests.. once you go through them you realize that they test the same topics but in a different fashion.. but my friends that have taken recent tests have told me that it's also important to review the topics on the outline because those out of the park questions usually stem from those topics.


lastly. I prob have a full notebook of ALL the mistakes I have ever made.. like for example *flow of heart blah blah blah* or *real vs ideal gas diff in volume/pressure* and I review that every day.. up until my test. It's helped tremendously.

I will update more once I take this damn thing. and rock it

 

[deleted388502]

@orangetea is bae

Hope you all are killing school, life, being awesome people all around, y'know

 

[pbrocks15]

Is it regular to fluctuate +- 3 points from your average during exams?

Or did everyone usually keep scoring what they were mostly averaging?

 

[mehc012]

real tho, yall need to hop on the love train, pop some valerian, ganja, molly, or buddhism, and stop being angry at each other.\


**** everyone already hates premeds for being pretentious, narcissitic, neurotic pricks, last thing we need to do is hate each other.

oh wait, **** im going to be competing against you guys for positions.


TEAR EACH OTHER'S THROATS OUT. DRINK THEIR BLOOD. FORGET YOUR SECONDARIES. ATTACK YOUR INTERVIEWER. .

I actually was not frustrated with Lokkja, despite our differing opinions.
I am starting to get frustrated with the mushy 'love thy neighbor' stuff.


lolat the end, though

 

[bambam92]

Me? Angry?

To anyone who is interested in why I answered in the way that I did; feel free to send me a private message in my Inbox.

I have noticed many people asking the following question: Should I use TBR Bio to review Biology content?

It is quite a fascinating question, because EK and Kaplan's content review leave much to be desired. The middle ground or balanced approach that many people recommend is TPR and subsequently the TPRH Science Workbook for passages. Where does this leave TBR? Would it be circumspect, for those who want to leave no detail unturned, to study from TBR? Or is that too much of an arduous task? Ought they, then, to skim through chapters taking notes here and there? Or is that indicative of an apathetic effort, and therefore not a prudent use of one's resources?

Discuss!

I say get TPRH bio if you can and WB for passages--it is the best by far. And I have every company under the sun. I read EK bio first for main idea and concepts--then I go into TPRH afterwards and read corresponding chapter in there then crush some passages in WB. Its niceee

 

[JMMTB]

Should I use TBR Bio to review Biology content?

It is quite a fascinating question, because EK and Kaplan's content review leave much to be desired. The middle ground or balanced approach that many people recommend is TPR and subsequently the TPRH Science Workbook for passages. Where does this leave TBR? Would it be circumspect, for those who want to leave no detail unturned, to study from TBR? Or is that too much of an arduous task? Ought they, then, to skim through chapters taking notes here and there? Or is that indicative of an apathetic effort, and therefore not a prudent use of one's resources?

Discuss!

I haven't taken physiology yet so I originally thought that the detail of TBR bio would really help me learn the physiology that I lacked. I was getting around 70% and thought well if I just had a better groundwork then I would be able to do better. Fast forward a month - read a textbook to get physiology- only 2% better on the 2/3. I will say there are certain aspects of TBR bio that I really enjoy, but some questions are horrible, like one was between which amino acids is a disulfide bond? Easy right? well in the answer choices they had cysteine as well as cystine. I totally get it 2 cysteine form to make a cystine, but why include that when it is, to me at least, at trivial detail that will never show up on the MCAT. Maybe I feel that in their chapter readings they should include all of the details, so when you get to the passages there is no surprise.

Overall, am I glad I am using TBR bio - Yes. Would I do it differently - hard to say as I don't have TPRH/EK/Kaplan.

 

[TBRBiosadist]

I really only used EK for content, but post-gaming TBR passages gave me any knowledge gaps I had. Plus im still fresh out of my pre reqs and doing research which has relevant info to the mcat so I was pretty up to speed. It's different for every person. Doing it again I would probably use TPR, but I dont think the lack of using it really hurt me. We'll see when scores come out

 

[gene_pool]

Me? Angry?

To anyone who is interested in why I answered in the way that I did; feel free to send me a private message in my Inbox.

I have noticed many people asking the following question: Should I use TBR Bio to review Biology content?

It is quite a fascinating question, because EK and Kaplan's content review leave much to be desired. The middle ground or balanced approach that many people recommend is TPR and subsequently the TPRH Science Workbook for passages. Where does this leave TBR? Would it be circumspect, for those who want to leave no detail unturned, to study from TBR? Or is that too much of an arduous task? Ought they, then, to skim through chapters taking notes here and there? Or is that indicative of an apathetic effort, and therefore not a prudent use of one's resources?

Discuss!

I didn't use TBR correctly..... I had to ditch SN2's schedule as I was falling way too far behind

I went through each chapter spending more time than I should have on small details... Then, being in a hurry to get onto the next chapter, I would take only 1-3 passages but then not even review them because I was worried I wouldn't get the next day's content review done..

Totally ineffective approach...

I do have EK Bio and I absolutely love the concise treatment they give for each topic. However, I'm recently removed from a bunch of Biology upperdiv classes so that could be why it was so much easier to digest. Being two years removed physics and G Chem, it's interesting to wonder if I would equally be able to soak in the concise presentation of the EK material.

It took me a long time to get through the TBR Physical Sciences chapters due to too much attention to detail and minutia. To make matters worst, I didn't give myself periodic review of previous material while I was learning other new chapters - I was simply trying to barrel through the next chapter's text. Stuff is coming back to me quick, but so is my test date. Just crammin' away at problems now, which is helping, but I definitely wish I practiced more in the beginning.

Overall, I would say that if you are a couple years or more removed from any of the sciences, you should expect to take a longer time re-learning that material than the sciences that you've taken more recently...No matter how smart you think you are..

To answer the question: if you're a Bio Major who has done most of the classes related to the MCAT, I would say that EK Bio should be just fine. In my opinion, TBR chapter's are a beast to get through, and I think you have to have incredible endurance to follow SN2's 3- month schedule. If you like brevity and making connections yourself, just go with EK and do a bunch of practice to fill in the gaps. If you do use TBR, they have really great passages.. but definitely distinguish which concepts are more important to understand than others rather than treating the entire chapter equally.

 

[oznefu]

I also have to say that ESPECIALLY the last month of studying things started to click... I realized how to approach verbal..

Share your verbal approach plsssss!! I've been trying a few different strategies, with the most recent being reading slowly and more carefully in one go but I always always find myself referring back to the passage because I forget/don't feel confident/realize i didn't fully understand the passage. Nothing seems to help!! I'm stuck around a 9 but come out of it feeling like a 5 every time

 

[orangetea]

Share your verbal approach plsssss!! I've been trying a few different strategies, with the most recent being reading slowly and more carefully in one go but I always always find myself referring back to the passage because I forget/don't feel confident/realize i didn't fully understand the passage. Nothing seems to help!! I'm stuck around a 9 but come out of it feeling like a 5 every time

I am by no means the expert because I still manage to miss 1 or 2 per passage BUT what I realized is that you can almost get a whole passage wrong but if you do generally well on the rest you can pull a 10 . So I read it once through but I got this advice from @sillyjoe to read it as if I am saying a prayer.. like not loud enough where anyone can hear you but you. That way you are not only reading but also mouthing the words which in my case really helped me focus. It takes me from 3-4 mins to do that .. it also helps me understand the passage really well. But I rarely look back at the passage except for the natural sciences I think they are.. the ones about dinosaurs and the earth and stuff like that.


I would try that with AAMC passages tho because IMO this approach fails with kaplan, TBR, EK101. Also verbal is such a shady game changer because the difference between a 9 and a 1o is literally 1 question. So don't give up you can get there just focus and get the main idea then run with it!!


p.s I should add that I started with a 7 in aamc 8, got to a 9 in aamc 3, my 11 is from aamc 10(which was last week). I didn't take the aamcs in order but I realized you WILL keep improving as long as you analyze your approach and make conscious efforts to go with whatever method you choose.

 

[mehc012]

For me, I read it once, thoroughly, then look at the questions. I pick whichever one seems right to me, and then I search back to the passage, not to support, my choice, but to actively disprove the other answers. It is too easy to get tricked into believing a statement is supported...far better to disprove them, because it only takes one point to prove something wrong, whereas for a statement to be right, it has to be consistently supported throughout.
If I have a tossup, I choose an answer, mark it, and come back at the end for a fresh perspective.

Note: While I was scoring 13-14 on AAMC VR, I did poorly on all other materials - EK, TBR, TPRH, all of them.

 

[pbrocks15]

Hey ya'll!!

My exam is in at the end if October and I was wondering what you guys suggest I do when I'm not taking exams or reviewing them?

I was last recommend to stop doing the online princeton questions and substitute it for TPRH SW.

Is TPRH SW the way to go right now?

 

[TexasSurgeon]

Hey ya'll!!

My exam is in at the end if October and I was wondering what you guys suggest I do when I'm not taking exams or reviewing them?

I was last recommend to stop doing the online princeton questions and substitute it for TPRH SW.

Is TPRH SW the way to go right now?

I would do the parts of TPRHSW that you miss on exams. For example if you miss electrochem, do a bunch of those passages