The parts of the MCAT you can't study for...

[Machination]

I keep reading posts where people see the MCAT as testing skills which cannot be helped by studying. People who have taken the test, what are these skills, and what can be done ahead of time (say a year before the test) to improve them?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[MeowMix]

You can improve your score on every part of the MCAT (except the writing sample) by practicing, working on your timing and pacing, and learning effective strategies for ruling out wrong answers and guessing accurately. These same skills can often be practiced in multiple-choice tests in other coursework, if you are still taking courses that use MC tests.

You can also of course improve your understanding of the science concepts and practice ways to solve problems intuitively and conceptually.

The best way to develop these skills is to get some prep materials developed specifically for the MCAT, and to use them.

If you are thinking about starting a year early, I suggest that you take a look at the Examkrackers web site and read their suggestions for people who want to start studying very early (i.e. don't start too early, burn out, or run out of good practice materials); www.examkrackers.com

 

[Freakingzooming]

One of the biggest misconception is that standardized testing is supposed to be measuring how smart you are.

That is flagarantly wrong and preaching to the wrong choir here.

The only thing the MCAT, SATs, GMAT, LSAT, every standradized test there is out there test is your ability to spend tons and tons of money into a useless test that at best helps you review the stuff you breezed by in the four years of college.

That said, I think every section on the test is open to improvement. I myself didnt do so well the first time.. I got a 25M. or something like that, didn't study, thought I would try it out.

Boy, so I took it again with studying and got a 30 S. Each section other than verbal I improved on.

Writing is possible to improve. Sometimes its by luck, sometimes you just need a different strategy. I went into the test with a "screw writing" strategy. Knowing that writing samples are scored in Cal, I decided to freely bash Bush and Microsoft. I don't know how much that helped me but I also threw a couple Roussea references and I wrote more clearly.

But the take home in all of this is don't despair. Even if you speak more Swanhili than English or you slept your way thru college, you can do well on the MCAT. You can spend, spend, and spend your way to a solid score.

 

[R_C_Hutchinson]

I completely disagree.
to get a good mcat score you have to have a good understanding of BASIC science and be an intelligent person. I'd say the balance is about 70/30 knowledge to intelligence. The MCAT to me is a way to fairly judge people from different backgrounds. you can go to a community college because of financial reasons and outscore a Harvard grad with the mcat- that's why it's valuable. If you breeze through classes, you wont have that basal knowledge that is absolutely necessary to do well. this is why i think you see a lot of people who do very well (38+) with slightly lower GPA's- because they take hard classes and focus on learning instead of a grade. I sure as heck wouldn't pick a class because it was easy to get a good grade- i want my money's worth when i shell out thousands of dollars. Taking the mcat i was rewarded for taking a brutal schedule, even though i don't have a 4.0 or go to a traditionally ultra-prestigous ivy league school

 

[crazee8]

Originally posted by R_C_Hutchinson
The MCAT to me is a way to fairly judge people from different backgrounds. you can go to a community college because of financial reasons and outscore a Harvard grad with the mcat- that's why it's valuable.

I think its the opposite. In most cases, the MCAT favors people from better institutions as these people would have had more rigorous classes and preparation than a person from a community college because the classes are tougher and more competitive. Its like the SAT, people from better high schools usually score better, than people from poor high schools, not because the person from the prep high school is necessarily smarter than the person from the "poorer" high school, but more that the person from the prep school has had more opportunities to excel and demonstrate his or her abilities. That's why there is so much controversy surrounding standardized testing and that's also why some medical schools, as far as I know, expect students from Harvard and other ivy leagues to have better MCAT scores than people from less rigorous institutions. So in a sense, the MCAT, like all standardized tests is, "biased."

 

[R_C_Hutchinson]

you missed my point, what i mean is that it is possible for a community college student to outscore a harvard grad. obviously harvard's AVERAGE scores will be higher, that needs not be stated, the reason i see the MCAT as an equalizer is that someone can have failed high school, turned their life around, worked hard and have something to show for it. this cannot be said with GPA- even a barely passing harvard GPA is better than a 4.0 from community college of (insert small town here). hence the mcat is a more egalitarian form of evaluation, putting everyone on the same starting ground when they enter the test (you dont get any compensation points for going to harvard when you take the test, as you would with GPA)

 

[Nutmeg]

Originally posted by R_C_Hutchinson
you missed my point, what i mean is that it is possible for a community college student to outscore a harvard grad. obviously harvard's AVERAGE scores will be higher, that needs not be stated, the reason i see the MCAT as an equalizer is that someone can have failed high school, turned their life around, worked hard and have something to show for it. this cannot be said with GPA- even a barely passing harvard GPA is better than a 4.0 from community college of (insert small town here). hence the mcat is a more egalitarian form of evaluation, putting everyone on the same starting ground when they enter the test (you dont get any compensation points for going to harvard when you take the test, as you would with GPA)

A case study:

Attended junior high and high school in inner city
Grades (fall/spring):

8th grade algebra D-/D-
8th grade science F/D-
9th grade algebra II F/F
10th grade English C-/F (required summer school)
10th grade physics D-/D- (actual score 20%, teacher did not believe in giving F's)
11th grade English D/B- (switched to remedial mid year)
12th grade English C/C-
12th grade algebra II C-/D-

Attended community college, where I took my prerequisite physics, math, gen chem, and biology for MCAT. Took o-chem at state university.

MCAT: 40T (99.9th percentile for numeric score, 99.6-99.9th percentile WS)

Standardized tests: the great equalizer.

 

[crazee8]

Originally posted by Nutmeg
A case study:

Attended junior high and high school in inner city
Grades (fall/spring):

8th grade algebra D-/D-
8th grade science F/D-
9th grade algebra II F/F
10th grade English C-/F (required summer school)
10th grade physics D-/D- (actual score 20%, teacher did not believe in giving F's)
11th grade English D/B- (switched to remedial mid year)
12th grade English C/C-
12th grade algebra II C-/D-

Attended community college, where I took my prerequisite physics, math, gen chem, and biology for MCAT. Took o-chem at state university.

MCAT: 40T (99.9th percentile for numeric score, 99.6-99.9th percentile WS)

Standardized tests: the great equalizer.

You're obviously quite exceptional Nutmeg and good job on the MCAT! But I disagree that standardized tests are the "great equalizers," as standardized tests do have an element of cultural, racial and socioeconomical bias. Say for instance, a student from an inner-city school in the Bronx, who was obviously bright but went to a underachieving public school and earned straight A's in school but only ended up scoring like a 1100 on the SAT because his school education was really bad and because he didn't have the money for SAT prep courses or tutoring. Take on the other hand, some of the "not-so bright" George W. Bush types, lol, who have received the best education since they were young and have parents who have spent thousands and thousands of dollars for SAT prep, so that their kids can get 1350+ SAT scores. Doesn't this then create a disadvantage for the "poor" student and create an advantage for the "rich" student who was able to take prep courses and receive tutoring and go the best high schools? If so, can we really then say that standardized tests are the "great equalizers?"

The website, <www.fairtest.org> addresses this makes valid points about this.

(Also, I scored a 1600 on the SAT and so I have no reason to be "biased" against standardized tests. )

 

[Nutmeg]

Originally posted by crazee8
You're obviously quite exceptional Nutmeg and good job on the MCAT! But I disagree that standardized tests are the "great equalizers," as standardized tests do have an element of cultural, racial and socioeconomical bias. Say for instance, a student from an inner-city school in the Bronx, who was obviously bright but went to a underachieving public school and earned straight A's in school but only ended up scoring like a 1100 on the SAT because his school education was really bad and because he didn't have the money for SAT prep courses or tutoring. Take on the other hand, some of the "not-so bright" George W. Bush types, lol, who have received the best education since they were young and have parents who have spent thousands and thousands of dollars for SAT prep, so that their kids can get 1450+ SAT scores. Doesn't this then create a disadvantage for the "poor" student and create an advantage for the "rich" student who was able to take prep courses and receive tutoring and go the best high schools? If so, can we really then say that standardized tests are the "great equalizers?"

The website, <www.fairtest.org> addresses this makes valid points about this.

(Oh, and if any of you are curious, I scored a 1600 on the SAT and so my opinions aren't "biased." )

I've actually emailed that site, and complained about the fact that their goals opposed people like me trying to show their talents despite the disadvantaged upbringing. As for the kid in the Bronx, how are they any different from me? Neither of my parents are college educated. I've been working to help support my family since the age of twelve. In third grade, I did a duck-and-cover drill while a police helicopter chased a man with an uzi off of campus. In sixth grade I remember spending a day cleaning up my class room after it had been looted and vandalized. In eighth grade I remember being dropped off on the side of the school because the police were still examining the dead body in front of the school. Also in eighth grade, I remember my principle walking into my math class and saying "Just have to take a look around because we received a bomb threat...no big deal, we get about 100 of these per year..." In ninth grade an arson burned the school gym, and I spent the rest of the year smelling charred remains being pulled out. In high school, the sports regions were redefined because they were sick of riots breaking out whenever my school played Lincoln. My sister, a year older than me, had her senior picnic canceled due to rioting which occurred the previous year. My school band used overturned stools as drum stands, and taped together drumsticks because we were broke as ****. Our uniforms were 20+ years old. There were always homeless people sleeping on campus, even during school hours. I didn't live in the ghetto/barrio, but I certainly went to school there.

As for my SAT scores, I never took the SAT because it cost more money than I could afford to spend on it. And my MCAT studying consisted of rereading my textbooks from the prerequisite classes--there's no way in hell I could afford a prep course. Standardized tests may have their biases, but so do grades and LOR's. Standardized tests are the only thing that you can't brown-nose your way through, or have Mommy and Daddy pull strings. I support AA to help as an equalizer, but for poor whites like myself, the MCAT can be your saving grace. I honestly think all the money in the world could not get GW Bush to get your 1600 on the SAT or my 40T on the MCAT.

 

[Sunflower189]

I have to agree with Nutmeg. Standardized tests like the MCAT do test ability to succeed - but people test well for a whole spectrum of reasons.

Say someone went through Andover and Harvard. He'll do well on the MCAT, without studying as much as others, but he's been well prepared for med school. Then you have people like Nutmeg who come from less optimal situations and need to prove themselves - but if they can scrape up enough resources and motivation to score well, they'll do well in med school also.

It's the same with intelligence. Some people walk in cold and rock the MCAT. Others do the stereotypical premed, study for months, take five different prep classes, do every practice test known to man, and then rock the MCAT. Med school will be easier on the first group, but the second group has the work ethic to pull through.

But what was the question? Oh yeah.

Some of the hardest things to "study" are controlling stress, working efficiently, and endurance.

Something I think helped me with this - I'm used to ridiculous exam conditions, to the point where I was grateful for how short and relaxed the MCAT was. Take two practice exams back to back, or do a section in half an hour, or blare your favorite rap CD in the background. (Hardcore, but helpful.)

Also, basic math skills are handy. So is the ability to turn all doubts off on test day - you want to walk in convinced you are going to tear the curve to shreds, and you want to walk out feeling the same.

 

[Nutmeg]

Originally posted by Sunflower189
Also, basic math skills are handy. So is the ability to turn all doubts off on test day - you want to walk in convinced you are going to tear the curve to shreds, and you want to walk out feeling the same.

At about 5am on the day of the test, I decided to do the free practice MCAT that AAMC gives you. It was then that I learned that it was an 8 hours day, and that I wouldn't be able to bring my calculator. I had assumed calculators would be provided.

 

[spumoni620]

Originally posted by Nutmeg
At about 5am on the day of the test, I decided to do the free practice MCAT that AAMC gives you. It was then that I learned that it was an 8 hours day, and that I wouldn't be able to bring my calculator. I had assumed calculators would be provided.

nutmeg, your experience/scores are amazing. i demand an explanation!! how on earth did you do it...and where does the discrepancy in grades vs. scores come from? especially w/o studying for the actual test itself?? did you just not push yourself in class b/c you were bored...or are you just super-intelligent...

 

[R_C_Hutchinson]

Originally posted by Nutmeg
I've actually emailed that site, and complained about the fact that their goals opposed people like me trying to show their talents despite the disadvantaged upbringing. As for the kid in the Bronx, how are they any different from me? Neither of my parents are college educated. I've been working to help support my family since the age of twelve. In third grade, I did a duck-and-cover drill while a police helicopter chased a man with an uzi off of campus. In sixth grade I remember spending a day cleaning up my class room after it had been looted and vandalized. In eighth grade I remember being dropped off on the side of the school because the police were still examining the dead body in front of the school. Also in eighth grade, I remember my principle walking into my math class and saying "Just have to take a look around because we received a bomb threat...no big deal, we get about 100 of these per year..." In ninth grade an arson burned the school gym, and I spent the rest of the year smelling charred remains being pulled out. In high school, the sports regions were redefined because they were sick of riots breaking out whenever my school played Lincoln. My sister, a year older than me, had her senior picnic canceled due to rioting which occurred the previous year. My school band used overturned stools as drum stands, and taped together drumsticks because we were broke as ****. Our uniforms were 20+ years old. There were always homeless people sleeping on campus, even during school hours. I didn't live in the ghetto/barrio, but I certainly went to school there.

As for my SAT scores, I never took the SAT because it cost more money than I could afford to spend on it. And my MCAT studying consisted of rereading my textbooks from the prerequisite classes--there's no way in hell I could afford a prep course. Standardized tests may have their biases, but so do grades and LOR's. Standardized tests are the only thing that you can't brown-nose your way through, or have Mommy and Daddy pull strings. I support AA to help as an equalizer, but for poor whites like myself, the MCAT can be your saving grace. I honestly think all the money in the world could not get GW Bush to get your 1600 on the SAT or my 40T on the MCAT.

good to hear there are people trying for med school without a kaplan book in their backpack and a silver spoon in their mouth. More and more, i'm beginning to think that a fairly rough/stressful upbringing is a Godsend on standardized tests because such people can better handle stress. I do see a kind of pattern, with your score, my score and a friend of mine who is from south central LA who also scored a 39 with no prep. who says there's no justice for poor over-represented majority's?

 

[Nutmeg]

Originally posted by spumoni620
nutmeg, your experience/scores are amazing. i demand an explanation!! how on earth did you do it...and where does the discrepancy in grades vs. scores come from? especially w/o studying for the actual test itself?? did you just not push yourself in class b/c you were bored...or are you just super-intelligent...

I hate HW. I push myself learn, but I can't stand needless busywork.

It's also prabably only fair to include the fact that I'm a ChemE/ Molecular bio BS/BA simultaneous degree candidate, who started as a philosophy and later a psych major. I'm also 26, and next semester, I'll graduate with more than 240 semester units taken in college.

 

[DrBodacious]

Originally posted by Freakingzooming
The only thing the MCAT, SATs, GMAT, LSAT, every standradized test there is out there test is your ability to spend tons and tons of money into a useless test that at best helps you review the stuff you breezed by in the four years of college.

This is just one example of the "you need money for a test-prep course to do well on the MCAT" argument. This is bologna! What do you expect to do for the USMLEs, pay a tutor? Good luck finding one! Anyone entering med-school should have the self-dicipline to teach themselves for the MCAT. The advantage given by adcoms to people who overcome hardships such as Nutmeg overshadows the advantage given to a sheltered kid with a 36 who had to shell out $1500 to get it.

Hey, if want to spend money for a course to motivate you to study that's great! But to say that it gives rich people an advantage is BS. Books are all you need, and yes they do cost money, but comon.

Standardized test are not an anomoly of the cosmos. There are enough rescources out there (SDN is plenty) for anyone with internet access to figure out what the MCAT is all about.

 

[DrBodacious]

I can somewhat see the high school <-> SAT interrelation. Even intellegent high school juniors shouldn't be assumed to be so mature as to realize the importance of algebra and whatever the hell else they test on the SAT in the grand scheme of things, if they don't have some external direction (a good high school, smart parents, tutors). But college juniors who want to go to med school should definately realize the importance of the MCAT and use the neccessary means to prepare themselves for it.

Maturity folks.