Took the AMCAS#3 as a diagnostic. Stupid, I know

[serendipity007]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Soooo, I took the AMCAS test 3 as a diagnostic. No flames please! I know I wasted one good practice test but I really wanted to know how much I sucked at MCAT before I started studying. I also wanted to know my weaknesses before I focused on other aspects.

Long story short: I got 10/10/8 PS/VR/BS

I was meh about PS (hoping I can improve though!). But, I was super-surprised by VR since people have told me that I will have to struggle to get an 8 since English is not my first language.

But, Bio............ I have seen on SDN that literally everyone does well on Bio. Any good practice advice? I haven't taken a lot of bio classes (no genetics or microbio). I have bio1 and cell bio under my belt but that's pretty much it. I guess this explains my terrible score but still study tips? Thanks everyone!

 

[BABSstudent]

The only advice you will get is to study. Review problem areas. Then study even more.

 

[serendipity007]

Haha obviously I expected that. So, it is salvage-able? wooops made up a word

It is just that I haven't seen such a low bio subscore. Or maybe I just read SDN a bit too much

 

[Jepstein30]

Haha obviously I expected that. So, it is salvage-able? wooops made up a word

It is just that I haven't seen such a low bio subscore. Or maybe I just read SDN a bit too much

Dude you'll be fine especially if this is before content review.

I went from a 30 on AAMC 3 to a 40 on AAMC 11.. all after content review.

Identifying weaknesses is most important. Also helps if the 'newer' MCATs play to your strengths such as molecular biology (which is one of mine).

get examkrackers or TBR (TBR is too much info imo but if you dont have a solid bio background, would be useful) and you can up that BS score with some work.

 

[TheShaker]

Haha obviously I expected that. So, it is salvage-able? wooops made up a word

It is just that I haven't seen such a low bio subscore. Or maybe I just read SDN a bit too much

Well, I mean, you haven't even started studying yet so of course it is salvageable. A 28 is a pretty good score for not studying. Those bio scores are from people who have completed a good portion of their content review and are likely bio majors.

 

[PanRoasted]

general opinion is that your PS will see the largets improvement after studying, then BS, then VR last.

i'd say you are in an extremely good place right now 🙂

 

[serendipity007]

Dude you'll be fine especially if this is before content review.

I went from a 30 on AAMC 3 to a 40 on AAMC 11.. all after content review.

Identifying weaknesses is most important. Also helps if the 'newer' MCATs play to your strengths such as molecular biology (which is one of mine).

get examkrackers or TBR (TBR is too much info imo but if you dont have a solid bio background, would be useful) and you can up that BS score with some work.

Wow that's a sweet improvement! I think you're right that I should look into TBR since I feel like I am very weak in the bio section. Thanks!

 

[serendipity007]

Well, I mean, you haven't even started studying yet so of course it is salvageable. A 28 is a pretty good score for not studying. Those bio scores are from people who have completed a good portion of their content review and are likely bio majors.

general opinion is that your PS will see the largets improvement after studying, then BS, then VR last.

i'd say you are in an extremely good place right now 🙂

Wow, thanks guys. I honestly didn't think it was a good score. And wasn't trying to be an a**
My GPA kind of sucks so I am focusing on doing decent on this test to make up for my chances. I am shooting for the January test date so I won't have to deal with worrying about my score while I am filling the primary in June.

 

[Jepstein30]

Wow that's a sweet improvement! I think you're right that I should look into TBR since I feel like I am very weak in the bio section. Thanks!

I mean, I really put most of that improvement on just getting used to CBTs because I averaged 36 after AAMC 3. But yes, 26 as a diagnostic is awesome dude.

 

[PanRoasted]

i think 26 is above the median MCAT score, so yeah nothing to worry about.

but don't take this as an excuse to slack off during your studying. that's probably the worst thing you could take from this topic. the fact that you have a high diagnostic should make you want to study MORE because you have the potential to get an astronomically high score. reach it

 

[serendipity007]

i think 26 is above the median MCAT score, so yeah nothing to worry about.

but don't take this as an excuse to slack off during your studying. that's probably the worst thing you could take from this topic. the fact that you have a high diagnostic should make you want to study MORE because you have the potential to get an astronomically high score. reach it

You're definitely correct! Thanks for the motivation. I will not slack. I think my low GPA is a good enough motivation but I agree with your reasoning esp. the last part 😀

 

[serendipity007]

Also, to be fair. most people take Kaplan or other test company diagnostic tests which are artificially harder than the AAMC. I was reckless with taking the #3 so I won't call my diagnostic exceptional. However, there is a huge room for improvement. Yep, I am looking at you, Mr. BR

 

[Jepstein30]

Also, to be fair. most people take Kaplan or other test company diagnostic tests which are artificially harder than the AAMC. I was reckless with taking the #3 so I won't call my diagnostic exceptional. However, there is a huge room for improvement. Yep, I am looking at you, Mr. BR

Just don't get carried away with memorizing every single TBR bio factoid and acing every single question in that book.. it is way more info than the real thing and much harder IMO.

 

[serendipity007]

yeah I know what you mean! the book is monstrously huge

 

[Luvahgilahsa]

That is not stupid. AAMC 3 is too easy anyways, it is a pretty good diagnostic...
I took the Princeton Review course and they made us take the AAMC 10 as a diagnostic test.... So much for their higher scores guaranteed. If they give you one of the hardest AAMC tests to do diagnostic before reviewing, no way you're not going to improve right?

I didn't study for anything, and got a 30 on it. People say AAMC 10 and 11 are most predictive of your actual score, but I really didn't do any content review for AAMC 10 at all, so all I have is my AAMC 11 scores to base off my score predictions upon... Even when I retook AAMC 10 again after all my content review, I still remember all of the questions and answers.. so it was not helpful at all.

 

[serendipity007]

I think that's why some people don't like the idea of taking actual AMCAS tests as diagnostics. If you go back, you remember the answers. But, it is a pretty good baseline!

I am planning to read the EK Bio since it is shorter and then work on relevant sections in TBR Bio. I feel like that would be the most efficient way to do it.

 

[Jepstein30]

I think that's why some people don't like the idea of taking actual AMCAS tests as diagnostics. If you go back, you remember the answers. But, it is a pretty good baseline!

I am planning to read the EK Bio since it is shorter and then work on relevant sections in TBR Bio. I feel like that would be the most efficient way to do it.

That's what I did.

Though the more recent tests (and my MCAT this past week) is much more molecular biology focused.. less physiology stuff. So it would actually help to read some scientific papers IMO and get used to digesting figures, etc.

I got a 15 on bio in AAMC 11 because I'm pretty strong in the mol. bio department and there were maybe a handful of physiology related questions.

Definitely know your physiology stuff and memorize your hormones but spend more time on genetics/biochemistry/cell processes, etc.

 

[SixStringPsych]

It seems like the AAMC is making the bio section more tailored towards knowing basic facts from Bio 101 and applying them to experimental passages, this is what I hear from everyone and what I am seeing by doing EK practice problems and the one AAMC diagnostic I did. Don't worry about not knowing advanced stuff because most pre meds are Bio majors so it would be unfair to give the, any advantage by making it heavily content based. After some content review, BS is all about practice problems!!

 

[Jepstein30]

It seems like the AAMC is making the bio section more tailored towards knowing basic facts from Bio 101 and applying them to experimental passages, this is what I hear from everyone and what I am seeing by doing EK practice problems and the one AAMC diagnostic I did. Don't worry about not knowing advanced stuff because most pre meds are Bio majors so it would be unfair to give the, any advantage by making it heavily content based. After some content review, BS is all about practice problems!!

Definitely an advantage to being a bio major but there's so many things you can possibly pull out of biology to write up a passage that the odds of you actually being an expert in that field is astronomical!

Actually, and this was crazy, I was taking one of the early AAMCs and there was a BS passage on a cilia species that is very similar and related to the cilia species I'm doing research on!! My additional knowledge didn't really help me do any better though since everything was possible to get from the passage itself.

I would even say expert knowledge of a passage background can hurt you.. assuming too much and knowing too much (for instance, I found that in the passage I mentioned above, the question writers significantly simplified concepts to the point they were pretty much.. wrong) is not the way to go. Ground yourself in the passage!