TPR or BR for PS content review

[phixius12345]

Hey guys I just had a quick question. I haven't taken my Gchem and physics for a long long time so I am very rusty / don't remember much at all. I know TBR is better for the passages but can sometimes be confusing as far as explaining goes because I think they assume you to remember everything. My question is, should I just stick with review BR and learn whatever content I don't understand from reading through the passages? Or would TPR be a better fit for me for PS because I feel like they explain things a little clearer and don't get as abstract. Really appreciate any help I can get. Thanks guys!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Dreamstoo]

Hey guys I just had a quick question. I haven't taken my Gchem and physics for a long long time so I am very rusty / don't remember much at all. I know TBR is better for the passages but can sometimes be confusing as far as explaining goes because I think they assume you to remember everything. My question is, should I just stick with review BR and learn whatever content I don't understand from reading through the passages? Or would TPR be a better fit for me for PS because I feel like they explain things a little clearer and don't get as abstract. Really appreciate any help I can get. Thanks guys!

For passages, TBR physics is golden IMO. Then gen chem is pretty good. For content, I feel TBR is too much also. TPR should do the trick. I only use TBR for passages and other sources for content.

 

[csx]

The common consensus on this board for Biology is TPR all the way.

 

[santeprof]

Read my only post. I only know MCAT physics. I have not studied TPR which I assume is The Princeton Review. I have studied TBR physics only and found it accurate. You might consider taking the Khan Academy MCAT Physical Processs section. It coproduced by AAMC and covers the MCAT PS section at the deepth tired by the MCAT. And it's free.

Also I think it is necessary to drill all the AAMC practice tests.

Let me know how you proceed.