Validity of AAMC Practice Retest

[PharMed2016]

---

Members do not see this ad.

How valid are the scores from retaking the practice AAMCs and their correlation with your actual performance on the actual MCAT? I thought that they were a pretty good measure the first time around when I first took the actual MCAT (31). Just took AAMC #3 today again (last took it about a year ago) and got a (35 - 10/10/15). This was frankly surprising since I thought I had forgotten a ton of material since last summer and I wonder how much of it was me having foreknowledge of the material?

Let me know your experiences if you have any concerning retakes of old practice exams and the correlation with actual performance.

 

[transfec]

You've taken #3 twice then? Hm. I would stick to only taking each AAMC Practice once, unless I've misunderstood you. As for the validity of the tests, they certainly "feel" much easier than the actual test, but the curve on the real test definitely compensates for that. My avg. AAMC score was a 31 and I ended up getting a 32 on the real deal. I didn't practice for the writing at all and ended up with a Q. I just came up with complete lies of examples on that. Hope that helps! 🙂

 

[NickNaylor]

Please see the search button.

Most people agree that your AAMC 7-10 average is a good predictor of your score. I averaged 37 on those tests and ended up with a 41. Most people seem to get +/-2 or so within their average, assuming they didn't completely bomb a section or something like that.

 

[SN2ed]

Should I retake FL X?

I don't suggest it for a few reasons. First, your score will be inflated. This alone negates the predictive power of the test. If you don't need it to gauge where you are, fine, retake them. For instance, you could simply be going over the problems again to, as others have mentioned, understand the thinking behind it. However, if you are using it as a practice FL, don't.

One of the most important aspects of a FL is that it's material you've never seen before. It forces you to quickly analyze an unknown passage, tap into your knowledge, and answer questions you've never seen. If you knew exactly what was going to be on the test, it would take away from the somewhat frantic experience of getting that weird passage. It also makes you more relaxed overall because you know what's coming. Unfortunately, you will not have the luxury of either on the test. You will have to deal with weird passages. You will have to get out of your comfort zone of knowing what's ahead.

Then, you get into the timing issues which you MUST get down before the test. When you have prior knowledge of the material, you miss the chance at gaining more experience with the clock. Too many people underestimate the effect of the timer. Again, you have to get used to it and retaking problems won't help.

Think of the whole thing like sports practice. Sure, you go over some standard plays again and again to get a feel for them. However, to practice for a real game, you have a scrimmage match or an exhibition game. The other team doesn't tell you what plays they're going to run. If they did, it would eliminate the usefulness of the scrimmage or exhibition game.

 

[PharMed2016]

Thanks for all the responses regarding my questions. All the points everyone raised were ones that I too asked myself. I was worried that I had forgotten most of what I learned and this did reassure me otherwise.

As for the timing as SN2ed mention, I did complete this last MCAT very fast relatively speaking ~ 10 minutes faster on each section and about 25 minutes faster on BIO. I attribute the improvement in BIO more to my increased familiarity with the material since I have have since taken Immunology and a whole host of other higher level physiology courses just this past year reinforcing my understanding.