value of reviewing diagnostics

[tsefour]

---

Members do not see this ad.

After you complete a diagnostic test (say TPR, for example) and recieve your score, is there any value in reviewing the test other than to see what types of questions you missed?

 

[GoldShadow]

Most definitely. What's the point of even taking a practice/diagnostic if you're not going to review? What I always did was go through every questions (including ones I got right) to see what concepts I had to work on for questions I got wrong, or to see if I really understood the concept even if I got it right.

 

[DrMattOglesby]

i agree with goldshadow!
In fact, I may have spent more time reviewing questions than I did answering questions.
And don't just look for the type of question you missed. Find out EXACTLY what went wrong with your error. I feel that a lot of people (including myself) found mathematical calculations to be the source of the majority of error in the Physical Sciences (as well as regular Chem and Physics classes). The concept isn't too far-fetched, so being able to work at lightning speed with accuracy is a skill that must be honed in order to succeed.

 

[JaggerPlate]

Most definitely. What's the point of even taking a practice/diagnostic if you're not going to review?

To remind you that you are INDEED stupid and that your prep course has a built in 'higher score guarantee.'


I put 0 stock into diagnostic. I suppose they let you know what your real weaknesses are, but for me at least:

-I correctly selected my weaknesses before hand (test confirmed)
-It let me know that I had to review everything (this is why I was taking a course)
-I also feel it was absurdly difficult compared to other exams - higher score guarantee
-I think it freaks a lot more people out than it really helps

Reviewing practice full lengths is absolutely golden, but a FL before any content review is just pointless in my opinion.

 

[olemissbabydoc]

After you complete a diagnostic test (say TPR, for example) and recieve your score, is there any value in reviewing the test other than to see what types of questions you missed?

For me, this is THE most important part of the studying process.

 

[GoldShadow]

To remind you that you are INDEED stupid and that your prep course has a built in 'higher score guarantee.'


I put 0 stock into diagnostic. I suppose they let you know what your real weaknesses are, but for me at least:

-I correctly selected my weaknesses before hand (test confirmed)
-It let me know that I had to review everything (this is why I was taking a course)
-I also feel it was absurdly difficult compared to other exams - higher score guarantee
-I think it freaks a lot more people out than it really helps

Reviewing practice full lengths is absolutely golden, but a FL before any content review is just pointless in my opinion.

I didn't take a TPR course but I think that they refer to all their tests as "diagnostics". That's how I interpreted the question.

If this is, however, a "diagnostic" as in first test that a prep course gives you to establish a baseline score, then I agree with JaggerPlate. Those are worthless.

 

[JaggerPlate]

I didn't take a TPR course but I think that they refer to all their tests as "diagnostics". That's how I interpreted the question.

If this is, however, a "diagnostic" as in first test that a prep course gives you to establish a baseline score, then I agree with JaggerPlate. Those are worthless.

OHHHH I didn't know that diagnostic = full length. That changes things. Taking realistic full lengths is the most important thing you can do to study (in my opinion), and going through them carefully is just as important as taking them. However ... as stated before ... the initial diagnostic is worthless.

 

[kish180]

The initial diagnostic for me (TPR) actually wasnt that bad... alot of people think that because of the incentives involved TPR would give out an incredibly hard first test, but I was talking to one of the tutors about it and he was saying that this is really a huge misconception, which I believed because this guy seemed like he really didnt care a whole lot about TPR and he even said he'd tell me that the first test was harder if it was. Anyways reviewing any test is a good idea, but reviewing the AAMC's are vital. I reviewed every single question on all 8 AAMC verbal, and I know it helped, probably it was the only thing that actually helped my verbal.

 

[Chocolate Bear]

Let me break it down:

--Most students who can't seem to raise their average scores are often NOT reviewing their practice tests.

--This is one of the best ways to periodically assess weaknesses and reinforce strengths.

Is there value in reviewing PRACTICE TESTS?
👍 👍 👍 👍 👍 👍 👍 👍 👍

The above posters are a million percent correct!

 

[Vihsadas]

I think there's value in even re-re-re-re-iterating this point:

Going through your practice full-length exams with a fine tooth comb is perhaps, THE most important thing that you can do to prepare for your MCAT. You need to carefully review every single problem on the exam: both the questions that you got wrong as well as the questions you did correctly. As you are reviewing, you should keep a log book of what types of questions you missed, what exactly you were thinking when you missed them, and most importantly, spending time figuring out the things that you can do to answer the question correctly and more efficiently in the future. As I said, you should be doing this for questions you got wrong as well as questions you got right. Your thought process and approach to every problem is what is important here. Half of the battle is learning to beat the questions themselves. If you don't dissect and analyze the structure, purpose and characteristics of every problem and every answer choice, you are selling yourself short. So yes! Review your practice exam in extensive detail!

 

[SN2ed]

First off, there is usually a very large difference between the diagnostic tests prep companies hand out versus their actual practice tests. For actual practice tests, ALWAYS thoroughly review your test. For the diagnostic you get before you start, it might not be worth your time to review it. Some diagnostic tests are not even remotely similar to the actual MCAT. If your diagnostic test is similar to the MCAT, review it. If your diagnostic looks nothing like an actual MCAT, don't bother. Again, this is for DIAGNOSTIC tests NOT actual practice tests. Always review your practice tests. If you notice my sig, I don't have a high opinion of diagnostic tests in the first place.

 

[BlueElmo]

Okay, then even after I carefully reviewed each test, my test score never rose up? What's up with that?

Although I did review each and every question after I did a practice exam, I don't know if it was THAT important. My practice score never varied from a 32.

 

[Chocolate Bear]

Okay, then even after I carefully reviewed each test, my test score never rose up? What's up with that?

Although I did review each and every question after I did a practice exam, I don't know if it was THAT important. My practice score never varied from a 32.

When already scoring a 10.67 on each section, it might have benefitted you more to review the upper tier of content, as you had a solid grasp on 80%+ of the material, at that point.

As one's score goes up, the ability to make improvments goes down exponentially.

 

[futuredoctor10]

I reviewed every single question on all 8 AAMC verbal, and I know it helped, probably it was the only thing that actually helped my verbal.

I also reviewed all the AAMC exams and Kaplan exams I took thoroughly. I am retaking and plan to redo some AAMCs and reanalyze the questions for all sections, especially Verbal, even MORE thoroughly than I did in the review process after taking each practice test the first time through.

Any suggestions for how to dissect/analyze the questions, especially for VR? Did you notice trends in question types or logic used to solve the question? Etc.