Verbal Reasoning, Examkrackers or Kaplan technique?

[millepora]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I have no got a chance to learn both of these techniques now, and I was curious if anyone else has a subjectible opinion towards them.

I just finished reading the examkrackers verbal technique book. But, I see that it is based on the verbal passages in the older tests. I think a lot of the fundamental concepts are still there. But, I am having trouble using the technique of deriving a main point from the question stems. A lot of the passages don't seem to give much information in the passages, and I am wondering if this is the case with the new tests?

I am still getting pretty bad scores (with my past technique and present technique), anywhere from a 6-8 (a lot of times a 6). But, I am finding with the examkrackers technique I can actually get through all the passages. I figure I still have time to further polish one, but it pretty hard to choose.

Btw, I also find the sticky threads at the top of the this form very informative, especially Bloodysurgeon's.

 

[SN2ed]

The verbal passages are older, but they're still fundamentally the same. The only two differences between old verbal passages and the ones on the CBT are passage length and number of questions per passage. Neither of these affect one's verbal technique beyond timing.

I didn't find Kaplan's technique helpful in the slightest. It slowed me down and distracted me while I was reading.

The reason the EK method might be giving you problems is that you're trying to get the main point from the question stems. You should be picking up the main point from the passage and applying that knowledge to the questions. It shouldn't work in reverse order.

 

[millepora]

I agree that book tells you to read the passage and look for the main idea, but it also states that once you do that it is very easy to learn a lot more about the author and main idea from the question stems. In the workbook it seemed to worked out perfectly, but when I did actual passages it didn't seem to work.

Just mainly curious, it that was just me.

 

[futuredoctor10]

Yeah I remember in their "Verbal Reasoning" workbook one sample section (taken straight from AAMC 1 or AAMC 2, when they existed) had the entire passage deleted and just the question stems and answer choices to see how you used them and the info from the stem to answer.

But I'd say generally most of the main idea used to answer questions and eliminate wrong answers will come from the passage overall... not the individual question stems. So still use them to help in answering, but sparingly and when relevant.

 

[Anotherface]

I think it is helpful to use the scope of purpose method and to stop and annotate during your first weeks of study. Overall it improves your ability to read actively and actually follow the argument. The problem is that stopping to jot things down is time consuming and distracting. Hence, why you should only use it while your learning to tackle the passages. During the actual MCAT and the CBTs I wrote a few things down, but mostly relied on highlighting.

Anyway, I felt doing passages and looking them over after I was finished was the most effective way to study. That said, I wish I would have spent more time doing that.