The AAMC exams are not representative of the real deal! The real thing is much harder! Get TPR A-D!!!
kaplan exams are crap, I really dont think they are very representative at all (i posted on this somewhere). Honestly, i dont know what is representative of that beast. I strongly feel that the hard as hell TPR A-D tests are probably pretty good for preparation.anucar said:
exactly. I wasted $80 on that emcat. I should have known that it was just a money-sucking machine.Cerberus said:
I have to agree here. The Practice MCATs on the web are much easier then the real thing. They are still good practice though as long as you supplement them with allot more science knowledge. The timing on the web is easier also, point and click is alot smoother then filling in bubbles and going from one sheet to the next while your neck is sore... I am not sure there is a universal answer on how to prepare, but do not doubt that anything hard will be on there. I ran out of time on the physical science section because my timing was way off, however I think I brought it back up with the other sections.
Don't you now feel for those of us who had to take it twice? BTW, how the heck are you still awake? I crashed after that thing!Cerberus said:
Don't worry, I thought I bombed it both times. How you feel doesn't tell you your score.
relax, guys. i promise, you have absolutely no clue how you did on the test. i felt horrible the last time i took it. i did really well. im not the type of person to think i failed a test and then get an a, either. im usually right on with my predictions. but on the mcat, i wasnt...thank the lord. im sure you did much better than you expected, especially on verbal. though it seems a lot harder than the practice aamc tests, the scores are usually right on, some how or other. best of luck.
No way I totally disagree. Kaplan test that you take in the class especially full length number 5 was EXACTLY like the real thing for me. It was so close even the writting sample topics I got were similar to the ones i got on full length number four it was really the same. Number 1-3 I dunno but the last couple very representative.
I haven't taken TPR A-D, but I completely agree that the AAMC tests were not representative. I think the Berkeley exams were more representative.Cerberus said:
Cerberus, I agree 100%. I remember telling myself during the BS, The closest to this is TRP A-D. Something I never anticipated. Oh well.Cerberus said:
I strongly disagree. I practiced with the AAMC tests (3R-6R) and I feel they were pretty well representitive of what kind of material to expect on the MCAT. I actually felt the PS on this MCAT was a bit easier than the PS on the practice tests. The verbal on this test was definitely harder (buy 7R), but the BS section was very similar. I'm not at all dissapointed with my e-mcat purchase. I guess we'll see how well my scores will correlate with the practice exam when we get them back.
I think some of the reason you feel the practice tests were easier may be that you know what you missed on them, and you know why. You feel like you understand the test a lot better. With the real thing, you don't get your scores back immediately, and this impending sense of doom comes over you right after the test.
Who knows, to each his own!
I think some of the reason you feel the practice tests were easier may be that you know what you missed on them, and you know why. You feel like you understand the test a lot better. With the real thing, you don't get your scores back immediately, and this impending sense of doom comes over you right after the test.
Who knows, to each his own!
I gotta agree with JohnDO. I also think that a better method for taking the AAMC practice tests is to print them out and bubble them in just like the real thing. Then, later, you type in the answers and still get the analysis and solutions.
Each of the AAMC practice tests had different easy and difficult parts, for me. Same with the real exam. Every test has an element of luck, as to whether it asks things you know better or worse.
Each of the AAMC practice tests had different easy and difficult parts, for me. Same with the real exam. Every test has an element of luck, as to whether it asks things you know better or worse.
well, in specific, i would advise people to do all of the princeton review physics crap. when i was doing it, i was like, "man this sh.t is hard. it's so calculation-heavy...there's no way the REAL MCAT will be like this."
WRONG! the real MCAT PS section had tons of friggin' calculations! TPR actually prepared me quite well for this scenario, i must say.
oh, and contrary to what some have said, i thought AAMC 3-6R were pretty similar to the real thing, but TPR A-D were also EXCELLENT practice (except for verbal--A-D verbal was simply INSANE. way too hard, scaled score "curves" were absurd).
WRONG! the real MCAT PS section had tons of friggin' calculations! TPR actually prepared me quite well for this scenario, i must say.
oh, and contrary to what some have said, i thought AAMC 3-6R were pretty similar to the real thing, but TPR A-D were also EXCELLENT practice (except for verbal--A-D verbal was simply INSANE. way too hard, scaled score "curves" were absurd).
This is what I've been saying for the past 9 mumfsCerberus said:
Definitely practice with harder exams.
People that are saying the aamc exams are like the real thing:
Sure, they are similar in question type and whatnot but the real thing is significantly harder than any of the aamc exams! Especially the BS section!
Sure, they are similar in question type and whatnot but the real thing is significantly harder than any of the aamc exams! Especially the BS section!
yes, the BS section was harder (except for that passage on G418-resistant cells...teehee teehee... finally, doing that stuff everyday has paid off!).
Hey all,
I'm a virgin MCAT taker and I'm gearing up for the August MCAT . I was just wondering how I can get my hands on the TPR A-D practice tests?
Thanks,
J
I'm a virgin MCAT taker and I'm gearing up for the August MCAT
. I was just wondering how I can get my hands on the TPR A-D practice tests?Thanks,
J
Act now and buy TPR B&C from meJayMD2004 said:Hey all,
I'm a virgin MCAT taker and I'm gearing up for the August MCAT
Thanks,
J
I also have two hardass BK exams for sale if anyone is interested and Kaplan 1-5 w/answers. Maybe I should just list everything I am selling in the for sale forum.
i have the unused TPR A-D test book...i will sell it to you...if i get a decent score for this April's test
PM me.
PM me.
Cerberus, you gotta relax man. I dont think it's a good idea to try to sway people from buying the AAMC exams. I think my MCAT was almost exactly like the AAMC exams. By the way, the only practice exams I have taken were 3R-7 (I have looked at some of the PR and Kaplan tests and none of them looked like my test at all). I'm sure most of you guys are overreacting. Wait till you get your score back before you tell the whole world AAMC is crap. I'm sure after you get your 30+ your opinion about the test will change.
I think everyone should get the AAMC exams, what I hate to see is people being lulled into a false sense of security because they are scoring 34+ on all the aamc exams. Thats the purpose of this thread, to inform people that the test is a little harder than they might expect from the aamc exams.blz said:
The AAMC exams were right on for me, but I have always been good at predicting my score. I think you guys are over reacting. You all have the same mind set that you do for your classes- that if you miss 2 you did horrible. What you must realize is that the MCAT is a whole different playing field. You can miss 10 on every section and still do excellent. So whereas on a normal test if you came out feeling like you didnt know 30 questions that would normally mean something horrible, it doesn't on the MCAT. The more practice exams you do, the more you will get a feel for this.
As for practice:
-AAMCs are a must. They are all really good (although 1 & 2 are too easy)
but by them on Ebay or from friends. In the end, I only spent $50 on 1-7.
-Am I the only one who thinks 7R verbal was a lot easier? My score went up from a consistant 9s and 10s to 12 on 7R.
-I was pissed that my MCAT version's verbal was like the old verbal- with the line numbers and all.
-Examkrackers exams were really nice. They were a little on the hard side, but it was good practice. Examkrackers by far has the best review if you are a biology major. If you havent had all the biology classes you will want something a little more in depth... like a textbook. Same goes for their PS. If you haven't had a lot of chemistry and physics classes you may want to go with something else. As for orgo, every test prep company went over board on orgo. As long as you got an A in orgo and retained at least 25% of it, I dont think you really will have to study it.
-Kaplan exams sucked. Their PS was the worst, too many calculations- not at all like the real thing. I don't think I ever finished a kaplan PS in under 120 mins whereas all others I finished 10 mins early. Their biology was not too bad, but not as good as EK's or TPRs. Kaplan's review book was pretty nice though for getting the nitty gritty details.
-I took 2 TPR exams that were very nicely written (not A-D).
As for practice:
-AAMCs are a must. They are all really good (although 1 & 2 are too easy)
but by them on Ebay or from friends. In the end, I only spent $50 on 1-7.
-Am I the only one who thinks 7R verbal was a lot easier? My score went up from a consistant 9s and 10s to 12 on 7R.
-I was pissed that my MCAT version's verbal was like the old verbal- with the line numbers and all.
-Examkrackers exams were really nice. They were a little on the hard side, but it was good practice. Examkrackers by far has the best review if you are a biology major. If you havent had all the biology classes you will want something a little more in depth... like a textbook. Same goes for their PS. If you haven't had a lot of chemistry and physics classes you may want to go with something else. As for orgo, every test prep company went over board on orgo. As long as you got an A in orgo and retained at least 25% of it, I dont think you really will have to study it.
-Kaplan exams sucked. Their PS was the worst, too many calculations- not at all like the real thing. I don't think I ever finished a kaplan PS in under 120 mins whereas all others I finished 10 mins early. Their biology was not too bad, but not as good as EK's or TPRs. Kaplan's review book was pretty nice though for getting the nitty gritty details.
-I took 2 TPR exams that were very nicely written (not A-D).
You know, I really think you should wait until you get your scores back. I think you will find you did much better than you think. You really don't know anything for sure until then. Another thing that is important about the AAMC is that you recreate all testing conditions.Cerberus said:
1) Timed conditions and don't allow yourself to keep working after time. You have to experience having to rush through the end of the exam because you are running out of time so that if it does happen during the real thing, you will know how to handle it. If not, you will run out of time during the real thing and freak out.
2) Take all the breaks- no longer, no shorter.
3) I took all mine in different locations of the library and testing center at my college so that I would get used to different places with different sounds. The last couple I took right out in the open in the library where is was noisy.
If I were just getting ready to start studying for the MCAT, I would get Kaplan's Comprehensive Review and Schaums "Quick Outlines" for Genetics and Organic Chemistry. As for practice tests, there are sample items in the Kaplan book and the AAMC tests, of which I would probably take 3R, 6R and 7R.
Use the Kaplan comprehensive review for Bio, Physics and General Chemistry. Use the Schaums for Genetics and Orgo. Take the first practice test early to diagnose your weaknesses, and the other two to check your progress.
The later physics stuff, about Optics, Sound and Circuits is high yield, as is the VERY BASIC Genetics and Organic stuff. The Kaplan book, and every other review book I've seen, goes WAY overboard on the Orgo. You just flat out don't need to have most reactions memorized.
Use the Kaplan comprehensive review for Bio, Physics and General Chemistry. Use the Schaums for Genetics and Orgo. Take the first practice test early to diagnose your weaknesses, and the other two to check your progress.
The later physics stuff, about Optics, Sound and Circuits is high yield, as is the VERY BASIC Genetics and Organic stuff. The Kaplan book, and every other review book I've seen, goes WAY overboard on the Orgo. You just flat out don't need to have most reactions memorized.
I will disagree. I echo Superveil's sentiments. I got form DK, lotta calculations and 65% physics. Even the chem questions were sometimes calculation oriented.fun8stuff said:
However I think the real thing was more difficult than the AAMC exams.
the aamc practice tests are the real thing as far as score predictability.
forget how "hard" or "easy" a certain test was, your performance compared to other test takers is what matters
forget how "hard" or "easy" a certain test was, your performance compared to other test takers is what matters
Although well-intentioned, I don't think it's wise to extrapolate your experience on one MCAT to all MCATs. Here's why.
I took the MCAT in April 2003 (as a practice) and remembered my form being very similar to what people are talking about; dense PS, difficult, computations; tons of genetics on BS. Somewhere between the AAMC, EK and Kaplan practice tests on PS, but VR and BS were like AAMC (just add more genetics).
But the exam I took in August 2003 was extremely similar to AAMC 6 and many of the EK exams, and COMPLETELY dissimilar to the Kaplan full-lengths on PS and VR. I felt very well prepared for it by the AAMC full-lengths.
I don't know if it's because of having different test-writers or what, but there is definite variation among test forms and among different sittings of the MCAT. I always tell my students that they should prepare by taking full-length tests from AAMC and at least one other source.
I took the MCAT in April 2003 (as a practice) and remembered my form being very similar to what people are talking about; dense PS, difficult, computations; tons of genetics on BS. Somewhere between the AAMC, EK and Kaplan practice tests on PS, but VR and BS were like AAMC (just add more genetics).
But the exam I took in August 2003 was extremely similar to AAMC 6 and many of the EK exams, and COMPLETELY dissimilar to the Kaplan full-lengths on PS and VR. I felt very well prepared for it by the AAMC full-lengths.
I don't know if it's because of having different test-writers or what, but there is definite variation among test forms and among different sittings of the MCAT. I always tell my students that they should prepare by taking full-length tests from AAMC and at least one other source.