What's everyones take on Exam Krackers?

[yanks26dmb]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I just got my EK books yesterday and dove into the bio material. Is anyone else finding some of these questions in Bio 1001 incredibly detail oriented? From what I've heard, the MCAT does not get nearly as detail-oriented as EK (or obviously, BR). Additionally, I've found several errors already - one EK question in particular had a directly opposite answer to that found in BR material.

I'm using SN2ed study guide..anyone have any suggestions to supplement those materials with anything else? In particular, is there anything else, like BR, that provides quality passages to practice with?

Or should I just give it more time and assume EK will adequately prepare me for the real thing?

 

[masaraksh]

I studied on my own with EK + AAMC practice exams. I was very happy with EK and my PS/BS scores.

Don't know much about BR. I can say that I used a Barrons book that I didn't like at all. Kaplan is okay but seemed to not go into am much detail as EK. If I hadn't used EK, I am not sure I would have scored as well on PS/BS.

 

[Psai]

I studied on my own with EK + AAMC practice exams. I was very happy with EK and my PS/BS scores.

Don't know much about BR. I can say that I used a Barrons book that I didn't like at all. Kaplan is okay but seemed to not go into am much detail as EK. If I hadn't used EK, I am not sure I would have scored as well on PS/BS.

Same. I felt that Examkrackers was weak for verbal reasoning but very good for science. I used EK as my study guide pretty much exclusively, AAMC practice tests and Kaplan exams.

 

[GC1000]

EK sucks!!!!


To study effectively, pick one set of books and go with it. I think buying multiple books in the same subject is a waste. I used TPR for everything on my retake and saw a significant improvement. For my first attempt i used a mixture of different books. It was much simpler to use one set.

 

[fhg]

I really liked Examkrackers for everything except PS. I felt a little less comfortable in PS, so I supplemented with the Nova Physics book (which was fantastic).

 

[dancingmate]

I personally liked EK in terms of drilling my weaknesses and understanding concepts in physical sciences/biological sciences that I was having trouble with. I didn't like the verbal much, but it actually helped me improve my score the second time around. I would use TPR for more MCAT-representative questions when you practice day-to-day, and the AAMC tests for the practice exams. EK is a good supplement.

 

[Stoptheclot]

I loved the Verbal 101 passages, mostly for practicing/learning MCAT format. It felt really good to hammer out passage after passage, notice which questions I struggled at answering and improve - I swear that its the reason why I jumped from a 6 to a 10 in VR. Can't speak to PS/BS though - good luck!

 

[OneTwoThreeFour]

I just got my EK books yesterday and dove into the bio material. Is anyone else finding some of these questions in Bio 1001 incredibly detail oriented? From what I've heard, the MCAT does not get nearly as detail-oriented as EK (or obviously, BR). Additionally, I've found several errors already - one EK question in particular had a directly opposite answer to that found in BR material.

I'm using SN2ed study guide..anyone have any suggestions to supplement those materials with anything else? In particular, is there anything else, like BR, that provides quality passages to practice with?

Or should I just give it more time and assume EK will adequately prepare me for the real thing?

Hey there! I taught an MCAT course a few times and tutored a few students and I always recommended (of course) the AAMC self-assessments for practice problems, and then some TPR passages--for example, Cracking the MCAT CBT has a couple passages on almost every topic, as well as giving you access to a few online TPR CBTs.

EDIT: This is specifically for bio questions, not necessarily any of the other topics.

 

[yanks26dmb]

Bottomline - do people find EK (bio) asks for more detail than the real MCAT?

 

[fhg]

I thought the bio was pretty accurate. I thought the PS asked for more detail, if I remember correctly...

 

[doggyfern]

Exam Krackers is where its at. 1001 question books are pretty much all i used and the verbal passage book increased my VR score by 5

 

[OCDOCDOCD]

I don't remember much about the EK textbook passages/questions, but the EK1001 books are definitely far more detail oriented than the exam. This is intentional though. The EK1001 books are meant to drill you on every topic on the exam so that you can quickly grind out any weaknesses in a very specific area. The 1001 books are not meant to be done from cover to cover (even the books themselves say that); you're only supposed to do problems related to topics that you feel weak on.

The 101 VR book though is different; it is meant to be done cover to cover and it's much more like the exam than the 1001 books. That said, EK101 does focus too much on details to be a perfect emulation of the real VR. For third party VR practice, nothing beats TPRH VW.

 

[GC1000]

Bottomline - do people find EK (bio) asks for more detail than the real MCAT?

EK doesn't give most topics enough details, especially if your weak on the area. Unless you have a good understanding, avoid EK.

 

[Brownshorts]

I liked the verbal passage book. It seemed much closer to actual AAMC passages/ questions than kaplan.

 

[yanks26dmb]

EK doesn't give most topics enough details, especially if your weak on the area. Unless you have a good understanding, avoid EK.

I'm referring to the questions in the 1001 books..not the content itself.

 

[pyrrion89]

EK Bio is pretty solid. Used it.; ended up being my highest subsection score.

 

[corndogger]

I found the verbal EK great. The other sections were pretty solid too, but I already had a good background. Tbh, I looked at some other ones (TPR I believe) and found them way too detail oriented.

 

[taffer]

EK worked for me.

 

[Planes2Doc]

I loved the VR book, and their strategy using question stems. I incorporated question stems into my final strategy, and saw my score double! Otherwise, I used TPR for everything else. TPR is great if you need to relearn a lot of things.

 

[sazerac]

I just got my EK books yesterday and dove into the bio material. Is anyone else finding some of these questions in Bio 1001 incredibly detail oriented? From what I've heard, the MCAT does not get nearly as detail-oriented as EK (or obviously, BR). Additionally, I've found several errors already - one EK question in particular had a directly opposite answer to that found in BR material.

I'm using SN2ed study guide..anyone have any suggestions to supplement those materials with anything else? In particular, is there anything else, like BR, that provides quality passages to practice with?

Or should I just give it more time and assume EK will adequately prepare me for the real thing?

I went with EK 100% with all their regular and supplemental materials like 1001 and mini-MCATs. Everything except for the EK full length practice exams. I even followed the EK schedule not the SN2ed schedule. Like you, I was worried that EK plus my weak bio background would be inadequate, so on each EK "break" day I did a chapter of TBR bio instead. When I took the MCAT I only got one science question incorrect. So yeah, EK is awesome if you are solid, and feel free to supplement if you think you will still have a weak spot.

If you are finding errors in your review materials, think of it as a good sign that you really really understand the material.

 

[alamo4]

I used only Exam Krackers (7th ed, 5 book set) and the AAMC practice tests. I just worked through the books, and went over the background material any questions I missed or confused me a few times to consolidate the information. The AAMC practice tests very accurately predicted my actual score, so I knew about what I was going to get before I took the test.

I recommend it to anyone I know who is premed. I bought a lot of other materials (study guides), but never ended up using them. I agree with finding one system and making sure you go through all of it. Part of the process of cranking through lots of realistic questions is bolstering learning weak areas and making sure you aren't just working on your strengths.

It had been several years since I took the prereq courses, but EK was sufficient for me to do well enough on the MCAT to get into a selective school. Just a personal anecdote, but I only have a sample size of 1.

Good luck!

 

[3838]

I just got my EK books yesterday and dove into the bio material. Is anyone else finding some of these questions in Bio 1001 incredibly detail oriented? From what I've heard, the MCAT does not get nearly as detail-oriented as EK (or obviously, BR). Additionally, I've found several errors already - one EK question in particular had a directly opposite answer to that found in BR material.

I'm using SN2ed study guide..anyone have any suggestions to supplement those materials with anything else? In particular, is there anything else, like BR, that provides quality passages to practice with?

Or should I just give it more time and assume EK will adequately prepare me for the real thing?

Don't "assume" that any thing will prepare you for the real thing. First, study the content. Then, study the test. I really liked tpr hyperlearning science workbook. I used youtube videos, online textbooks, TBR, TPR, EK, Wikipremed to understand the material. I did whatever it took to grasp it. Then I used AAMC passages (timed) to study the test i.e. understand trends in passages, questions, answers and to adjust my thought processes/approaches to the types of passages. Key point in everything I typed? Do whatever it takes!!! If something isn't working for you, change it.

 

[Gauss44]

Science:
I think of EK lecture books as "the least you need to know." I made sure that I understood the answer to every single question in the lecture books. After that I went on to The Berkeley Review to fine tune. I scored 12's in the science sections on the real MCAT.

1001 books were a waste of time IMO. If someone wants to use them, I recommend doing every 5th question or so. (To be fair, this is coming from someone - me - who is very strong in the sciences. In fact, I've literally carried the curve and got THE top score in almost every science class I've been in for my entire life.)

Verbal:
Every non-AAMC VR source seems to be different than AAMC material in some way. I'm going to diverge from the rest of the group here and say that variety is key. I wish AAMC produced enough material to prepare using AAMC material exclusively, but they don't so you have to use other sources. TPR and Kaplan are the most popular. Personally, I've found EK passages to be shorter, easier, and more predictable than AAMC material. (I've thoroughly gone through every single passage in EK 101 and most AAMC, TPR, and TBR material.) Technique practiced might be at least as important as the material used to practice.

 

[Microglia]

1001/101 series.

Best. Books. Ever.

But only once you've thoroughly prepared. Not great if you're just getting acquainted with MCAT material.

 

[darkjedi]

When I took the MCAT I basically exclusively used the EK books and the AAMC tests. I tried looking over the Princeton Review and Kaplan books, but just didn't find them as approachable. I never used the BR books but I've heard good things about them. I also agree that the EK books are amazing for review, but it assumes that you are already familiar with the material so it's hard to get into without a good knowledge base. I highly recommend EK for the sciences. I've always been weak in verbal and I don't think any prep book could have changed that.

 

[amad01]

I had at least 4 questions on my exam that were asking about material that EK said "wouldn't be on the test."