WHy am I doing so poorly with EK verbal book?

[Tofurkey]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hello,

I am taking Kaplan and got 10s on their verbal stuff--practice tests, etc. Now I am trying to use EK verbal strategies (I had no strategy previously) and I am getting everything from 5 to 7 scaled on my EK tests in the EK 1001 verbal book.

I don't know what the problem is. I find EK verbal WAY harder than Kaplan. When I try to apply EK techniques I find it screws me up. I find going back to the passage as the only way I can do well in verbal.

Can anyone help?

Thanks,

T

 

[DReject]

I'm experiencing the same problem. No increase yet.
BTW, the 3rd exam was so difficult.

I'm gonna keep practicing while applying EK strategies.
I'd love to hear others' opinions as well.
Good luck.

 

[silkworm]

I actually feel Kaplan and EK have about the same difficulty, since my score on practice tests for both of them are nearly identical. But apparently no one else here thinks so.

As for following their strategy, why don't you try one of their test using your old ways to see if it's the new methods that's tripping you up?

 

[javandane]

Hello,

I am taking Kaplan and got 10s on their verbal stuff--practice tests, etc. Now I am trying to use EK verbal strategies (I had no strategy previously) and I am getting everything from 5 to 7 scaled on my EK tests in the EK 1001 verbal book.

I don't know what the problem is. I find EK verbal WAY harder than Kaplan. When I try to apply EK techniques I find it screws me up. I find going back to the passage as the only way I can do well in verbal.

Can anyone help?

Thanks,

T

i've said it before, and i'll say it again: i firmly believe EK 101 questions and answers are largely biased towards the author's way of thinking. so, if you don't think like the author, you're probably not going to do well on the exams. with that said, i believe the question types found in 101 are most similar to those on the real deal--i.e. "main idea" types. so, becoming familiar with those types is helpful in preparation for the exam (i've heard Kaplan verbal focuses too much on detail questions, which are only a very small part of the real exam). i do believe EK's "strategy" is solid, so i'd keep working on that. if you can get your scores up to aound the 8-9 mark on the EK exams, you'll have no trouble getting a 10+ on the real exam.

 

[Groove]

My advice would be to really internalize the EK methods. I say this because I was scoring 8's on some practice verbal tests and getting fed up with EK's methods, but have noticed a jump in my score lately by doing nothing more than slowing down and really internalizing each paragraph of the passage instead of rushing through the passage and spending my greatest amount of time with the questions and re-reading. It sounds simple, but it seems to really be helping me.

Oh and yes, the EK's are more difficult than the Kaplan's IMO.

 

[Tippy007]

If you were getting 10s and are now sinking to 5-7s, then maybe the EK strategy isn't working for you. 10s on the Kaplan tests aren't bad, so maybe you should try the next test without using the EK strategy and see how you do. Either that or EK's verbal may just be harder than Kaplan's.

 

[RayhanS1282]

I am in the same boat as you guys. The EK stuff seems harder than the Kaplan or the Princeton stuff. I did 4 exams so far, I got 9, 9, 9, 10. My best advice would be to do what works best. For example, I tried the TPR method of swift reading is good reading but that didn't work for me. Instead I had to spend more time going back and rereading the whole thing just b/c I didn't get the ideas the first time around. Now, I ususally read a little bit slower and try to get the main idea of each paragraph in my head and then sum up the whole idea by the end along with the tone. Although it's not the "fastest" way to read, it does wind up adding points to my final score. Also, I usually find a passage that I wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole, trust me there's always one of those, I use the time that I would spend wrestling with that and still getting questions wrong onto the passages where a couple of seconds can ensure a right answer. Hopefully, this has been helpful.

 

[javandane]

i agree that slowing down is necessary. i myself am a fast reader--finished the first EK exam with 20 minutes to spare--got an 8. the next two, i slowed way down, finishing with 2 minutes left (what EK recommends), and raised my score by 2 and 3 points, respectively.

 

[jammin06]

everyone is completely differnet w/ the EK series. As other threads have said, it all comes down to finding your own strategy and goin with that. I am taking TPR and scored a 5 and 4 on the first two diagnostics, but then somehow managed a 9 on the first EK exam. Prolly gonna take the second one tomorrow, we'll see how everything goes.

 

[theunc31]

In the same boat as you jammin. Last diag-10,10,4(V). Then amazingly have been getting 9's on my last 2 self-administered tests. Don't really believe I learned reading comprehension in less than a week, but hope it stays this way.

theunc31

 

[jammin06]

i think one of the things that i have trouble w/ is freakign out in the test type situations. i lose my concentration and start focusin on things i shouldn't be (ie. 'why don't i understand this' , 'gotta go faster,need to stay on pace', etc..) I've now realized that as long as i'm calm before i take the verbal section, i can do better. (well, i hope, taking my next practice exam on saturday)

 

[blz]

Hate to destroy your hopes, but the Kaplan verbal exams are far more easier than the real thing. sorry dude, just go by what you get on the AAMC tests.

 

[strangelight]

i agree. i know people that have previously taken kaplan & the mcat, and apparently kaplan's verbal isn't a very good predictor on what you'll get on the real mcat.

soo, b/c of this, i started working on the ek verbal book & i'm also doing horribly! the questions seem a lot harder. i guess i'm glad that i'm not the only one having trouble on this thing...it's really frustrating. i don't really know what to do except practice. i also feel like i'm not putting enough time into the other sections b/c i'm always concentrating on this. i guess we'll see what happens...

 

[RayhanS1282]

Hate to destroy your hopes, but the Kaplan verbal exams are far more easier than the real thing. sorry dude, just go by what you get on the AAMC tests.

Just curious about your thoughts on the EK 101V, I've been doing those and my score so far has been 9,9,9,10,11. Are those an accurate representation or are the EK stuff too easy as well? Thanks in advance.

 

[javandane]

Just curious about your thoughts on the EK 101V, I've been doing those and my score so far has been 9,9,9,10,11. Are those an accurate representation or are the EK stuff too easy as well? Thanks in advance.

nice improvement. if you maintain those 10's and 11's on ek101, you'll hit 12+ on the real deal.

 

[blz]

Just curious about your thoughts on the EK 101V, I've been doing those and my score so far has been 9,9,9,10,11. Are those an accurate representation or are the EK stuff too easy as well? Thanks in advance.

You're doing great on your EK tests. I scored in the 8-10 range on all the EK exams and scored an 11 on the real deal. You're in good shape to score well as long as you stay confident on test day. good luck man

 

[dzlist]

Hello guys,
I tried Kaplan and got very bad VR. i was naively studying only Kaplan for MCAT. I am going to take MCAT again. I am going to try EK, Princeton, and Kaplan. EK seems to work well for me.

 

[KrisF]

I was getting 7's on PR verbal. I used the EK techniques (ie. read for main idea and no writing in margins) and have improved just in the last 2 weeks. For instance, today I got a 10 on an EK verbal section.

As for the EK Bio, I keep getting 9's on the 30 min in class exams. Is that accurate?

How about the EK 30 min physics and g-chem. haven't taken any of those yet, whoops!

Thanks.

 

[PRamos]

i've said it before, and i'll say it again: i firmly believe EK 101 questions and answers are largely biased towards the author's way of thinking. so, if you don't think like the author, you're probably not going to do well on the exams. with that said, i believe the question types found in 101 are most similar to those on the real deal--i.e. "main idea" types. so, becoming familiar with those types is helpful in preparation for the exam (i've heard Kaplan verbal focuses too much on detail questions, which are only a very small part of the real exam). i do believe EK's "strategy" is solid, so i'd keep working on that. if you can get your scores up to aound the 8-9 mark on the EK exams, you'll have no trouble getting a 10+ on the real exam.

I so much agree with your comment about the author's bias. I have been through all of the EK verbal materials. At first, I was getting beaten up on them using their methods. By the end, I got better. I don't know if I finally got used to their style or actually improved. Verbal is so random anyway. My AAMC verbal scores varied between 7 and 11. I got an 8 on the real thing last time. I'm getting about 10 on Berkeley tests now.

Having done PR methods, EK methods, and now Berkley methods, they all seem hit or miss. I really like the verbal packets that come with Berkeley lectures, but their book needs work. I liked PR's passages, but the lectures and strategies didn't really help. EK materials seem about the same. I wouldn't worry too much about your EK scores.

This thread has some good insights. I hate to say it, but what verbal materials you use don't matter. You have to find your own method and don't blindly trust any of the companies. The only thing they care about is selling more materials, not how well you do. If they can convince you they have some secret method, try it, but if it's not working, find a better plan.