Why such mixed reviews for Examkrackers?

[ProteinChemist]

---

Members don't see this ad.

If I took the pre-reqs a few years ago should I not go with EK since some people say it does not explain the answers in depth enough?

Does EK or Kaplan practice tests emulate the real thing better?

 

[olemissbabydoc]

If I took the pre-reqs a few years ago should I not go with EK since some people say it does not explain the answers in depth enough?

Does EK or Kaplan practice tests emulate the real thing better?

AAMC practice tests are the closest you will get to the real thing, followed by other CBT materials, and lastely, paper tests. All test prep companies (at least the major ones) have their good points and their bad points... the 30+ MCAT Score stickied thread has some of THE best advice regarding people's opinions of different programs.. Remember, though, it's ultimately up to how you study and learn the best.

I liked EK because it was easy to understand. If the info wasn't in depth enough, I referred back to Princeton Review or my undergrad textbooks.

 

[ProteinChemist]

Thanks for the referral to the 30+ MCAT thread.

Oh and btw on your signature, the Hippocrates quote: The Greeks did not have a concept such as "holy". There was piety but it was not the same thing it is considered today. Just saying if you think of "holy" in a modern sense, it is a mistranslation.

 

[nontrdgsbuiucmd]

If I took the pre-reqs a few years ago should I not go with EK since some people say it does not explain the answers in depth enough?

Does EK or Kaplan practice tests emulate the real thing better?

I liked EK, but only as a supplement (rather than as a replacement) to the courses I'd taken, specifically some of the bio courses such as cell & molecular, A&P. My A&P course was very detailed, EK backed things out to 20,000 feet and helped me to get a better view from this perspective.

I'd looked at the Kaplan material and paid for the class, did not like it as much as the EK stuff; Kaplan was too detailed and off-point versus the real thing.

Concur about the exams - there are around 10 AAMC exams available, take all of those. I'd taken a few Kaplan exams too, but really did not think they felt like the real thing too much. I'd taken them as part of my training process, 2 practice MCAT exams per week for the month or so before the exam.

 

[emno]

I am going for KAPLAN and EK.

 

[SN2ed]

The reason why there are mixed reviews, is that EK's Bio book is in a certain style that some people like, but others hate. EK Bio is not detail oriented which can be a turn off. If you prefer having a detail oriented Bio approach, BR and TPR are good choices. Kaplan is kind of in the middle between the two approachs. For verbal, EK Verbal 101 is generally considered the best practice outside of the AAMC practice tests. There are a few who disagree, yet those people are pretty rare. In physics, gen chem, and o-chem, EK is decent and work for people. However, there are far better options in those categories.


About the practice tests, hands-down Kaplan FL #1-6. EK has among the worst practice tests.

 

[WashMe]

If I took the pre-reqs a few years ago should I not go with EK since some people say it does not explain the answers in depth enough?

Does EK or Kaplan practice tests emulate the real thing better?

I only used EK and I've told my friends to do the same. EK is the shiz. My buddy used EK for like 2 weeks and got a 36. It explains everything well. If the explanation for a problem is brief in the back of the book, just look in the chapter and it will be in there for sure.

Don't learn more than what you need to know. The MCAT is a survey of various material, not a "detail" exam (unless you are shooting for 40+). It is reading comprehension and EK is sufficient to prepare.

And... Only the AAMC practice tests will help you IMO. Take them timed, under testing conditions. Review what you missed.

 

[2muchcoffeegirl]

The explanations are not extremely detailed, but I did not find them to be deficient, either...especially since most of the material is review if you've taken the pre-recs. I felt like the books used my time wisely, so to speak. Also, I agree that the AAMC tests are the best test-taking preparation; my actual score was exactly in the middle of the range I was getting on those. I actually only used these two things and was very pleased with my level of preparation.