WTF is up with EK Verbal?

[hqt331]

Seriously, I absolutely cannot agree with a few EK 101 VR questions. One question went something like this: The such-and-such assertion is NOT clearly consistent with which of the following?

Answer I chose, but was incorrect: something that was not at all related to the assertion. The explanations say that since the two ideas weren't related, no consistency is expected between them. WTF????

Correct answer was an idea that was very closely related to the assertion, but also expanded it a little, and therefore supposedly they weren't consistent.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Compass]

Seriously, I absolutely cannot agree with a few EK 101 VR questions. One question went something like this: The such-and-such assertion is NOT clearly consistent with which of the following?

Answer I chose, but was incorrect: something that was not at all related to the assertion. The explanations say that since the two ideas weren't related, no consistency is expected between them. WTF????

Correct answer was an idea that was very closely related to the assertion, but also expanded it a little, and therefore supposedly they weren't consistent.

Like this:

Essay Fact: Apples are green.

A. Oranges are orange.
B. Fuji apples are red.

A is not related to the fact. Therefore it cannot be compared as such. Fuji apples are apples, therefore they should be green. It's very subtle, but I do remember the question. It isn't very fair, but it's better to not get tripped up by these sneaky questions now than later. It is, in my opinion, a valid difference.

 

[SuperSaiyan3]

compass, why are you currently fighting a shark?

 

[Naijaba]

Yes, the EK verbal 101 book is insane, but it's insane in the same way as the real MCAT...just learn to conquer it.

 

[sv3]

Like this:

Essay Fact: Apples are green.

A. Oranges are orange.
B. Fuji apples are red.

A is not related to the fact. Therefore it cannot be compared as such. Fuji apples are apples, therefore they should be green. It's very subtle, but I do remember the question. It isn't very fair, but it's better to not get tripped up by these sneaky questions now than later. It is, in my opinion, a valid difference.

are mcat questions like this? as in don't compare unrelated things if given in an answer? As long as this is consistent with the way the MCAT works i'm cool with it.........but just looking for confirmation?

 

[QuackaDO]

I have run across a number of VR questions in the 101 book that I'll read and reread the explanations over and over again and simply just don't agree. I'm not saying I don't understand what they mean... I do... just saying that I simply do not agree with the logic they use sometimes and think it's flat out wrong.
What really bothers me the most is they use a reasoning/rationale for question A to show you how they came to that answer then somewhere down the line, say on quesiton P, the exact same type of question comes up and you use their logic from question A to get your answer and it's wrong. When you look at their reasoning they say something along the lines of what YOUR logic was for question A was, only thing was when you used that logic for question A you got it wrong and when you didn't use it for question P you got that wrong too.... frustrating.

 

[Compass]

are mcat questions like this? as in don't compare unrelated things if given in an answer? As long as this is consistent with the way the MCAT works i'm cool with it.........but just looking for confirmation?

They're usually not as vague as the EK ones, but yes, there are some outliers that will go HEY, PICK ME because they aren't true, but they aren't related to the passage. Off-topic answers may be true or seem true, but without verification, DON'T PICK IT. I imagine this passage was something about path-finding animals, amirite?

As to why I'm fighting a giant shark, I put it up in a fit of anguish when I was waiting for my MCAT score. I figured if I failed the test, I would probably never come on SDN again out of emotasticness. As it stands, I just leave it there for pure amusement at the fact that I actually did not fail my MCAT.

 

[sv3]

They're usually not as vague as the EK ones, but yes, there are some outliers that will go HEY, PICK ME because they aren't true, but they aren't related to the passage. Off-topic answers may be true or seem true, but without verification, DON'T PICK IT. I imagine this passage was something about path-finding animals, amirite?

As to why I'm fighting a giant shark, I put it up in a fit of anguish when I was waiting for my MCAT score. I figured if I failed the test, I would probably never come on SDN again out of emotasticness. As it stands, I just leave it there for pure amusement at the fact that I actually did not fail my MCAT.

The questions were asking you to identify which two concepts were not consistent with each other. Now I know better than to pick an answer that has a concept not covered the passage. But, even though the answers i chose contained concepts covered in the passage they were incorrect b/c Ek said "no consistency was expected since they are unrelated". Ok - i get this, but i can see how other markers would have accepted my original answer b/c expectation or not, they were inconsistent. Am I making sense? So I am wondering how the MCAT would mark this? I'm worried that doing it Eks way might make you "outsmart" yourself and pick the wrong answer. I don't wanna be getting dumber basically is what im saying

thanks
steve

 

[hqt331]

The questions were asking you to identify which two concepts were not consistent with each other. Now I know better than to pick an answer that has a concept not covered the passage. But, even though the answers i chose contained concepts covered in the passage they were incorrect b/c Ek said "no consistency was expected since they are unrelated". Ok - i get this, but i can see how other markers would have accepted my original answer b/c expectation or not, they were inconsistent. Am I making sense? So I am wondering how the MCAT would mark this? I'm worried that doing it Eks way might make you "outsmart" yourself and pick the wrong answer. I don't wanna be getting dumber basically is what im saying

thanks
steve

Absolutely what I'm worried about. This passage was actually about learning and memory. Now if someone said this idea is inconsistent with the other, I would have said: why would it be, it's about a different topic. But if someone asked, is this idea consistent with the other, I would have to say no, since it cannot be consistent. I don't understand, isn't this the way the English language works?

 

[xmsr3]

Don't worry about EK verbal it is nothing like the real thing.

The passages are way to interesting but the questions are insanely difficult.

Here's the one question from EK VR 101 that will haunt me to my grave.

The passage was about a greek historian who believed that a state should only invest in a strong military so it could expan its empire.

Question: According to the passage what should a nation do if it wants to build an empire?

A. Invest heavily in the military
B. Make peace with its neighbors
C. Grant citizenship to the conquered
D. Something else

I said A, thinking it was obvious.

Correct answer, C.

Logic: well the greek historian may have said A, but since Greece no longer has an empire he must be wrong, to build a LASTING empire one must give citizenship to the conquered.

I swear to god that is what their logic was. NOWHERE IN THE QUESTION DID IT EVEN IMPLY THAT THE EMPIRE MUST LAST!

Don't worry about low scores on EK VR, my last few EK tests I was getting 8,9 and I got a 13 on the real thing.

Oh and the real VR on the MCAT involves much longer passages than the AAMC tests, but the questions are about the same difficulty.

 

[sv3]

Don't worry about EK verbal it is nothing like the real thing.

The passages are way to interesting but the questions are insanely difficult.

Here's the one question from EK VR 101 that will haunt me to my grave.

The passage was about a greek historian who believed that a state should only invest in a strong military so it could expan its empire.

Question: According to the passage what should a nation do if it wants to build an empire?

A. Invest heavily in the military
B. Make peace with its neighbors
C. Grant citizenship to the conquered
D. Something else

I said A, thinking it was obvious.

Correct answer, C.

Logic: well the greek historian may have said A, but since Greece no longer has an empire he must be wrong, to build a LASTING empire one must give citizenship to the conquered.

I swear to god that is what their logic was. NOWHERE IN THE QUESTION DID IT EVEN IMPLY THAT THE EMPIRE MUST LAST!

Don't worry about low scores on EK VR, my last few EK tests I was getting 8,9 and I got a 13 on the real thing.

Oh and the real VR on the MCAT involves much longer passages than the AAMC tests, but the questions are about the same difficulty.

Much longer? or a paragraph longer?
also, that question, i hated it. Apparently you were to apply your learning from the passage to if you wanted to build an empire today. I remember that question

Can you shed any light on my above post though? About two ideas being consistent or not? I mean i guess i'll figure out during my AAMC practice but was curious if Ek's reasoning is the same would have.

thanks!

 

[G1SG2]

The questions were asking you to identify which two concepts were not consistent with each other. Now I know better than to pick an answer that has a concept not covered the passage. But, even though the answers i chose contained concepts covered in the passage they were incorrect b/c Ek said "no consistency was expected since they are unrelated". Ok - i get this, but i can see how other markers would have accepted my original answer b/c expectation or not, they were inconsistent. Am I making sense? So I am wondering how the MCAT would mark this? I'm worried that doing it Eks way might make you "outsmart" yourself and pick the wrong answer. I don't wanna be getting dumber basically is what im saying

thanks
steve

The POE can be very helpful for such problems. I usually eliminate answer choices that talk about something extraneous, but if all the other answers are from the passage and are INCONSISTENT, then by POE, you should end up picking the answer that the passage didn't cover because you KNOW for sure that the other answers are wrong from the passage itself. After testing yesterday, I don't think the real MCAT verbal is anything like EK verbal. Then again, I could've totally messed up on the verbal yesterday (with a 5,6, or 7 ). But, I don't think the questions were like EK verbal. They were exactly like AAMC verbal but my verbal questions were not long, most of the were like 1-2 lines (a few paragraph questions). The passages were LONGGGGGG (I just kept scrolling and scrolling but this was expected so I had no problem). The passages were easier to read (like the official MCAT guide passages) to compensate for the length, I guess.

 

[sv3]

The POE can be very helpful for such problems. I usually eliminate answer choices that talk about something extraneous, but if all the other answers are from the passage and are INCONSISTENT, then by POE, you should end up picking the answer that the passage didn't cover because you KNOW for sure that the other answers are wrong from the passage itself. After testing yesterday, I don't think the real MCAT verbal is anything like EK verbal. Then again, I could've totally messed up on the verbal yesterday (with a 5,6, or 7 ). But, I don't think the questions were like EK verbal. They were exactly like AAMC verbal but my verbal questions were not long, most of the were like 1-2 lines (a few paragraph questions). The passages were LONGGGGGG (I just kept scrolling and scrolling but this was expected so I had no problem). The passages were easier to read (like the official MCAT guide passages) to compensate for the length, I guess.

Ya see this goes against what Ek preaches....shoot!
Anyway would you still say I should use this for practice? i've done TPR already but could do the ICC.

thanks
steve

 

[G1SG2]

Ya see this goes against what Ek preaches....shoot!
Anyway would you still say I should use this for practice? i've done TPR already but could do the ICC.

thanks
steve

I would do some of the ICC passages because they are long and gave me an idea of what I would be up against for the real MCAT (even though I think the real thing may be a tad bit longer). EK is still good practice, I think. Just not very similar to the real deal. I'd keep practicing. But if you really want to get an idea of the length of the real verbal passages, do the verbal passages in AAMC's official MCAT guide.

 

[hqt331]

so i just took my first AAMC. The questions are not as scandalous as EK's are (IMO). I would say 3 of the 5 i got wrong were completely understandable, and the other 2 were nowhere near as bad as EK.

edit: i'm taking kaplan, so all i've got are kaplan and EK: which do you think is better?

 

[ezsanche]

I would do some of the ICC passages because they are long and gave me an idea of what I would be up against for the real MCAT (even though I think the real thing may be a tad bit longer). EK is still good practice, I think. Just not very similar to the real deal. I'd keep practicing. But if you really want to get an idea of the length of the real verbal passages, do the verbal passages in AAMC's official MCAT guide.

What are the ICC passages ???

 

[G1SG2]

What are the ICC passages ???

TPR In Class Compendium. You get it in the TPR Hyperlearning Course.

 

[ezsanche]

thanks!!!

 

[sv3]

I would do some of the ICC passages because they are long and gave me an idea of what I would be up against for the real MCAT (even though I think the real thing may be a tad bit longer). EK is still good practice, I think. Just not very similar to the real deal. I'd keep practicing. But if you really want to get an idea of the length of the real verbal passages, do the verbal passages in AAMC's official MCAT guide.

yeah the guide just arrived today in the mail but only has like 6 passages.
Hmmmm ok i'll alternate TPR and Ek. After being through TPR, I can say they are all about the details and tough passages but not subjective (can the real thing be anything like this?). Ek is about splitting hairs and the subjective which i thought the real thing would be like. Like i said above, the one thing is that with TPR i never had issues with their answers, but with Ek I do..........once I hit the AAMCs i'll know whether or not something can be compared (for consistency) and whatnot i guess. Thanks for the heads up. VR is my worst section as i'm a slow reader. I can make up for it with content on the sciences but not here.

cheers

steve