Your take on this verbal reading method??

[pathophys17]

So I've come to a disagreement between two different VR methods and would like some input. For anyone who has studied/is studying with Kaplan, they advocate "passage triage," that is, going through the passages before attempting any, and picking the ones you want to do first. My teacher said to do the ones on topics you tend to do better at first, and leave the harder/more dense ones for last so as to get easy points early.

On the other hand (so I'm still in the keywords lecture from MCAT class tonight ), I read through some Examkrackers this fall before starting Kaplan. They advise against "triaging" and say it is a waste of time. They say you still have the same number of questions and still have to complete all of them before time runs out. I tend to agree with their strategy-why would you scan all of them, wasting time and having to almost read some things twice? You still have to do all of the passages and they are all worth the same number of points, so why jump around?

Has anyone found success with one or the other? Thoughts on both??to all the JUNE MCATers!! I'll be joining!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Lukkie]

i used the EK strategy and got a 12 so take that for what you will. i think if youre shooting for anything 10 or higher you will have to do all the passages anyways.

 

[Bernoull]

I second that and the EK rationale just makes too much sense, how can you know that a passage is tough without reading it and its questions. Afterall that if you skip it, you just wasted precious minutes!!!!!!!!

EK all da way..

 

[student1799]

So I've come to a disagreement between two different VR methods and would like some input. For anyone who has studied/is studying with Kaplan, they advocate "passage triage," that is, going through the passages before attempting any, and picking the ones you want to do first. My teacher said to do the ones on topics you tend to do better at first, and leave the harder/more dense ones for last so as to get easy points early.

On the other hand (so I'm still in the keywords lecture from MCAT class tonight ), I read through some Examkrackers this fall before starting Kaplan. They advise against "triaging" and say it is a waste of time. They say you still have the same number of questions and still have to complete all of them before time runs out. I tend to agree with their strategy-why would you scan all of them, wasting time and having to almost read some things twice? You still have to do all of the passages and they are all worth the same number of points, so why jump around?

Has anyone found success with one or the other? Thoughts on both??to all the JUNE MCATers!! I'll be joining!

I just took the MCAT for the third time, but not because of verbal--it's been my best section. (I got 12 the first time and 13 the second. My problem has been in PS.) I did the Kaplan online course and the EK books for my MCAT prep, and I realized very early on that the Kaplan VR materials are so bad they border on dangerous: both the lessons and the passages contain answers that are blatantly and completely wrong. (For instance, in one verbal workshop they tell you that a given statement is a fact, when it's really an opinion.)

I was doing well on the EK tests, but horribly on Kaplan (8-ish on their FL verbal sections), but I strongly suspected that it wasn't MY problem, because I have a lit background. Just as an experiment, I took the verbal section of AAMC 3 and got a 13! That convinced me to just ignore the Kaplan VR lessons and tests and do it my way.

Pretty much everything about Kaplan's approach is ******ed, from the "passage mapping" (right, waste your precious time outlining the passage when you could be doing the actual questions) to the "cherry-picking." I'm with EK: you're wasting time hunting for the "best" questions when you could just be plowing through the section in order and getting it done. Furthermore, as I see it, skipping around in the section significantly increases the probability that you'll accidentally leave a passage undone, which could be disastrous. So just do the passages in the order they appear in the test. (BTW, I'd advise this in the science sections of the test as well.)

If I were you, I'd just skip all the verbal material in Kaplan's course (if that's what you're taking), and use EK and the AAMC tests for practice instead. You'll do a lot better on the real thing.

 

[pathophys17]

I just took the MCAT for the third time, but not because of verbal--it's been my best section. (I got 12 the first time and 13 the second. My problem has been in PS.) I did the Kaplan online course and the EK books for my MCAT prep, and I realized very early on that the Kaplan VR materials are so bad they border on dangerous: both the lessons and the passages contain answers that are blatantly and completely wrong. (For instance, in one verbal workshop they tell you that a given statement is a fact, when it's really an opinion.)

I was doing well on the EK tests, but horribly on Kaplan (8-ish on their FL verbal sections), but I strongly suspected that it wasn't MY problem, because I have a lit background. Just as an experiment, I took the verbal section of AAMC 3 and got a 13! That convinced me to just ignore the Kaplan VR lessons and tests and do it my way.

Pretty much everything about Kaplan's approach is ******ed, from the "passage mapping" (right, waste your precious time outlining the passage when you could be doing the actual questions) to the "cherry-picking." I'm with EK: you're wasting time hunting for the "best" questions when you could just be plowing through the section in order and getting it done. Furthermore, as I see it, skipping around in the section significantly increases the probability that you'll accidentally leave a passage undone, which could be disastrous. So just do the passages in the order they appear in the test. (BTW, I'd advise this in the science sections of the test as well.)

If I were you, I'd just skip all the verbal material in Kaplan's course (if that's what you're taking), and use EK and the AAMC tests for practice instead. You'll do a lot better on the real thing.

That's an interesting thought to me because I was originally scoring 7's on the EK verbal materials, but on my Kaplan diagnostic I got a 9. I was surprised to hear that Kaplan advises strategies that all seem to take up more time. The questions we do in class (yes, I am in Kaplan) seem really straightforward and easily found with their "passage map" listing topics so they can be found quickly. It seemed like EK had more questions dealing with the author's feelings and overall main idea. I also was wondering if passage mapping was worth the extra time that could be put into answering the questions. I think I definitely will not be skipping around on any of the sections; it takes too much time and I'm not comfortable with going back and forth. However, EK seems to really discourage "going back to the passage," and I find I missed a lot of questions trying to not use the passage as much.

 

[student1799]

That's an interesting thought to me because I was originally scoring 7's on the EK verbal materials, but on my Kaplan diagnostic I got a 9. I was surprised to hear that Kaplan advises strategies that all seem to take up more time. The questions we do in class (yes, I am in Kaplan) seem really straightforward and easily found with their "passage map" listing topics so they can be found quickly. It seemed like EK had more questions dealing with the author's feelings and overall main idea. I also was wondering if passage mapping was worth the extra time that could be put into answering the questions. I think I definitely will not be skipping around on any of the sections; it takes too much time and I'm not comfortable with going back and forth. However, EK seems to really discourage "going back to the passage," and I find I missed a lot of questions trying to not use the passage as much.

Kaplan's cookie-cutter approach works in their lessons because they write cookie-cutter questions to use it on. There's another thread that gets into this issue, but as someone with ample exposure to the real test, I'd agree that Kaplan doesn't seem to duplicate the feel of the actual MCAT questions as well as EK does. And I stand by my first comment that Kaplan's strategies are a DANGEROUS waste of time. But you're the one who's taking the test: if you find this method actually works for you on the AAMC practice tests, go for it, no matter what anyone else says. (Just make sure that you have ample time to finish the section without having to panic and guess at the end.)

As for EK, I think their most valuable advice is to concentrate on the "main idea" of the passage, and to try to imagine a stereotypical image of the author in your mind (i.e. pedantic professor, hotheaded radical, etc.). This seems silly, but gives you a decent feel for the overall spirit of the passage, which is a helpful way to guide you toward the right answer when you're stuck between two choices. (What would the pedantic professor say?)

I didn't worry about going back to the passage too much: I did this whenever I needed to. But I'm a fast reader, so time was never an issue for me in this section, while it is a problem for many people. I think that's why EK tries to discourage frequent rereading of the passage--to conserve time.

 

[futuredoctor10]

I agree EK's strategy is better than Kaplan's verbal strategy. Kaplan VR questions are not MCAT style either.

I also think that you have to find the right strategy for you. EK says never/rarely look back at the passage, but for some questions you have to if you don't remember (and you only know that it was explicitly or implicitly part of the passage).

 

[aevea]

I think that there are a couple of separate issues here. It's hard to make generalizations about the verbal section. A lot of test-prep companies gear their strategies around getting the lower scoring students up to an acceptable score and those strategies are not always best for someone with a decent score trying to improve to a high score.

First of all, section strategy. On the one hand, I think it does make sense to do the easiest passages first. On the other hand, you get points for answering questions not for assessing passages. My preferred methodology is "instantaneous triage": rather than going through the whole section, making a call of "do it now or come back to it later" after a quick glance at the passage and questions. The initial call has to be fast and accurate. The main things I consider are: topic, style, number of questions, question length & answer length. Once you make a call, stick with it. So usually I progress more or less linearly through the VR section but temporarily skip over one or two passages that look particularly ugly.

All test prep companies have methodological biases and those biases affect the ways they design simulated mcat questions.

 

[pathophys17]

I think that there are a couple of separate issues here. It's hard to make generalizations about the verbal section. A lot of test-prep companies gear their strategies around getting the lower scoring students up to an acceptable score and those strategies are not always best for someone with a decent score trying to improve to a high score.

First of all, section strategy. On the one hand, I think it does make sense to do the easiest passages first. On the other hand, you get points for answering questions not for assessing passages. My preferred methodology is "instantaneous triage": rather than going through the whole section, making a call of "do it now or come back to it later" after a quick glance at the passage and questions. The initial call has to be fast and accurate. The main things I consider are: topic, style, number of questions, question length & answer length. Once you make a call, stick with it. So usually I progress more or less linearly through the VR section but temporarily skip over one or two passages that look particularly ugly.

All test prep companies have methodological biases and those biases affect the ways they design simulated mcat questions.

So if we're looking at my baseline Kaplan VR of 9, any idea which methods are best for someone with a decent score looking to get to a higher score? EK seems to say they're geared towards that while Kaplan works better if you're trying to get an acceptable score.

 

[aevea]

Experiment and see what works best for you. Maybe try AAMC PT3VR linearly and AAMC PT4VR saving the ugliest passages for last and see which way you're more comfortable with.

 

[go lakers]

TPR triaging got me a 6 VR. EK's method got me a 10 VR.
But I also figured out my timing and had much more practice the second time around.

Best bet is to experiment what works for you, but EK seems to make more sense if you are aiming for 11+.